Skip to main content

Reviews

Reviews in ClarityLoop are for moments when the business needs a real decision, not just a signal.

Feedback, goals, growth signals, and 1:1s keep performance conversations moving all year. Reviews turn that ongoing context into a structured process with clear reviewers, clear timing, and a final outcome people can understand.

Use Reviews when you need consistency across people, teams, or time periods, for example:

  • performance cycles
  • probation and onboarding checkpoints
  • offboarding or transition reviews
  • promotion or readiness discussions
  • improvement-plan follow-ups
  • recurring talent review rhythms

Reviews how-to​

Watch this walkthrough to understand when to use Reviews and how a review cycle runs from setup through results.

What a review cycle is made of​

Here is the plain-English model:

  • Review cycle: the reusable design. It includes audience, stages, timing, access, and questions.
  • Run: one live send of that cycle to a specific set of people.
  • Subject: the person being reviewed in a run.
  • Stage: one step in the process, such as self review, manager review, or panel review.
  • Reviewer: the person completing a stage response.
  • Owner: the person who configures, publishes, operates, and finalizes the cycle.
  • Leader: a person with results access for their reporting line only.

What each role sees​

In Performance > Reviews, everyone sees the part of the process they are responsible for:

  • Individual contributors see Self Review for their own stages.
  • Managers see Team Reviews for direct-report work they need to complete.
  • Panel reviewers see Panel Reviews for assigned panel stages.
  • Owners, HR, and people ops use Manage / Results to set up cycles, monitor runs, calibrate, and finalize.
  • Leaders can review results for their reporting line when they have been added as leaders on the cycle.

This split keeps day-to-day reviewer work simple while still giving operators enough control to run a fair process.

How a review run actually works​

  1. An owner creates a cycle from a template, AI Assist, or from scratch.
  2. The owner configures timing, audience, owners, leaders, and stage design.
  3. The cycle is published for immediate send, scheduled send, recurring send, or lifecycle-triggered send.
  4. A run is created and reviewers get notified when their stage opens.
  5. Reviewers complete responses with autosave, context links, and AI refinement.
  6. Owners and leaders inspect run health and results.
  7. Owners calibrate scoring where needed, request changes or approve reopen requests, and finalize decisions.

Two timing modes that shape reviewer experience​

  • One after another: stages open in sequence. This is best when handoff matters, such as self review first and manager review second.
  • All at once (blind): stages open in parallel. Reviewers work independently, and submitted responses stay hidden from other reviewers until they submit their own response.

This matters a lot for trust. If you want independent judgment, use blind mode. If you want explicit progression, use sequential mode.

Visibility and trust rules worth knowing​

  • Draft responses are only visible to the reviewer who is writing them.
  • Submitted responses become visible based on the cycle rules, stage timing, and question-level visibility settings.
  • Some questions can be restricted to reviewer only or reviewer + reviewee's manager.
  • Finalizing a decision makes the review visible to participants and sends notifications, but restricted-visibility questions stay restricted.
  • Leaders do not get global access by default. They only see the slice of results that matches their reporting line.

Why teams use Reviews instead of spreadsheets or side-channel docs​

Reviews is designed to make high-stakes people decisions more consistent without making the experience robotic.

It helps teams:

  • keep the process visible and auditable
  • avoid memory-only or recency-heavy decisions
  • compare people against the same scoring structure
  • request better evidence without restarting the cycle
  • separate operating access from reporting access
  • reuse strong cycle designs over time

Why this matters for leaders and HR/workspace owners​

For managers, Reviews reduces ambiguity around individual decisions. For leaders, HR, and workspace owners, Reviews creates consistency across teams without forcing every decision into the same script.

In practice, that means you can:

  • spot completion risk early
  • compare outcomes using shared calibration logic
  • improve weak responses through change requests or reopen approval
  • finalize with a visible summary instead of scattered notes

Reviews work best with the rest of ClarityLoop​

The strongest review cycles are not built from scratch at the last minute.

Before or during a cycle, teams often use:

  • Feedback for specific examples and coaching moments
  • Growth Signals for recurring themes over time
  • Goals for measurable progress and delivery context
  • 1:1s for ongoing coaching and follow-through

Reviews is the structured decision layer on top of that living context.

Next steps: