Reviews from the record
Review season without the archaeology
When reviews run on memory, the person who wrote the tidiest self-review wins, and your best people notice. Threadiant grounds each rating in the year's actual work instead.
Evidence, not recollection
The review assembles itself
Each review is built from the year's actual record: the weekly check-ins, the notes a manager wrote at the time, and peer feedback. The rating you sign off on starts from that evidence, not from a scramble the week before.
Performance Review · Evidence
That grounds the rating on the way down. But would anyone tell you the truth on the way up?
Upward feedback · on your management
From your team, identities severed in the database
Anonymous, and believed
Upward feedback people actually trust
Feedback on managers is anonymous in the only way people believe: identities are severed in the database, not hidden behind a checkbox that someone could later untick.
That is what makes it honest enough to be worth reading. When several people raise the same thing, you can trust that it is real and not just one bad week talking.
Severing identities only works if you trust where the data sits. So whose database is it?
Your data stays yours
The evidence belongs to your firm
The record a review leans on is your firm's alone, held in a database no other firm shares. Exports and the right to erasure are built in, so the evidence behind every rating stays something you control.
The record writes itself, a week at a time
Nothing here is a separate chore. It is the weekly rhythm, read back at review season. The guided tour has a full year of it standing behind one person's review.