Skip to the main content.
Talk to an expert
Talk to an expert
Featured Offer
Ambitious 50 →
6 months of Hire and Engage free for businesses under 50 people.

Hey Compono!

A coach that actually gets you.

Get 10 minutes free, then $15 a month. Cancel anytime.

Get Started ≫
Free tools for HR leaders

Integrity
performance review phrases

24 phrases across four rating bands, for managers, coaching conversations and self-evaluations. Filter, copy, print. Free, no sign-up.

Start with the rating band that matches the person, then pick the voice you are writing in. Copy a phrase, then change the specifics so it names the real project, the real quarter, the real thing that happened. A comment that could describe anyone is the thing you were trying to avoid.

How these were written, and the five steps to a review that holds up ↓
Rating:
Voice:
24 showing
Exceeds expectations

Raised a problem that reflected badly on their own work, before anybody else could have found it.

Manager to employee

Holds the line on standards when it is inconvenient, including upward.

Manager to employee

Says the same thing to the room as they say afterwards.

Manager to employee

Worth putting them where standards are genuinely contested. That is where this is worth the most.

Coaching

Others already use them as the check on whether something is reasonable. Worth making that role explicit.

Coaching

I flagged the error in [work] before it was found, which was uncomfortable and much cheaper than the alternative.

Self-evaluation
Meets expectations

Keeps confidences and handles sensitive information appropriately.

Manager to employee

Acknowledges mistakes rather than managing the story around them.

Manager to employee

Gives credit accurately, including when it costs them.

Manager to employee

Reliable on their own conduct. The next step is naming it when a standard is slipping around them.

Coaching

Worth practising the awkward correction in the moment rather than afterwards, when it is easier to let go.

Coaching

I corrected an attribution in a report where the credit had drifted to the wrong person, including where it was mine to lose.

Self-evaluation
Needs development

Positions shift depending on who is in the room.

Manager to employee

Mistakes are explained more thoroughly than they are acknowledged.

Manager to employee

Commitments made in private are not always reflected in what is said publicly.

Manager to employee

If you would not say it with the other person present, that is the signal. Say it to them first or not at all.

Coaching

When something goes wrong, lead with what happened before the context. The context reads very differently in that order.

Coaching

I soften my position depending on the room, which I have told myself is diplomacy.

Self-evaluation

I explain my mistakes before I acknowledge them.

Self-evaluation
Unsatisfactory

Accounts of the same events have been materially inconsistent between audiences.

Manager to employee

Confidential information has been shared inappropriately after this was raised in [month].

Manager to employee

This is the one area where the standard is not negotiable, and I need it stated plainly rather than coached.

Coaching

If there is pressure making honest reporting feel unsafe, I need to know now, because that would be mine to fix.

Coaching

I have not been consistent in how I have represented [situation]. I want to correct the record rather than leave it.

Self-evaluation
No phrases match those two filters together. Clear one of them.
How do you write about integrity in a performance review?

Keep it observable. Consistency across audiences, acknowledging mistakes before explaining them, giving credit accurately when it costs something.

How these were written

Written, not calculated. Each phrase names a situation, an observable behaviour and its effect on the work or the people around it. Bands run from exceeds expectations to unsatisfactory across three voices: a manager writing about somebody, a manager coaching, and a person writing their own self-evaluation.

Assumptions
  • Phrases are starting points. Drop in the real situation or the comment reads as filler.
  • The four bands assume a four-point scale. On a three or five-point cycle the band is a sorting device, not a score.
  • Written for Australian workplaces and Australian English.
  • Check the constraint before rating the person. Workload, authority and what happened to the last person who tried shape most of what gets written up as an individual failing.
  • Unsatisfactory-band comments assume a dated record already exists and the issue has been raised before.
Sources

What to do about it

Good phrasing rescues a review that was already done properly. It cannot rescue one where nobody wrote anything down until the week it was due.

1

Start from your notes, not from this list

Open what you recorded during the year, pick what really happened, then find the wording. The other order produces a fluent review that says nothing.

2

Name the situation in every comment

The real project, the real quarter, the real result. Only one person could have earned it.

3

Match the band to your evidence, not the conversation you want

A generous rating on somebody you privately consider a problem is how next year's difficult conversation ends up looking like it came from nowhere.

4

Pair every development comment with a support step

Training, a pilot, a pairing, a cadence. Criticism without a path forward produces defensiveness and reads badly to anyone reviewing the file later.

5
Where a tool helps

Read your reviews as a set

If the same competency is the gap across a function, that is a capability gap in how the team was built rather than a dozen development plans.

The same thing in
and out of the room.

Compono Hire measures values and culture fit before the offer, which is a great deal cheaper than discovering a mismatch at review time.

Step 5 asks what your reviews say together. That is very hard to answer from a folder of review documents and straightforward to answer from capability data.

See how it works
Compono Hire
400+
stores on one standard process

Common questions

Should integrity be in a performance review at all?

Yes, and specifically when it is strong. It is usually only written about when there is a problem, which makes any mention of it read as an accusation.

How do you raise an integrity concern?

Plainly, with specific examples, and in writing. This is the one area where coaching language obscures rather than helps.

Can I use these phrases word for word?

In the unsatisfactory band, only with a dated record already in place.

These phrases are starting points, not finished comments. Change the specifics so each one is true of the actual person and the actual situation, because a comment that could describe anyone is the thing you were trying to avoid. Review comments can later be read as evidence in an employment matter, so anything you take from the unsatisfactory band should match a dated record you already hold. Last reviewed July 2026.

Next step

HR Glossary

Competency framework

The bands above are competency ratings. This is what a competency framework is, and how the levels are meant to work.

Read the definition →Related tool

Cost of a bad hire calculator

Reviews name the gap one person at a time. This one sizes it across the team.

Run it next →Buying

Requirements builder

Score the platforms you are looking at against the two risks, must-haves first.

Build the scorecard →Talk to us

Bring us your review cycle

A conversation about what your reviews are telling you as a set, not a demo script.

Talk to us →