Why is my team not on the agenda?
Because every away-from-middle rating you wrote named something checkable, nothing on file contradicts any of them, the goals were in force, and nobody moved two levels. Those 155 rows are ratified in one act by a named signer, which is a recorded decision rather than the meeting running out of time. Running the cycle that way is how the agenda gets shorter.
Do you force a distribution?
No, and the worked example is the proof. Thirteen ratings changed and the spread moved by one row. A distribution tells you where to look. Two managers with identical spreads can be doing opposite things, and only the evidence behind the ratings separates them.
How do you tell a lenient manager from a strong team?
Evidence density, never the histogram. Nine high ratings that each name a shipped deliverable or a date met are a strong team. Nine that read like character references are a fact about the manager. The action for the first is nothing at all. The same test runs on a hiring loop.
Is a rating of four out of five evidence?
No. A number is a conclusion the manager reached, and the register asks what it was reached from. Evidence is something an outsider could go and check: the migration that went live on the committed date, the training week she ran, the deadline missed and the dependency behind it.
What happens to the low ratings nobody argues about?
They get a defensibility check as a document review rather than meeting time: a prior written record dated before the cycle closed, a named outcome, nothing inconsistent on file. Seven of eight passed in the worked example. The one that failed kept its rating and lost its improvement plan.
Why does every change need a sentence?
Because the employee never sees the meeting, only a manager delivering a rating. A manager who cannot explain a change either says it went to calibration or invents a reason. EEOC guidance recommends employees can have appraisals reviewed and corrected (Section 15), and an unexplainable rating cannot survive that.
Do you look at ratings by demographic group?
Yes, at company level, because ratings feeding promotion and pay form part of a selection decision and impact is expected to be disclosable by group (29 CFR 1607.4). Only two of six cuts passed the threshold here, and saying so beats four meaningless ratios. Onboarding evidence starts in the onboarding pack.
Distribution by Manager