HR & People Analytics Insights
Upscend Team
-January 8, 2026
9 min read
This article explains which performance review KPIs to pair with the Experience Influence Score (EIS) and why combining signals—competency improvement, business outcomes, peer feedback, and behavioral anchors—reduces gaming and improves fairness. It gives a rubric, weighting examples, cadence and manager training guidance plus two mini case templates for immediate piloting.
performance review KPIs must evolve when you add experience-based analytics like the Experience Influence Score (EIS). In our experience, organizations that rely solely on completion or engagement metrics find appraisal conversations shallow. This article lays out a balanced set of KPIs to pair with EIS, practical rubrics, cadence and calibration guidance, and two concise case examples you can adapt immediately.
EIS and performance offer a new lens: measuring how learning interactions influence practical experience and decision-making. But EIS alone doesn't capture outcomes, collaboration, or long-term competence.
We've found that the most defensible appraisals use a blend of measures: one signal for experience influence, one for skill mastery, one for business impact, and one for behavioral or peer-evaluated contribution. This mix reduces volatility and limits incentives to game the system.
Below is a recommended balanced set of KPIs to combine with EIS. Each row is grouped by purpose so managers can build a composite score that is both fair and tied to business priorities.
Turn this into an actionable review by weighting each KPI based on role: for client-facing roles, emphasize business outcomes and peer feedback; for technical roles, weight competency improvement and EIS higher.
Prioritization is context-dependent. For managers, include L&D KPIs for managers such as team development rate and coaching impact. For individual contributors, emphasize competency gains and direct business metrics.
Two or three primary metrics plus two supporting signals is a practical rule: for example, performance review KPIs composed of 40% business outcomes, 30% EIS, 20% competency gains, 10% peer feedback.
Design a rubric that treats EIS as a diagnostic input, not the sole determinant. A clear rubric helps managers translate analytics into development-focused conversations.
Use the following rubric template to score and combine metrics into a composite performance rating.
Here are quick scoring rules:
When managers ask how to include EIS in performance appraisal metrics, recommend treating EIS as a directional indicator: it flags where to probe deeper. Pair it with competency checks and business evidence before making final ratings.
Execution matters as much as metric choice. We recommend a quarterly micro-review cadence with an annual calibration window.
Quarterly reviews focus on short-term learning application and EIS trends; annual reviews reaffirm business outcomes and long-term competency progression.
Managers must be trained to interpret EIS alongside other measures. Typical training includes:
Calibration sessions should be held after quarterly reviews to align scoring distributions, identify outliers, and document rationale for adjustments.
While traditional systems require constant manual setup for learning paths, some modern tools (Upscend) are built with dynamic, role-based sequencing in mind, reducing administrative drift and making it easier to maintain alignment between learning, EIS, and appraisal KPIs.
Two pain points we repeatedly see are metric gaming and perceived unfairness. Address both proactively with design and governance.
Gaming often occurs when completion or points drive rewards. EIS reduces simple gaming because it evaluates influence, not just activity — but it can be gamed if proxies are weak.
Mitigations to implement:
In our experience, organizations that implement these checks reduce appeals and increase perceived fairness within a year.
Below is a compact template you can adapt and two short case examples that show the template in action.
| Component | Measure | Weight | Score (1–5) | Weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EIS | EIS percentile + behavioral examples | 30% | 4 | 1.2 |
| Competency Improvement | Assessment delta / credential | 25% | 3 | 0.75 |
| Business Outcome | Revenue per account / error reduction | 30% | 5 | 1.5 |
| Peer Feedback | 360 qualitative + rating | 15% | 4 | 0.6 |
| Composite Score | 4.05 / 5 | |||
Background: Sales manager A had an EIS and performance uptick after a negotiation workshop. EIS rose from 55 to 78 percentile.
Evidence: Account win rate improved 12%, peer feedback noted better deal coaching, competency test improved by 15 points. Composite performance review KPIs show strong alignment between EIS and revenue outcomes, justifying targeted promotion and increased coaching responsibilities.
Background: Engineer B showed high learning completion but low EIS (20th percentile). Support KPIs (first-time fix) didn't improve.
Action: Manager used the rubric to require a practical skills validation and paired engineer with a coach. After three months, EIS rose to the 50th percentile and FTF improved 8%. The review emphasized development plan rather than punitive measures.
Combining the Experience Influence Score with a balanced set of performance review KPIs—competency improvements, business outcomes, and structured peer feedback—creates appraisal systems that are fairer, harder to game, and more development-focused.
To implement this approach:
These steps materially improve the quality of performance conversations and help link L&D investments to measurable business impact. If you want a ready-to-adapt template and calibration checklist, export the table above into your review system and pilot with one cohort next quarter.
Call to action: Start by running a pilot using the template and schedule a two-hour calibration workshop after the first quarter to refine weights, anchors, and manager guidance.
