Academic Employees

Staff Types Included

The following employees can expect to receive a review in Workday:

• Classified Staff
• Regular University Staff (UStaff) employees
• A&P Faculty

Staff Types Excluded

Employees that do not complete a review in Workday:

• Academic Wage and Temporary employees
• Professional Research Staff
• Non-A&P Faculty
• SOM & CHMSL employees
• Employees on New Hire Probation
• New hires whose probation ends less than 3 months before the performance cycle closes:
  • CY cycle: Start or probation end date after September 30
  • FY cycle: Start or probation end date after March 31
• Identified Athletics Coaching staff (contact your HR Business Partner for more information)

All schools/units follow the calendar year (CY) process except Advancement, Athletics, Audit, and EOCR, which follow a fiscal year (FY) process. Schools/units may set their own deadlines, except for mass advancement and employee acknowledgment dates:

FY26 Timeline

Applies to Advancement, Athletics, Audit, and EOCR:

• June 1, 2026: Self-evaluations launch
• June 30, 2026: Self-evaluations due
• July 1, 2026: All incomplete self-evaluations mass-advance to managers
• July 31, 2026: Classified Staff manager evaluations due 
• August 14, 2026: Classified Staff secondary review/approval due
• August 31, 2026: All manager evaluations, 1:1s, and acknowledgments due
• Employee Acknowledgments due immediately upon receipt and review

CY26 Timeline:

• December 1, 2026: Self-evaluations launch
• January 8, 2026: Self-evaluations due
• January 31, 2026: All incomplete self-evaluations mass-advance to managers
• January 31, 2026: Classified Staff manager evaluations due
• February 12, 2026: Classified Staff secondary review/approval due
• February 28, 2026: All manager evaluations, 1:1s, and acknowledgments due
• Employee Acknowledgments due immediately upon receipt and review

Employee Acknowledgments

You should acknowledge your review immediately after receiving and reviewing. If you wish to appeal, you must submit a written request to your primary reviewer within 10 workdays of receiving your review. For more information, visit the Appeals of Annual Performance Evaluations webpage.

Ongoing Performance Conversations

It is strongly recommended managers discuss performance regularly throughout the year following our Guide to Regular Performance Check-Ins.

Below are the general definitions of each rating. Ratings reflect both goal achievement and demonstration of desired behaviors:

1. Unsatisfactory: Rarely achieves expected performance level; requires significant and immediate corrective action.
2. Inconsistent: Inconsistently achieves expected performance level; needs improvement.
3. Effective: Consistently achieves expected performance level.
4. Highly Effective: Consistently achieves and often exceeds expected performance level.
5. Exceptional: Significantly and consistently exceeds expected performance level.

Leaders should discuss performance expectations with their teams and calibrate ratings as appropriate. Success most often depends on three key performance areas:

1. Individual Achievement: Reflects an employee's ability to complete tasks, meet goals, and deliver results independently
2. Team Collaboration: Measures how well an individual works with colleagues to support a productive and positive team environment
3. Organizational Impact: Captures the broader impact of an employee's work on UVA and its internal or external stakeholders

Use the Performance Rating Rubric to help with assessing your own or your team's performance in these areas.

Appealing a Performance Review

If you wish to appeal, you must submit a written request to your primary reviewer within 10 workdays of receiving your review. For more information, visit the Appeals of Annual Performance Evaluations webpage.

Classified Staff Ratings

New for 2026: DHRM updated their policy in August of 2025 that included moving to a 5-point rating scale.

Additionally, the Extraordinary Contribution and Notice of Improvement/Substandard Performance forms are no longer required.

Completing a Self-Evaluation or Manager Evaluation

To complete your self-evaluation or manager evaluation, navigate to your Workday inbox and open the task. If you need to reference goals from a previous review, follow the steps in the next section: "Viewing a Completed Performance Review."

Managers: You can search and run the "Performance Completion Report" or "PM Dashboard" to check the status and details of reviews. Manager evaluations are completed by opening the task in your Workday inbox (their self-eval must have been submitted or push forward to appear in your inbox).

Viewing a Completed Performance Review

Through Your Workday Profile:

1. Click your profile picture in the top-right corner
2. Select "View Profile" from the drop-down menu
3. Click "Performance" in the left-hand menu
4. Select the "Performance Review" tab at the top of the page
5. Click "View" next to your previous performance review

Managers: Open an employee's profile by selecting them from your Team Org Chart or searching their name, then follow steps 3–5.

Resources:

• Goal Setting Resources
• Feedback Resources
• Guide to Writing & Conducting a Performance Review
• Guide to Regular Performance Conversations

PM Services

We offer in-person training, lunch-and-learns, 1:1 consulting, and performance coaching for managers, teams, and individuals upon request. Email AskHR@virginia.edu with "Performance Management" in the subject line, and a member of the performance team will reach out to you.

Required

Use only UVA-approved AI tools.

Do not upload university work information to unapproved AI platforms. UVA-approved, enterprise-protected tools for Generative AI have the added privilege of enterprise security, meaning what you tell it and upload stays within UVA.

Appropriate vs. Inappropriate AI Use in Performance Management

Appropriate AI Uses:

• Refining goals and vision: Sharing your organization, department, or team vision along with your initial goals, then asking AI to suggest edits or brainstorm refinements.
• Improving feedback delivery: Drafting feedback you plan to give someone, then asking how it may be received or for tips on delivery.
• Enhancing clarity: Creating bullet points of accomplishments and development areas, then asking AI to improve clarity, conciseness, or flag subjective language.
• Checking alignment: Providing rating criteria alongside your written summary, then asking where the language appears to align.
• Getting permission: Asking your employee or colleague if they are OK with you uploading their created work to AI (self-evaluation, goals, feedback), or transcribing a conversation with AI.
• Transcribing 1:1 notes: Using MS Teams Transcription and Recap features to automatically generate meeting notes.
• Verifying accuracy: Asking AI to provide sources and verify the accuracy of its responses.

Inappropriate AI Uses:

• Copy-pasting generic content: Asking AI to write your vision, purpose, or goals, then copying and pasting them as your own.
• Sending unreviewed feedback: Asking AI to draft feedback and sending it directly to an employee or colleague.
• Generating generic reviews: Asking AI to generate a generic performance review about someone.
• Gaming the rating system: Uploading a rating rubric and asking AI to produce a review that matches a specific rating.
• Violating privacy: Uploading someone's self-evaluation or other created work, or transcribing a conversation, without their permission or knowledge.
• Trusting without verification: Assuming AI output is accurate and appropriate.

AI is a tool to enhance clarity and efficiency but should complement authentic, thoughtful input. For questions regarding AI use specific to performance management (reviews, goals, feedback), contact the PM team at AskHR@virginia.edu.