Q01
Message
All templates
Software Developer Performance Review & Growth Survey
A structured performance check-in for software engineers that pairs self-rated competency scores, behavioral frequency questions, and a priority trade-off exercise with an AI follow-up interview that digs into the developer's biggest blocker and lowest-rated skill area for concrete, specific detail managers can use in 1:1s and growth plans.
Sample questions
A preview of what’s in the template. Every question is editable before you launch.
14 questions · ~7 min
Q02
MatrixRequired
Rate your own performance this period on each of the following:
5 rows × 5 columns
- Code quality and maintainability
- Technical problem-solving
- Collaboration and communication
- Ownership and reliability (things get done and stay done)
- Delivery speed and predictability
Columns: Needs improvement · Developing · Meets expectations · Exceeds expectations · Outstanding
Q03
Opinion ScaleRequired
Overall, how would you rate your performance this period against the goals you set?
Scale: 1 – 10
Min:Fell well short of my goalsMax:Exceeded my goals
Q04
Ranking
Rank these priorities by how much of your actual attention they got this period (most to least):
- Code quality and maintainability
- Shipping features quickly
- Mentoring or supporting teammates
- Paying down technical debt
- Cross-team collaboration
Drag to rank
Q05
Multiple Choice
In the last 3 months, how often did you review a teammate's pull request or code change?
- Never
- Rarely (a few times)
- Sometimes (about weekly)
- Often (several times a week)
- Almost daily
Q06
Slider Matrix
How much do you agree you received the following this period?
4 rows, one slider each
- Technical mentorship from my manager or senior engineers
- Clear priorities and goals
- Recognition for my contributions
- The tools, time, and resources I needed
Slider 0–10Min:Strongly disagreeMax:Strongly agree
Q07
Short Text
What's one technical accomplishment from this period you're most proud of?
Q08
Long Text
Describe the biggest blocker or challenge that slowed you down this period — technical, organizational, or otherwise.
Q09
AI Interview
Probe the specific competency the respondent rated lowest in their self-assessment: ask for a concrete example of when it showed up, what made it hard, and what would have helped in the moment. Cross-reference their stated biggest blocker — if it connects to that low-rated area, dig into whether it's a skill gap, a support gap, or a process problem, and ask what change would most improve it next period. If everything was rated highly with no real blocker, ask what stretch goal would meaningfully grow them next.
Q10
Multiple Choice
Which best describes the career direction you're most interested in pursuing next?
- Going deeper as an individual contributor / technical expert
- Moving into people management or team leadership
- Staying in my current role and scope for now
- Not sure yet
Q11
Opinion Scale
How likely are you to recommend this engineering team as a great place to do your best work?
Scale: 0 – 10
Min:Not at all likelyMax:Extremely likely
Q12
Dropdown
What's your current level? (optional)
- Junior / entry-level
- Mid-level
- Senior
- Staff / Principal
- Engineering manager
- Prefer not to say
Q13
Multiple Choice
How long have you been on this team? (optional)
- Less than 6 months
- 6 months to 1 year
- 1-2 years
- 2-5 years
- 5+ years
- Prefer not to say
Q14
Message
Thanks for the thoughtful answers! This feeds directly into your performance review discussion and your manager's planning for support, growth, and next period's goals.
What’s included
AI follow-ups
Adaptive probes on open-ended answers that pull out detail a static form would miss.
Attention checks
Built-in safeguards against rushed answers and low-quality respondents.
AI-drafted copy
Wording, ordering, and branching written by the AI — tuned to your research goal.
Auto report
Themes, quotes, and a plain-English summary write themselves once responses come in.
How it compares
We reviewed the closest templates from other survey tools. Here’s what they do well — and where this template goes further.
Why this template
- Combines self-rated competency matrix scores, behavioral frequency questions (like PR review cadence), and a priority ranking exercise for a structured quantitative baseline of the period
- Follows up with an AI interview that specifically probes the competency the respondent rated lowest and digs into their described biggest blocker for concrete, usable detail
- Captures qualitative wins (a proud technical accomplishment) and challenges via open text, then adaptively interviews on whichever answer needs more depth, rather than using one fixed script for everyone
- Explicitly frames the output as feeding directly into the performance review and growth plan, per the survey's own closing message, with an auto-generated report for managers
SurveySparrow
Software Developer Performance Review Template | For Software EngineersThis is the closest direct match in audience — a static, fielding-ready template built specifically for software developer performance reviews. It likely uses SurveySparrow's conversational one-question-at-a-time UI, but every respondent sees the same fixed question set with no adaptive follow-up. Good for a quick standardized check-in, less suited to surfacing unique per-person detail.
What it does well
- Purpose-built for the software developer/engineer role rather than a generic employee template
- Conversational, mobile-friendly survey-taking experience typical of SurveySparrow
- Likely quick to deploy as a ready-made template
Where it falls short
- No adaptive AI follow-up — everyone gets the identical fixed question list regardless of answers
- No mechanism to automatically probe a respondent's specific lowest-rated skill or blocker in more depth
- No published methodology or transparent prompt logic since there's no AI interviewing layer at all
QuestionPro
Short Employee Performance Review Survey | QuestionProA general employee performance review survey rather than one tailored to software developers specifically, so role-specific items like code review cadence or technical blockers aren't built in. It's a static, fielding-ready template backed by QuestionPro's broader enterprise survey and reporting tooling. Useful as a lightweight, generic starting point rather than an engineering-specific instrument.
What it does well
- Backed by QuestionPro's established enterprise survey platform with logic and analytics features
- Described as 'short,' suggesting low respondent burden
- Reusable for growth-opportunity framing across roles
Where it falls short
- Not tailored to software engineering specifics (no PR/code-review or technical-blocker questions)
- Static question flow with no adaptive AI interview to dig into individual weak areas
- No automated per-response quality scoring or auto-generated growth report described
Jotform
Mid Year Performance Review Form Template | JotformThis is a generic mid-year performance review form template, not specific to software developers or engineering competencies, and functions more as a form than a structured survey instrument. It benefits from Jotform's easy drag-and-drop customization and integrations. As shipped, it would need significant editing to match a developer-specific review like ours.
What it does well
- Easy drag-and-drop customization typical of Jotform's form builder
- Broad integration ecosystem (e.g., PDF export, notifications)
- Simple to adapt for basic HR/manager review cycles
Where it falls short
- Generic form, not built around developer-specific competencies or behaviors
- No adaptive AI interviewing — a fixed field list with no follow-up logic based on answers
- No built-in quality scoring or auto-generated growth-focused report
Typeform
Performance Review Form TemplateA generic, role-agnostic performance review template rather than one designed for software developers, presented as a static fielding-ready form. It likely benefits from Typeform's polished, one-question-at-a-time conversational design. It would require notable rework to include engineering-specific behavioral or competency items.
What it does well
- Polished, well-known conversational form-taking experience
- Simple to launch as a general-purpose review template
- Clean visual design typical of Typeform templates
Where it falls short
- Not tailored to software engineering roles or technical competencies
- No adaptive AI follow-up interview — same static questions for every respondent
- No automated quality scoring or auto-generated report for managers
Ready to launch?
Open this template in the editor. Every part is yours to change before the first respondent sees it.