>, I don't think it's good to write things down and put them into a system for years. Because of a litigious labor environment, companies and HR departments a

>, I don't think it's good to write things down and put them into a system for years. Because of a litigious labor environment, companies and HR departments are forced to document appraisals and ratings and keep them archived. Part of the reason Ellen Pao failed to convince a jury[1] consisting of 50% women (6 women) was that KPCB had extensive historical documentation contradicting her claims. Even though they've won their case, it shouldn't surprise us if they keep even more documentation on employee evaluations. If companies followed your idea of not writing things down, they'd end up in a situation of "he said, she said". That's a weak defense in a lawsuit. In theory, the employers & employees in America have what's called "at will" employment. Employers can fire for any reason (except for discrimination), and likewise, employees can also quit without giving notice. That's the theory. The reality is different. If you want to fire a "protected class"[2] employee for unacceptable job performance, the worker may try to retaliate and claim discrimination. The "at will" principle gets trumped by lawsuits. The company's defense against protected class workers who think they are impervious to being terminated is to document everything. [1]"Her chief reservation with Pao's case lay in her performance reviews, Malone said. That was also the view of the two other jurors interviewed by Reuters" http://www.businessinsider.com/r-juror-in-gender-lawsuit-sympathized-with-pao-sided-with-kleiner-2015-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/r-juror-in-gender-lawsuit-sym... [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class