As described here, "communication ability" and "timeliness" are not metrics -- they are just things that someone wants. They are no more a metric than "tastiness". In the absence of a well-defined measurement procedure and the intent to carry it out, one can not really be said to have a metric.

It's not exactly circular, since there are many less managers than low level workers, and progressively less people as you go higher. Presumably the people at the top were once successful managers or successful workers.

Basically, this promotes a system where metrics are given by how your peers and managers feel about you.

Perhaps while our metrics aren't perfectly capable of predicting how good a worker will turn out or judging it's progress, we shouldn't rely too much on them in place of peer judgement.

But indeed let's not fool ourselves that coworker judgement is perfect. It needlessly introduces a whole body of biases, unnecessary politics, and social engineering that can be as bad if not worse than a metric-only system, which at least are objective.