| name | 65-team-performance-review-global |
| description | Use when a leader evaluates a marketing TEAM MEMBER using data — a KPI scorecard by role, strengths with real examples, areas to improve stated as observable behavior, a 30 and 90 day development plan, and a 1-5 rating rubric. Trigger on 'performance review for my marketer', 'evaluate a team member', 'monthly 1:1 review', 'feedback for my content writer', 'development plan for an employee', 'is this person underperforming'. Also use when the user is unhappy with someone and cannot articulate why. Not for — evaluating a campaign rather than a person, see `63-campaign-retrospective-global`; reviewing one piece of output, see `62-marketing-review-global`; scoring an external vendor, see `67-agency-vendor-brief-global`. |
| metadata | {"version":"1.0.1","category":"operations"} |
| license | MIT |
| triggers | ["performance review","evaluate a team member","review my marketing team","monthly 1:1 review","feedback for a team member","development plan for an employee","KPI scorecard by role"] |
| output | File .md — full review: KPI scorecard, strengths, areas to improve, 30/90-day development plan, rating rubric, next steps |
| related | ["64-team-brief-global","63-campaign-retrospective-global","07-marketing-report-global","62-marketing-review-global","47-design-review-global"] |
Team Performance Review (Global)
A review is not a grade — it exists so the person knows what to do to get better. Feedback without data is opinion; feedback with data is coaching. There should be no surprises in a review: feedback is given continuously through the period, and the review only summarizes it.
Information gathering
Read the brief history (64-team-brief-global), last period's output, and the reports (07-marketing-report-global) if available. If missing, ask up to 4 questions:
- Who is being reviewed, in what role, for what period? Content writer / designer / media buyer / channel owner; monthly or quarterly.
- What KPIs were set at the start of the period? If none were set, this review can only be qualitative — say so explicitly in the document.
- Concrete output data: pieces published, assets delivered, CPA/ROAS on campaigns they own, on-time rate, revisions per task.
- Specific observations from the period: 2-3 real situations (positive and negative) with dates.
Principles
- No surprises. Negative feedback is given when it happens, not saved for review day.
- Every statement needs evidence. "Hard-working" is not an assessment; "on time on 9 of 10 tasks, proposed two new content angles unprompted" is.
- Assess behavior, not character. Write "submitted late 3 times without notice", not "irresponsible".
- Rate consistently. Apply the same standard across the team; do not let personal rapport shift the scale.
- A review must produce a development plan. Without one it is just an unusable scorecard.
- The document is confidential. Leader and reviewee only.
Documentation caution
In many jurisdictions, written performance documentation carries employment-law weight and can be produced as evidence in a dispute. Write it accordingly:
- Record observable behavior and measurable outcomes with dates — what was delivered, when, against what agreed standard.
- Avoid subjective characterizations, comparisons to other individuals, and anything touching protected characteristics (age, gender, race, religion, disability, pregnancy, national origin, or similar).
- Do not put speculation about a person's attitude, motives, personal circumstances, or health in the document.
- Keep this review separate from any discussion of discipline, termination, or compensation changes. This skill does not give legal or HR advice. Anything termination-adjacent, any performance improvement plan with employment consequences, and any cross-border reporting line should go to HR or employment counsel before it is written or delivered.
