Something to readReviews & performance
Talent Assessment
A public handbook page on how GitLab rates its people and calibrates the results
Why it’s worth your time
Much of what decides a performance rating tends to happen out of view, and this is one company laying its version out in public. GitLab's handbook explains its process in its own words, caveats included. Reading it can turn a rumor-shaped process into one you know how to ask about.
How performance ratings and calibration work
The essay · 56 min · Free
How to get it
Opens their site. We don’t copy it here; we’d rather they get the read.
- Read the handbook page.
It's long, so use the jump links at the top. Start with what performance and growth potential mean, then read the calibration section, which describes the meeting where managers and leaders compare ratings.
- Ask your manager how ratings get decided here.
Keep it curious. Ask whether ratings are compared across teams, what the categories mean, and what growth looks like at your level.
You“I was reading how another company runs its performance reviews, and realized I don't know much about how ours work. Could we spend ten minutes in our next 1:1 on how ratings get decided here, and what you'd want to see from me this year to be rated as ready for more?”
Good moments for this: a month before review seasonafter a rating that surprised youwhen you start at a new company
Keep going with Truest
Small actions add up. Truest helps you find the next thing worth doing, make the space to do it, and keep a record of your progress. It’s a private place to work on your career, and it’s yours, not your employer’s.
- It actually happensWe’ll put it on your calendar and remind you before it starts.
- A living page in your VaultKeep it as one page you add to, next to your reviews and your files.
- It’s yours to keepEach thing you do is saved to your private record, there when your next review or job search comes around.
Anything else we can help you with this week?
Making it work for you
Every workplace is different. Here’s what to think about before you start, and what might get in the way.
Things to think about
A process like this exists to plan pay, promotions and succession. Seeing that can make a rating feel less like a verdict on you and more like a placement you can ask questions about.
What might make this harder
Ask your manager once, plainly: what the categories are, who reviews them, and when. If the answer stays vague, ask what you'd need to show this year, which is the part you can act on either way.
Questions people ask
What is a 9-box talent assessment?
A grid that rates people on current performance and on growth potential, at three levels each, making nine boxes.
What happens in a calibration meeting?
Managers and leaders review proposed ratings together to make them consistent across teams. GitLab's handbook says its sessions tend to focus on gaps and outliers, and lists people close to promotion among others worth discussing.
Does GitLab use forced ranking?
Its handbook page says no: it describes an expected distribution, roughly 10% Developing, 60 to 65% Performing and 25% Exceeding, as a baseline rather than a quota, and says calibration isn't a stack ranking. It also notes the page is under revision.
How can I improve my growth potential rating?
Ask your manager what growth means where you work. GitLab's page names four areas, adaptability, expandability, consistency and self-awareness, and suggests stretch projects and naming the skills you want to build.
What it says, and how it holds up
GitLab, which counts transparency among its values, publishes its own process: the grid, the definitions behind each box, the calibration meeting, the scripts managers use to deliver results, and a long FAQ. It's written for GitLab's own people, and a note at the top says it's being revised for a new cycle. Read it as one company's recent practice, not as a guide to how yours works.
A few details are worth more than the grid itself. The handbook weights performance 60% on the job's responsibilities and 40% on GitLab's competencies, including its values and remote-working competencies, so how you work counts alongside what you deliver. An Exceeding rating, the handbook says plainly, doesn't guarantee a promotion. For people promoted during the year, the page recommends starting from a middle box at their new level, and calibration is told to leave out things like parental leave, health and the details of an improvement plan.
GitLab's own page notes that in most companies this kind of grid stays a management tool and the results aren't shared with the people rated, and it says it shares them. It's also candid that growth potential is the softer score: more qualitative than performance, harder to measure, and leaning on what managers and leaders have observed. That's where the conversation with your manager earns its keep, because it's the score that depends most on what they've seen you do and heard you say you want.
Where the page stops helping is a rating you think reflects something other than your work, such as time on leave or a health issue. GitLab lists those among the things calibration should steer clear of, which shows what a fair process tries to exclude but says nothing about your options if it didn't. Those can be questions about your rights, and someone who knows the employment rules where you work is better placed to answer them than any handbook.
You might like
More in Reviews & performance
See allRead this alongside your role page
Tell Truest what you’re dealing with
We read every one, and we write guides for the things that come up most. Leave your email if you’d like to hear when we do.
Picked by Truest and described in our own words. The original belongs to its creator. Last updated October 9, 2026. We sell a career membership; where that’s relevant above, we say so.