Nearly 60% of employees say their company’s performance review process feels unfair or unclear, according to recent Gallup data. That is not just a perception problem. It directly affects whether people trust their leaders, commit to their goals, and stay long term.

Well-designed performance review survey questions help you see your review cycle through employees’ eyes. They measure clarity, perceived fairness, psychological safety, and the usefulness of the conversation. They also show whether people want to take part again next cycle or would opt out if they could.

These surveys sit next to, not instead of, performance ratings. You still need ratings, calibration, and decisions on pay or promotion. But you also need a separate feedback loop about the experience of the process itself. Crucially, these questions focus on the process, not on rating individual managers publicly.

In this article you get:

So how can you design performance review survey questions that employees trust and leaders actually use? Let’s walk through the key sections and then build them into concrete survey designs.

1. Clarity & Expectations: Are Your Review Goals Crystal Clear?

A transparent review process starts with clear goals and criteria. When employees understand expectations, their trust in the performance review rises sharply.

Research shows that organizations with strong goal-setting and clear expectations see up to 30% higher satisfaction with performance reviews (Harvard Business Review). Yet many people still enter their Mitarbeitergespräch unsure how they will be evaluated.

In one mid-size German tech company (around 250 employees), leadership rewrote performance criteria in plain language and shared sample evaluations before review season. They also ran a short explainer session on the rating scale. In the following pulse survey, perceived fairness increased by 25 percentage points.

Typical issues you want to measure:

Example performance review survey questions – Clarity & expectations (5-point Likert: strongly disagree to strongly agree):

Open-ended items:

Example outcome from a simple clarity initiative:

These clarity-focused performance review survey questions work well in both a short post-cycle pulse and a deeper annual survey. Next you want to know whether people had enough time and evidence to prepare.

2. Preparation & Evidence: Did Everyone Have What They Needed?

Even the best-designed review process fails if nobody has time to prepare. Employees need space to reflect. Managers need data and examples, not vague impressions.

SHRM reports that around 70% of employees feel unprepared for reviews because they lack ongoing feedback or documentation. In one Swiss manufacturing company with 400 employees, HR started sending a simple Selbsteinschätzung template two weeks before each Mitarbeitergespräch. After two cycles, more than half of employees moved from “poorly prepared” to “well prepared” in follow-up surveys.

Key aspects to measure:

Example performance review survey questions – Preparation & evidence (Likert 1–5):

0–10 rating item:

Open-ended prompt:

Many organizations run a quick pulse with 3–4 of these items immediately after the review, then combine results with more detailed annual data.

Once you know whether people came prepared, you can focus on the quality of the actual conversation.

3. Conversation Quality: Was the Review Constructive and Two-Way?

A performance review should feel like a real dialogue, not a verdict. Employees want specific feedback, time to ask questions, and space to disagree respectfully.

Data from platforms like Glint and CultureAmp show that reviews rated as “two-way” are usually considered twice as useful as one-way feedback sessions. Yet many employees still describe their last Mitarbeitergespräch as a monologue.

In a Berlin fintech, HR introduced a simple Gesprächsleitfaden with prompts such as “What are you most proud of this year?” and “What would you like to do differently next quarter?”. Within one review cycle, the share of employees who said they “felt heard” rose by more than 15 percentage points.

Topics to measure:

Example performance review survey questions – Conversation quality (Likert 1–5):

0–10 rating item:

Open-ended prompt:

Even great conversations can be undermined if ratings or calibration feel biased. That is why fairness and bias deserve their own section in your performance review survey questions.

4. Fairness & Bias: Was the Process Fair for Everyone?

Perceived fairness is central. If employees believe ratings are inconsistent or biased, trust erodes, and future participation drops. Fairness also shapes psychological safety: do people feel safe challenging outcomes?

Gartner found that organizations with strong fairness and transparency in calibration enjoy engagement scores around 19% higher than peers. Yet in many DACH companies, only a minority of employees say they trust the Kalibrierungsrunde to be objective.

One logistics company introduced standardized calibration rubrics and required each rating change in calibration to be justified in writing. They also added a confidential comment field in the post-review survey about perceived fairness. Within 1 year, internal reports of perceived favoritism fell by around 50%.

Key dimensions to measure:

Example performance review survey questions – Fairness & bias (Likert 1–5):

0–10 rating item:

Open-ended prompts:

The next question is whether the process actually supports development or just delivers scores.

5. Development & Next Steps: Is Growth Actually Supported?

The real impact of a review lies in what happens next. Employees want clarity on strengths, growth areas, and concrete next steps, not only a rating.

According to LinkedIn Learning, employees who see clear development steps after a review are about twice as likely to stay at least one more year. Yet in many DACH organizations, fewer than half of employees say their last review included specific learning actions.

An Austrian engineering company introduced a simple Entwicklungsplan template that every manager had to complete with each team member during their Mitarbeitergespräch. Within 6 months, internal mobility applications increased by nearly 25%, and employees reported much higher clarity about their career paths.

Key angles to measure:

Example performance review survey questions – Development & next steps (Likert 1–5):

0–10 rating item:

Open-ended prompt:

Of course, none of this works without solid support from managers and HR throughout the review cycle.

6. Manager & HR Support: Did You Feel Backed Up Throughout?

Support before, during, and after the Mitarbeitergespräch shapes how safe employees feel and how well they can use feedback. Support also matters for managers, who juggle heavy admin and emotional conversations.

McKinsey has found that ongoing, high-quality manager support can increase positive sentiment after performance reviews by roughly 35%. Still, many employees in the DACH region say they are unsure whom to contact if they have concerns about their review.

A Munich SaaS company tested an “HR Office Hours” model plus a dedicated chat channel during review season. Employees could ask questions about the process, calibration, or next steps. Satisfaction with HR support jumped from “rather low” to “high” in internal surveys.

Dimensions to measure for employees:

Example performance review survey questions – Manager & HR support (Likert 1–5):

Pulse-style yes/no or multiple choice:

Open-ended prompt:

Finally, you want a global view: how do employees rate the overall experience, and will they willingly participate in the process again?

7. Overall Experience & Future Intent: Would You Do It Again?

The most powerful single signal from performance review survey questions is whether people would recommend the process to others or choose to participate again. If they would opt out, you have a serious trust problem.

Many organizations use an NPS-style item to track this. Companies that monitor review NPS and act on feedback tend to see 20–35% better participation and satisfaction over time.

A Dutch retail chain simplified its review form, shortened the meeting length, and introduced an open-ended “What should we change first?” question after each cycle. Within two cycles, the share of employees who would “recommend the performance review process” increased by more than one third.

Suggested overall experience items (Likert 1–5):

0–10 NPS-style items:

Open-ended items:

With the main themes covered, you can now combine these performance review survey questions into practical survey blueprints.

8. Ready-Made Survey Blueprints

To make this concrete, here are 3 blueprints you can adapt: a short post-review pulse, an annual deep-dive, and a manager-focused pulse. Mix and match questions from the sections above to fit your context.

8.1 Short Post-Review Pulse (10–12 items)

Purpose: Quick, anonymous check right after the Mitarbeitergespräch to capture fresh impressions. Ideal for every review cycle.

Suggested items:

8.2 Annual In-Depth Review Experience Survey (18–20 items)

Purpose: Once per year, after the main review and Kalibrierungsrunde, take a deeper look across all 7 themes: clarity, preparation, conversation, fairness, development, support, and overall experience.

Sample structure (all Likert 1–5 unless noted):

8.3 Manager Pulse on the Review Process (8–10 items)

Purpose: Understand how the process works for managers. This survey focuses on workload, tools, clarity of guidelines, and support from HR.

Example manager pulse items (Likert 1–5):

To decide which blueprint to use, it helps to compare them side by side.

9. Implementation Guidance for DACH: Timing, Anonymity & Routing

Good performance review survey questions are one part. Running them well in a DACH context requires attention to timing, anonymity, GDPR, and works council expectations.

9.1 Timing the surveys

Typical rhythm:

Avoid survey fatigue by clearly communicating purpose and planned follow-up actions. Employees in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland usually appreciate transparency on how results feed into concrete changes.

9.2 Anonymity thresholds

To build trust and stay safe from a data protection and Betriebsrat perspective, you should:

Always communicate these rules in your survey introduction. That reassures employees that their answers cannot be traced back to them personally.

9.3 Routing urgent issues and complaints

Most performance review survey questions are about patterns, not individual issues. Still, sometimes a comment points to an urgent problem (e.g. bullying, discrimination).

Good practice in DACH:

This balance keeps your survey focused on process improvements while still pointing people to help when needed.

10. DACH/GDPR Notes: Legal Basis, Data Minimisation & Betriebsrat

Performance review experience surveys touch on personal perceptions but usually not on sensitive data. Still, in the DACH region you should align with GDPR (DSGVO) and often involve the Betriebsrat.

10.1 GDPR basics for review experience surveys

Key principles:

Also provide a short privacy notice in the survey explaining contact details of the data controller, legal basis, storage period, and rights of the data subjects.

10.2 Role of the Betriebsrat / works council

In many German and Austrian companies, surveys that relate to behavior, performance or “Mitarbeiterbeurteilung” fall under co-determination. That means the Betriebsrat expects:

In practice, most works councils support performance review experience surveys if you can show they are used to improve fairness, psychological safety, and manager training, not to tighten control.

Conclusion: Performance Review Surveys That Build Trust—and Drive Improvement

Performance review survey questions give you a direct line into how employees really experience your review cycle. They uncover whether people understand expectations, see ratings as fair, and leave conversations with clear next steps.

Three core insights stand out:

Practical next steps:

As organizations in the DACH region become more agile and distributed, performance reviews will only work if they are trusted. Systematically measuring review experience, then acting on the results, turns a compliance ritual into a real driver of development and engagement.

Häufig gestellte Fragen (FAQ)

What are the most important performance review survey questions every HR leader should ask?

Focus on a core set that covers clarity, fairness, development, conversation quality, and overall satisfaction. For example: “Did you understand expectations?”, “Was your rating fair?”, “Were next steps clear?”, “Did you feel heard?”, “How likely are you to recommend this process?”. Combine 5-point Likert items with at least one open-ended question per theme.

How do I ensure our post-performance review surveys stay GDPR compliant in Germany?

Limit questions to what you need to improve the process (“Datensparsamkeit”), avoid sensitive categories like health data, and keep responses anonymous by using minimum group sizes. Inform employees about purpose, storage time, and legal basis, often Art. 6(1)(f) DSGVO (legitimate interest). Involve your Betriebsrat early and document any agreement on survey use.

Why should we separate engagement surveys from performance review experience surveys?

Engagement surveys look at broad topics such as workload, leadership, and culture. Performance review experience surveys zoom in on a specific process: goals, ratings, calibration, and the Mitarbeitergespräch. Keeping them separate allows you to see which issues come from the review process itself and fix them faster, without mixing them into general engagement signals.

How often should we run a performance review experience survey?

A good pattern is a short pulse after each main review cycle plus one annual deep-dive. The pulse focuses on immediate impressions of the Mitarbeitergespräch and ratings. The annual survey takes a broader view across all 7 themes, including development and HR support. You can add a manager-focused pulse when you change tools, rubrics, or timelines.

Can we use these survey results to evaluate individual managers’ effectiveness?

Ideally, no. These surveys are designed to improve the system: process design, rubrics, training, and communication. Using anonymous answers to judge single managers breaks trust and raises legal and co-determination concerns. If you plan to give manager-level feedback, co-create the rules with your Betriebsrat and communicate clearly what will and will not be done with the data.