<!-- AUTO-GENERATED by export-plugins.py — DO NOT EDIT -->
name: hr-operations
description: Manage hiring pipelines, analyze compensation data, create performance review templates, and design onboarding checklists. Use when building HR processes, conducting comp analysis, designing review cycles, or structuring employee onboarding.
tags: [hr, hiring, compensation, performance-management]
HR Operations
Operational HR framework for hiring pipeline management, compensation analysis, performance reviews, and employee onboarding. Covers the process-oriented side of people operations — not strategic workforce planning (which is the CHRO agent's domain).
Use this skill when
- Designing or analyzing a hiring pipeline (stages, conversion rates, time-to-fill)
- Conducting compensation benchmarking and pay band analysis
- Creating performance review templates and calibration processes
- Building employee onboarding checklists (pre-start through 90 days)
- Calculating HR metrics (attrition, eNPS, cost-per-hire)
- Designing org-level review cycles
Do not use this skill when
- Setting company-wide people strategy or culture (use CHRO agent directly)
- Planning OKRs or goal-setting frameworks (use
brainstorm-okrs)
- Running employee engagement surveys (use CHRO agent for strategy)
- Handling legal employment matters (use
legal-contract-review for contract aspects)
Instructions
- Identify the HR operation — hiring, compensation, performance, or onboarding.
- Apply the relevant framework from the sections below.
- Use templates to standardize output across the organization.
- Track metrics using the HR Metrics Framework for ongoing measurement.
Hiring Pipeline Dashboard
Pipeline Stages & Benchmarks
| Stage | Description | Target Conversion | Target Duration |
|---|
| Sourced | Candidate identified (inbound or outbound) | — | — |
| Applied / Screened | Resume review passed | 20-30% of sourced | 2-3 days |
| Phone Screen | Recruiter screen completed | 40-60% of screened | 3-5 days |
| Technical / Skills Assessment | Skills evaluation passed | 30-50% of phone screens | 5-7 days |
| Onsite / Final Interview | Full interview loop completed | 50-70% of assessments | 5-10 days |
| Offer Extended | Offer made | 70-90% of onsites | 2-3 days |
| Offer Accepted | Candidate accepts | 80-90% of offers | 3-7 days |
| Started | First day completed | 95%+ of accepted | Per start date |
Pipeline Health Metrics
| Metric | Formula | Benchmark | Action if Off |
|---|
| Time-to-Fill | Days from req open to offer accepted | 30-45 days (IC), 45-60 days (manager+) | Review bottleneck stage |
| Cost-per-Hire | (Internal costs + External costs) / Hires | $3-5K (IC), $10-20K (senior/exec) | Optimize source mix |
| Source Effectiveness | Hires per source / Candidates per source | Referrals: 2-5x better than job boards | Invest in high-yield channels |
| Offer Acceptance Rate | Offers accepted / Offers extended | >85% | Review comp competitiveness |
| Quality of Hire | Performance rating at 6-12 months | >80% meeting/exceeding expectations | Review interview process |
Pipeline Report Template
## Hiring Pipeline — [Period]
**Open Requisitions:** [X] | **Hires This Period:** [X] | **Avg Time-to-Fill:** [X] days
| Role | Stage | Days in Stage | Recruiter | Hiring Manager | Notes |
|------|-------|--------------|-----------|----------------|-------|
| | | | | | |
### Funnel Conversion (Period)
| Stage Transition | Volume | Conversion | Benchmark | Delta |
|-----------------|--------|------------|-----------|-------|
| Sourced → Screened | | % | 25% | |
| Screened → Phone | | % | 50% | |
| Phone → Assessment | | % | 40% | |
| Assessment → Onsite | | % | 60% | |
| Onsite → Offer | | % | 80% | |
| Offer → Accepted | | % | 85% | |
Compensation Analysis Framework
Market Benchmarking Process
| Step | Action | Data Source |
|---|
| 1 | Define comparison cohort (industry, size, geo, role) | Radford, Pave, Levels.fyi, Option Impact |
| 2 | Pull market data at P25, P50, P75 | Survey data + real-time platforms |
| 3 | Map internal roles to market equivalents | Job architecture / leveling framework |
| 4 | Compare internal comp to market percentile targets | Internal HRIS data |
| 5 | Identify outliers (below P25 or above P75) | Comp analysis output |
| 6 | Build adjustment recommendations | Budget-constrained optimization |
Pay Band Design
| Level | P25 (Below Market) | P50 (Market Rate) | P75 (Above Market) | Spread |
|---|
| IC1 (Junior) | $ | $ | $ | ±15-20% |
| IC2 (Mid) | $ | $ | $ | ±15-20% |
| IC3 (Senior) | $ | $ | $ | ±20-25% |
| IC4 (Staff) | $ | $ | $ | ±20-25% |
| M1 (Manager) | $ | $ | $ | ±20-25% |
| M2 (Director) | $ | $ | $ | ±25-30% |
| M3 (VP) | $ | $ | $ | ±25-30% |
Total Compensation Modeling
| Component | IC (Individual Contributor) | Manager+ |
|---|
| Base Salary | 60-70% of total comp | 50-60% of total comp |
| Variable / Bonus | 10-15% | 15-25% |
| Equity (RSUs / Options) | 15-25% | 20-30% |
| Benefits | 5-10% | 5-10% |
Internal Equity Analysis
## Compensation Equity Review — [Department/Team]
| Employee | Role | Level | Tenure | Base | Total Comp | Market % | Compa-Ratio | Flag |
|----------|------|-------|--------|------|------------|----------|-------------|------|
| | | | | $ | $ | P[X] | X.XX | |
**Compa-Ratio:** Employee pay / Pay band midpoint (1.0 = at midpoint)
- <0.85 = Below range (retention risk)
- 0.85-1.15 = Within range (healthy)
- >1.15 = Above range (review justification)
Performance Review Templates
Self-Assessment Template
## Self-Assessment — [Name] — [Review Period]
### Accomplishments
1. [Achievement with quantified impact]
2. [Achievement with quantified impact]
3. [Achievement with quantified impact]
### Areas for Growth
1. [Skill or behavior to develop]
2. [Skill or behavior to develop]
### Goals for Next Period
1. [Specific, measurable goal]
2. [Specific, measurable goal]
### Career Aspirations
[Where I want to grow in the next 12-24 months]
Manager Assessment Template
## Manager Assessment — [Employee Name] — [Review Period]
### Performance Summary
**Overall Rating:** [Exceeds / Meets / Developing / Below]
### Key Accomplishments
1. [With business impact]
2. [With business impact]
### Strengths
- [Strength with evidence]
- [Strength with evidence]
### Development Areas
- [Area with specific examples and improvement plan]
- [Area with specific examples and improvement plan]
### Rating Justification
[Evidence-based narrative — avoid recency bias, include full period]
### Compensation Recommendation
- Merit increase: [X]%
- Promotion: [Yes/No — if yes, to what level]
- Equity refresh: [Yes/No — amount]
Calibration Process
| Step | Action | Participants |
|---|
| 1 | Managers submit initial ratings | Direct managers |
| 2 | Pre-calibration: review distribution | HR Business Partner |
| 3 | Calibration session: discuss outliers | Manager peers + skip-level |
| 4 | Adjust ratings based on cross-team view | Managers |
| 5 | Final approval | Department head |
| 6 | Deliver reviews to employees | Direct managers |
Rating Distribution Guidance (avoid forced ranking):
| Rating | Target Distribution | Notes |
|---|
| Exceeds Expectations | 15-20% | Truly exceptional, not just "good" |
| Meets Expectations | 60-70% | Solid performance at level |
| Developing | 10-15% | New to role or specific growth areas |
| Below Expectations | 5-10% | Requires performance improvement plan |
Employee Onboarding Checklist
Pre-Start (Before Day 1)
Week 1: Orientation
Day 30: Foundation
Day 60: Contribution
Day 90: Integration
HR Metrics Framework
| Metric | Formula | Benchmark | Frequency |
|---|
| Attrition Rate | Departures / Avg headcount x 100 | <15% annual (tech) | Monthly |
| Regrettable Turnover | High-performer departures / Total departures | <30% of total attrition | Quarterly |
| eNPS | % Promoters - % Detractors | >30 = good, >50 = excellent | Quarterly |
| Offer Acceptance Rate | Accepted / Extended x 100 | >85% | Monthly |
| Time-to-Fill | Avg days from req open to accepted | 30-45 days | Monthly |
| Cost-per-Hire | Total recruiting spend / Hires | $3-5K IC, $10-20K senior | Quarterly |
| Span of Control | Direct reports per manager | 5-8 (IC teams), 3-5 (manager of managers) | Annually |
| Diversity | % representation by dimension | Set org-specific targets | Quarterly |
Common Mistakes
- Compensation decisions without market data — internal perception of "fair pay" often diverges from market reality; always benchmark
- Performance reviews without clear criteria — vague criteria lead to bias; use rubrics tied to level expectations
- Onboarding that ends after Day 1 — orientation is not onboarding; the 30/60/90 framework is the minimum
- Hiring pipeline without source attribution — if you don't know which sources produce the best hires, you can't optimize
- Forced ranking — forces managers to label good performers as poor; use guided distribution instead
- Ignoring span of control — managers with 15+ reports cannot coach effectively; restructure before it becomes a retention issue
Additional Resources
- Related skill:
brainstorm-okrs (goal-setting alignment for performance reviews)
- Radford / Pave / Levels.fyi — compensation benchmarking data
- SHRM — HR operations best practices
<!-- Source: .faos/custom/skills/business/hr-operations/SKILL.md -->