HR playbook · AI Employee: Harry

Performance Review Cycle Kickoff

100% cycle completion before deadline

Install this playbookBack to marketplace
The problem

Review cycles are quarterly chaos disguised as process. HR sends the launch email; two weeks later half the org hasn't started; managers chase reports for self-reviews while writing their own; calibration meetings happen with half the data missing; the cycle stretches from 4 weeks to 8 and the last third of managers submit at midnight before the deadline. The tool tracks completion; nothing coordinates the humans.

At a glance
Trigger
Cron (cycle start)
Approvals
HR review of cycle setup
What it does
Writes to your systems
Systems
Lattice · 15Five · Slack
How it feels in production

An hour-by-hour walkthrough.

The cycle kicks off Monday. Remy takes the roster from Workday (who's eligible — must be past probation, still employed, in a review-eligible role) and generates a per-manager launch packet: their reports, each report's peers-to-request-feedback-from suggestion (based on collaboration graph — who did they cc, review with, meet with), the review templates for each role. Each manager receives a Slack DM: "Q3 review cycle is open. You have 6 reports. Suggested peers to request feedback from per report (edit before sending). Self-review deadline for your reports: Sept 20. Manager review deadline: Oct 4. Calibration meetings: Oct 8-11." Through the cycle, Remy tracks progress and nudges: - Report hasn't started self-review 5 days before deadline → gentle Slack nudge - Peer feedback request pending 7 days → nudge the peer with the specific ask - Manager review draft empty 3 days before manager deadline → Slack nudge with the report's self-review + peer feedback attached - Calibration meeting: 24 hours before, Remy assembles the pre-read (all reviews for the calibration group, distribution vs. targets, outliers to discuss) and DMs each attending manager Weekly HR digest: completion by department, at-risk reviews, calibration attendance, distribution health. Cycle finishes on time, calibration meetings have data ready, HR spends the freed-up hours on the reviews that need judgment instead of the completion chase.
How it works

Step by step.

  1. 01

    Assemble eligibility + peer-feedback suggestions

    Read HRIS for eligible reviewees (past probation, still employed, role-eligible). Suggest peer-feedback contacts per reviewee from the collaboration graph — email cc frequency, shared meetings, code-review overlap, cross-team project participation.

    Workday · Google Calendar · Email · GitHub · Slack (collaboration signals)
  2. 02

    Manager launch packets with editable defaults

    Per-manager Slack DM: their reports, suggested peer-feedback contacts per report (with reasoning), templates + deadlines. Manager can edit peer list before Remy sends the requests.

    Slack · Teams · Review platform (Lattice · Culture Amp · 15Five · Betterworks)
  3. 03

    Send + track every review + peer request

    Self-review invitations to reports, peer-feedback requests to nominated peers, manager review templates prefilled with links to the report's OKRs + 1:1 notes + last review. Every send tracked; every response tied back.

    Review platform · Email · Slack
  4. 04

    Graduated nudges + pre-read for calibration

    Nudge cadence for stalled steps. 24 hours before calibration, Remy assembles: all reviews in the group, distribution vs. targets, outliers to discuss, unresolved 360 conflicts. DMs each attending manager with the pre-read.

    Slack · Teams · Calibration document generator
  5. 05

    Weekly HR digest + cycle-closure record

    Weekly digest: completion by dept, at-risk reviews, calibration attendance, distribution health. Post-cycle: closure record with cycle-time metrics, completion rate, feedback quality signals, next-cycle recommendations.

    Analytics · Slack digest · HRIS closure event
Systems and wiring

What you connect to make this run.

Lattice · Culture Amp · 15Five · Betterworks · Workday

read+write

Review platform is the system of record. Remy writes self-review invitations, peer requests, manager review templates. Reads completion state. Never modifies review content — that's the reviewer's authorial space.

Workday · BambooHR · HiBob

read

Roster + eligibility + manager relationships + tenure. Probation status + role eligibility drive the eligible-reviewee set. Manager relationships drive routing.

Google Calendar · Email · GitHub · Slack

read

Collaboration signals for peer-feedback suggestion. Frequent 1:1 partners, cross-team project collaborators, code reviewers, shared-meeting attendees — no signal on its own; combined signal drives suggestions.

Analytics · Reporting

read+write

Cycle-time, completion rate, calibration attendance, distribution vs. targets. Feeds HR planning + comp-cycle prep. Historic trends inform next-cycle timing recommendations.

What changes

Before and after, honestly.

Cycle duration (kickoff to close)
Before
8-12 weeks (chronic slippage)
After
4-6 weeks (on the published timeline)
% of reviews complete by deadline
Before
55-75%
After
94%+ (graduated nudges catch stallers early)
Peer feedback response rate
Before
30-50%
After
70-85% (context in the ask + nudges close the gap)
HR hours per cycle chasing completion
Before
80-160 hours
After
12-25 hours (only escalations + exceptions)
Related

Playbooks that pair with this one.

HR

Performance & Feedback Routing

Continuous performance signals feed each cycle's context.

HR

Compensation Requests

Comp cycle follows review cycle; calibration outcomes feed comp recommendations.

HR

30/60/90-Day Check-Ins

Early-tenure cadence sets the pattern for later formal cycles.

Frequently asked

Answers about this playbook.

How does it handle managers with 15+ reports?

Large teams get earlier launch (2 weeks head-start on the cycle) and stronger draft assistance (Remy prefills the review template with 1:1 notes + OKR progress + peer highlights; manager edits rather than writing blank).

Can peer-feedback suggestions be overridden by policy?

Yes — HR can require certain reviewers (functional lead, cross-team partner) or exclude certain relationships (recent hire, first 60 days). Suggestions become policy-filtered defaults.

What about 360-review anonymity?

Remy respects the review platform's anonymity settings. If peers are anonymous, Remy handles the nudge without revealing who's been asked. Managers see aggregate signals only per the platform's rules.

How does it handle reorgs mid-cycle?

Manager-change-cascade playbook coordinates. In-progress reviews stay with the outgoing manager if past halfway; otherwise transfer with the outgoing manager's notes attached to the incoming manager's context.

Does it work for continuous performance-management (no cycles)?

Yes — configuration says the cycle is quarterly / semi-annual / continuous. Continuous mode fires per-employee milestones (12 months in role, 90-day check-ins) instead of company-wide cycles.

See it run on your data.

Free plan, no credit card. Connect the systems this playbook needs and run it against a past event first.

Book a demoMore HR playbooks