Majority of employees now think AI is being used to judge their work performance, as they see find their manager’s feedback very generic and lacking personal touch, according to a recent report by Kickresume.
The report, prepared on the basis of a global survey of 1,365 employees across Asia, Africa, Australia, Europe, Latin America and North America, reveals a striking reality that most people approach performance self-reviews with caution, calculation and quiet self-editing.
It also underlined that a majority of employees admit they don’t tell the whole truth when evaluating their own performance at work, raising new questions about whether self-reviews still serve their intended purpose, or have become little more than a corporate ritual.
The findings from the report are:
Employees ‘touch up’ their self-assessments: According to the survey, 71% of employees bend the truth in their self-evaluations. Only 29% portray themselves exactly as they are. The remaining make small edits to soften rough edges or avoid career risks:
38% are mostly honest but present themselves slightly better
18% focus on strengths and downplay weaknesses
8% deliberately underplay their abilities to avoid extra attention
4% write what they think their boss wants to hear
3% openly admit to exaggerating achievements
Despite these adjustments, workers rarely reinvent themselves. Instead, they tweak. They polish. They strategically omit.
What’s more striking is the consistency: across regions, genders and generations, the differences are only one to three percentage points. In other words, the awkwardness around self-reviews is universal.
The only steady generational trend? Older employees continue to downplay their abilities more often (Gen Z 6%, Millennials 8%, Gen X 11%), suggesting experience brings caution.
The topics employees never dare to write: When asked what they deliberately censor, employees point to the same sensitive categories that often shape workplace tension:
36% avoid feedback about management
23% hide real career goals
22% avoid salary expectations
18% hide struggles or requests for support
These are the topics workers feel they should be allowed to discuss, but don’t trust the process enough to. Gen Z is the most reluctant to discuss salary, while Gen X is the most willing to critique management. Regionally, 46% of American workers avoid criticizing their managers, the highest in the world.
If reviews were anonymous, honesty would flood in: The survey also asked the participants what would they say if self-reviews were anonymous. The answers hint at a workforce that feels unseen, stretched, and in many cases, near exhaustion, as:
32% would admit they deserve more credit and money
24% would say they’re overworked and under-recognized
20% would confess they’re “barely hanging on”
11% would say they’re less passionate than they pretend to be
9% would be harsher on themselves
Interestingly, Millennials surfaced as the most overworked, while Gen Z is the most emotionally overwhelmed in the workplace. If we look at geographies, Asia stands out for having the highest intensity across all struggles, from under-recognition to burnout risk.
Most workers rate themselves highly, but doubt lingers: When asked to grade their performance, 74% gave themselves an A or B, with 14% awarding themselves an A+. Yet 26% believe their performance is average or below expectations, which is a sign of either modesty or hidden struggle.
Patterns emerge across demographics:
Gen Z is the most self-critical
Gen X is the most willing to give themselves a failing grade
Asian respondents show the highest levels of confidence, with 20% giving themselves an A+
Do managers see the real person behind the review?: Perhaps the most revealing finding, is that less than half of employees believe their manager sees them as they really are.
40% think their boss would agree with their self-review
25% believe their boss would be shocked by how much self-doubt they hide
17% say their boss would be surprised by their confidence
7% think their manager wouldn’t recognize them at all
This disconnect hints at the silent emotional labour workers carry, confidence masked as humility, or insecurity hidden behind polished professionalism.
Do self-reviews even matter?: When asked, employees remain divided on the value of self-reviews, as:
26% believe self-reviews exist simply to make employees feel included
22% see them as a genuine reflection tool
17% think they’re tied mainly to pay or promotion decisions
15% believe they’re just data collection
7% call them pointless
But the biggest group, 39%, says the process only works if a manager truly engages with it. Additionally, faith in the system also declines sharply with age:
Gen Z: 81% believe reviews can be useful
Millennials: 71%
Gen X: 60%
The older the worker, the more the process feels like “corporate theatre.”
Who's really evaluating me – my manager or an AI tool?: This finding urges organizations to reshape their approach with a performance feedback mechanism, as about 72% of employees suspect their manager uses AI to generate performance reviews. And:
30% of them say parts of their review feel generic or overly polished
24% of them sense a lack of personal touch
18% of them believe the review is mostly or entirely AI-written
This suspicion was reflected strongest in Asia (82%), followed by Europe (68%) and the U.S. (67%). At a time when authenticity and recognition matter more than ever, an AI-flavored evaluation risks weakening trust even further.
The report underlines a workplace caught between aspiration and skepticism. Performance management and self-reviews are intended to spark honest reflection, provide clarity, and create meaningful dialogue. But if employees approach the process with caution, uncertainty, and a sense of ritualized performance, then companies need to rethink their approach and turn performance feedback into meaningful conversations, not just around productivity metrics, but also around how work is shaping employees’ roles, careers, and skills in the long run.