Lattice 2027: 45% of organisations now run monthly or quarterly reviews. 6 ways to add review cycles without adding manager admin.

A midweek question for People leaders in Dublin, London, Amsterdam, Stockholm and Tallinn: if your CEO asked for quarterly reviews next year, would your managers cope? Most mid-market teams already struggle to get one annual cycle finished on time. Four cycles run the same way means four times the chasing.

New research says the move to more frequent reviews is already happening. Lattice’s 2027 State of People Strategy Report, published on 9 September 2026 (press release), is based on survey responses from 1,358 HR professionals collected between 2 April and 11 June 2026. Nine in ten respondents are Director-level or VP/Head of People.

1. What the report actually found

In plain language:

• Reviews are getting more frequent. 33% of organisations run reviews quarterly and 12% monthly. Lattice says monthly reviews have tripled since 2025. Its press release puts it as 45% of organisations reviewing monthly or quarterly. Annual reviews are still common.
• The writing is being handed to AI. 74% of HR leaders believe managers already use AI to write performance reviews, and most view it positively, citing faster completion (76%), better quality (64%) and higher completion rates (64%).
• Time is the real constraint. US HR teams are more likely to run weekly or biweekly one-on-ones (45% vs 27% in Europe), but also far more likely to name time constraints as the main reason managers struggle to give more one-on-ones, updates and feedback (70% vs 48%).
• Europe’s focus is the stack. In Europe, 41% of HR leaders say updating HR tech is their biggest 2027 priority. Performance didn’t make Europe’s top five, which Lattice reads as performance being built into everyday practice.
• Tech regret is common. 47% of HR teams say at least one solution bought in the past two years underperformed or was a clear mistake, mainly because functionality fell short (50%) or integration was hard (34%). 23% say their team wasn’t ready for the new tool, and 16% bought something more complex than they needed.
• HR is asked for proof. 51% of HR professionals are under pressure to quantify manager effectiveness with data.

Honest caveats. This is vendor research: Lattice sells performance management software (so does Revolut People, where I work). Respondents are HR professionals answering about their own organisations, so the figures are self-reported. About two thirds of the sample is in the US and 17% in the UK, so the European comparisons rest on a smaller group. Percentages are rounded, and parts of the full report sit behind a sign-up form. It’s a useful signal, not a controlled study.

2. The mid-market hurdle: more cycles, same managers

In a 200–600 person company, the People team is often two to five people, and most managers carry a full workload of their own. The annual review already takes weeks of reminders. Each manager opens a blank form, digs through a year of Slack messages and notes, rewrites goals from memory and sends it in late. HR then chases, collates and builds a summary in a spreadsheet.

Move that process to quarterly and nothing gets better. You get four rounds of blank forms, four rounds of chasing, and managers who start treating reviews as box-ticking. The report’s own experts make the point: Dave Druzynski (CPO, Fleetworthy) says “the real value of performance management isn’t in the written review, it is in the conversation that follows.” If a frequent cycle eats the time that conversation needs, you’ve made things worse.

3. 6 ways to add review cycles without adding manager admin

1. Agree the cadence with your people, and say why. Matt McFarlane (Startup People Summit) puts it simply in the report: if you link formal checks to clear outcomes people understand, “you’ll be granted permission by your workforce to do more frequent reviews.” Write one sentence on what each cycle decides: development focus, goal reset, pay input.
2. Make the quarterly check light and the annual review full. Not every cycle needs every section. A quarterly check might cover goal progress and one development question; the fuller review once or twice a year adds peer input and ratings. In Revolut People: review cycles are configurable and scorecards take custom questions, so you can keep a quarterly check short.
3. Never start a manager from a blank page. The biggest time cost is rebuilding context. Goals and the last cycle’s answers should already be on the form, so the manager reviews what changed. In Revolut People: the scorecard opens with the person’s goals filled in and previous-cycle data carried forward, so managers write about the change, not the whole history.
4. Collect input from more than the manager. Self, peer and upward input spreads the effort and gives a fairer picture. Keep it short: two or three questions each. In Revolut People: self, peer, upward and manager reviews run inside the same cycle.
5. Fix the process before you buy the tool. The report’s most useful number: high-performing HR teams are twice as likely to blame internal process gaps, not the tool, when a purchase fails (45% vs 22%). Map who does what in your current cycle, cut any step that doesn’t feed a decision or a conversation, then pick software that fits that process.
6. Measure the time, not just completion. HR is under pressure to show manager effectiveness with data. Track three numbers per cycle: on-time completion, average manager time per review, and the share of reviews followed by a one-on-one within two weeks. Get a quick baseline with the performance health check, and run your next cycle against the review cycle checklist.

The PDF goes to your work email. The call is 15 minutes, calendar only.

4. Where Revolut People fits, and where it doesn’t

Revolut People started as the in-house system Revolut uses to run performance. The part that maps to this report is Reviews: configurable review cycles with self, peer, upward and manager input, and a scorecard that opens with each person’s goals and their previous-cycle data already in place. That’s what makes a more frequent cycle realistic, because managers update what changed instead of starting again.

To be straight about the limits: software won’t decide your cadence for you, and it won’t make a review useful if nobody acts on it. The report itself warns that how a team implements technology matters as much as which tool it picks. Decide what each cycle is for, keep the forms short, and protect the one-on-one that follows. Related reads: why annual reviews fail, Gartner on reviews and calibration, and Betterworks on goals that lag priorities.

Bottom Line

Lattice’s 2027 report says 45% of organisations now review monthly or quarterly, and managers everywhere are already short of time. For a mid-market People team in the UK, Ireland, Benelux, the Nordics or the Baltics, the answer isn’t to copy the annual review four times. It’s a light quarterly check with a clear purpose, forms that start from goals and last cycle’s answers, and a measure of manager time per review. Try it with one department next quarter and compare the minutes per review with your last annual cycle.

FAQ

What did Lattice’s 2027 State of People Strategy Report find about review frequency?

Lattice surveyed 1,358 HR professionals between 2 April and 11 June 2026 and published the report on 9 September 2026. One third (33%) of organisations now run performance reviews quarterly and 12% run them monthly, which Lattice describes as a threefold increase in monthly reviews since 2025. Its press release puts the combined figure at 45% of organisations reviewing monthly or quarterly.

Does reviewing more often mean more admin for managers?

Not necessarily, but only if the process is designed for it. Lattice reports that 74% of HR leaders believe managers already use AI to write performance reviews, and most see it positively, citing faster completion (76%). The report also finds US HR teams are far more likely than European teams to cite time constraints as the main reason managers struggle to give more one-on-ones, updates and feedback (70% versus 48%). Frequency without less admin per cycle simply moves the burden around.

Is this independent research?

No. Lattice sells performance management software, so this is vendor research, and Ash works for another performance management vendor, Revolut People. Respondents are HR professionals answering about their own organisations, so the figures are self-reported. About two thirds of respondents are in the US and 17% in the UK, so European numbers come from a smaller part of the sample. Percentages are rounded. Treat it as a useful signal, not a controlled study.

How often should a mid-market company run performance reviews?

There’s no single right answer. The report’s advice is to decide the cadence with your people and link each formal check to a clear outcome they understand. A common pattern is a light quarterly check on goals and development with a fuller review once or twice a year, with one-on-ones in between. Start with one department before changing the whole company.

Is Revolut People available in the UK, Ireland, Benelux, the Nordics and the Baltics?

Yes. Revolut People is available to businesses with a registered entity in the UK, the EEA or the US, which covers Ireland, the Benelux, Nordic and Baltic countries.