1

Technical Execution

Scope, complexity, and quality of technical work delivered. Architectural decisions made and owned.

Exceeds

Solves problems at a scope beyond their level. Architectural decisions are adopted by the broader team. Catches systemic issues before they surface as incidents.

Meets

Delivers assigned work at the expected scope and quality. Code reviews are thorough. Incidents in their area are rare.

Below

Requires significant rework or scope reduction. Technical decisions need frequent correction. Delivery is inconsistent.

Example review phrases

  • "Redesigned the data ingestion pipeline, eliminating a class of race conditions that caused 3 incidents over 6 months."
  • "Routinely takes on the most complex work in the sprint without prompting—and ships it cleanly."
  • "Delivered the auth refactor under budget, enabling the mobile team to ship 3 weeks ahead of schedule."
  • "Work frequently requires rework—estimates are optimistic and corner cases often missed in the first pass."
2

Cross-Team Impact

Influence and contribution beyond the immediate team. Who relies on this engineer for expertise or to remove blockers.

Exceeds

Consulted regularly by engineers outside their team. Drives cross-functional initiatives. Influence visible in org-wide decisions.

Meets

Works effectively with adjacent teams when needed. Proactive about sharing context and removing cross-team blockers.

Below

Primarily siloed. Cross-team dependencies cause friction. Limited visibility into how their work affects other teams.

Example review phrases

  • "ONA data shows they are the most-consulted engineer on authentication across 4 teams—influence extends well beyond their title."
  • "Proactively documented the API contract changes that prevented a multi-team incident."
  • "Other teams route around them rather than to them when they need a dependency resolved."
3

Reliability & Ownership

Follow-through on commitments. Operational ownership of systems. Response to incidents and production issues.

Exceeds

Never drops commitments. Surfaces risks before they become misses. Owns systems end-to-end including ops.

Meets

Delivers on sprint commitments. Handles on-call rotation effectively. Escalates blockers early.

Below

Commitments slip without early notice. On-call response is slow or incomplete. Work needs significant follow-up.

Example review phrases

  • "Has not missed a sprint commitment in 6 months—and when scope creeps, flags it before it becomes a miss."
  • "Took ownership of a production incident at 11 PM, mitigated within 2 hours, and wrote the post-mortem before EOD."
  • "Sprint commitments are treated as aspirational—actual delivery runs 40–60% of what's planned."
4

Communication & Collaboration

Clarity in design docs, code reviews, and cross-functional work. Contribution to team health.

Exceeds

Design docs are referenced org-wide. Code reviews teach as well as catch bugs. Sought out for technical opinion in cross-functional discussions.

Meets

Communicates blockers early. Code reviews are substantive. Participates constructively in team decisions.

Below

Blockers surface late. Code reviews are shallow or delayed. Team decisions happen around them rather than with them.

Example review phrases

  • "The system design doc they wrote is now the onboarding reference for every new backend engineer."
  • "Code reviews are substantive—they consistently catch performance issues the author missed."
  • "Blockers are discovered in standups, not flagged ahead of time—this repeatedly delays team delivery."
🔮

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 →