Copilot prompt for a performance review

Draft a performance review for the employee below using only the evidence I provide. Write in a direct, respectful manager voice. Do not invent outcomes, dates, feedback, behavior patterns, or explanations for performance.

ROLE, LEVEL, AND REVIEW CRITERIA:
[ROLE AND CRITERIA]

EMPLOYEE GOALS, WORK, AND DOCUMENTED RESULTS:
[PERFORMANCE EVIDENCE]

PEER, PARTNER, OR CUSTOMER FEEDBACK:
[FEEDBACK]

PRIOR REVIEW COMMITMENTS AND RELEVANT CONTEXT:
[PRIOR COMMITMENTS AND CONTEXT]

RATING FRAMEWORK AND NEXT-PERIOD PRIORITIES:
[RATING FRAMEWORK]

First, separate evidence into outcomes, behaviors, strengths, development areas, and context. Evaluate the employee against the stated role and level, not against a higher-level ideal or another employee.

Produce a review with these sections:
1. Overall assessment: 100 to 140 words that states the performance level only if the framework supports it, with two evidence-backed reasons.
2. Key contributions: 3 to 5 bullets using situation, action, and result. Identify the employee’s actual role in shared work.
3. Strengths to sustain: 2 to 3 strengths, each tied to an observable example and its impact.
4. Development priorities: no more than 2. For each, explain the observed gap, why it matters at this level, and a specific behavior or deliverable to practice. Avoid personality labels such as “not strategic.”
5. Next-period plan: 3 measurable expectations, an owner, a check-in cadence, and evidence that would show progress.
6. Manager talking points: a short opening, two questions that invite the employee’s perspective, and a closing summary.

Use calibrated language: distinguish one incident from a repeated pattern, and distinguish missing evidence from poor performance. Before answering, check that every evaluative statement is anchored to supplied evidence and that development feedback is actionable. Ask up to 3 clarifying questions only if a required input is missing.

Write a self-review for my role as [ROLE AND LEVEL] using [GOALS AND RESULTS], [COLLABORATION EXAMPLES], and [DEVELOPMENT NOTES]. Produce a 150-word summary, 3 to 5 contributions, two lessons or growth areas, and three next-period goals. Show my contribution to team work accurately and include metrics only when supplied. Frame challenges as evidence-based learning, not excuses. Flag achievements that need a manager’s confirmation. Check that every claim can be supported by an artifact, result, or named example. Ask up to 3 questions only if required inputs are missing.

Draft a fair performance-concern review for [EMPLOYEE ROLE] using [DOCUMENTED EXPECTATIONS], [SPECIFIC INCIDENTS OR PATTERNS], and [SUPPORT ALREADY PROVIDED]. Produce factual observations, the impact on work, expectations not met, a time-bound improvement plan, manager support, check-in dates, and evidence that would demonstrate improvement. Do not diagnose motives, make legal conclusions, or include allegations that are not documented. Clearly separate one-time incidents from repeated patterns. Check that each expectation is measurable and tied to the role. Ask up to 3 questions only if a required input is missing.

Write peer feedback for [COLLEAGUE NAME OR ROLE] based on [WORKING EXAMPLES] and [DEVELOPMENT OBSERVATIONS]. Produce two paragraphs: one describing specific contributions and impact, and one offering one constructive, respectful suggestion. Use first-hand observations only, explain the effect of the behavior, and avoid guessing intent or repeating hearsay. Keep it under 180 words and suitable for a formal review system. Check that the feedback is specific enough for the colleague to recognize the situation without exposing confidential information. Ask up to 3 questions only if needed.