This framework helps managers provide clear and accurate feedback during employee appraisals, ensuring ratings genuinely reflect the performance and contributions of rtCampers. It also helps rtCampers to better understand and act on the feedback they receive.
Appraisal Feedback Overview:
Contents
- Appraisals are designed to evaluate the overall performance of an rtCamper over the entire year.
- As a manager, your role is to compile and summarize quarterly feedbacks/performance over the past 1 year into a cohesive final report that reflects the rtCamper’s performance level.
Please review the breakdown below to accurately select the type of rating and appraisal.
| No. of Stars | Core Value | Core Value description | Appraisal type |
|---|---|---|---|
| ⭐️ | Poor | Consistently fails to meet job requirements, with frequent errors, missed deadlines, and a need for constant supervision. | No appraisal at all |
| ⭐️⭐️ | Below Expectations | Often falls short of expectations with inconsistent performance and a need for more supervision; improvement is needed. | On lower side |
| ⭐️⭐️⭐️ | Meets Expectations | Reliably performs tasks to expected standards with normal supervision and occasional guidance for complex tasks. | Average |
| ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ | Above Expectations | Exceeds basic duties, takes on additional responsibilities, and shows strong skills and initiative with minimal supervision. | On higher side |
| ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ | Excellent | Far exceeds expectations, mentoring and leading with expert skills and exceptional performance, requiring no supervision. | Maximum |
Interpreting Client Feedback for Staff Augmentation Engagements (if applicable):
Contributors to the Final Feedback Rating:
- The feedback recorded for a given period is based on three parameters –
- External – Performance feedback shared by clients
- Internal – Maintaining internal consistency and discipline standards
- Team/community contributions – Making contributions to the rtCamp team or WordPress community, outside expected deliverables
- The following feedback form is shared with staff augmentation clients –
Interpreting Feedback:
- A team member’s final rating is based on the majority of feedback received. For example, if a member is rated “Above Expectations” in three out of four performance areas, their final feedback will be “Above Expectations.”
- If a team member receives “Meets Expectations” in two areas and “Above Expectations” in two others, internal feedback and team contributions will influence the final rating.
- Note: Any underperformance during the period will impact the final rating, and CAM/PM discretion applies.
- Example 1: If a team member frequently needed reminders for time entries, their feedback remains “Meets Expectations.”
- Example 2: If a member consistently updated entries on time, they would receive “Above Expectations.”
- Note – Time entry is just an example and can be replaced with any other communicated guidelines/feedback.
Other Tips:
- Ensure client feedback aligns with the role’s expectations.
- Seek more details from the client if feedback is general (especially if negative).
- Consistent performance throughout the year should determine higher ratings, not recent or isolated feedback.
- Team members needing clarification should contact their project or reporting manager first, who will reach out to the client if required.
Rating Guidelines:
- Meets Expectations (3 stars): Performance aligns with expectations, requires little to no improvement for client satisfaction.
- Above Expectations (4 stars): Additional positive feedback and work quality that goes beyond the regular goals assigned.
- Excellent (5 stars): “Above Expectations” in all areas, in addition to meeting rtCamp’s consistency and discipline guidelines. Any additional internal/WordPress community contributions will be considered.