I agree that, in most cases, performance reviews are a waste of time, or at least represent a process smell. Regular, frequent feedback is more valuable and eff

I agree that, in most cases, performance reviews are a waste of time, or at least represent a process smell. Regular, frequent feedback is more valuable and effective. It's ok to summarize that quarterly or something, but as others have mentioned, if anything in a performance review is a surprise, management has failed. Having said that, there are situations where performance reviews are a more pragmatic option. As a consultant, I interact daily with my client management, but I can go weeks without any meaningful interaction with my consulting company management. We do check in regularly, and as-needed outside the regular sessions, but my consulting management doesn't take part in my day-to-day work. In order to adequately assess my performance, they need to solicit feedback from client peers and client management. This is a burdensome process that is more practical to perform on a three or six month cycle. None of this precludes feedback and assessment more frequently, however without the day-to-day observation, some schedule and formality help. I suspect there are many other situations in which people do not work directly with their management.