10 Performance Rating Scale Examples Scrutinized: Scale Up Your Reviews

When seeking to enhance performance evaluations, revisiting the fundamentals of performance rating scales is essential. With numerous options available, how do you select the one that best fits your organization’s rhythm and objectives? How can you ensure it’s fair, transparent, and balanced?

In this article, we will explore various types of performance rating scales and examine ten practical examples, complete with scales, definitions, and detailed explanations, that you can implement or customize within your evaluation frameworks.

We also included a checklist of key considerations to help you establish a rating scale that delivers clear, meaningful, and constructive feedback, fostering employee growth and development.

What is a performance rating scale?

Performance rating scales are a standardized tool for assessing an employee’s job performance based on predetermined criteria or expectations. These evaluations allow organizations to measure how effectively employees fulfill their job responsibilities and contribute to the company’s objectives.

Performance ratings help managers quantify whether performance exceeds expectations regarding their effectiveness, contributions, and output. Additionally, a performance scale lets managers establish explicit performance targets and action plans. These goals provide employees with clear guidance for task completion and skill development, preparing them for employee appraisals.

Performance assessments typically use a rating scale or scoring system to evaluate various facets of an employee’s performance, focusing on productivity, work quality, communication, teamwork, problem-solving, adaptability, and alignment with company values.

Why rating scales matter

Performance rating scales provide a standardized framework for evaluating employees, ensuring that all employees are assessed using the same criteria, leading to fairness and consistency in evaluations.

Rating scales can also help align employees with the organization’s goals and objectives. They help communicate expectations regarding performance and behavior, reducing ambiguity and ensuring managers and employees have a shared understanding of performance expectations.

Types of performance review rating scales

Five-point rating scale

A five-point scale is a commonly used rating system that provides five options for assessing or measuring a particular trait, characteristic, or performance level.

Each option on the scale represents a distinct level of the evaluated attribute.

Often, a five-point scale ranges from a low point to a high point, with a neutral or middle option in the center. The scale is typically represented numerically, with 1 as the lowest level and 5 as the highest.

One example of a 5-point scale is:

• Unacceptable performance
• Partially successful
• Fully successful
• Superior
• Distinguished performance

A simpler 5-point scale is:

• Unacceptable
• Needs improvement
• Acceptable
• Good
• Excellent

Three-point rating scale

A three-point scale is a rating system that provides three distinct options for assessing or measuring a particular trait, characteristic, or performance level. Each option on the scale represents a different level of the evaluated attribute.

Like with the five-point rating scale, you can represent a three-point scale numerically or through descriptive labels. The options typically range from a low point to a high point, with one single neutral or middle option in between.

For example, Williams College's Competency-based form uses a 3-point scale with the following ratings:

• Exceeds expectations: Performance consistently exceeded expectations in all essential areas of responsibility, and the quality of work overall was excellent
• Effective: Performance consistently met expectations in all essential areas of responsibility, at times possibly exceeding expectations, and the quality of work overall was very good
• Improvement needed: Performance failed to meet expectations in one or more essential areas of responsibility. The employee needs to acquire and/or develop the necessary skills to build and sustain performance standards

Four-point rating scale

A four-point scale for performance reviews is a rating system for assessing employee performance across various competencies or tasks. This scale consists of four levels, each representing a different degree of proficiency or achievement.

This type of scale is often preferred because it avoids a neutral or middle option (the 3-point and the 5-point scales have this), compelling the reviewer to make a more definitive judgment about the performance.

Duke University offers a performance rating example on a 4-point system:

Exceeds expectations

1. Performance clearly and consistently exceeds communicated performance requirements
2. Contributes to the organization’s success well beyond job requirements. Contributes unique, innovative, and workable solutions to projects/problems

Achievements and abilities are obvious to subordinates, peers, managers, and customers.

Fully achieves expectations

1. Performance consistently meets the requirements, standards, or objectives of the job.
2. Occasionally exceeds requirements. Results can be expected which are timely and accurate with minimum supervision.
3. Recognizes, participates in, and adjusts to changing situations and work assignments.

“Fully Achieves Expectations” describes solid, fully competent performance.

Needs improvement

1. Performance does not consistently meet the requirements, standards, or objectives of the job.
2. Needs improvement in one or more areas of consistent weakness. Problem areas should be monitored and documented.
3. Requires guidance and direction to fully achieve/accomplish responsibilities and objectives.

Improvement is required for staff members to fully achieve expectations.

Unsatisfactory
Staff members must have been counseled regarding unsatisfactory performance to receive this rating.

1. Performance is consistently below requirements and is Unsatisfactory.
2. Performance meets few or none of the standards/objectives.
3. Shows failure to follow directions and initiate improvement.
4. Knowledge is inadequate to retain the job without improvement.
5. Corrective action must be outlined and monitored.

Unsatisfactory is a rating that a staff member should not receive twice.

Narrative scales

Narrative scales, also known as qualitative or descriptive scales, are performance rating systems that rely on written feedback rather than numerical or quantitative performance ratings.

Instead of assigning numerical scores or predefined categories, narrative scales provide detailed written assessments of an employee’s performance.

Let’s examine some examples of a narrative scale from Williams College’s Narrative performance development form.

For each of the outlined performance development competencies, they define 2 levels: Effective and Exceed Expectations.

Personal leadership and innovation

Effective: Effectively manages and utilizes time, is self-motivated, and approaches work from a service mindset. Identifies and resolves problems with an eye for quality and continuous improvement.

Exceeds expectations: Takes a strategic approach to organizational challenges. Uses innovative and creative ideas to solve problems and enhance the working environment. Actively evaluates new ways of working and is not afraid to make mistakes in productive ways.

Communication and collaboration

Effective: Is responsive to the needs and expectations of customers. Demonstrates effective listening skills, proactively shares information, and effectively communicates. Works effectively as part of a team exhibits civility and respect. Solicits input and assistance from others.

Exceeds expectations: Consistently goes above and beyond to serve others and maintains a positive attitude. Asks questions and makes efforts to resolve misinformation and concerns. Hold themselves mutually accountable for the success of the team. Makes time to help colleagues, sharing knowledge and resources.

Graphic scales

A graphic scale for employee performance rating is a visual representation of a performance evaluation tool. It uses a graphical format (often a line or a bar) with labeled intervals to assess and communicate an employee’s performance level. This type of scale provides a clear, visual, and easily understandable way to gauge performance.

Behaviorally-anchored rating scales

Behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) are a distinctive approach to employee performance assessment. They offer a more comprehensive and precise measurement than conventional Likert or 1-5 scales.

This method employs a detailed evaluation framework, using various criteria, ranging from excellent to unsatisfactory, to assess employee performance.

BARS's primary objective is to deliver highly accurate, objective, and dependable evaluations during performance appraisals. It achieves this by focusing on specific, observable behaviors directly relevant to job requirements and desired outcomes.

5-Point performance rating scale examples

Let’s see real-life examples of rating scales in action, starting with the 5-point scale.

The University of Maryland, Baltimore recommends a simple 5-point performance rating scale with the following 5 rating options:

• Outstanding: The employee’s work consistently exceeded expectations
• Above standards: The majority of the employee’s work exceeded expectations
• Meets standards: Performance fully met the established job expectations and may have periodically exceeded expectations
• Below standards: Performance met some of the job expectations but did not fully meet the established measures
• Unsatisfactory: Performance generally failed to meet the established expectations or required frequent, close supervision and/or the redoing of work

Their documentation further expands on the descriptions for each of the rating options. For example, this is the complete description for someone worthy of the “Above standards” rating:

Above standards

• Performance consistently exceeds the requirements needed to fulfill the principal duties, responsibilities, objectives, and expectations of the position.
• Frequently integrates a wide variety of technical, managerial, and other skills to effectively solve problems and carry out duties, responsibilities, and objectives beyond the expectations of the position; makes ongoing improvements.
• Employee demonstrates proficiency in performing difficult and complex aspects of the job competently and thoroughly, including extra and unique tasks assigned.
• Quality of work is excellent; consistently exceeds performance expectations.
• Performance met all major aspects of expectations and exceeded requirements in several key areas. Performed the most difficult parts of the job competently and thoroughly.
• Adds value to the organization beyond what is expected; one of the key contributors within the organization and peer group. Contributes significant results of own initiative.

This 5-point rating scale example from Forbes Advisor also leverages numbers for faster results quantification.

• 5 (Outstanding): Performs significantly above the quality/quantity criteria for this role
• 4 (Exceeds expectations): Generally exceeds the quality/quantity criteria for this role
• 3 (Meets expectations): Meets the set criteria for the designated role
• 2 (Needs improvement): Didn’t fully meet the set criteria for the designated role
• 1 (Unacceptable): Performs significantly below set criteria

Behaviorally anchored rating scale examples

These detailed types of rating scales often require extra documentation to be prepared before applying them.

You can use any number of rating points as long as the main focus is on getting as many details as possible on an employee’s behavior.

The following behaviorally anchored rating scale examples come from the State of Michigan. They differentiate between job groups, each group having a specific competency model. All groups share the same framework for a behaviorally anchored rating scale with three performance levels: needs improvement, meets expectations, and high-performing.

Group one refers to Technical, Office, Administrative Support, Paraprofessional, and Service Occupations (Non-Supervisory) roles. Their competency model consists of 16 competencies:

• Adaptability
• Applied learning
• Building customer loyalty
• Communication
• Contributing to team success
• Decision making
• Impact
• Initiating action
• Innovation
• Integrity/honesty
• Interpersonal skills
• Managing work
• Quality orientation
• Safety awareness
• Stress tolerance
• Valuing diversity and inclusion

Group two refers to Business, Human Service, Scientific, and Engineering Professional Classes (Non-Supervisory) roles. Their competency model consists of 15 competencies:

• Adaptability
• Building strategic working relationships
• Building trust
• Coaching
• Continuous learning
• Contributing to team success
• Customer focus
• Communication
• Decision making
• Follow-up
• Initiating action
• Innovation
• Planning and organizing work
• Valuing diversity and inclusion
• Work standards

Group three covers the competency model for managers, consisting of 15 competencies:

• Adaptability
• Communication
• Customer focus
• Decision making
• Innovation
• Technical/professional knowledge and skills
• Valuing diversity and inclusion
• Planning and organizing work
• Delegating responsibility
• Building trust
• Developing a successful team
• Aligning performance for success
• Managing conflict
• Facilitating change
• Building partnerships

Now, let’s take an extra BARS example and look at how they define the behavioral indicators for the managerial competency of developing a successful team:

Needs improvement

• Often fails to build consensus in team thoughts and actions; key objectives are not understood by or acted upon by team members.
• Does not promote full team involvement in decisions; the leader makes all substantive decisions.
• Expects the team to solve problems but does not give enough guidance or support.
• Ignores dissension; doesn’t attain full team participation; allows one or more team members to unduly influence others.
• Does not consider diversity of skills and perspectives in assembling and developing a team.

Meets expectations

• Brings individuals together who effectively work towards solving a problem or goal.
• Monitors team progress towards goals and regularly provides feedback to the team regarding progress.
• Actively involves the team in decision-making; gives the team credit for successes as well as responsibility for failures.
• Actively seeks ideas and involvement of team members in problem-solving and shares information on why decisions are made.
• Creates an environment where team members accept differences in approaches. Values the opinions of others and acts to promote the success of the entire team.

High performing

• Leads teams that are highly effective in producing significant business results; teams are recognized within the organization for their ability to deliver results.
• Creates high-performing teams where team members regularly learn from each other and adapt team processes for improved team efficiency and outcomes.
• Highly effective in developing and sustaining a high level of team member commitment and “ownership” for decisions and results by team members.
• Conveys strong confidence in self and team; builds pride in the team and inspires team members to perform to their fullest.
• Insightfully diagnoses critical skills and capabilities needed by individuals or by the entire team and takes effective action to bring about needed improvement.

3-point performance rating scale examples

This University of Michigan rating scale example, for instance, sticks to a 3-point scale but further develops upon the exact criteria behind each point:

• Exceeded: The employee’s performance far exceeded expectations due to exceptionally high quality of work performed in all essential areas of responsibility, resulting in an overall quality of work that was superior and either included the completion of a major goal or project, or made an exceptional or unique contribution in support of unit, department, or college objectives. This rating is achievable by any employee, though given infrequently.
• Achieved: The employee’s performance consistently met expectations in all essential areas of responsibility, at times possibly exceeding expectations, and the quality of work overall was very good. The most critical annual goals were met. Typically demonstrates proficient knowledge, skills, and abilities for the required work.
• Not achieved: The employee’s performance did not consistently meet expectations and failed to meet expectations in one or more essential areas of responsibility, and/or one or more of the most critical goals were not met. The employee’s work failed to meet the goals of the job function and generally falls short of performance goals, even though sometimes approaching goals. The employee provides minimal support to the contributions of the organization.

10-point performance rating scale examples

While not as popular due to its extensiveness, a 10-point performance rating scale is a system where employees are assessed on a scale from 1 to 10, with each point on the scale corresponding to a different level of performance.

This type of scale allows for a higher degree of granularity in evaluating employee performance.

Here’s an example of a 10-point performance rating scale along with corresponding descriptors:

1. Poor performance: Employee consistently falls far short of meeting performance standards. Significant improvement is needed
2. Very weak: Employee’s performance is consistently below what is expected. Immediate improvement is a must
3. Weak: Employee’s performance is below the expected level, but there are occasional instances of meeting expectations
4. Below average: Employee consistently meets the expected performance standards, but there’s room for refinement and growth
5. Average: Employee consistently meets all performance standards satisfactorily
6. Above average: Employee not only meets but consistently exceeds expectations
7. Good: Employee consistently surpasses performance standards with some notable achievements
8. Very good: Employee consistently exceeds expectations with significant achievements
9. Excellent: Employee’s performance is consistently exemplary, far surpassing all expectations
10. Outstanding: Employee’s performance is consistently exceptional, demonstrating a level of achievement far beyond what is expected

Competency rating scale 1-5 examples

Competency rating scales help you evaluate employee performance by touching on specific competencies or skills. They prove particularly valuable in assessing whether a job candidate or current employee aligns with the requirements of their role.

These scales are especially useful for performance reviews when aiming to enhance training initiatives within your team or when considering a new hire or promotion. Customized to each specific job role, they gauge employee competencies in critical areas like adaptability, communication, problem-solving, and beyond.

Competencies ratings follow a five or four-point scale such as:

1. Needs improvement
2. Below expectations
3. Meets expectations
4. Exceeds expectations
5. Expert (sets a new standard)

We know that many companies are wary of using numbered scales. To mitigate this issue, Berfu Ulusoy, our Learning and Development Consultant, recommends ditching the numbers altogether and using a simple scale with labels for more clarity.

Here’s a growth rating scale she recommends using:

1. Developing: Making efforts to improve skills and knowledge
2. Expanding: Demonstrating growth and acquiring new competencies
3. Evolving: Continuously improving and adapting to challenges
4. Advancing: Making significant strides in personal and professional development
5. Transforming: Exhibiting exceptional growth, embracing change, and inspiring others

Factors to consider when choosing the right rating scale for your teams

Now that you have a solid understanding of the available performance rating scale options let’s explore the key factors you should consider before selecting the right one for your organization.

The feedback culture in your company

A culture that values positive feedback and honest communication can help create an environment where employees feel comfortable providing constructive feedback and trust that their opinions will be heard and respected.

By taking this into account, you can choose rating scales tailored to the specific needs of individuals in your team and ensure that your employees feel comfortable and supported in the feedback process. Additionally, a well-designed rating scale can encourage employees to provide meaningful, thoughtful feedback that can be used to help improve team performance.

Our expert, Berfu Ulusoy, notes that if you’re not feeling comfortable using scales, you can stick to qualitative answers to open-ended questions:

The type of reviews needed

Are you only looking for manager performance reviews, or do you want to involve different team members in performance reviews?

If you want to extend performance ratings to the entire organization, Likert or 5-point scales are fairly easy and quick to use, so you can turn to them whenever you want to gather feedback from colleagues, clients, and collaborators. Additionally, employees can even use them to self-rate their performance.

The types of role or industry you’re in

Customer service roles may require different rating scales than those in a design or web development role. Further, certain industries may require different scales. Simply put, to measure performance accurately, you need the right scales that will support the diversity of criteria you want to test.

Let’s go back to our two industry examples.

In a creative role, performance might be measured using criteria such as creativity, collaboration, and innovation.

In contrast, performance will be evaluated in a customer service environment using criteria such as customer satisfaction, product knowledge, and responsiveness. The latter are easier to measure using quantitative scales like a 5-point system.

The scale’s complexity

Qualitative review might require a more detailed rating scale that allows you to capture different aspects of the feedback, such as the quality of the work, the speed of delivery, and the overall customer experience.

In contrast, a quantitative review might require a simpler rating scale that focuses on the team’s overall performance. Considering the type of reviews needed will help you choose the most suitable rating scale for your team.

Jo Taylor, Founder and MD at Let’s Talk Talent, advocates for keeping past performance analysis simple:

Training requirements and available resources

Training materials and possibilities are important to consider because they can determine the complexity of the scale for employee performance reviews.

Suppose your team doesn’t have access to the right training materials or enough time to learn a complex rating system. In that case, a simpler scale may be more appropriate.

Best practices for ensuring your performance rating scales drive clarity, consistency, and fairness

Use these eight core best practices when defining the rating scales for your performance review cycles:

1. Write clear descriptors: Leave little room for ambiguity during employee performance reviews. All raters should have the exact same understanding of what each level means
2. Maintain consistent increments: The difference between each successive level should be consistent. So, not jumping from not meeting to barely meeting or exceeding. There should always be other levels in between
3. Include anchor behaviors or examples: This ensures a shared understanding of what performance at each level should look like
4. Keep a balanced scale: Stick to an equal number of positive and negative performance levels, so you’re not purely using a numerical scale
5. Always add a neutral midpoint: This is especially valid for scales with odd points, as a neutral mid-point is useful for capturing average or expected performance
6. Be wary of the cultural aspects and language you use: With any performance review, avoid jargon and stay culturally neutral to ensure all points and explanations are understood consistently across diverse groups
7. Combine performance ratings with regular feedback sessions for comprehensive performance reviews: Consider adding a calibration step after getting the results from your scales. Stick to our list of recommended steps for holding a fair and productive performance calibration meeting
8. Train your managers to ensure consistency in performance ratings across departments: Personal biases can still creep through even when descriptions are super clear. You can avoid these by ensuring your entire leadership team is up to par with the correct rating standards

Measure and boost performance with Deel Engage

Regardless of the performance rating scale you opt for, Deel Engage is your go-to partner for driving performance and growth.

Elevate your performance reviews with a highly flexible and customizable tool. You have complete power over:

• The types of feedback you want to collect (peer, self-evaluations, manager reviews)
• The anonymity of the input
• The recurrence and timeline of your cycles
• The kinds of questions you want to ask (qualitative or quantitative)
• The kinds of ratings you want to use.
• Whether you want to link the questions to your people’s competency and career frameworks or their goals
• And much, much more

Gain valuable insights into your workforce by pinpointing high achievers, assessing talent distribution, populating your 9-box grid with accurate data, and identifying potential issues like toxic leadership and more!

Use the insights from your performance reviews to help your people create tailored development plans to support their professional growth.

In addition, Deel HR, our truly global HRIS solution, is always included for free.

Book a demo to see how our solutions will help you build a high-performance workforce.