Resources

Guide

How to use competencies in performance reviews

Use competencies in performance reviews by rating each person against the expectations for their Function, role track, and level, then supporting the rating with evidence from the review period. Keep one Function version fixed for the cycle, discuss rating differences in calibration, and update unclear criteria only for future cycles.

Published by Peasy HRPublished 18 Aug 2026Updated 18 Aug 2026

Short answer

Use competencies in performance reviews by rating each person against the expectations for their Function, role track, and level, then supporting the rating with evidence from the review period. Keep one Function version fixed for the cycle, discuss rating differences in calibration, and update unclear criteria only for future cycles.

Set the standard before kick-off

Assign each participant to the correct Function, role track, and level. Confirm that managers and employees can read the expectations before self-assessments begin.

Pin the published Function version to the cycle. Editing live criteria after people start writing changes the basis of the decision.

Ask for evidence by competency

A self-assessment or manager review should connect a claim to work from the period, then explain how that evidence meets or misses the level expectation. Useful evidence can include outcomes, decisions, artifacts, feedback, and changes adopted by others.

Do not rate personality or reward polished writing. Missing evidence may mean the competency was not observed, not that the person performed poorly.

Connect evidence to the expectation

Shows strong ownership and communication.

Flagged the launch dependency 2 weeks early, named an owner, and recorded the revised plan so both teams could adjust.

Use the rating scale consistently

Define what each rating means relative to the expected level. A rating scale should not replace the competency text or create a second standard.

Managers should explain the evidence behind ratings, especially when a rating is above or below expectations. Avoid averaging unrelated competencies into a story about overall character.

Calibrate decisions, then revise later

In calibration, compare how managers applied the same expectations. Use the Function text and evidence to resolve inconsistent interpretations, rather than adjusting a score to fit a distribution.

Record criteria that caused repeated confusion. After sign-off, update the next Function version while completed reviews keep the standard they originally used.

Sources

  • Peasy HR competency writing style guide: observable expectations and fair evidence.
  • Peasy HR review writing style guide: claims anchored in supplied evidence, calibrated ratings, and no invented facts.

Draft an evidence-based review

The free review writer can organize evidence into a first draft. Check every claim against the Function and rating scale used in your cycle.

Open the review writer

Common questions

Should every competency receive a rating?

Rate the competencies the cycle is designed to assess. If evidence was genuinely unavailable, use an explicit not observed path when your process supports it instead of inventing a score.

How much evidence should a review include?

Include enough specific evidence to support the rating and explain material gaps. One strong example may be enough for a narrow claim, while a broad or high-impact claim usually needs evidence across the period.

Can we change a competency during the cycle?

Do not change the standard for an active cycle. Clarify process questions for everyone, record content issues, and publish corrections in the version used by the next cycle.

Related resources

Review guide

Competency-based performance reviews

A competency-based review compares evidence with published expectations for the employee's level. Everyone in the cycle uses the same Function version, and each rating is supported by prose that explains the judgment.

Read guide

Review guide

Performance review calibration guide

Calibration aligns how leaders apply the same rating scale and Function expectations before reviews are finalized. A useful session compares evidence, tests edge cases, records decisions, and sends managers back with clear updates for each draft.

Read guide

Review guide

Performance review rating scales

A rating scale works when each point has an observable meaning against the employee's current level expectations. Keep the scale stable across the cycle, require evidence for each rating, and use calibration to resolve differences in interpretation.

Read guide
Competencies in performance reviews | Peasy HR