Conduct Performance Reviews That Actually Work

Goal

Run performance reviews that techs actually value, that improve performance, + that don't feel like an HR ritual. Most service-business reviews are useless theater - once a year, painful, full of recency bias, ending in a small raise that demotivates more than it motivates. Reviews done right are a relationship-building tool that compounds retention + performance.

Prerequisites

• 90 minutes per review (60-min review + 30-min prep)
• Quarterly cadence (NOT annual; annual is too long a feedback loop)
• Clear documented expectations for the role (otherwise feedback is unfair)
• Prior data: KPIs, customer feedback, callback rate, peer feedback
• Private space, no interruptions
• Both parties prepared (tech fills out self-assessment ahead of time)

Steps

Step 1: Prep before the meeting (30 min)

1. Pull the data:

• Jobs completed, average ticket, close rate, gross margin per job
• Customer reviews + survey scores
• Callback rate + safety incidents
• Time card / attendance
• Peer feedback (collected via brief survey to 2-3 coworkers)

1. Review their self-assessment (sent 1 week ahead). Notable gaps between their view + the data?
2. Identify 3 strengths + 1-2 growth areas. Specific examples, not abstractions.
3. Pre-write 2-3 questions to ask them. Genuine curiosity, not "gotcha."
4. Decide on compensation in advance (if review is comp-tied). Don't surprise yourself + don't surprise them.

Step 2: Open the meeting (5 min)

1. Set tone: "This is a conversation, not a performance evaluation. I want to know what's working for you + what's not."
2. Confirm time + format: "We'll cover [WHAT], should take about an hour. Stop me if anything's unclear."
3. Confidentiality: "Anything you share stays between us unless we agree to discuss it elsewhere."

Step 3: Their perspective first (15 min)

1. "What's gone well this quarter?" Don't fish for self-praise; ask open question, listen.
2. "What's been frustrating or hard?" Real answer here is the gold. Listen without defending.
3. "What do you want to grow toward?" Tech career direction matters. They may not have a clear answer; that's OK.
4. "What's getting in your way?" This is your homework - fix what they identify.

Take notes. Pay attention. Do NOT solve problems in this section.

Step 4: Your perspective (15 min)

1. Lead with strengths: 2-3 specific examples of what they've done well
2. Coach on growth areas: 1-2 specific behaviors to develop. Frame as "let's grow X" not "you're bad at X"
3. Be specific with examples: "On the Smith job March 15, I noticed..." not vague generalizations
4. Hand over the data: KPIs in writing, walk through together
5. Ask for their response: "How does this land for you? Anything I'm missing or wrong about?"

Step 5: Co-create the development plan (15 min)

1. Pick 2-3 things to focus on next quarter (not 10). Examples:

• Improve close rate by 10% via better discovery questions
• Reduce callbacks by 30% via documented quality checklist
• Complete X certification by Q-end

1. Specifically what they'll do + what you'll do to support them
2. Measurable + time-bound: how will we know it worked?
3. Schedule check-in in 30 days

Step 6: Compensation discussion (5 min, if applicable)

1. Don't make it the focal point of the review. Comp is downstream of performance, not the point of the conversation.
2. Be transparent: "Based on [PERFORMANCE], your new rate effective [DATE] is [RATE]."
3. Tie it to the data: "Hitting [METRIC] is why this raise reflects [AMOUNT]."
4. No haggling: this should be predetermined by your comp structure; if you've decided, stick.
5. No surprises: if they're not getting a raise, they should have known by mid-quarter, not in this meeting.

Step 7: Close (5 min)

1. Recap: "Here's what we agreed - [3 priorities, check-in date]."
2. Thank them: "I appreciate the candor. This kind of conversation is how we both get better."
3. Open door: "If anything comes up before our next check-in, come find me."
4. Document: write up notes within 24 hours, share with them, save to their file.

Acceptance criteria

• Tech leaves with 2-3 specific, measurable growth priorities
• You've heard at least one thing you didn't already know
• The conversation didn't feel like a performance evaluation
• Documentation captured + shared
• 30-day check-in on calendar

Common mistakes

• Doing it annually: feedback loop too slow. Quarterly minimum.
• Recency bias: only last 2 weeks recalled. Solution: track throughout the year, refer to data.
• One-way conversation: you talk, they listen. Bad. Should be 50/50.
• Mixing comp + development: comp gets all the focus. Better: separate meetings or strongly compartmentalize.
• No follow-up: nothing changes between reviews. Worst possible outcome.
• Generalizations: "you need to work on attitude." Means nothing actionable.
• Sandwich technique (good-bad-good): people see through it. Better: be direct + kind.

When a review goes badly

Sometimes a tech doesn't want feedback. Sometimes their performance is genuinely bad + they're not improving. Signs:

• They argue every piece of feedback
• They blame everyone else for their results
• They've heard this feedback before + nothing has changed

If you're at this point, the review is too late - they should already be on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP). Reviews are for growing employees, not firing them. If you're going to fire someone, that's a separate conversation; don't pretend a review is one.

References

• Patrick Lencioni, "The Advantage" - leadership tools
• Kim Scott, "Radical Candor" - feedback philosophy
• Manuall internal: Technician Compensation Plans for Service Businesses, Hiring Your First Technician