Pros
Some team members demonstrate exceptional knowledge and are valuable resources for learning.
Cons
In my experience, performance evaluations were heavily driven by metrics that did not adequately reflect the complexity or impact of the work being performed. I consistently worked on a high volume of advanced tickets involving deep troubleshooting and multiple queries, which required significantly more effort and time than standard cases, yet this was not meaningfully differentiated in evaluation. I was placed on a PIP primarily based on this metric, despite handling some of the most complex issues in the queue. This highlighted a clear gap between measurable output and actual contribution, particularly in roles where quality, depth, and problem-solving are critical. Additionally, contributions beyond metrics — such as mentoring peers, improving knowledge base content, and organising team and community initiatives — were not adequately recognised. These efforts directly improve team capability, morale, and long-term efficiency, but were largely overlooked in performance discussions. Finally, the impact of organisational restructuring further reinforced the misalignment between stated values and actual practices. A more transparent, fair, and holistic evaluation system would go a long way in building trust.