How PIMPmyBOSS protects evaluations
Your responses remain anonymous to your manager: no individual evaluation, identity, date or personal index is revealed. Protection is built through the collective threshold, batched aggregation and the absence of individual-level granularity.
A manager never sees an individual evaluation. Collective perception only appears from at least three unique eligible evaluators, then it is batched, rounded and displayed without individual dates or exact contributor counts.
Below the threshold there is nothing to infer: the collective view is not displayed.
The active threshold counts at least three unique evaluators whose contribution is eligible for the current collective view. The same person never counts more than once because they have several cycles or periods with the same manager.
Managers do not receive the exact number of contributors. Visible stages only describe how consolidated the collective view is without exposing their numeric boundaries.
Visible results do not move after every new evaluation.
Manager aggregates are calculated in batches spaced by at least 168 hours. They are rounded on display and no batch date is shown to the manager.
That distance reduces the possibility of comparing the screen before and after one contribution to infer its individual effect.
A name is used to attach the right relationship, not to create a directory.
When an evaluator enters a manager name, resolution happens server-side. Unclaimed manager identities are stored in an encrypted vault and the browser receives only a technical identifier.
Evaluators can see the name they personally entered in their private space after server-side ownership checks. This exception does not make the manager profile publicly named.
Atypical signals remain internal and never become a public accusation.
The system can detect selected statistical signals and slightly reduce a contribution’s weight in the collective view. It does not automatically turn a signal into a fraud finding and never reveals evaluator identity.
Even when a manager disputes a profile, the review concerns signals and linkage. The outcome is never disclosure of who submitted an evaluation.
Deleting an account is not just removing a name from a table.
When an evaluator account is deleted, self-assessments and the personal profile are destroyed. Relationship evaluations may only remain after irreversible anonymisation under the dedicated process; encrypted pseudonymisation alone is not enough.
Frequently asked questions
Important answers should remain understandable without animation, internal jargon or dependence on a personal result.
Can my manager know that I evaluated them?
PIMPmyBOSS never shows your individual evaluation, its date or your personal index. The collective view appears only above the protection threshold and only in aggregated form.
How does PIMPmyBOSS protect my anonymity in practice?
Your individual evaluation is never shown to your manager. Collective perception only appears above the protection threshold, then it is batched and displayed without evaluator identity, individual dates or exact contributor counts.
What happens if an evaluation looks suspicious?
Internal signals can adjust its weight or trigger a separate review. They are not shown to the manager and never reveal evaluator identity.
Can a manager force the collective view to recalculate?
No. There is no button that lets a manager recalculate on demand and track the arrival of a contribution.
The model becomes clearer when the pages connect.
See what this looks like in a real relationship.
See how it worksThe pulse does not judge the value of your experience
Pulse collection follows a specific rule: an unusual, very positive or very negative response is not downweighted for that reason. Checks concern the authorised relationship, whether it is current, the choices served, timing and one contribution per person and dimension.
The integrity weighting described for full assessments should therefore not be confused with the pulse. In both cases, it gives the manager no access to an evaluator’s identity.