
Ask HN: How was your first performance review? - matora
How was it? Did you get what you were expecting?  Did you regret anything? What would you advise to first timers?
======
musicale
It was a complete and utter waste of time, as has been every other performance
review I have ever been a part of.

Performance reviews from bosses are almost always useless and do more harm
than good. The only possible exception I've seen might be in research settings
where supervisors sometimes work closely with you and may actually be
qualified to evaluate your work. But in that case, usually they are already
giving you feedback during the process and a formal performance review is just
a checkbox item to satisfy their own supervisor or funding organization.

Moreover it is generally impossible to have a fair and honest discussion with
someone who can fire you or influence your pay.

Actual feedback on your work from skilled technical people on your team and
actual users is generally far more useful than a performance review and can be
gathered at any time.

~~~
perl4ever
Well, I can't say I have ever had a performance review that was inspiring or
useful, but it's kind of depressing when you start out having them and then
stop. Because one of the subtexts is, why even pretend we might give you a
raise? And it means you're unlikely to be fired, but it also means nobody even
cares enough to do something about anyone that is causing problems.

------
ordinaryperson
Odd that many in this thread blame performance reviews themselves ("complete
and utter waste of time", "waste of time and simply busy work", etc) and not
the manager giving them.

For your manager to do it right requires some courage (to give negative
feedback), maturity (to do it professionally), training (e.g. never deliver
feedback in 'the compliment sandwich') and empathy (to relate to the
employee's POV). Obviously most managers lack these.

E.g. Some employees are over-eager and blitz colleagues: "Hey did you get the
email I just sent 30 seconds ago?" Others like to have Jira ticket comment
wars. A good manager would give direct feedback routinely throughout the year.

"Hey Bob, blowing up my inbox with dozens of IMs and emails in a single day is
counter-productive."

"Hey Suzy, that 750-word Jira comment about why your dispatch function to the
React store is a better approach then Duane's could have been better handled
face-to-face."

Then the performance review is hopefully a boring, pedestrian summary of stuff
talked about all year.

Instead managers are afraid to give feedback and wait until January to tell
you all the things they hate about you. Plus your review is likely tied to
your compensation/promotion, often making it unnecessarily a high-stress, do-
or-die bombshell.

What's really important these days (IMHO) is not the review itself since
nowadays everyone changes jobs like they change pants, what matters is your
ability to receive negative feedback like an adult and adapt. It means having
a manager who can give negative feedback like an adult (a big if) but that
will likely help you more in your career than generic pats on the back.

Happy review season everyone.

~~~
poulsbohemian
I hear what you are saying, but... in several places where I have been a
manager, it really didn't matter what I said or how I said it. Pay increases
(or not) came from HR. Scoring rubrics came from HR. The performance review
was performance art, nothing more. I knew it, the employee knew it, and
frankly it was more fun to polish our resumes and laugh/cry about it.

What I tried to do instead was offer continuous feedback and career direction,
with the understanding that it was just advice. Sure I tried my part to
advocate to HR and up the food chain, but in a lot of places they really don't
care about retainment or career progression.

~~~
ordinaryperson
Ideally a good performance review helps the employee become better, and they
can use that feedback to grow in their carer.

E.g. have someone on your team who writes long e-mails? Or insta-replies to
things without taking time to think? Helping those people grow is the point.

Compensation is a universe unto itself. Ideally we'd all be paid according to
merit but merit is hard to measure. A (well-executed) performance review
should have value in helping people grow and not just be a vector for more $$.

Realistically speaking if you want to significantly increase your compensation
these days you have to get a new job.

------
pskiba
Somehow I ended up getting a perfect score in every category, which in my
company is not typical and I was given pretty much no feedback.

I'm confident my manager was scolded for the score he gave me by his boss or
hr.

Ever since he's given me the most middle of the road scores . The only take
away I've gotten from this experience is that performance reviews in my
company are more political then actually reflective of your performance.

~~~
rapfaria
This really gets me:

    
    
      I was given pretty much no feedback
    

This is exactly what happened to me a few years back. I was so eager for that
review since we had all our KPIs recorded and I knew I had a perfect record,
and all I heard was something along the lines "I have nothing bad to say". In
that review, my manager said my results would warrant at least an A, and a
promotion would probably be on the way. Probably.

A few weeks later I received a letter with my C rating, and I left the company
a few months later.

~~~
mikekchar
I once had an interesting review: "Ordinarily if someone had given me this
list of accomplishments I would give them I very good review. But I just don't
like you". Sometimes reviews serve you well in ways you don't expect ;-)
Especially when you are at the start of your career, you don't always twig
that the place you are working in is completely dysfunctional.

------
glacials
My company had just started doing performance reviews, as they had been
growing a lot (generic small startup with unlimited vacation and all that) and
it was That Time. So this was a quarterly performance review, but was my first
after having worked there 1-2 years.

The system had six levels resembling standard deviations in a normal
distribution, so ~2% at the extreme high and extreme low. In parallel, you
pick one for yourself and describe why in text, and your manager picks one for
you and describes why in text. Then some software simultaneously shares them
between you, and you have a 1:1 to discuss things you didn't agree on, or that
one of you brought up but not the other.

I rated myself as the highest level, because I thought I was the second-
highest level and had learned that my opinions about myself are generally
lower than others' opinions of me, so I decided to purposefully account for
imposter syndrome. My manager rated me as the second-highest level and said
that the only thing keeping me from the highest level was the amount of
vacation I'd taken that quarter.

I'd taken 5 weeks off that quarter. It's a lot for a quarter, but it was also
the only time I'd taken off the whole year, and 5 weeks was the "recommended"
yearly amount. So I wasn't sure how to feel, and second-highest level didn't
seem like something to complain about.

Still not sure how I feel five years later because I do see both sides and
it's a hard problem to fairly solve. But I live a happy life and don't have
any complaints, so I don't let it get to me. It's just a performance review,
and you will look back in 10 years from a different job, city, and/or life
situation wondering why you cared so much.

~~~
orev
If a company has an “unlimited” vacation policy, it’s totally off-limits to
bring that up against you in a review. They could say that you didn’t get X
work done or something, but with that kind of vacation policy — it’s what they
specifically signed up for.

~~~
teeray
Just another data point to show that when you hear "unlimited vacation" you
should think about it the same way as when you hear your cell phone company
say "unlimited data"

~~~
orev
A company policy of unlimited vacation is highly regressive and damaging to
the workforce as a whole. It obviously creates a situation where it becomes a
competition on who takes less vacation time, as an indicator of one’s
dedication to the company (whether you think this is a reliable indicator of
dedication is irrelevant—all that matters is that many people _do_ think it
is, and evaluate others from that perspective).

To avoid this kind of situation, people should be required to take vacation,
both to actually get some rest, and to keep a reasonably level playing field
for all employees.

------
xnyan
At first confusing, then enlightening. When I was hired, I was told many
things about the values of the company, how much they wanted people to think
about doing things differently and create innovation even if it was not
directly profitable, how much they value diverse contributions and thought,
and most importantly, how it's not all about the bottom line here.

I was praised in my 1 year performance review to no end and given great
feedback by my manager about new initiatives I had worked on or projects I had
done. When I got my official paper copy of the review, it had a score that
equaled C- because my estimated revenue contribution was ~5% below my role's
average and that was essentially the only thing that mattered for performance
evaluation score and bonus/promotion opportunities.

Knowing this, I focused much more on making money the next year and got a much
better grade. I left the company shortly after that and I'm still mad they
were not just honest with me at the start. I would have taken another job if I
knew that was what the deal was, which I suspect is why they lied.

------
ereyes01
My first performance review came 6 months after I started at IBM. I was
basically told that I did everything perfectly but I still got what amounted
to a middling "satisfactory" rating. My manager told me that I will get a
better score next year if I change nothing about my performance, and the
"satisfactory" rating was due to company policy and my not having worked there
a full year yet. I later learned that managers have a budget of how many
good/medium/bad ratings they can hand out, and the choice of who gets what is
100% arbitrary and up to the manager. Big company politics I guess <shrug>. I
proceeded to have many much better years after that, fortunately.

------
DMcVeigh
I seem to be going against the grain here, but I actually find them generally
useful. I have a 1-2-1 with my Line Manager every 4 weeks and I find it great
to discuss what I have been doing.

My manager asks about what ive been working on, if the pace is good for me and
if there is anything holding me back.

I can be frank on how I feel about things (Ive mentioned that I felt I wasnt
doing any productive work, because I wasnt comfortable with the experience I
had and didnt want to slow down the team) and get honest feedback with them
actually trying to help. Its also a great time for me to improve our
relationship and ask about the future (Whats happening with this team? How is
this project going? When will I be able to do x?).

The main issue here seems to be managers who don't care, not the process
itself.

------
EnderMB
My first performance review was at my third job. I was promoted to lead dev in
my first six months at my first job and by the time my review came up we had
been acquired. In my second job I was made redundant a few days before my
review.

My first review was a total waste of time, but I only learned this after my
second review. In my first review I was given an "average" rating, because my
technical knowledge was high, but some of my projects were late. Most of this
was out of my control, and was down to the fact that I refused to work in my
free time to make up for shoddy project management. I was also told that I
could apply for a mid-level promotion, despite already being mid-level. I
played ball regardless, and got my "promotion" and pay rise.

My second review was "outstanding", and I learned that my job title, at least
internally, was now senior-level. While I was a better developer after 12
months, the only thing that had changed was that the manager that did my last
review had left and my new manager liked me. The only constant was the
managing director, and when I questioned what made the company decide I had
gone from junior to senior within the space of a year they couldn't give an
answer. Despite being given a nicer job title, more responsibility, and more
money, I was annoyed at how stupid the process was.

A day earlier, one of our best developers was given a poor review. The manager
didn't like him because his project was grossly behind schedule. This was no
fault of his own, and he was being punished because he took on a very hard
project and was ignored when he requested that we start from scratch due to
the issues with the initial build. His review wasn't a reflection of his
skill, because skill-wise he was way above everyone else there. His review was
down to how liked he was, and whether he played "the game".

I've been a developer for a decade now, and I can't name a single review that
was worth my time, because ultimately the outcome has always been obvious. I
always try to be positive and to show empathy where possible, and for around
6+ years that approach has always given me solid reviews. The technical side
has always been largely irrelevant, even when working with languages/tools
that are new to me.

------
adeeshaek
Right out of college, I got hired into a team that maintained trading software
for a big bank. I was thoroughly disinterested in trading, which made it quite
difficult for me to understand the needs of the people for whom I was
maintaining software. Looking back, I realize that because of my disinterest
in trading, I was a terrible fit for that job, and I was quite unhappy and
non-performant as a result.

The mediocre performance review I got helped me realize that I was a poor fit
for my team, and it motivated me to transfer to a different team which was a
better fit.

My next few performance reviews were much better, but I eventually left the
big bank for a startup, and now I am as happy as a clam!

I advise first-timers to make friendships with managers other than the one
they report to, and ask their help to interpret the results of the review.
It's difficult to interpret the results of a performance review without the
benefit of mental separation (the ability to look at it in an impartial way,
without being blinded by ego) and experience, both of which an experienced
manager should have. If nothing else, having a sympathetic and interested
human you trust interpret these results is bound to help a great deal.

For bonus points, identify and cultivate a few older mentors, and keep in
touch with them even after you move to new teams and new jobs. For even more
bonus points, pick up a mentee or two when you gain a few years of experience.

------
rs23296008n1
Consider doing your own review first. Then do a review based on what you
consider as your manager's point of view. If you can get some other opinions
about how you seem at various points of time, eg your partner's perspective,
this might be useful as well. Your general vibe of not being grouchy after
various events throughout should be applicable. Feed this all into your own
review of yourself. Was the year doing this work actually successful and good
for you? Were you a good fit? What worked? What didn't?

Two perspectives:-

One of my early reviews: Complete and utter waste of time. Nothing said by the
manager was useful for the future. No actionable items. Useless evaluation
criteria and meaningless bland comments. I read the notes afterwards three
times and got advice from others to verify. Their advice: get out fast.

My review at my next job was great and set the stage for much better results.
I actually saw the gaps I needed to fill and multiple possibilities for
improvement and alternative pathways to access them. Helped with a training
plan and what I needed to cover as a educational framework for the next 10
years.

The difference was night and day. If the review is merely a checklist item
then its unlikely to be useful.

------
sys_64738
Performance reviews are a waste of time and simply busy work. When you’re a
star performer but not getting a raise then you leave.

------
inertiatic
My first performance review was around 2013 or so on my first job, after not
doing any significant work for the first few months I was worried I was asking
my manager too many questions. I was told I was doing great. I then got a 25%
raise next month without anyone communicating anything else to me (not a lot
of money but the percentage is still significant at that point).

Since then, and despite not being the best worker in any group I've been in,
I've have had good to stellar reviews that resulted in no actionable items and
no salary adjustments.

This whole experience does lead me to believe that performance reviews are
very hard to get right (ie. to make them actually useful).

------
GoToRO
_Performance reviews. If you didn 't demotivate your employees till now, now
it's the time._

I've read somewhere that as a manager you don't have to motivate the people,
you just have to be careful not to demotivate them.

------
choeger
As a general rule it should be transparent to you what is evaluated how. Is it
subjective feedback (" _I_ have the feeling you could benefit from looking
through your code before submitting to review."), is it some kind of arbitrary
metric ("Your change requests take way more iterations than the average before
being merged.") or is it some kind of pre-arranged evaluation scheme ("You
scored only 3 out of 10 on the code quality.").

With that knowledge you can prepare a defense or proactive suggestions for
improvement if you feel the need. It could also give you something to use as
an argument for a raise.

------
tspike
My first performance review as an employee was good. I had a manager that
cared about his employees and understood their strengths and weaknesses. I was
challenged on some key shortcomings but got enough positive feedback and
reward to keep me motivated. He had good visibility into what I was doing and
what its impact (or lack thereof) was.

My first performance review that I gave as a manager was terrible. My employee
was twice my age, and I'd managed him for 2 months. He came into the room and
his first words were "Yeah. I think in my entire career, this kind of thing
has only been useful once."

~~~
GoToRO
_My first performance review that I gave as a manager was terrible._

I understood that you took it personally?

------
drakonka
It was very positive. This was back when we had 'ratings' like On Target,
Above Target, Significantly Above Target, etc. I only joined a couple of
months before the review period so it was not really a full review. I got
positive feedback which told me that if I continue on the same track I'll be
performing well above target in the next review. I got a nice raise and bonus.
Eventually we got rid of the rating system, but the reviews have come with
useful feedback and a decent compensation bump in the form of bonuses, salary,
and RSUs each year.

------
planetzero
My favorite part was that the only negative marks I got was on leadership. My
manager admit that I was not given any power or opportunity to demonstrate my
leadership skills.

I got a raise, but ended up leaving 6 months later.

------
dilippkumar
It takes me about 3 years of working closely with someone before I can give
them useful feedback. And when I want to give someone feedback, I take them
out for a walk or go get coffee with them and ask them if they're willing to
take some feedback from me.

Don't expect too much from your official performance reviews, especially in
terms of actionable feedback. However, sometimes reviews can teach you that
the way others perceive your value to the team/company might be very different
from your own beliefs of what you think you're good at.

------
probinso
They didn't inform me that it was a performance review. I did not notice that
it was a performance review. It wasn't made clear what or weather i was doing
well or should change behavior. I didn't interpret the meeting as intended to
have any effect on my employment. It was months later, after I had started
hearing friends talk about their performance reviews, that I realized that I
had one as well.

------
amylene
Most people are too nice in reviews. You probably won’t get better as a
result.

Respect people who give it to you straight, even if it costs you the ego
stroke of a promotion. Your career is a marathon, so your first performance
review is like the first half mile - focus on your process, and getting
better, rather than being ahead of the competition.

The only good performance reviews I’ve gotten are when I evaluated myself. But
of course, those are laden with bias.

------
draklor40
My manager set no goals. I received an email in Feb (appraisal was April-March
following year) that I did Ok but have to do better to get more money or be
promoted. No goals again next year. Same feedback. Forced my manager to set
goals for the following year. Managers changed. Had to start over. Left my
jobs. If a company says that there are no fixed goals or no fixed vacation
days, run. Run and dont look back.

------
muzani
Boss said I was too slow. It's a confusing bit of feedback because colleagues
were telling me to slow down. I graduated from a pretty elite university where
we had a weekend to write a client+server in C... and my first job was PHP. So
the work felt trivial.

I feel that it was just a negotiation tactic. I quit after a year there. He
proposed a counter-offer later, but I decided to try elsewhere.

------
anotheryou
Don't fear it.

If you have a good boss/coach it will be constructive and you'll identify
areas to improve on and maybe get some training if you want.

If you have a bad one you will get rated on some scales, make some goals
nobody will give you room to work on. Just get through it quickly and try to
keep the goals remotely realistic so you can still convince them to a raise
later..

------
smarri
I think these reviews depend on your manager. If you have a good manager, they
will make it important, meaningful, and worthwhile. Plus dependant on how well
the reviewee prepares for the review and how serious they take it. That being
said, these type of managers are rare. I'm generally unimpressed with
performance reviews.

------
iamflimflam1
1995/6? Went to the pub. Founder told me I was getting a pay rise from £13,600
to £15,600. He then made a pantomime of patting his pockets before saying he’d
left his wallet in the office...

Simpler times back then.

------
_bear
My overall grade was 'Outstanding', but I joined in Feb, so had a good -5
months before I was reviewed. Apparently it's difficult to get this where I
work.

------
ThrowMeAwayOkay
I don’t remember...it was in early 1998.

