Executive Performance Reviews: A Tool for Stability, Not Compliance

why performance reviews are often underused, how clear expectations build executive confidence, why structured support matters, and how effective reviews reduce risk for councils and elected members.

Performance planning and reviews are sometimes treated as a governance requirement rather than a leadership tool. In local government, annual performance reviews of CEOs, general managers and senior executives are mandated by legislation, but councils that approach them as a compliance exercise miss a larger opportunity. When used well, performance reviews provide clarity, confidence and continuity for executives operating in complex environments.

This article explores why performance reviews are often underused, how clear expectations build executive confidence, why structured support matters, and how effective reviews reduce risk for councils and elected members.

Why performance reviews are often underused

Legislative requirements across Australian jurisdictions make performance reviews compulsory. For example, in Western Australia, the Local Government (Administration) Regulations set out minimum standards for CEO reviews, including documented criteria, evidence collection and impartial assessment. Councils must endorse the outcome by absolute majority and inform the CEO in writing.

Despite these clear standards, some councils fall into the trap of conducting reviews as formal tick‑box exercises. Performance reviews are seen as something to complete by a deadline rather than as an opportunity to align leadership with strategy.

Race to compliance can mean:

Performance criteria are generic or not linked to strategic outcomes
Reviews focus on past achievement rather than future growth
Little time is spent on meaningful dialogue between councillors and executives

Without a structured approach, reviews do not reinforce confidence or provide a shared platform for leadership performance.

The link between clear expectations and executive confidence

Effective performance reviews begin well before the formal review meeting. Clear, agreed performance agreements and key performance indicators (KPIs) provide the foundation. When executives know what is expected and how their performance will be assessed, they are more likely to be confident and focused in their leadership.

Good performance agreements:

Align with council strategic priorities
Include measurable outcomes agreed by councillors and the executive
Allow for contextual adjustments when external factors change

There is a clear move in parts of the sector towards standardised publication of CEO KPIs to support transparency and confidence. Proposed reforms in Western Australia, for example, would require greater clarity in CEO KPIs and publication of performance outcomes to improve accountability.

Councils such as Adelaide Hills Council have established dedicated CEO Performance Review Panels that bring structure, regular KPI reporting and mid‑year progress updates into the review cycle. The panel role is to ensure performance indicators remain aligned to strategic objectives and to review progress regularly, not just at year‑end.

Supporting CEOs and directors through structured reviews

Performance reviews should support development and continuous leadership improvement. Independent facilitation often strengthens this process by bringing objectivity, sector insight and a framework that encourages open conversation rather than defensive posturing.

Structured performance reviews typically involve:

Review of the existing performance agreement and strategic priorities
Self assessment by the executive
Input from councillors and, where appropriate, other stakeholders
A facilitated review discussion focused on achievements, challenges and future priorities
A written summary that informs the next performance agreement

When reviews are forward‑looking and developmental, executives feel supported rather than judged. This builds resilience, encourages ongoing professional growth and strengthens trust between elected members and senior management.

Facilitated reviews also help clarify performance issues early, making time‑critical adjustments rather than reacting only when concerns escalate.

How reviews reduce risk for councils and elected members

Performance reviews can be a risk‑management tool as much as a leadership support mechanism. Councils that conduct reviews thoroughly are better positioned to:

Identify and address issues early before they become entrenched
Ensure performance expectations evolve with changing strategic environments
Document agreed objectives and assessments in ways that support governance reporting
Strengthen the relationship between council and executive through structured feedback

Independent review processes also help manage perceptions of bias and reinforce procedural fairness, which is particularly important in councils with high media or community attention.

Reports from peak bodies such as the Victorian Local Governance Association highlight that robust performance cycles — conducted with training and external support where necessary — contribute to better governance outcomes and healthier councillor‑CEO relationships.

A cultural shift in performance reviews

The most effective councils embed performance reviews in a culture of open, ongoing dialogue rather than an annual event on a calendar. This is reflected in practice guidance that encourages mid‑year check‑ins, regular KPI progress updates and transparent reporting processes.

For example, some councils formalise policies that outline not just the annual review but expectations for quarterly progress discussions and recalibration of KPIs where appropriate. These approaches signal that performance review is part of leadership rhythm, not an isolated procedural requirement.

Final Thoughts

Executive performance reviews are far more than a compliance obligation. When handled with structure, clarity and purpose, they become a stabilising force for leadership in councils. Clear expectations generate executive confidence, structured support strengthens leadership capability, and robust review mechanisms mitigate governance risk.

Councils that invest in meaningful performance reviews see stronger executive performance, more constructive council‑executive relationships and increased organisational continuity. By treating reviews as a leadership tool rather than a formality, local governments can support stable and effective leadership in an environment of complexity and change.