Goal Cascading & Performance Reviews Flashcards

A manager rates a high-performing employee lower than deserved because the employee had one highly visible failure late in the year. This is an example of:

Answer: Horn effect

The horn effect occurs when one negative incident disproportionately lowers a manager's overall assessment of an employee, overshadowing their broader performance.

In a performance review conversation, a manager should spend the majority of time on:

Answer: Discussing future development opportunities and goal-setting for the next period

Effective performance conversations are forward-looking; spending most time on development and future goals drives growth more than backward-looking rating justification.

What is the key difference between an output-based goal and an outcome-based goal in performance management?

Answer: Output-based goals focus on activity volume; outcome-based goals focus on the business result or impact produced

Output goals measure what was produced (e.g., number of calls made), while outcome goals measure the business impact of that activity (e.g., revenue generated per call).

A manager is preparing for annual review calibration and realizes her ratings skew significantly higher than her peers'. What should she do before the calibration session?

Answer: Bring supporting documentation for each rating to justify her assessments to peers

Bringing evidence-based documentation allows the manager to defend legitimate high ratings or identify where leniency bias may have inflated scores.

When cascading a company goal of 'increase customer retention by 10%' to a software engineering team, which individual goal best reflects appropriate cascading?

Answer: 'Reduce customer-reported critical bugs by 30% within six months'

Reducing critical bugs directly contributes to customer retention through improved product stability, creating a measurable link between the engineering role and the company objective.

Which practice in goal-setting helps prevent 'goal displacement,' where employees meet the letter of a goal but violate its intent?

Answer: Pairing quantitative goals with qualitative behavioral expectations

Pairing quantitative metrics with qualitative behavioral guardrails ensures employees pursue both the number and the spirit of the goal without gaming the metric.

An employee disagrees with their performance rating and requests a formal review. As a people manager, the most appropriate first step is to:

Answer: Listen actively, review the documented evidence together, and explain the rating rationale clearly

Active listening and a transparent walkthrough of documented evidence demonstrates respect for the employee, ensures due process, and often resolves disagreements without escalation.