The Royal Naval system of reporting gives each Subject a 24hr period to read and then comment on the report. This system allows people to contest factual inaccuracies as part of the reporting mechanism. However you get a mid period appraisal that is a quick highlight of good but more importantly things to improve. If something crops up between that and the report a written report highlighting faults would be expected.
I highlight this as the military is often seen as bad in these areas but in reality the Divisional System (an officer or Chief Petty Officer will run about 10 - 15 people) gives the report writer a structure to follow. In theory no surprises should come out of the annual report as constant dialogue is order of the day (it might just be that dialogue was strong verbal guidance in a forceful manner ie bollocking). Also our reporting is geared for merit for promotion. Performance pay of a type exists but we are much more promotion to gain pay based.
But this relies upon someone, normally the Leading Hand supervisor and above having contact in some form to review people.
Interestingly for the very new 19yr lads or lasses it comes as a very big shock to have a report that is not stellar. They tend to have gone through the school system with each report telling them they are the best and all is well. I have had to talk many youngsters through what the reporting chain is about. If you have been in the Navy less time than I have been on the crest of a wave you are not going to be A+ material first year, you need to build experience towards achieving Ninja status.