5 Mistakes Managers Make That Sabotage Performance Reviews

Performance reviews are arguably the most important structured conversation a manager has all year. They are not merely an administrative exercise in rating employees; they are a critical cultural touchpoint that defines expectations, shapes careers, and dictates engagement.

Yet, time and again, managers—often through poor training or hurried execution—make easily avoidable mistakes that turn this process into a source of anxiety, resentment, and attrition.

As the guardians of the employee experience, HR must equip managers to sidestep these five common pitfalls and transform reviews into powerful drivers of growth.

5 Performance Review Mistakes Manager Should Avoid

1. The Recency Bias Trap

The human memory is notoriously short. We tend to overemphasize events that happened most recently, typically in the last 60-90 days, while giving short shrift to the nine months of work that preceded them.

The Mistake: A manager focuses 80% of the review on a great presentation the employee gave last month or a major crisis they recently averted, ignoring a full year of consistent, baseline performance. Conversely, a single Q4 failure can overshadow a year of excellence.
The Cultural Fix: HR must mandate and audit a Rolling Evidence Log. Managers must be required to collect and timestamp specific, tangible examples of both positive and corrective feedback quarterly. The review becomes a synthesis of this log, not a spontaneous recollection based on the manager's current memory.

2. Confusing Personality with Performance

This mistake centers on the difference between "how I feel about you" and "what you accomplished." Managers often default to rating employees based on subjective factors like agreeability, effort, or how much face-time they spend in the office.

The Mistake: The manager rates a quiet, efficient remote worker lower than a less productive but highly visible ‘office chatterbox’. The feedback focuses on personality traits ("needs to be more of a self-starter") rather than objective metrics ("Project X was delivered 15% under budget").
The Cultural Fix: Introduce Anchored Behavioral Rating Scales (BARS). This is HR's job. Provide managers with clear, behaviorally-specific examples for each rating level. For example, instead of rating "Communication," rate "Clarity of Project Updates" with specific examples:
- High Rating: "Proactively summarizes project status in a weekly 5-bullet email, identifying risks and dependencies."
- Low Rating: "Only provides status updates when directly asked, often missing key metrics."

3. The "Sandwich" Feedback Disaster

The classic feedback sandwich—a positive comment, the negative criticism, followed by another positive comment—is a widely debunked but persistent managerial myth.

The Mistake: This approach often confuses the employee and dilutes the critical message. The employee leaves the review clinging to the two positive pieces and completely missing the core area that needs correction. It also makes the positive feedback feel insincere and manipulative.
The Cultural Fix: Train managers on the Dedicated Coaching Conversation. Positive recognition and constructive criticism must be separated. Use the review for holistic assessment and goal setting. If specific corrective feedback is necessary, it should have already happened in a dedicated, timely coaching session long before the formal review date.

4. Focusing Exclusively on Past Failures

A performance review that dwells solely on mistakes made over the last 12 months is an accountability session, not a development tool.

The Mistake: The manager treats the review as a recitation of grievances and missed targets, leaving the employee feeling defensive, demotivated, and focused on finding a new job.
The Cultural Fix: The 70/30 Future Focus. HR should structure the review document to mandate that 70% of the conversation time be dedicated to the future. This includes development plans, required training, new career goals, and discussing how the company can support the employee's growth in the coming year. This transforms the review from an evaluation of worth into a plan for success.

5. Missing the Crucial Context Discussion

The most common reason an employee underperforms is not a lack of effort or skill, but a lack of organisational support, resources, or clarity. Managers often fail to ask the critical question that uncovers these barriers.

The Mistake: The manager simply rates the outcome without exploring the context. They might say, "You failed to hit the Q3 sales target," instead of asking, "What organisational constraints (e.g., lack of marketing support, faulty CRM, poor product alignment) prevented you from hitting the Q3 sales target?"
The Cultural Fix: Mandate a Manager Self-Review section within every performance document. The manager must answer: "What resources, support, or clarity did I fail to provide that impacted this employee's performance?" This shifts accountability from a singular employee problem to a joint organisational opportunity.

By addressing these five mistakes, HR elevates the performance review from a mandated chore to a genuine tool for continuous improvement and cultural reinforcement.

For leaders carrying more than their job titles…

Be part of Malaysia Immersion Week 2026!

Join us for an 8-day journey (June 24–July 1, 2026) designed for leaders who want time and space to connect with like-minded business leaders. You’ll gain VIP access to the Malaysia Leadership Summit, engage in masterclasses with global leaders, and experience cultural immersion that offers fresh perspective on yourself and your team.