Master performance management, goal-setting, OKRs, reviews, feedback, and metrics for engineering teams
Provides engineering managers with frameworks for performance management, including OKR templates, performance review structures, and PIP documentation. Use this when setting goals, conducting reviews, or addressing performance concerns with team members.
/plugin marketplace add pluginagentmarketplace/custom-plugin-engineering-manager/plugin install engineering-manager-assistant@pluginagentmarketplace-engineering-managerThis skill inherits all available tools. When active, it can use any tool Claude has access to.
assets/performance_config.yamlreferences/PERFORMANCE_GUIDE.mdscripts/performance_tracker.pyProvide engineering managers with frameworks for effective performance management, goal-setting, OKRs, reviews, and continuous feedback.
Agent: hiring-performance-agent Relationship: This skill provides review templates, OKR frameworks, and feedback models that the agent uses.
okr_template:
metadata:
owner: "{Name}"
quarter: "{Q1 2025}"
created: "{Date}"
last_reviewed: "{Date}"
objective:
statement: "{Qualitative, inspirational goal}"
why: "{Why this matters to team/company}"
key_results:
kr1:
metric: "{Specific measurable outcome}"
baseline: "{Where we are today}"
target: "{Where we want to be}"
current: null
confidence: "70%"
initiatives:
- "{Action to achieve this}"
kr2:
metric: "{Another measurable outcome}"
baseline: "{Current state}"
target: "{Target state}"
current: null
confidence: "70%"
kr3:
metric: "{Third measurable outcome}"
baseline: "{Current}"
target: "{Target}"
current: null
confidence: "70%"
scoring:
"0.0-0.3": "Failed to make progress"
"0.4-0.6": "Made progress but fell short"
"0.7-0.9": "Delivered (target zone)"
"1.0": "Fully achieved (might not have been ambitious enough)"
review_cadence:
weekly: "Quick progress check"
monthly: "Deep review, adjust if needed"
quarterly: "Final scoring and retrospective"
performance_review:
metadata:
employee: "{Name}"
level: "{Current level}"
manager: "{Manager name}"
review_period: "{Date range}"
review_date: "{Date}"
overall_rating:
scale: "[1-5]"
rating: null
summary: ""
rating_definitions:
5: "Exceptional - Top 5%, role model, exceptional impact"
4: "Exceeds - Frequently exceeds expectations"
3: "Meets - Consistently meets expectations"
2: "Developing - Partially meets, improving"
1: "Below - Does not meet, action needed"
goal_review:
goal_1:
description: "{Goal from last review}"
target: "{What success looked like}"
result: "{What was achieved}"
rating: null
learning: ""
goal_2:
description: ""
target: ""
result: ""
rating: null
competency_assessment:
technical_excellence:
rating: null
strengths: []
growth_areas: []
evidence: ""
collaboration:
rating: null
strengths: []
growth_areas: []
evidence: ""
communication:
rating: null
strengths: []
growth_areas: []
evidence: ""
ownership:
rating: null
strengths: []
growth_areas: []
evidence: ""
impact:
rating: null
strengths: []
growth_areas: []
evidence: ""
peer_feedback_summary:
themes: []
quotes: []
development_plan:
strengths_to_leverage: []
focus_areas:
- area: ""
action: ""
timeline: ""
success_metric: ""
support_needed: []
resources: []
next_period_goals:
goal_1:
description: ""
success_criteria: ""
alignment: ""
career_discussion:
aspirations: ""
timeline_to_next_level: ""
gaps_to_address: []
sbi_feedback:
model:
situation: "In {specific context/meeting/moment}..."
behavior: "I observed/noticed {specific observable behavior}..."
impact: "The impact was {effect on team/project/individual}..."
examples:
positive:
situation: "In yesterday's design review"
behavior: "you asked probing questions that helped us identify a critical edge case"
impact: "which likely saved us a week of rework and improved the design"
constructive:
situation: "In the last sprint planning"
behavior: "you committed to more story points than you could complete"
impact: "which meant the team had to scramble to cover, affecting our sprint goal"
best_practices:
- "Be specific (not 'you're doing great' but 'your documentation was thorough')"
- "Be timely (within 48 hours of the event)"
- "Focus on behavior (not personality)"
- "Be balanced (both positive and constructive)"
- "Make it a conversation (not a lecture)"
performance_improvement_plan:
metadata:
employee: "{Name}"
manager: "{Name}"
hr_partner: "{Name}"
start_date: "{Date}"
end_date: "{Date}"
duration: "{30/60/90 days}"
performance_concerns:
concern_1:
area: "{Specific area of concern}"
examples:
- "{Specific instance with date}"
- "{Another specific instance}"
expected_standard: "{What 'good' looks like}"
concern_2:
area: ""
examples: []
expected_standard: ""
improvement_goals:
goal_1:
description: "{Specific, measurable improvement}"
success_criteria: "{How we'll know it's achieved}"
timeline: "{When by}"
support_provided: "{Training, mentoring, etc.}"
goal_2:
description: ""
success_criteria: ""
timeline: ""
support_provided: ""
check_in_schedule:
- date: "{Week 1}"
focus: "{Initial check-in}"
- date: "{Week 2}"
focus: "{Progress review}"
- date: "{Midpoint}"
focus: "{Formal midpoint review}"
- date: "{Final}"
focus: "{Final evaluation}"
outcomes:
successful: "Return to good standing, continue employment"
unsuccessful: "Separation from company"
acknowledgement:
employee_signature: ""
manager_signature: ""
date: ""
Individual assessment complete
|
+-- Compare to level expectations
| +-- Exceeds level consistently? -> Consider 4 or 5
| +-- Meets level consistently? -> 3
| +-- Below level? -> 2 or below
|
+-- Compare to peers at same level
| +-- Top quartile? -> Lean toward 4+
| +-- Middle half? -> Likely 3
| +-- Bottom quartile? -> Likely 2 or below
|
+-- Review evidence quality
| +-- Specific examples documented? -> Trust rating
| +-- Vague or missing? -> Reconsider, gather more
|
+-- Final calibration with peers
+-- Adjust for consistency across org
Performance concern identified
|
+-- Is this a new issue?
| +-- Yes -> Give feedback, set expectations, monitor
| +-- No -> Continue
|
+-- Has feedback been given previously?
| +-- No -> Give clear feedback first, document
| +-- Yes -> Continue
|
+-- Has there been time to improve (4-8 weeks)?
| +-- No -> Allow time, provide support
| +-- Yes -> Continue
|
+-- Is there a pattern of underperformance?
| +-- No -> May be temporary, continue coaching
| +-- Yes -> Consider PIP
|
+-- Is the issue coachable?
+-- Yes -> Start PIP with clear goals
+-- No -> May need immediate action (HR consult)
anti_patterns:
recency_bias:
symptom: "Only remembering last month of performance"
remedy:
- "Keep running notes throughout period"
- "Review goals quarterly"
- "Collect feedback continuously"
rating_inflation:
symptom: "Everyone is 'exceeds expectations'"
remedy:
- "Calibration sessions"
- "Distribution guidelines"
- "Manager training"
surprise_reviews:
symptom: "First time hearing about issues at review"
remedy:
- "Continuous feedback culture"
- "Monthly check-ins on goals"
- "No surprises rule"
personality_focus:
symptom: "Rating the person, not the work"
remedy:
- "Evidence-based reviews"
- "Specific examples required"
- "Behavior focus"
S - Specific: Clear and well-defined
M - Measurable: Quantifiable outcomes
A - Achievable: Realistic but challenging
R - Relevant: Aligned with team/company goals
T - Time-bound: Clear deadline
Example:
Bad: "Improve code quality"
Good: "Reduce production incidents by 30% in Q2
by implementing automated testing for
critical paths, measured by PagerDuty data"
| Type | Cadence | Format |
|---|---|---|
| Quick praise | Daily | Slack/in-person |
| Constructive | Within 48h of event | Private 1-on-1 |
| Goal progress | Weekly in 1-on-1 | Documented |
| Formal review | Semi-annual | Written + meeting |
| Rating | Target % | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | ~5% | Exceptional, role model |
| 4 | ~20% | Exceeds consistently |
| 3 | ~50% | Meets expectations fully |
| 2 | ~20% | Developing, improving |
| 1 | ~5% | Below, needs action |
| Problem | Root Cause | Solution |
|---|---|---|
| Goals not achieved | Unclear or unrealistic | Use SMART, check in weekly |
| Surprises at review | No ongoing feedback | Continuous feedback culture |
| Rating disagreements | Different standards | Calibration sessions |
| PIP fails | Wrong fit, not coachable | Better hiring, earlier intervention |
input_validation:
review_type:
type: enum
values: [annual, mid_year, quarterly, pip]
required: true
employee_level:
type: enum
values: [junior, mid, senior, staff, principal, manager]
required: false
timeline:
type: enum
values: [30_day, 60_day, 90_day]
required: false
Books:
Frameworks:
This skill should be used when the user asks to "create a slash command", "add a command", "write a custom command", "define command arguments", "use command frontmatter", "organize commands", "create command with file references", "interactive command", "use AskUserQuestion in command", or needs guidance on slash command structure, YAML frontmatter fields, dynamic arguments, bash execution in commands, user interaction patterns, or command development best practices for Claude Code.
This skill should be used when the user asks to "create an agent", "add an agent", "write a subagent", "agent frontmatter", "when to use description", "agent examples", "agent tools", "agent colors", "autonomous agent", or needs guidance on agent structure, system prompts, triggering conditions, or agent development best practices for Claude Code plugins.
This skill should be used when the user asks to "create a hook", "add a PreToolUse/PostToolUse/Stop hook", "validate tool use", "implement prompt-based hooks", "use ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}", "set up event-driven automation", "block dangerous commands", or mentions hook events (PreToolUse, PostToolUse, Stop, SubagentStop, SessionStart, SessionEnd, UserPromptSubmit, PreCompact, Notification). Provides comprehensive guidance for creating and implementing Claude Code plugin hooks with focus on advanced prompt-based hooks API.