Xemplo Performance uses a four-point rating system to provide clear, consistent feedback on employee performance. This structure helps organisations assess contribution, guide development, and recognise achievement fairly and transparently.
Evaluating an individual's performance using the rating scale
Why a Four-Point Scale?
Xemplo deliberately chose a four-point scale (instead of five or more) to help reduce central tendency bias—a common issue in performance reviews where reviewers default to the middle rating to avoid difficult conversations or decisions. With an even number of choices, there is no neutral middle option, encouraging more thoughtful evaluation and clearer distinctions between levels of performance.
The Four Performance Ratings
Each rating is clearly defined to promote shared understanding across teams and support meaningful performance conversations:
Needs Development
Performance does not consistently meet the expectations of the role. Requires significant direction, support, or skill development to achieve desired outcomes. Demonstrates potential but falls short of delivering consistent results.
This rating indicates that improvement is needed. It can reflect a mismatch between the role and current capability, or a need for more support and guidance. It’s not a judgment of character—it’s a signal to focus on growth, skill-building, and alignment.
Meets Expectations
Reliably meets the core responsibilities and expectations of the role. Occasionally goes beyond the requirements. Achieves most goals with minimal support or guidance.
This rating reflects solid, dependable performance. The individual delivers what’s required, maintains consistent standards, and contributes effectively. Most employees will sit in this category—it’s a strong and valued level of contribution.
Exceeds Expectations
Regularly surpasses expectations and consistently delivers high-quality results. Demonstrates initiative and requires little oversight to achieve objectives. Frequently goes above and beyond role requirements.
This rating acknowledges standout performance that adds noticeable value. Individuals rated here are self-directed, proactive, and produce results that elevate the team's success.
Leading the Way
Consistently achieves exceptional results and inspires higher performance across the team. Sets a new benchmark for success and drives meaningful progress beyond the role’s core expectations.
This rating is reserved for those whose impact goes beyond their role. They influence others, innovate, and raise the bar for what's possible. It's not about perfection—it's about measurable leadership, outcomes, and influence.
Using the Xemplo Rating Scale Effectively
By combining clear criteria with a deliberate rating structure, performance reviews are more equitable, actionable, and focused on performance improvement. When used consistently, this scale helps teams:
-
Identify areas for development and support
-
Recognise and reward high performance
-
Align expectations across managers and departments
-
Provide a common language for performance conversations
Before asking an individual or reviewer to complete a Performance Review, sharing this article can help each participant understand the rating scale and how each rating should be used.
How Performance Scores Are Calculated
On completion of a Performance Review (when all participants in the review process have completed and submitted their responses), an automated Results panel will display for the Performance Review. To ensure fairness and consistency, Results are calculated automatically based on the ratings provided during the review process.
Results are calculated based on the following system:
-
Each rating on the four-point scale is assigned a numerical value:
-
Needs Development = 1
-
Meets Expectations = 2
-
Exceeds Expectations = 3
-
Leading the Way = 4
-
-
The system calculates an average score by taking the mean of all individual ratings provided in the review (e.g., across goals, competencies, or other review criteria).
-
The final score is automatically generated and is visible to participants depending on your organisation’s visibility settings.
📌 Note: The final score is not rounded, allowing for more granular insights (e.g., 2.7 or 3.5), but it can be interpreted using the rating scale above for context.
An average score is provided for each section of the review for each participant. An overall score (the average of all responses in the review) is also calculated for each participant.
This scoring method removes subjectivity from manual calculations, ensures transparency, and supports meaningful comparisons over time or across teams.