A probation review should help the employee and manager understand the work completed, the expectations being used and what happens next. It is more useful when both sides bring specific evidence rather than relying on a general impression.
The contractual and legal position depends on the actual terms and circumstances. This article helps organise the conversation; it does not determine confirmation, extension or termination rights.
Review the agreed responsibilities
Read the role description, initial goals and any documented changes. Identify which expectations were clearly agreed and which remained ambiguous. A review should not quietly replace the original role with a different standard that was never explained.
Employees can list the tasks they now handle and the areas where they still need context. Managers can identify the work assessed and how expectations were communicated.
Bring factual examples
Use recent work to discuss accuracy, communication, delivery or other relevant requirements. Separate an observed issue from an assumption about attitude or personal characteristics. Give enough context for the other person to understand the example.
If a task was blocked by missing access, training or an unresolved decision, record that fact. It does not automatically settle the assessment, but it is relevant context for a fair discussion of the work.
Discuss support and development
Ask which changes would help and who will provide the support. “Improve communication” is vague; an agreed update format and review point are easier to act on. Keep the scope realistic for the role and time available.
Use a development plan to identify the capability, practice opportunity, support and evidence of progress. Do not confuse an encouraging conversation with a guaranteed employment outcome.
Confirm the next step clearly
Ask which decision has been made, which terms apply and what will be recorded in writing. If a point is disputed or unclear, seek appropriate advice promptly rather than assuming an online checklist establishes the answer.
After the meeting, keep a factual summary and invite corrections. The first-90-days guide can help with ongoing learning, while regular manager check-ins can prevent important questions from remaining unspoken until a formal review. Clarity about evidence, support and decisions benefits both sides.
