[noblepayne]

> but you're against performance reviews?

It may be useful to further refine what we mean when we are talking about "performance reviews". Are we talking about regular discussions between Managers (or skip-level, or product stakeholders) and their reports, or are we talking about an HR-driven process that happens every x months? Personally (for whatever that's worth) I find the former helpful and the latter to be mostly a waste of time.

> How do you know if you're doing well or poorly in your job?

Just my 2¢, but I think most folks would acknowledge that it is easy to have a myopic view, and outside feedback is valuable. But, at the same time, I would expect most (non-junior) engineers (who have been at a company long enough to understand the business) to have some sense of how their efforts and contributions are going? Put more plainly, I know if I'm slacking, and I don't usually need my manager to tell me that I'm writing decent code or getting my work done. That said, this all surely depends a lot on the specifics of the work and the organization/teams involved. And also assumes some healthy and regular conversations between peers and between the Business and the development team.

[DangitBobby]

I feel that a performance review cannot hurt you (unless they cut the worst n% of course). If they are giving you an honest assessment of how happy they are with you, you either know you're doing good and to stay the course or you know you're doing bad and to try something else. We've done yearly reviews in the last two places I worked (bonuses are also based on these reviews) and I like that cadence. It helps that I'm not too worried about getting fired without a fair shake, though.