A quick opening to set the scene

• Tell me briefly which parts of your current review cycle feel most defensible and which feel like noise to people who use them every day
• How often do you run formal reviews today and how many distinct review templates do you maintain Options: Annual only, Biannual, Quarterly, Continuous with annual snapshot, Mixed cadence across teams
• Walk me through the last review cycle that caused a major complaint, who raised it, and what happened next
• When HR reports that fewer than half of employees find the review useful, which internal metric or comment do you show first to convince leadership something must change Options: Engagement survey item, Calibration variance report, Promotion mismatch examples, Manager feedback quality examples, Other
• Which people groups or business units are most vocal about changing the process right now Options: Senior leadership, People managers, Individual contributors, HR business partners, Finance/Comp, Other

Where the current process actually breaks trust

• If your review outcomes were put under a microscope, what single evidence of breakdown would make you worry you cannot rely on the results
• Describe the most recent calibration meeting you ran, how you prepared for it, and what went wrong or went well
• Who usually drives disagreements in calibration sessions and what pattern do those disagreements follow Options: Rating inflation by managers, Uneven documentation, Inconsistent goal frameworks, Lack of shared context across teams, Other
• How many employees, roughly, would you say lacked meaningful manager touchpoints in the past six months Options: None or very few, Under 10%, 10-30%, 30-50%, Over 50%
• What downstream decisions have been harmed by the current review credibility issues, for example promotions, pay moves, or legal risk Options: Comp cycles affected, Promotion mistakes, Retention failures, Pay equity concerns, Compliance or legal flags, Other

Who needs to be in the room for this to succeed

• If this project stalls, who will feel the consequences first and how would that show up in their day to day
• Which roles will need to sign off on scope, budget, and data access for a pilot Options: CHRO/Head of People, Head of HR Operations, IT/Integration lead, Finance/Comp, Legal/Compliance, Business unit leader
• Who is the most skeptical stakeholder today, what do they worry about, and what evidence would soften that view
• How many dedicated hours per week can your HR operations team commit to a pilot during the configuration phase Options: Less than 5 hours, 5-10 hours, 10-20 hours, 20+ hours
• Which single decision maker, if fully aligned, would accelerate approval for a pilot immediately

Integration and data readiness, stated plainly

• Which HR systems must we integrate with for the pilot to be meaningful, include HRIS, payroll, and LMS as relevant Options: Primary HRIS, Payroll system, Learning management, SAML/SSO, Compensation planning tool, Other
• On the technical side, who owns the APIs or data feeds and are they available for vendor integrations now Options: Owner is IT, APIs ready, Owner is IT, APIs planned, Owner is HR, no APIs, No clear owner, Other
• If the integration to your HRIS cannot be completed within the pilot window, would a staged approach with CSV imports be acceptable Options: Yes, acceptable, Only for a small pilot cohort, No, must be API from day one, Unsure
• How clean is the people data needed for mappings and reporting, for example manager relationships, job codes, hire dates Options: Mostly clean, Somewhat clean with gaps, Significant cleanup required, Unknown
• What single integration or data gap would stop you from running a pilot at all

Change capacity, manager behavior, and training reality

• If changing manager behavior is the true lever, who will own coaching and how will you hold them accountable
• In previous attempts to improve reviews, which interventions did you try and which actually changed manager behavior Options: Manager training workshops, Template redesign, Calibration facilitation, Manager scorecards, Nothing has changed behavior, Other
• How many managers will need live training versus microlearning modules during rollout Options: All managers need live training, Only people managers of managers, A pilot subset, Microlearning sufficient
• What resistance have managers voiced about changing cadence, rating models, or documentation practices Options: Time burden, Unclear benefit, Fear of accountability, Tool usability concerns, Other
• Which outcome would convince you that managers actually changed behavior after a pilot, sample options include frequency of documented check-ins or reduction in rating variance Options: Increase in check-in frequency, More documented feedback per person, Narrower calibration variance, Better correlation to business outcomes, Other

Acceptance criteria, measurement, and the pilot's kill-switch

• If the pilot proves a single measurable improvement, what metric and threshold would make you recommend enterprise rollout Options: Increase in manager check-ins by X%, Reduction in calibration variance by X points, Improved employee confidence in reviews to Y%, Faster comp cycle completion, Other
• How soon after a pilot would you expect to see meaningful behavioral data, for example check-ins or feedback activity Options: Within 2 weeks, Within 4-6 weeks, By the end of the pilot (8-12 weeks), Longer than the pilot
• Which stakeholders will sign off that acceptance criteria have been met Options: CHRO/Head of People, HR Operations, Finance/Comp, Business unit leads, Other
• What single negative outcome during the pilot would make you stop the project immediately

The alternatives you are weighing and what would keep you where you are

• Which of the following options are you actively evaluating alongside an external platform Options: Existing incumbent vendor, Build internally with HRIS team, Do nothing for now, Process adjustments without a new tool, Other external vendors
• What would have to be true about your current approach for you to keep it rather than change Options: Improved manager adoption, Clearer ROI within one cycle, Lower implementation effort, Stronger leadership buy-in, Other
• Has anyone inside proposed a fully internal rebuild instead of buying, and if so who would lead that and what timeline did they suggest Options: Yes, HR Ops, Yes, IT, No internal build proposed, Unsure
• Which incumbent or category of vendor makes you most nervous and why, for example legacy review tools or point analytics vendors Options: Legacy review vendors, Point analytics tools, Compensation planning tools, No incumbent worries me, Other
• What specific proof would make you walk away from the incumbent this quarter

Timeline, budget guardrails, and procurement checkpoints

• If the timeline slips beyond your target, at what point does the project lose priority Options: 2 weeks, 1 month, 6 weeks, Project remains priority regardless
• Which budget authority will approve a pilot and which will approve enterprise spend Options: CHRO/Head of People, Finance, Business unit head, Procurement, Other
• How transparent is the procurement process for vendor agreements and how long does review typically take Options: Fast, under 2 weeks, Typical, 2-4 weeks, Long, 4-8 weeks, Very long, 8+ weeks
• What hidden costs or budget categories worry you, for example integration engineering, ongoing maintenance, or training Options: Integration engineering, Data cleanup, Manager training, Ongoing admin support, Other
• Would a guaranteed pilot price and acceptance window accelerate procurement approval Options: Yes, Maybe, No

Operational constraints that could block implementation

• Which internal approvals are non negotiable before we begin configuration, for example legal, security, or data protection Options: Legal, Security/InfoSec, Data protection/privacy, Finance, None required
• Do you have a named integration owner and what capacity can they commit during the pilot Options: Named and available, Named but limited capacity, No named owner yet, IT will assign if we move forward
• Which regulatory requirements or internal policies might require additional review, for example data residency or third party processing Options: Data residency, Industry compliance, Union agreements, None known, Other
• How quickly can you provide a sample data extract with manager reporting lines and job codes for mapping Options: Within 1 week, 1-2 weeks, 2-4 weeks, Longer than a month
• What single operational constraint would force us to pause the project

Decision triggers and next-step clarity

• If a pilot delivered the agreed metric improvement, what would be the next decision and who would make it Options: Enterprise rollout by CHRO, Extend pilot for more cohorts, Revisit scope with HR Ops, Other
• Which pilot cohort would create the most persuasive case study for broader rollout Options: Frontline managers, High potential population, A single business unit, Cross functional sample, Other
• How soon are you willing to start a pilot if integrations and approvals line up Options: Immediately, Within 2-4 weeks, Within 1-2 months, Longer than 2 months
• What would need to happen between now and kickoff to make procurement and leadership comfortable signing a pilot agreement
• If the pilot proves the numbers, what realistic blockers could still prevent a signed enterprise agreement the following month Options: Budget reallocation, Procurement delays, Leadership changes, Concerns about scale, Other

• Solution Experience Session

• Confirm the current state and its cost
• You confirm the current state and agree on the measurable costs it imposes on talent decisions and manager time.
• Provide one representative manager review scenario and one anonymized sample dataset for a pilot cohort.
• Walk a manager's current workflow end-to-end
• You confirm the demonstrated workflows will change manager behavior to increase check-ins and reduce manual form avoidance.
• Provide a list of required HRIS and payroll integration endpoints and any available API documentation or access constraints.
• Prove the continuous feedback and goal-alignment workflow
• Run a sample calibration summary on the provided data and deliver an annotated report before the follow-up session.
• You agree that the calibration outputs shown provide specific evidence to improve compensation and promotion decisions.
• Prepare a short manager-script and coach plan tailored to your manager population and share prior to the next session.
• Show calibration analytics on a sample cohort
• Validate mapping to your needs
• Agree evidentiary next steps and decision criteria

• Solution Experience Session
• Solution Experience Deck
• Solution Brief

• meeting
• slides
• document

• Provision Platform Seats and Role Access
• Configure Goal Frameworks and Alignment Mapping
• Migrate Historical Performance Records and Notes
• Configure Review Cycles and Rating Models
• Enable Continuous Check-ins and Feedback Workflows
• Set Up Calibration Analytics and Distribution Reports
• Integrate HRIS for Workforce and Organization Data
• Integrate Payroll and Compensation Sync
• Integrate Learning Management System
• Customize Competency Profiles and Performance Templates
• Manager Enablement Workshops and Coaching
• Deploy Mobile Access and Notification Channels
• Generate Calibration-Ready Performance Summaries
• Go-Live Hypercare and Adoption Support

Provision Platform Seats and Role Access

• How many active user seats do you plan to provision at go-live, split by managers, individual contributors, and HR administrators? Options: Less than 50, 50-250, 251-1,000, More than 1,000
• Which single sign-on (SSO) method do you require for account provisioning to the integration endpoint? Options: SAML 2.0, OAuth 2.0 / OpenID Connect, LDAP, No SSO / Password only
• Who on your team will own role definitions and approval for manager, reviewer, and admin permission sets? Options: People Operations (HR), IT / Identity, Security / Compliance, Other
• Describe the least-privilege access controls you need for viewing performance notes and review drafts (for example: hide comments until calibration meeting).
• Provide the canonical employee identifier field name from your HRIS (for example: employee_id, emp_number) that we should map to user accounts.
• Confirm whether any collective bargaining or local privacy rules restrict which roles can see written manager feedback. Options: Yes, No

Configure Goal Frameworks and Alignment Mapping

• How many hierarchical goal levels will you operate (for example: individual, team, department, company)? Options: 1, 2, 3, 4 or more
• Which primary goal methodology will you adopt for your program (for example: OKR, SMART, competency-linked)? Options: OKR, SMART, Competency-linked, Hybrid / Other
• What specific HRIS fields must map to goal ownership and review routing (for example: manager_id, department_code, cost_center)?
• Outline the goal review cadence you want enforced by the platform (for example: quarterly OKR refresh, rolling 12-month targets). Options: Quarterly, Biannual, Annual with quarterly check-ins, Continuous rolling
• Provide an example team hierarchy CSV header we should validate for alignment mapping (for example: team_id, parent_team_id, manager_id).
• Indicate whether you need multi-owner support for cross-functional goals (for example: product + sales shared objectives). Options: Yes, No

Migrate Historical Performance Records and Notes

• State the number of years of historical review records you require migrated into the platform. Options: None, 1 year, 2-3 years, 4+ years
• Identify the export formats available from your legacy review system for transcripts and notes (for example: CSV export, API endpoint, PDF bundles). Options: CSV export, API export, PDF bundles, Other
• Who will provide the redaction rules for PII and confidential comments in migrated notes (for example: HR lead, Legal counsel)? Options: People Operations (HR), Legal, IT / Security, Other
• Specify the maximum acceptable migration gap rate (percentage of records that may be missing) for migration acceptance. Options: 0%, Less than 1%, 1%-5%, More than 5%
• Outline any statutory retention rules that determine which historical reviews must be imported or archived per country or region (for example: six-year retention for Country X).
• Attach a sample exported review record (CSV or JSON) that includes comments, ratings, and reviewer fields to validate mapping.

Configure Review Cycles and Rating Models

• How often should your formal review cycles run (choose the cadence used by your compensation cycle)? Options: Quarterly, Semi-annual, Annual, Continuous with scheduled reviews
• Indicate the numeric or tiered rating model required by your compensation process (for example: 1-5 numeric, Exceeds/Meets/Below). Options: 1-5 numeric, 1-4 numeric, 3-tier (Exceeds/Meets/Below), Custom
• What HRIS or compensation fields must appear on the review form to support pay decisions (for example: job_grade, current_base_salary)?
• Outline the rule that converts review scores to compensation bands or promotion eligibility (for example: average score >= 4.2 = promotion pool).
• Do you require competency-weighted calculations in the final rating (for example: technical 60% + leadership 40%)? Options: Yes, No
• Specify any calibration constraints for ratings by job level or band (for example: maximum variance allowed within grade band).

Enable Continuous Check-ins and Feedback Workflows

• How frequently should the platform automatically schedule manager-employee check-ins (for example: weekly, bi-weekly, monthly)? Options: Weekly, Bi-weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Ad hoc
• Select the feedback channels you want enabled in the workflow (for example: private 1:1 notes, peer 360, team shout-outs). Options: Private 1:1 notes, Peer 360 feedback, Team shout-outs, Upward feedback, Public praise
• Identify which roles in your org may submit anonymous upward feedback under your privacy rules (for example: ICs only, managers exempt). Options: Individual contributors, Managers, People Ops only, No anonymous feedback
• State the overdue reminder cadence you want when a scheduled check-in is missed (for example: reminder after 3 days, then 7 days). Options: Remind after 3 days, Remind after 7 days, Custom cadence, No automated reminders
• Indicate whether you require an agenda template attached to check-ins that pulls live goal progress fields (for example: progress%, linked objectives). Options: Yes, No
• Provide any language or localization needs for check-in templates (for example: Spanish locale for EMEA managers).

Set Up Calibration Analytics and Distribution Reports

• Estimate the number of calibration cohorts you will define for distribution reporting (for example: by department, grade band). Options: 1-3, 4-10, 11-25, More than 25
• Select the distribution visualizations required for calibration meetings (for example: bell curve, box plot, stacked bar by performance vs. risk). Options: Bell curve, Box-and-whisker, Stacked bar by rating vs. potential, Heatmap by manager
• What statistical thresholds should trigger an outlier review (for example: manager variance > 1.5 standard deviations or top 5% discrepancy)?
• List the HRIS filters that must be available in calibration reports (for example: job_level, location, hire_date, manager_id).
• Indicate the acceptable data freshness lag for calibration reports relative to payroll cutoffs (for example: within 24 hours). Options: Within 1 hour, Within 24 hours, Within 72 hours, Weekly
• Specify any audit trail or review comment retention period required for calibration artifacts (for example: retain comments for 2 years).

Integrate HRIS for Workforce and Organization Data

• Identify which HRIS endpoints must be connected for roster and org structure (for example: employees, managers, departments). Options: Employees roster, Manager relationships, Department list, Locations, All of the above
• How will you provide secure access to HRIS for ingestion: API credentials, SFTP drop, or periodic exports? Options: API credentials, SFTP export, Scheduled CSV export, Other
• Specify the exact HRIS field names required for accurate mapping to the platform (for example: employee_id, job_code, hire_date).
• Outline your preferred full vs incremental sync cadence for HRIS data (for example: nightly incremental, weekly full). Options: Nightly incremental + weekly full, Daily full, Weekly incremental + monthly full, Ad hoc
• Share any country-specific data residency or consent requirements that affect HRIS integration (for example: EU employee consent, Brazil data localization).
• Provide a sample HRIS export (CSV or JSON) that includes manager_id and department_code to validate field mapping.

Integrate Payroll and Compensation Sync

• List the payroll fields that must flow into the performance record to support compensation calculations (for example: base_salary, bonus_target, job_grade).
• How frequently must compensation data sync before a compensation-run cutoff (for example: 3 business days prior)? Options: Same day, 1 business day, 3 business days, 7 business days
• Specify the authorization scopes your payroll provider requires for API access (for example: read_payroll, read_employees).
• Share your payroll cycle dates that drive compensation events and must align with review finalization (for example: annual increase effective date).
• Are there country or payroll variants (for example: allowances, country-specific tax fields) that require per-country mapping rules? Options: Yes, No
• Provide any compliance documents or SLAs required for payroll synchronization (for example: SOC 2, data processing agreements).

Integrate Learning Management System

• Identify the LMS export types or endpoints that will supply course completion and enrollment data (for example: course_id, user_id, completion_date). Options: API feed, CSV export, LMS webhook, Other
• How should LMS completions be mapped into development items on employee profiles (for example: course_id -> development_goal, certificate URL)?
• What cadence do you require for LMS syncs to reflect recent completions in performance summaries (for example: nightly, hourly)? Options: Real-time / webhooks, Hourly, Nightly, Weekly
• Specify any course identifiers or catalog IDs we should whitelist for mapping to competency profiles (for example: course_1234, leadership_path).
• Share whether completion certificates must be stored as attachments on the employee record and any retention rules for those files. Options: Yes, store certificates, No, reference only, Store on request
• Attach a sample LMS export (CSV or API response) that includes user_id, course_id, and completion_date for mapping validation.

Customize Competency Profiles and Performance Templates

• Which competency models do you use today for role-level expectations (for example: leadership rubric, technical competency framework)? Options: Leadership rubric, Technical competency framework, Role-specific competencies, Custom
• How many competency levels and descriptors should each competency include (for example: 4 levels with behavior examples)? Options: 3 levels, 4 levels, 5 levels, Custom
• What template fields must appear on the performance form (for example: strengths, development areas, calibration note)?
• Indicate whether competency profiles should be inherited by role family or assigned manually per job code. Options: Inherited by role family, Assigned per job code, Hybrid
• Provide example competency descriptors for one role (for example: Senior Engineer level 4 behavior examples) to confirm mapping fidelity.
• Specify whether templates must be localized by language or country (for example: Spanish form variant for Country Y). Options: Yes, localized, No

• Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA)
• Order Form / Subscription Agreement
• Master Services Agreement (MSA)
• Statement of Work (SOW)
• Data Processing Agreement (DPA)
• Data Sharing Authorization
• Integration & Responsibilities Schedule
• Training Services Addendum
• Service Level Agreement (SLA)
• Acceptance Criteria & Final Sign-off
• Payment Schedule & Invoicing Terms
• Renewal and Termination Addendum
• Regulatory Compliance Addendum (conditional)

• Go-live Health Check
• First Outcomes Measurement
• Acceptance Gate Review
• Quarterly Success Review

• Complete incumbent system decommissioning tasks or formalize read-only access and confirm data archive/migration completion.
• Restate acceptance criteria and numeric targets
• Produce a documented acceptance decision for the Solution Scope criteria and record outcomes for each numeric target.
• If any criteria failed, finalize a remediation plan with named owner and resolution date for each item.
• Confirm the incumbent system's decommissioning status or formal read-only retention and the plan for data archiving or migration.
• Publish the acceptance record that lists pass/fail per criterion, decision notes, and the buyer's documented acceptance or conditional acceptance.
• If applicable, execute the remediation plan with agreed milestones and deliver progress updates at set checkpoints.
• Reconfirm success criteria and owners
• Confirm whether outcome metrics remain at or are moving toward the targets recorded in Solution Scope.
• Review metric trends and adoption
• Prioritize persistent issues and enhancement requests and agree the top quarterly actions with owners and dates.
• Ensure all acceptance-gate remediation items are on track or have updated commitments.
• Publish the quarterly metric dashboard and a one-page summary with agreed actions and owners.
• Create a prioritized backlog of enhancement requests with expected delivery windows and communicate intake process for new requests.
• Schedule the next quarterly review and any interim checkpoints required for high-risk remediation items.
• All deployment tasks are verified as complete or have a named owner and target resolution date.
• Early adoption signals are within acceptable tolerances or a remediation plan is agreed to address gaps.
• Publish a go-live health report that lists completed items, open blockers, owners, and resolution dates.
• Resolve any critical integration or data-migration defects before the start of the first measurement window.
• Enable analytics access for the buyer's success owner and confirm dashboard permissions.
• Present first measurement data
• Determine whether review completion rate and manager check-in frequency are trending to the targets recorded in Solution Scope.
• Agree a prioritized set of corrective actions with owners and dates to close any gaps before the acceptance gate.
• Establish the evidence and timing that will be presented at the acceptance gate meeting.
• Deliver a remedial action plan that lists activities, owners, and due dates to address each metric gap.
• Update manager enablement materials to target the root causes identified in the measurement session.
• Schedule a short checkpoint two weeks before the acceptance gate to review remediation progress.
• Deployment and data migration validation
• Surface persistent issues and enhancement requests
• Diagnose root causes for gaps
• Present outcome data against each criterion
• Document pass or fail per criterion and record decision
• Review open remediation items from acceptance gate
• Agree corrective actions and owners
• Early adoption signals and usage patterns
• Agree next quarter actions and checkpoints
• Blockers and defect triage
• Confirm timeline to acceptance gate
• Agree remediation plan for any failed criteria
• Incumbent system wind-down and data archiving
• Agree immediate remediation actions