Performance management (PM) typically receives increased attention this time of the year as organizations conduct year-end performance discussions while preparing to set goals for the upcoming year. Although PM fundamentals haven’t changed much, the crisis has forced firms’ to reevaluate their PM practices to better respond to their organizations’ current context. Questions that arise range from how should performance goals change, to how to account for performance when employees are under stress? Regardless of the question, it is important that the answers enable fair outcomes- a cornerstone of effective PM. This short article outlines four critical conversations that determine the degree of fairness perceived in PM. 1) Goal setting, 2) Ongoing development, 3) Year-end appraisal 4)Total Rewards. While not referenced in the article, it is essential to note that one way to enable fairness in PM is by reducing bias–an error in judgment that occurs when a person allows their conscious or unconscious attitudes and beliefs to distort objectivity. For practical suggestions on reducing PM bias, check out previous posts where I reference articles by Deloitte and The Talent Strategy Group.