Employee Performance Appraisal Frequency in Growing Companies: Best Practices

Performance appraisals align employees with company goals and support growth, but their ideal frequency varies.

While annual reviews remain the norm, many experts now advocate more frequent feedback–especially in fast-growing organizations.

Most growing companies benefit from quarterly or biannual reviews paired with regular check-ins to stay agile and engaged.

Still, there’s no universal formula; cadence depends on factors like size, industry, and growth stage.

Below, we outline best practices and examples by company type, comparing pros and cons of each frequency.

General Recommendations for Appraisal Frequency

Adopt a Hybrid Approach (Annual + Ongoing Feedback)

Combine formal reviews (quarterly or semiannual) with continuous informal feedback. Annual-only reviews often miss fast-moving changes, while frequent check-ins keep employees aligned and engaged. Gallup data shows weekly feedback makes employees up to 5× more likely to find it meaningful. A continuous feedback culture ensures no surprises during formal reviews and makes development part of daily work.

Tailor Frequency to Business Needs

Match review cadence to your industry pace and company culture. Fast-moving or agile organizations often benefit from quarterly reviews or monthly one-on-ones, while stable industries may find semiannual or annual cycles sufficient if regular feedback occurs in between. Companies with strong real-time feedback cultures may need fewer formal reviews, while newer organizations may start with more frequent ones to build trust and consistency.

Ensure Both Development and Accountability

Reviews should balance looking back and planning ahead. Many organizations alternate between development-focused and compensation-focused cycles. It’s best to separate pay discussions from coaching so feedback stays constructive. Every appraisal should clarify both where employees stand and how they can grow.

Experiment and Iterate

Growing companies should test and refine their approach. Startups might try quarterly reviews and later shift to semiannual as they mature. Adjust if the cadence feels too heavy or ineffective. The goal is timely, sustainable feedback. Many organizations are rethinking the annual-only model to find what truly drives performance and engagement.

Appraisal Frequency by Company Size

Different company sizes face varying logistical and cultural challenges in performance management:

Small Companies (<50 employees)

Small teams benefit from frequent, informal appraisals–often quarterly or monthly. With close collaboration, feedback can be personal and timely, improving innovation and morale.

Many startups replace annual reviews with ongoing coaching or short check-ins. For instance, one PR agency shifted from monthly to quarterly reviews based on employee needs, while another used biweekly “bite-sized” coaching that boosted engagement.

Surveys show a majority of employees want feedback more than once a year, and small firms can meet that need easily.

Medium-Sized Companies (50–500 employees)

As companies scale, structure becomes essential. Semiannual reviews (mid-year and year-end) are common, often paired with continuous feedback. This cadence allows time to assess shifting goals, promotions, or new hires. For example, many tech scale-ups use two 45-minute reviews per year, and one healthcare firm adds a 60-day new-hire check-in.

Large Companies (>500–1,000+ employees)

Large enterprises typically rely on annual reviews, sometimes with a mid-year check-in, due to scale. Managing quarterly reviews across thousands of employees is impractical, but supplementing annual reviews with ongoing feedback works well.

Companies like Adobe, Microsoft, and GE replaced rigid annual cycles with continuous “check-ins,” seeing major engagement gains (e.g. Adobe cut voluntary turnover by 30%).

Appraisal Frequency by Industry

Industry norms and business models also influence how often performance evaluations occur. Different sectors have distinct paces of change and ways of measuring performance, which affect the ideal review cadence:

Tech & Software

Fast-paced and innovation-driven, tech companies lead in adopting frequent, agile performance management. Quarterly OKR reviews, continuous feedback, and one-on-ones are common. Buffer replaced annual reviews with monthly “coffee chats,” boosting satisfaction by 40% and cutting turnover below 5%. Adobe, Microsoft, and Google also use quarterly or continuous check-ins to stay aligned with changing goals.

Recommendation: Use quarterly or semiannual reviews plus weekly micro-feedback. Match review cadence to product or sprint cycles, but avoid feedback overload–lightweight digital tools like Slack integrations or PerformYard help sustain real-time dialogue efficiently.

Manufacturing & Production

Manufacturing favors structured, metrics-based performance tracking, often with annual appraisals. Daily output and safety metrics serve as ongoing feedback, reducing the need for frequent formal reviews. However, frontline roles benefit from shorter feedback loops–such as monthly KPI discussions or quarterly safety reviews.

Recommendation: Keep annual formal appraisals but supplement with brief quarterly or monthly team check-ins. Align feedback with production schedules and use team-based reviews to foster collective accountability and continuous improvement.

Healthcare

Due to demanding schedules, healthcare organizations typically hold annual reviews. Still, frequent informal check-ins are critical to support staff and maintain quality. Many hospitals use 60–90-day reviews for new hires and real-time coaching to reinforce best practices.

Recommendation: Maintain annual appraisals but add quarterly or biannual check-ins where possible, especially for new staff. Even short conversations help prevent burnout and improve retention. Technology and pulse surveys can streamline feedback without disrupting patient care.

Professional Services (Consulting, Finance, Law)

Client-driven firms are shifting from annual ratings to continuous, project-based feedback. Deloitte and Accenture now run quarterly coaching sessions and post-project reviews, replacing time-consuming annual cycles. This ensures timely recognition and better performance tracking.

Recommendation: Use quarterly or project-end evaluations supported by brief forms or digital tools. Continuous, lightweight feedback saves time, strengthens coaching, and supports rapid development in high-performance cultures.

Retail, Hospitality, & Hourly Services

In customer-facing industries, performance management relies on immediate, on-the-floor feedback. Formal reviews are typically annual, but frequent recognition and early-tenure check-ins (30–90 days) help reduce turnover. Many retailers now add quarterly mini-evaluations for goal-setting and motivation.

Recommendation: Keep annual reviews for documentation, but emphasize daily coaching and quarterly goal reviews. Frequent recognition and feedback drive engagement and retention in high-turnover environments.

Appraisal Frequency by Growth Stage

The growth stage of a company–from scrappy startup to scale-up to established firm–strongly affects how performance appraisals are handled.

Best practices evolve as the company matures:

Early-Stage Startup (Founding to ~50 employees)

‍At the earliest stage, feedback is informal and constant, often delivered in real time during stand-ups or project check-ins. As the team nears 50 people, it’s time to introduce a lightweight structure–typically semiannual reviews supported by continuous feedback. Index Ventures recommends formalizing reviews around this point, while still keeping things simple. For example, Personio adopted semiannual reviews plus ongoing coaching to avoid “feedback drag.”

Best Practice: Start with twice-yearly reviews and foster an always-on feedback culture. In fast-moving or remote startups, quarterly or even monthly check-ins can maintain alignment. The goal is to train early managers to give frequent, actionable feedback rather than relying on a rigid process.

Scale-Up Stage (~50–300 employees):‍

As the company grows, consistency and fairness become priorities. Most scale-ups retain semiannual reviews, adding structured forms, 360° feedback, and alignment with OKRs. This cadence balances agility and discipline. Revolut, for instance, used biannual reviews during rapid expansion to identify top performers and inform promotions.

Best Practice: Continue biannual reviews, adding quarterly goal check-ins where possible. Tie one review cycle to compensation and promotion decisions, and use regular reviews to identify high-potential talent. Keep the process lightweight but consistent–too much complexity can overwhelm busy managers.

Established Growth Stage (500+ employees):

In larger, more mature firms, performance management often streamlines to annual reviews supplemented by ongoing feedback and mid-year check-ins. Beyond ~250 employees, twice-yearly reviews become difficult to sustain, so many organizations move to one formal annual review tied to compensation, plus informal quarterly or mid-year development talks. Companies like GE, IBM, and Microsoft have replaced rigid annual ratings with continuous feedback via digital tools.

Best Practice: Maintain at least one comprehensive annual review, reinforced by quarterly or monthly one-on-ones to prevent surprises. If parts of the company are in rapid growth or transformation, temporarily increase review frequency for those teams. Flexibility and continuous dialogue are key as organizations mature.

Pros and Cons of Different Appraisal Frequencies

Choosing between quarterly, biannual, annual, or even more frequent appraisals involves trade-offs. Below is a comparison of common review cadences with their advantages and disadvantages:

‍

More frequent reviews (continuous or quarterly) foster agility, engagement, and timely development but require more effort and discipline. Less frequent cycles (annual) reduce administrative load and support big-picture evaluation but risk stale feedback, bias, and disengagement. Semiannual reviews strike a practical balance for many growing firms.

The HR consensus is clear: annual reviews alone aren’t enough. Most organizations now pair them with continuous or quarterly feedback. Research shows 81% of employees want feedback at least quarterly, and companies that added continuous feedback saw 14.9% lower turnover and 24% better financial performance than those using annual reviews alone. However, poorly executed frequent reviews can cause fatigue–manager training and balance are essential.

So, consider adopting a hybrid approach. Retain an annual review for strategic and compensation decisions, but also add quarterly goal and feedback sessions, and encourage weekly informal check-ins. This model blends the structure of annual reviews with the responsiveness of continuous feedback, ensuring no surprises while avoiding overload. As experts note, continuous feedback complements–not replaces–formal reviews, creating a cadence that keeps employees aligned, engaged, and supported year-round.

‍

‍

7 Considerations for Hybrid or Remote Work Environments

With the rise of remote and hybrid work, performance appraisal frequency and methods need adjustment. In a distributed work environment, regular communication is even more critical since managers don’t casually see the work being done.

Here are best-practice considerations for appraisals in hybrid/remote settings:

1. Increase Check-In Frequency:‍

Remote employees need more consistent touchpoints since casual, in-person feedback is absent. Relying on annual or semiannual reviews isn’t enough–experts recommend biweekly or monthly one-on-ones (15–30 minutes). Regular communication sustains engagement and promotion readiness; a Stanford study found hybrid workers perform and advance as well as office peers when feedback is managed effectively. Some teams even hold weekly video check-ins or daily chat stand-ups. The key: make feedback a frequent, lightweight habit.

‍2. Clarity and Goal Realignment:‍

Hybrid teams thrive on clarity. Shorter goal cycles–such as quarterly OKRs–ensure employees understand shifting priorities and how their work contributes to broader objectives. Each check-in should reinforce alignment and allow for course corrections. Many remote organizations pair quarterly goal reviews with ongoing coaching, blending agility with accountability.

‍3. Use 360° Feedback for Fairness:‍

Without in-person observation, managers may overlook remote employees’ contributions. To reduce bias, collect multi-source feedback quarterly or biannually from peers, clients, and collaboration tools. This ensures evaluations reflect real impact rather than visibility. Simple peer surveys or project-based reviews add valuable context and help create balanced appraisals.

‍4. Prevent “Out of Sight, Out of Mind”:‍

Managers must intentionally create visibility for remote staff. Extra mid-quarter touchpoints or brief informal reviews help prevent neglect. Research shows hybrid workers report higher engagement when communication is structured and documented. Using performance software or shared logs to track feedback, goals, and wins helps both managers and employees maintain transparency.

‍5. Flexible Formats and Scheduling:‍

Hybrid teams often span time zones, making asynchronous feedback essential. Many companies now use quarterly written self-reviews and asynchronous manager comments before a final live discussion. Video-based meetings level the playing field–holding reviews virtually for all team members avoids proximity bias and ensures fairness across locations.

‍6. Frequent Recognition and Informal Feedback:‍

Remote employees miss casual praise, so intentional recognition matters. Monthly virtual “wins” meetings or Slack “kudos” channels can replicate spontaneous appreciation. Recognition strongly drives engagement–84% of highly engaged employees feel recognized, compared to only 25% of disengaged ones. Regular praise complements formal reviews and strengthens connection.

7. Ensure Evaluation Equity:‍

Managers should focus on outcomes, not visibility. Training on remote performance evaluation helps reduce proximity bias. Calibration meetings can check for rating disparities between in-office and remote staff. Keep the cadence consistent–remote employees should receive reviews at the same or greater frequency, not less.