Bring goals, feedback and work history into the conversation. Run review cycles, compare perspectives and calibrate ratings with the evidence at hand.
Product Designer · Growth, with the evidence attached.
We brought three product teams onto one design system. I learned to involve engineering earlier and test patterns before turning them into components.
Naledi connects the outcome to how the work changed.
Follow Naledi’s Q3 review from the moment the cycle opens to the conversation that closes it.
HR launches the cycle with its template, reviewers and deadlines. Self, manager, peer and upward reviews run together, with anonymity thresholds for peers.
Who it’s for
Reviews go wrong in predictable places: missing evidence, uneven ratings and results nobody explains. These are the teams that feel it most.
150 people. Last year’s reviews lived in a shared drive.
“We need a process people trust, and we need it running by next month.”
Set up a cycle with templates, deadlines and the review types you want. Before launch, October flags people with no manager, recent hires and anyone still on probation.
Twelve reviews to write in the same fortnight as quarter end.
“I can’t remember what happened in March, let alone for twelve people.”
Goals and assessments, recognition, learning, other reviews and AI insights sit beside every review. The manager writes from evidence, not memory.
One department rates everyone ‘exceeds’. Another never does.
“A 4 in sales should mean the same as a 4 in operations.”
Calibration sessions compare submitted ratings with the expected curve. Every change is recorded with a reason, and bias checks show groups whose ratings moved differently.
Results go out the same week to every manager and employee.
“The rating shouldn’t land in an inbox before the conversation happens.”
HR chooses which parts of the report employees see and releases it to managers first. Managers preview, publish and turn the next 1:1 into the review conversation.
Why reviews disappoint
TodayManagers write reviews from memory in a blank form, so recent weeks outweigh the whole period.
With OctoberThe review opens with the period’s goals, recognition, learning and other reviews already gathered.
TodayPeer feedback is chased over email and pasted into a document.
With OctoberPeer reviews are part of the cycle, with nomination rules, minimum and maximum counts and an anonymity threshold.
TodayRatings are moderated in a meeting and the spreadsheet is the only record.
With OctoberCalibration keeps proposals, agreed changes and their reasons on the record, with a parking lot for cases that need more time.
TodayResults arrive as a PDF with no context, and the conversation never happens.
With OctoberHR controls what employees see, managers publish when ready, and the review conversation is booked as a 1:1.
Inside performance reviews
One cycle, run end to end in October, with the evidence and the record in one place.
Evidence
Every review opens beside the person’s goals, recognition, learning and the other reviews in the cycle, with AI insights on top. Employees can seed their self-review from the self reports they wrote during the period, so nobody starts from a blank page.
Set up
Choose self, manager, peer and upward reviews, each with its own template and deadline. Set how peers are chosen and the anonymity threshold. A readiness check lists anyone who can’t be reviewed properly before invitations go out.
Fix or exclude these people before invitations go out.
Calibration
Calibration sessions show the submitted distribution against the expected curve and surface outliers. Proposed changes need a reason. Bias checks compare how ratings moved by department, tenure, gender, employment type and job level, and agreed outcomes become action items with owners.
Tenure “0–1 years” ratings were adjusted more often than average. Worth a second look before you close.
Release
HR decides what employees will see: the overall rating, strengths and development areas, competencies, the AI summary and more. Results go to managers first, who preview and publish their own team and hold the conversation in a performance review 1:1.
One review cycle
An illustrative half-year cycle at a 200-person services firm running its first review in October.
Sets up the cycle with self, manager and peer reviews. The readiness check flags two people without a manager; HR fixes them and launches.
Nominate peers and write self-reviews, seeded from the self reports they kept during the half.
Write reviews with goals, recognition, learning and the self and peer reviews open beside the form.
Department heads meet. Ratings sit above the curve at 4; three are changed with reasons and one goes to the parking lot.
Results are released to managers, who preview their team, publish and hold each review conversation in a 1:1.
Review the work. Not the last two weeks.
How it works
Pick the review types, templates, dates and peer rules. Fix anything the readiness check flags, then send invitations.
People write with the evidence in view. Calibrate ratings against the curve and record why anything changed.
Choose what employees see, release to managers and let them publish after the conversation.
Fair by design
Peer feedback respects the cycle’s anonymity threshold, and private feedback stays with the manager and HR.
Calibration can draw on shared 1:1 notes if HR turns it on. Private manager notes are never included.
Calibrated ratings keep the original, the new rating, who changed it and why.
AI summaries and recommendations support the review. Ratings are set by people and calibrated by people.
Works with
Objectives from the period become the scored goal section of the review.
ExploreReleased results are discussed in a performance review 1:1, with actions that carry forward.
ExplorePay reviews can use performance ratings in their increase matrix.
ExploreOutcomes feed development plans, promotions and succession on the same record.
ExploreExplore the workflows, tools and practical details that support performance throughout the working day.
Goals, recognition, learning, past reviews and a Work tab from connected tools sit beside every review. Employees see their evidence first; managers see it once the self-review is in.
Run self, manager, peer and upward reviews with templates, deadlines and anonymity thresholds. Calibrate against performance curves and place people on the talent grid.
HR chooses which parts of the report employees will see. Managers preview and publish their team’s results, then turn the next 1:1 into the review conversation.
Set eligibility rules such as time in grade, minimum rating and no active PIP, preview their impact, then run nominations, panels and approvals, including off-cycle requests.
Talking points and insights for each direct report before the meeting.
Goals and OKRs drafted from natural language.
Recognition gaps and upcoming moments surfaced to managers.
Overdue reviews, missed 1:1s and morale dips flagged in time.
Explore the detail behind performance.
Yes. Review templates and cycles are configurable per group, with their own questions, competencies, reviewers and timelines. Ratings use a five-point scale with labels you can rename.
Managers submit ratings, calibration sessions surface distributions and outliers against the expected curve, and agreed changes become calibration actions with owners.
Recognition awards points and badges, and formal award programmes can be configured. Points can be linked to reward schemes through integrations.
We’ll walk through the real product with your team and show how it connects to the rest of October People.