Menu
Use when designing feedback rituals or training managers on giving and receiving feedback โ covers SBI, Radical Candor, conditions for effective feedback.
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
Use when designing or applying progressive discipline โ covers the escalating sequence, documentation, gross misconduct exceptions, and consistency.
Use when conducting or scoping workplace investigations โ covers intake, scope, interview protocols, evidence, findings, and outcomes.
Use when auditing or designing the candidate's journey โ covers communication, time, transparency, and the link between candidate experience and employer brand.
Use when designing career frameworks, level rubrics, IC and management track parity, and promotion processes.
Use when planning organizational change โ covers communication architecture, sequencing, manager enablement, and predictable failure modes.
Use when training managers in coaching skills โ covers GROW, listening, asking vs. telling, and growth mindset framing.
| name | feedback-frameworks |
| description | Use when designing feedback rituals or training managers on giving and receiving feedback โ covers SBI, Radical Candor, conditions for effective feedback. |
Kluger & DeNisi's 1996 meta-analysis is foundational: feedback improves performance about โ of the time and hurts performance about โ of the time. The conditions for effective feedback:
When these are missing, feedback can backfire. The fix is not "more feedback" โ it's better conditions.
The most usable framework for everyday feedback:
Example:
"In yesterday's design review (S), when you cut Maya off three times in a row (B), I noticed she stopped contributing for the rest of the meeting (I). Was that the outcome you wanted?"
The closing question is optional but powerful โ it invites reflection rather than defensiveness.
Two axes:
The four quadrants:
Most managers err toward ruinous empathy. Train for both axes.
Praise is feedback too. Same rules:
Bad: "Great job on the launch!"
Good: "The way you sequenced the launch โ handling the partner objections first, then the comms team โ meant we hit the date without surprises. That sequencing was the move."
The second is replicable, repeatable, motivating. The first is forgettable.
A separate skill (Stone & Heen, Thanks for the Feedback).
Three triggers that derail receiving:
Counter:
Train managers on receiving as well as giving.
The annual review should contain zero new information. If it does, the manager has failed in the year-round.
The kind managers receive least. Engineer for it:
Without upward feedback, managers operate on filtered information.
For development: useful, asynchronous prompts (3โ5 questions tied to competencies).
For evaluation: cautious. Use as input to manager assessment, not as a vote. Watch for sycophancy and retaliation.
Use with care.
For development: well-suited. Aggregate input from manager, peers, reports, partners. Recipient owns the action plan.
For evaluation: high risk. Easily a popularity contest. If used:
Suggested content:
Allow 3 hours minimum; role-play heavy.
feedback-systems-designer agentmanager-enablement-coach agentone-on-ones skilldifficult-conversations skill