A useful SI review should save you work and show its reasoning

Are you reviewing a person’s quarter or today’s delivery?

Lattice Performance supports reviews, feedback and one-to-one conversations, including review drafts grounded in Lattice data. That is relevant when managers need help preparing a broader performance conversation.

IPI works closer to the job itself: an employee proposes work, gets a response, submits a result and receives an assessment before a person makes the completion decision. Choose IPI when too much daily checking and explaining still comes through the owner. Compare IPI and Lattice if both needs matter.

The sentence sounds confident. Does the record support it?

Imagine a review says, “Rosa repeatedly missed delivery dates.” Open the jobs behind that sentence. One was late because Rosa did not start. Another waited for a client file. A third changed when the customer added a requirement.

Those events need different responses. A useful review makes the differences easier to see. It should help you identify the missed commitment, the dependency and the changed agreement without interviewing everyone again.

Take one important conclusion and follow it back to the work. If the explanation disappears at that point, the draft has moved the writing forward but left the thinking with you.

Give the employee a chance to clarify the work early

IPI lets the employee explain their situation and propose what they intend to accomplish. If your company delegates proposal acceptance to IPI, it can accept the proposal or ask for a better version with a reason.

The value starts there. Rosa can improve an unclear proposal before attempting it. The owner can follow the exchange without personally running it. The later assessment has a clearer agreement to work from.

Make the assessment useful before you decide

When the result comes back, IPI checks what was submitted against the agreed job and relevant context. The owner or chosen reviewer makes the final completion decision. A request for correction remains connected to that job.

For Rosa’s customer file, the assessment should help the reviewer understand what arrived and what is still missing. The reviewer can then decide the next step with the recorded explanation in view. See work completion approval.

For an employee’s wider performance, read patterns across jobs alongside their other responsibilities and contribution. One job’s assessment is useful evidence, not the whole person.

Try the missing-context test

Bring a completed job and one that changed partway through. Read the important claims in the assessment. Can you see which submission supports them? Does the changed requirement remain visible? Can the employee understand what to correct?

Then ask what reaches the next attempt. Inherited Will can keep a useful lesson and deliver relevant teaching to a later employee who is set up to receive it. The best review saves today’s manager effort and gives tomorrow’s worker a better starting point.