perf-calibrationlisted

# Performance calibration Calibration exists because a rating set by a single manager reflects that manager's standards, generosity, and blind spots as much as the employee's work. Putting managers in one room to defend ratings against a shared rubric surfaces the inconsistencies and the biases before anything reaches an employee. Done badly, it just hands the outcome to whoever argues hardest. ## Method 1. **Bring evidence, not adjectives.** Each manager arrives with specific, dated examples tied to the rubric's dimensions: what was delivered, its scope, its impact. "She's a rock star" is not calibratable; "she owned the X launch at senior scope, with result Y" is. Rule out claims no one can check. 2. **Anchor every rating to the rubric level.** Read the written definition of each rating band and place people against it, not against each other's vibes. When two managers rate similar work differently, resolve it by returning to the anchor, so the standard is the rubric and not the room's mood. 3. **Compare like work across managers.** Line up people at the same level and ask whether a "meets" from one team would be a "meets" on another. This cross-manager comparison is the whole point: it catches the lenient grader and the harsh one and pulls both toward a common bar. 4. **Run bias interrupts explicitly.** Name the biases in the moment: recency (weighting the last month over the year), halo and horns (one trait coloring everything), and sim