Review objectives

June 1, 2017

Liz Morrish suggests that academics “adopt a stance of concealed menace” towards their assessor to get through their annual performance and development review “unscathed” (Letters, 25 May).

Generating a spirit of “concealed menace” can cut two ways. There is more going on in any person-to-person interaction than that which is apparent on the surface. Individuals are at liberty to treat their annual review as a largely ceremonial ritual, the sophisticated negotiation of socially constructed “truths”, an outright waste of time for all concerned…or some combination of all those things.

Knowing how you want to treat your annual review and knowing how your reviewer plans to treat your annual review are probably key to making the process run smoothly.


Send to

Letters should be sent to:
Letters for publication in Times Higher Education should arrive by 9am Monday.
View terms and conditions.

Please login or register to read this article

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments