Performance reviews are often shaped by unconscious biases that can make feedback unfair, vague, or misleading. This episode breaks down eight common biases managers fall into during reviews and gives practical strategies employees can use to push back, get clearer feedback, and improve their outcomes. The advice applies broadly beyond software engineering to anyone receiving performance feedback from a manager.
What biases are and why they matter in reviews
Biases are a disproportionate favoring or disfavoring of someone, often unconscious, based on similarity, personality, or traits that feel familiar or alien.
They are a natural part of human nature — most people unconsciously prefer those similar to themselves and may undervalue those who are different.
In performance reviews, biases can distort ratings, make feedback unhelpful, and limit an employee’s growth or recognition.
The difference between specific and generic feedback
Specific feedback references a particular situation, what happened, what the manager was observed, and a conclusion drawn from it. This is actionable and allows the employee to agree, disagree, or discuss.
Generic feedback uses vague labels like “you’re too confrontational” or “your code quality isn’t great” without examples. It is harder to act on and more likely to reflect bias.
When feedback is generic, employees should ask clarifying questions: “Can you give me a specific example?” or “Have you observed this in multiple situations?”
A useful trick: if a manager can’t provide examples, ask them to commit to giving immediate feedback the next time it happens. Then follow up in every one-on-one to check whether they’ve observed it. If they haven’t, the original concern may not have been valid.
Pushing back on vague feedback is fair — a manager who can’t substantiate criticism should acknowledge the gap and commit to better observations.
The 8 most common biases and how to counter them
1. Recency Bias
The most common bias: managers overweight recent events (last few weeks or months) and underweight earlier contributions in a review period.
This can help you if you recently shipped something impactful, or hurt you if something went wrong near review time.
How to counter it: Send your manager a self-review before the performance review summarizing everything you’ve done across the full period. Keep an ongoing log of your work throughout the year. During the review, ask whether earlier contributions were factored in.
2. Strictness Bias
Your manager holds you to a higher standard than others on the team, rating you below expectations while being more lenient with others.
This is hard to detect because you don’t see other people’s reviews.
How to counter it:
Ask for specific examples if feedback is generic.
If no examples are forthcoming, ask the manager to commit to giving real-time feedback when they observe the behavior.
Consider embracing the higher bar: tell your manager you want to learn from them, set explicit goals together, and check in frequently on your progress.
This approach tends to work because managers notice effort they previously missed, appreciate receptiveness to feedback, and may soften their strictness in the next cycle.
3. Leniency Bias
The opposite of strictness bias: your manager rates you above or at expectations when you may not actually be performing at that level.
This is a “good problem” to have but can limit growth because you don’t get honest developmental feedback.
You likely won’t know this is happening. You can challenge it, but the episode doesn’t strongly recommend doing so.
4. Horns Bias
One negative trait or incident colors the entire review, causing the manager to rate you low across all areas even if the problem is isolated.
Example: a manager fixates on unclear writing or a single project that went poorly and applies that judgment everywhere.
How to counter it:
Identify the one thing driving the negative review (it’s usually mentioned early or repeatedly).
Ask: “If I improved in this one area, how would you rate me in [other area]?” This forces the manager to separate the issue from unrelated competencies.
If it was a one-off incident, push back on whether it’s fair for a single event to drag down every dimension of your review.
Ask what the single most important thing is that you should work on to grow.
5. Halo Bias
The opposite of horns bias: one outstanding quality or achievement (like working heroically to ship a project) causes the manager to rate you highly across all areas, even where performance was mediocre.
Common with hard-working individuals who “save” a project — they get strong reviews on collaboration, architecture, and citizenship even if those areas weren’t actually strong.
If you’re the beneficiary, the review may not be fully justified, but it works in your favor.
If you’re on the opposite end (getting a stricter review while someone else gets halo-biased praise), this is worth being aware of.
This is primarily something managers need to check themselves for.
6. Similarity Bias
People are naturally drawn to those who look, act, or think like them. Managers tend to be more lenient and susceptible to halo bias toward similar employees, and more strict or harsh toward those who are different.
Similarity can be based on appearance, personality (e.g., both outgoing), background, or communication style.
This is one of the hardest biases to address because you can’t directly call it out without sounding accusatory.
How to counter it:
Use the same strategy as with strictness bias: ask for specifics, get the manager more involved, spend more time showing your work, set shared goals, and check in regularly.
The reality is that unless a manager recognizes their own similarity bias, it’s very difficult for an employee to fix it alone.
7. Central Tendency Bias
Managers avoid distinguishing between high and low performers and rate everyone near the middle (e.g., giving everyone a 3 out of 5).
This happens because managers see their team as a cohesive unit and don’t want to single anyone out, even when performance differences exist.
This bias is why many companies adopted forced ranking curves (e.g., 20% high, 70% medium, 10% low).
How to counter it:
If you receive average ratings across all competencies, push your manager: “If you had to pick my strongest area, which would it be?” and “Where am I weakest and what should I focus on growing?”
You’re not asking them to lower your rating — you’re asking them to identify at least one strength and one growth area so you have actionable direction.
8. Contrasting Bias
Instead of evaluating you against clear role expectations, your manager compares you to other people on the team.
This is problematic because teams are small and the people you’re compared to may not be good benchmarks. Strong teammates can make you look worse than you are; weak teammates can inflate ratings that won’t hold up in promotion committees.
How to counter it:
If your manager names a specific person (“Bob does this better”), redirect: “Can you tell me what the expectation is without referencing other people?”
If there are no written expectations for your level, ask: “What does someone meeting expectations look like at this level?” Take notes, then map your own strengths onto that definition.
If your manager says a strength of yours (like writing good documentation) isn’t expected at your level, push back: “Why not? Where does that fit?”
If the manager refers to “other people” without naming them, ask who they mean and whether it’s people on the team — this can corner them into being more explicit.
On pushing back against your manager
Much of this advice may feel like you’re cornering your manager, but the episode argues that managers who give vague, biased, or low-quality feedback are not doing their job well.
Employees have every right to push for feedback that is specific, fair, and grounded in facts.
If a manager is receptive, the relationship improves: they’ll put more thought into future reviews, and you may even influence how expectations are defined.
If a manager resists or the relationship deteriorates, that’s a signal it may be time to look for a new team or manager.
