From “Check-the-Box” to High Performance: Lessons from the City of Milton

Most local governments know their appraisal process needs improvement. The challenge is figuring out what actually needs to change.

In LeaderGov’s recent workshop, we spoke with Ms. Stacey Inglis, Deputy City Manager for the City of Milton, Georgia, about how her team redesigned their performance management approach—and what others can learn from it.

The biggest issues aren’t what you might expect

During the session, participants identified their biggest challenges with appraisals. Two issues stood out clearly:

• 48.7% said their biggest problem is a lack of periodic coaching
• 25.6% pointed to poor integration of employee goals

Together, those two issues made up nearly three-quarters of all responses (74.3%).

That’s a powerful insight.

For many organizations, the problem isn’t just the appraisal form—it’s what happens (or doesn’t happen) throughout the year.

Why Milton decided to make a change 

As Ms. Inglis described it, Milton’s old system had become a “check-the-box exercise.”

• Feedback happened once a year
• Ratings varied widely by supervisor
• There was little connection between expectations and performance
• High performance wasn’t meaningfully rewarded

So the City set out to build something better: a performance management program designed to motivate employees, improve consistency, and drive stronger performance.

Importantly, they aligned with City Council early to ensure support before investing time in the redesign.

A different approach to designing the system 

One of the most effective decisions Milton made was how they built their team.

Instead of relying only on senior leadership, they selected respected employees from across departments—police, fire, public works, parks & rec—who could think objectively and represent their peers.

These individuals became both design contributors and ambassadors, helping gather feedback and build trust across the organization.

The full design process took about four months.

What changed in the new system 

Ms. Inglis and her team made several key shifts:

1. Competencies tied to core values
Performance is evaluated not just on what employees do, but how they do it—aligned with the City’s values.

2. A clearer rating system
They moved to a five-point scale with defined expectations and examples, helping supervisors apply ratings more consistently.

3. Goal progress separated from appraisal evaluation
Milton split goal-setting and appraisal coaching conversations from the formal evaluation. Employees now have goal check-ins throughout the year (beginning, mid-year, and end), making performance discussions more forward-looking.

4. Simple, focused self-evaluations
Employees reflect on accomplishments, challenges, and strengths—creating more balanced and meaningful conversations.

Ensuring fairness through calibration 

One of the most impactful elements is what Ms. Inglis described as calibration.

Supervisors review evaluations together, explain their ratings, and receive input from peers and leaders. In some cases, ratings are challenged and adjusted.

This process:

• Reduces inconsistency
• Minimizes bias
• Ensures ratings are defensible
• Builds confidence in the system

If one department’s ratings are significantly higher or lower than others, it triggers further review.

The role of incentives 

Milton also introduced a one-time merit incentive tied to performance, rather than increasing base pay.

This approach:

• Keeps long-term costs manageable
• Reduces pressure on supervisors
• Still provides meaningful motivation for employees
• Acknowledges the fluctuating nature of employee performance

As Ms. Inglis noted, communication was critical here. Employees needed to understand the “why” behind the structure.

Training and culture matter just as much as design 

Even the best-designed system will fail without proper rollout.

Milton invested time in:

• Training supervisors to give effective feedback
• Helping employees receive feedback constructively
• Communicating consistently throughout the process

There was still resistance—that’s normal. But the organization stayed committed to building a more honest, developmental culture.

What’s improved?

The City has already seen early results, including a modest increase in performance ratings in year two.

More importantly, they now have a system that:

• Encourages ongoing conversations
• Aligns performance with values
• Creates accountability and fairness
• Supports continuous improvement

And as Ms. Inglis emphasized, the work isn’t finished. The system continues to evolve.

Final takeaway 

If there’s one lesson from Milton’s experience, it’s this:

An effective appraisal process isn’t a once-a-year event—it’s an ongoing performance management program.

For many organizations, the starting point isn’t rewriting the form.

It’s improving coaching, strengthening goal alignment, and helping leaders and employees have better conversations throughout the year.

That’s where real performance improvement begins.

For more information on redesigning or improving your current employee performance appraisal program, contact LeaderGov at bill@leadergov.com or visit our website.