Should the Yearly Performance Review contain items only for that year? (employee, employer)

[Alley01]

I am getting conflicting reports about this. Thought I would get some input from the wise ones on this board! If you are doing a 2010 yearly review, should the only information cited in it pertain to 2010 or can you cite examples that happened the beginning of 2011?

[Nick99]

Pretty much limit it to 2010, although if advised of deficiencies in 2010 for which there is evidence of improvement in 2011, this is relevant. But then be prepared to discuss areas that may have deteriorated from 2010 to 2011, if applicable. It could cut both ways.

Also, obviously, projects that span both years would be topic for discussion

[manderly6]

I wouldn't talk about something that happened in 2011 unless it was started in 2010.

[ValueAddedWorker]

An annual performance review, assuming it's stated as covering one calendar year, should be limited to 2010 only.

[kodaka]

The term annual refers to a year. It does not have to refer to the calendar year. It could be fiscal year or school year or any other year-long period that you designate. Generally speaking, an annual performance review should cover everything that has happened since the last performance review.

If for some reason your company has a policy that prohibits evaluating an employee based on recent performance, you might avoid doing so in writing but still bring it up when meeting with them, so that they can address it promptly. It's stupid to wait a whole year to mention it when you have the opportunity now.

Furthermore, it could be a legal issue, if that performance issue is a firing offense. If something happens and you don't mention it in a performance review, and then fire them, they will almost certainly be eligible for benefits and the employer will be paying higher taxes.