評価面談の準備と振り返り

The performance review interview is a formal system conducted twice a year at most Japanese companies, where the half-year (April–September) and full-year (October–March) performance is reviewed. It is a formal procedure entirely separate from 1on1, and because the results are directly reflected in bonuses, salary increases, and promotions, both preparation and reflection are extremely important.

Many Japanese companies conduct evaluation along two axes. First, performance evaluation (also called results evaluation), which measures the achievement level of goals (KPI or OKR) set at the start of the period. The principle is objective evaluation expressible in numbers. Second, behavioral evaluation (competency evaluation), which evaluates behavior and attitude in the process of achieving performance. Items include cooperativeness, initiative, leadership, and sense of responsibility. The weight of performance vs. behavioral evaluation varies by company and position. Typically, managers have a higher weight on performance, while junior staff tend toward higher weight on behavior.

MBO is the system where the manager and subordinate discuss and set goals at the start of the period and evaluate the achievement level at the end. Advocated by Peter Drucker in 1954, it has been widely introduced in Japan since the 1990s. Goals are basically set on the SMART principle (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound). Achievement is typically evaluated on five stages (S, A, B, C, D). B means "as expected," A means "exceeds expectations," and S means "outstanding results."

Before the evaluation interview, the subordinate submits a self-evaluation sheet. There are three knacks for writing it. First, always include specific numbers. Just "worked hard" or "made effort" does not communicate to evaluators. Show numerically as in "achieved 120% of orders year-on-year." Second, use the STAR method. Writing in the order Situation → Task → Action → Result clarifies what was achieved and how. Third, write organizational contribution. Adding not only individual results but also how you contributed to the team or department tends to raise the evaluation.

Shoukyuu (salary increase) and shoukaku (promotion) are often confused, but they are completely different concepts. Shoukyuu refers to the base salary rising within the same grade. With many companies, getting a B evaluation or above each year leads to a fixed-range salary increase. On the other hand, shoukaku means the grade itself rises — for example, the position rises from "general employee" to "chief," "section chief," or "manager." Shoukaku does not occur every year; many companies decide it after a promotion exam or executive interview. At still many companies, shoukaku is influenced not only by performance but also by years of tenure and age.

Many Japanese companies have a hierarchical structure called the grade system. For example, grades like "G1 to G7" or a position hierarchy: "general → chief → section chief → manager → department head → division head → executive." Each grade has defined expected roles and behavior criteria, called the job description or grade requirements. Because evaluation is conducted against the requirements of the current grade, even with the same result, those at higher grades tend to be evaluated more strictly. When aiming for promotion, you need to show that you are already fulfilling the role required at the next grade while in your current grade.

At the evaluation interview you receive feedback from your manager. To positive feedback, returning "thank you, next I aim for ~" — pairing gratitude with the next goal — gives a good impression. To negative feedback, do not rebut emotionally; first confirm facts: "Thank you for the point. Specifically, in what scene?" After understanding, presenting an improvement proposal is the desirable response: "I will strive for improvement next period — specifically I will implement X and Y." An attitude of crying or rebutting emotionally has a negative impact on the next evaluation as well.

When you cannot accept the evaluation result, many companies have an objection-filing system (or re-evaluation interview). The procedure is typically: first request explanation again from the direct supervisor, then consult the secondary evaluator (department head or division head), and finally consult HR. It is essential not to become emotional but to assert logically with specific facts and numbers. However, cases where evaluations are overturned are extremely few, and there is a risk of damaging the long-term relationship with your supervisor — so judge cautiously.