1

Team Outcomes

Delivery quality and velocity of the team. Stakeholder trust. Incident rate.

Exceeds

Team consistently delivers on commitments at high quality. Stakeholders view the team as a reliable partner. Incidents are rare and addressed swiftly.

Meets

Team delivers the majority of planned work. Incidents are addressed promptly. Stakeholders are generally satisfied.

Below

Frequent misses or quality issues. Stakeholders manage around the team. Incidents recur without systemic resolution.

Example review phrases

  • "Team hit 93% of sprint commitments this half—highest in the engineering org, up from 71% last cycle."
  • "Q3 roadmap was delivered on time despite a 20% headcount gap—speaks to their prioritization and unblocking discipline."
  • "Stakeholders have learned to budget 2-week slippage into every dependency on this team."
2

People Development

Growth, retention, and promotion readiness of direct reports. Flight risk management.

Exceeds

Multiple promotions in the team. Low attrition. Engineers seek to join the team. Confirm flight risk scores are low.

Meets

Reports are developing on track. Attrition at or below company average. Promotions are on pace with tenure.

Below

Stagnant team development. Elevated attrition signals. Promotions lag or feel political.

Example review phrases

  • "Four promotions from this team in two review cycles—the highest output of any EM in the org."
  • "Confirm's ONA shows their team has the highest internal connectivity in Engineering—a strong signal of team health."
  • "Two engineers left the team in 90 days; both cited unclear growth paths—this is addressable with better development conversations."
3

Cross-Functional Leadership

Partnership with Product and Design. Presence in planning and strategic decisions.

Exceeds

Sought out by product and design partners for technical direction. Shapes roadmap, not just executes it. Trusted voice in org-wide decisions.

Meets

Effective partner to product and design. Represents engineering perspective in planning clearly.

Below

Reactive to product asks. Limited engineering perspective in planning. Cross-functional relationships have friction.

Example review phrases

  • "Product leads consistently describe them as their most effective engineering partner—they push back on scope with data, not just instinct."
  • "Shaped the Q4 roadmap, not just responded to it—engineering tradeoffs were factored in before commitments were made."
4

Hiring & Team Building

Quality of hiring decisions. Diversity of perspectives added to the team. Bar-raising vs. bar-lowering behavior.

Exceeds

Consistently hires engineers who perform in the top half of the org within 6 months. Raises the team's overall bar.

Meets

Hires competent engineers who meet role requirements. Participates constructively in hiring loops.

Below

Hiring decisions have produced below-average performers. Too willing to lower the bar when under headcount pressure.

Example review phrases

  • "Last 3 hires all became among the most impactful engineers on the team within one review cycle—demonstrates strong calibration."
  • "Resists lowering the bar even under pressure—turned down a candidate the team liked when the bar wasn't there."
🔮

Where do these examples come from in real reviews?

Most managers write performance reviews from memory—limited to what they personally observed. Confirm surfaces behavioral evidence from across the organization: who relied on this person, what they drove, how their impact extended beyond their direct manager's line of sight. Reviews written with Confirm's data are more accurate, more defensible, and faster to write.

See Confirm in action →