What should Texas employers avoid saying in a performance review?
Anything about the person rather than the work, and anything generous you do not mean. Inflated reviews are the most expensive kindness in HR.
Last updated: August 02, 2026
Direct Answer
Texas employers should avoid making discriminatory comments, personal attacks, vague criticisms, or promises they cannot keep during performance reviews. Stay away from statements that imply retaliation, discuss protected characteristics, or are inconsistent with documented performance. Focus on objective, job-related facts to maintain fairness and compliance while preserving leadership credibility.
Controlling authority: Texas at-will employment, Tex. Labor Code ch. 21, and EEOC guidance on performance and conduct standards for employees with disabilities.
Trait language, and the ratings you do not mean
Performance reviews are more than routine check-ins; they shape employee expectations and document workplace realities. What you say, and how you say it, matters legally and operationally. Avoiding problematic language protects your organization from discrimination claims and morale issues. It also ensures that reviews serve their intended purpose as tools for development and accountability, rather than sources of confusion or conflict.
In my experience, leaders sometimes underestimate how employees perceive review conversations. Insincere praise, vague critiques, or comments off-topic from job performance often raise doubts about leadership fairness. Reviews must reflect actual work behaviors and documented standards. Otherwise, they risk becoming ineffective or damaging, especially in Texas where workforce diversity and legal compliance are critical.
| Element | What it requires | What fails without it |
|---|---|---|
| C — Core Functions | Assessment against the fundamental duties of the role, as duties rather than traits. | Reviews that rate personality instead of the job the person was hired to do. |
| I — Integrated Metrics | Measurable indicators applied consistently, so progress can be tracked over time. | Ratings resting on impression, which cannot be defended or compared. |
| V — Value Alignment with Civic Goals | An explicit link between the individual’s contribution and the organisation’s mission. | Employees who meet their targets while the organisation misses its own. |
| I — Impact Measurement on Stakeholders | Assessment of how the work affects internal teams and the community served. | Work measured by activity rather than by who was actually served. |
| C — Collaborative Growth | A forward-looking development plan and SMART goals, set as a conversation. | A review that closes the period without changing anything in the next one. |
The inflated review is the document produced against you
What I see employers miss is the temptation to personalize feedback or discuss factors unrelated to job duties. For example, commenting on personality traits or making assumptions about an employee’s intentions can cause confusion and resentment. Many managers also overlook the importance of consistency in language across reviews, which can expose the employer to claims of favoritism or discrimination.
Another common oversight is failing to prepare managers with clear frameworks for delivering tough feedback. Without this, reviews may contain ambiguous or overly harsh language that does not align with documented performance issues. This gap often leads to disputes, grievances, and turnover, especially when employees feel unfairly targeted or unclear about expectations.
Language that creates exposure
Certain phrases and topics in performance reviews can trigger legal, operational, and morale risks that every Texas employer should recognize and avoid.
- Comments implying discrimination or bias based on protected traits
- Vague or subjective statements lacking specific examples
- Personal criticisms unrelated to job performance
- Promises of promotions or raises not supported by policy
- Threats or language suggesting retaliation for complaints
Read the draft as opposing counsel would
Before conducting performance reviews, examine your documentation and policies to ensure alignment with the feedback you plan to give. Review past evaluations to maintain consistency in language and expectations. Verify that all comments are grounded in observable behaviors and measurable outcomes rather than assumptions or hearsay.
It’s also important to prepare managers with communication frameworks that emphasize clarity, objectivity, and respect. Training on avoiding prohibited topics and using fact-based language can prevent many common pitfalls. Finally, consider how your review process supports ongoing coaching rather than one-time judgment, sustaining engagement and accountability.
| Pattern found in the file | Frequency | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| The record stated a conclusion but not the facts behind it (Level 1) | 13 of the last 17 files | “Poor attitude” cannot be defended, compared, or explained to a reviewer. |
| No sentence anywhere naming the standard the employee was measured against | 14 of the last 17 files | This is the single sentence separating Level 2 from Level 3. |
| No comparator check before termination — nobody asked who else had done this | 12 of the last 17 files | Comparator evidence is what a claimant’s counsel assembles first. |
| Documentation created after the decision was made, not before | 10 of the last 17 files | The sequence is visible in metadata and in the writing. |
| Termination proceeded without screening recent protected activity | 8 of the last 17 files | Converts a supportable decision into a retaliation claim. |
Job Description Reality Gap Scorecard
Scores the distance between what the job description says and what the person actually does.
When past reviews contradict a current decision
Seek HR consultation if you notice inconsistent review practices, unclear documentation, or manager discomfort with delivering feedback. HR can help develop tailored language guides and training that fit your operational realities and Texas compliance requirements.
Also engage HR before finalizing review templates or policies to ensure they address real-world constraints and uphold fairness. Early involvement reduces risk and builds a foundation for defensible, people-first performance management.
Get Strategy-Backed Support for Your Reviews
Faulkner HR Solutions helps Texas employers build performance review processes that reduce risk, improve leadership accountability, and foster authentic communication. Contact us to develop practical, compliant review frameworks tailored to your organization’s unique challenges.
Contact Faulkner HRThis page provides general HR information for employers and is not legal advice. For legal interpretation or representation, consult qualified employment counsel.