> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.elevate.help/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Framework Overview

> How People Protocol measures performance—the three dimensions, scorecards, Talent Bar, and grades, and how they fit together.

The Performance Framework is how we turn [talent philosophy](/philosophy/talent-philosophy) into **measurable, comparable, and actionable** outcomes.

## What the framework does

The framework:

* **Measures** performance across [Skills](/framework/performance-dimensions#skills), [Delivery](/framework/performance-dimensions#delivery), and [Behaviors](/framework/performance-dimensions#behaviors)
* **Structures** evaluation using [Scorecards](/framework/scorecards) (standardised, observable criteria)
* **Anchors** expectations using the [Talent Bar](/framework/talent-bar) (minimum by seniority)
* **Produces** [Performance Grades](/framework/performance-grades) (A-player, above bar, underperformer)

## Core components

| Component                                                   | Purpose                                                                                                                              |
| ----------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| [Performance Dimensions](/framework/performance-dimensions) | What we measure: Skills, Delivery, Behaviors                                                                                         |
| [Checklists](/framework/checklists)                         | Observable statements for Delivery, Skills, Behaviors                                                                                |
| [Scorecards](/framework/scorecards)                         | How we evaluate: [checklists](/framework/checklists), observable [evidence](/platform/connectors-and-evidence), standardised scoring |
| [Talent Bar](/framework/talent-bar)                         | Minimum expectations by seniority per dimension                                                                                      |
| [Performance Grades](/framework/performance-grades)         | Final outcome: A-player, above bar, or underperformer                                                                                |

## How they connect

1. [Managers](/process/roles-and-ownership#managers) complete [Scorecards](/framework/scorecards) using observable [evidence](/platform/connectors-and-evidence) for each [dimension](/framework/performance-dimensions).
2. **Scores** are compared to the [Talent Bar](/framework/talent-bar) for the person’s seniority.
3. [Grades](/framework/performance-grades) are derived from that comparison (see [Performance Grades](/framework/performance-grades)).
4. [Calibration](/process/calibration) checks distribution and outliers before results are final.

## Why it works

* **Science, not art** — Performance is broken into parts and scored in a standard way. Less room for bias; outcomes are explainable.
* **Consistent expectations** — The [Talent Bar](/framework/talent-bar) removes ambiguity across managers.
* **Defensible [outcomes](/process/outcomes)** — Promotions, comp, PIPs, and exits can be tied to [evidence](/platform/connectors-and-evidence) and criteria.

The framework is used in the [Quarterly Process](/process/overview): reviews → [calibration](/process/calibration) → delivery of [outcomes](/process/outcomes).