I didn't quite read it that way, but had a similar reaction in that to me it points to a problem with management rather than the people being reviewed. If a pr

I didn't quite read it that way, but had a similar reaction in that to me it points to a problem with management rather than the people being reviewed. If a problem gets to the point where the person being reviewed is unaware of it until a review, the system and management above it has failed. This should all be part of the process. Nothing should be surprising, the feedback should be continuous and so should the attempts to rectify things. I'm not saying disputes don't come up, or that there aren't issues that develop. But the idea of "implied" tasks or project needs that go neglected to me in turn implies that this should have been addressed immediately, not at the time of an annual review or something, after the fact, and after it's been allowed to grow. To me it's a sign of lack of communication and management being out of touch.