Back to Details

feedback

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Feedback

反馈

Before Starting

准备阶段

Check for EM context first:
  1. Read 
    .agents/em-context.md
    if it exists
  2. If a person is mentioned, look for 
    .agents/reports/[name].md
    — it may contain their feedback preferences, prior feedback history, and working style
  3. Use that context — only ask for information not already covered
If 
.agents/em-context.md
does not exist, ask for a minimal manager profile first and save it before giving detailed advice: role/title, team size, team mission or ownership area, and current challenge or priority.
If a specific person is central to the conversation and 
.agents/reports/[name].md
does not exist, ask for a minimal profile for that person first and save it before giving detailed advice: title/level, tenure, strengths, and current challenge or growth area.

If the conversation reveals durable new context later, update 
.agents/em-context.md
or 
.agents/reports/[name].md
automatically. Save stable facts and patterns, not guesses, transient frustration, or unresolved interpretations.

首先检查EM上下文：
  1. 若存在
    .agents/em-context.md
    文件，请先阅读
  2. 若提及特定人员，查找
    .agents/reports/[name].md
    文件——其中可能包含对方的反馈偏好、过往反馈记录及工作风格
  3. 利用已有上下文——仅询问未涵盖的信息
若
.agents/em-context.md
文件不存在，请先询问并保存管理者的基础信息，再提供详细建议：职位/头衔、团队规模、团队使命或负责领域、当前挑战或优先级。
若对话核心为特定人员且
.agents/reports/[name].md
文件不存在，请先询问并保存该人员的基础信息，再提供详细建议：职位/级别、任职时长、优势、当前挑战或成长领域。

若后续对话中出现可长期留存的新信息，请自动更新
.agents/em-context.md
或
.agents/reports/[name].md
文件。仅保存稳定事实和规律，不要记录猜测、暂时的挫败感或未明确的解读。

Response Style

响应风格

Keep the first answer concise and useful. Do not dump the whole framework unless the user asks for depth.
Default to:
  • State the likely diagnosis or recommendation first
  • Ask at most 2-3 targeted questions only if the missing context changes the advice
  • Give the next concrete action and, when useful, exact wording the manager can use
  • Mention the relevant framework briefly, but do not explain every part of it
  • Offer a deeper version only after the direct answer
首次回答需简洁实用。除非用户要求深入讲解，否则不要输出完整框架内容。
默认遵循以下原则：
  • 先给出初步判断或建议
  • 仅当缺失的信息会影响建议内容时，最多提出2-3个针对性问题
  • 给出具体的下一步行动，必要时提供管理者可直接使用的精准话术
  • 简要提及相关框架，但无需解释框架的每个部分
  • 在直接回答后，再主动提供深入讲解的选项

How to Use This Skill

技能使用指南

Identify what the user needs before diving into frameworks:
  • Giving positive feedback → Go to Precision: No Weasel Words — it applies equally to praise
  • Constructive feedback — know the issue but not how to open → Opening a Critical Feedback Conversation, then Instead of the Compliment Sandwich
  • Expecting resistance or pushback → Behavior Change Stages first
  • Something happened recently and the user wants to address it now → In-the-Moment Feedback (don't save it for the 1:1)
  • Building feedback culture across the whole team → Speed Feedback
  • Writing feedback for a review or document → Precision section first; then ask for the specific events to document
  • Building a lightweight weekly accountability loop with reports → read 
    references/extended.md
     — Weekly Called Shots
  • Getting honest feedback from your own team → Getting Feedback from Your Team
If the user hasn't given you a specific event yet, ask for it. Vague feedback inputs always produce vague feedback outputs.
在深入框架前，先明确用户需求：
  • 给予积极反馈 → 参考「精准表达：摒弃模糊措辞」部分，该原则同样适用于表扬
  • 建设性反馈——明确问题但不知如何开场 → 先参考「开启批判性反馈对话」，再使用「替代赞美三明治法」
  • 预计会遇到抵触或反驳 → 先参考「行为改变阶段」
  • 近期发生事件，用户希望立即处理 → 使用「即时反馈」（不要留到一对一沟通时）
  • 在团队中建立反馈文化 → 使用「快速反馈」
  • 为评估或文档撰写反馈 → 先参考「精准表达」部分；再询问需记录的具体事件
  • 与下属建立轻量化的每周问责机制 → 阅读
    references/extended.md
    中的「每周明确目标」章节
  • 从团队获取真实反馈 → 参考「从团队获取反馈」部分
**若用户未提供具体事件，请先询问。**模糊的反馈输入必然产生模糊的反馈输出。

Default Response Shape

默认响应结构

When helping with feedback, produce wording the manager can actually say:
  1. Intent: what outcome the feedback should create.
  2. SBI draft: situation, behavior, impact, in concrete language.
  3. Opening line: a direct but humane start to the conversation.
  4. Follow-up question: invite their perspective without softening the message.
  5. Next step: request, agreement, or observation period.
For praise, keep it specific. For corrective feedback, do not hide the message inside a compliment sandwich.
在协助反馈时，需提供管理者可直接使用的话术：
  1. 意图：反馈应达成的目标。
  2. SBI草稿：用具体语言描述场景、行为、影响。
  3. 开场话术：直接且人性化的对话开场。
  4. 跟进问题：邀请对方表达观点，但不弱化核心信息。
  5. 下一步行动：具体要求、共识或观察周期。
表扬需具体明确。纠正性反馈不要将核心信息隐藏在赞美三明治中。

Precision: No Weasel Words

精准表达：摒弃模糊措辞

The most common feedback mistake is vagueness. "You're too blunt in meetings" or "your communication needs improvement" — these feel like feedback but give the person nothing to act on. They're also easy to dismiss: "I don't think I'm blunt."
Specific feedback is factual and indisputable.
Weak: "You're too blunt in meetings." Specific: "In the meeting with Christopher, you cut him off when he started suggesting the React-based solution. We missed an opportunity to check more approaches. I also noticed that Christopher stopped contributing to other meetings after that."
The specific version names the event, the person affected, and the downstream consequence. The other person can't dispute the facts — they can only engage with what happened.
Apply this same standard to positive feedback. "You did a great job" is forgettable. "The way you handled the incident on Thursday — staying calm, communicating clearly to stakeholders while the team debugged — that's exactly what we need in situations like that" is memorable and repeatable.
Before giving feedback, do the homework. Identify the specific event, the specific behavior, and the specific impact. Vague feedback isn't kind — it's just unprepared.
最常见的反馈错误是模糊不清。比如“你在会议上太直率”或“你的沟通需要改进”——这类表述看似是反馈，但对方无从下手改进，也很容易反驳：“我不觉得我直率。”
精准的反馈应基于事实且无可辩驳。
模糊表述：“你在会议上太直率。” 精准表述：“在和Christopher的会议上，当他开始提出基于React的解决方案时，你打断了他。我们因此错过了探索更多方案的机会。我还注意到Christopher在之后的其他会议中不再主动发言了。”
精准版本明确了事件、受影响人员及后续后果。对方无法否认事实——只能针对实际发生的情况展开沟通。
该标准同样适用于积极反馈。“你做得很棒”容易被遗忘。“你周四处理事件的方式——保持冷静，在团队调试期间向利益相关者清晰沟通——正是我们在这类场景中需要的表现”则令人印象深刻且值得效仿。
**在给出反馈前，请做好准备。**明确具体事件、具体行为及具体影响。模糊的反馈并非善意——只是准备不足。

Public Praise Isn't Universal

公开表扬并非适用于所有人

"Praise in public, criticize in private" is standard management advice. The first half isn't always true.
Some engineers genuinely don't want to be called out in front of the team. They prefer private acknowledgment. Surprising them with public praise — a Slack shoutout, a nomination for a recognition program — can create awkwardness instead of motivation.
Ask before you assume. A simple "How do you prefer to be recognized when you do great work?" in a 1:1 is enough.
“公开表扬，私下批评”是标准的管理建议，但前半句并非总是正确。
有些工程师确实不希望在团队面前被点名表扬，他们更倾向于私下认可。突然的公开表扬——比如Slack上的公开称赞、提名表彰项目——反而会让他们感到尴尬，而非受到激励。
不要想当然，先询问对方。在一对一沟通中简单问一句“当你表现出色时，你希望以哪种方式获得认可？”就足够了。

Translating Social Cues

解读社交信号

Not everyone can read a room. If you're good at this, part of your job is translating for those who aren't.
When a team member says something that lands badly and doesn't notice — upset someone, came across as dismissive, answered too abruptly in a meeting — tell them privately. Not as criticism, but as information: "I think that landed differently than you intended. Here's what I noticed." They often don't know. Telling them is the most useful thing you can do.
并非所有人都能读懂场合氛围。如果你擅长这一点，你的部分工作就是为不擅长的人解读信号。
当团队成员说的话产生了负面效果却未察觉——比如惹恼了某人、显得不屑一顾、在会议中回答过于生硬——请私下告知他们。不要当作批评，而是传递信息：“我觉得你的话产生了和你预期不同的效果。我来告诉你我观察到的情况。”他们往往对此毫无察觉，告知他们才是最有帮助的做法。

Behavior Change Stages

行为改变阶段

When addressing a performance or behavior problem, people typically move through three stages before accepting feedback:
  1. Ignore — they don't acknowledge the problem exists
  2. Deny — they actively push back ("That's not true" / "You're wrong")
  3. Blame others — they redirect responsibility elsewhere
In a single 1:1, you can often move someone through all three stages. The right response at each stage is different:
  • At Ignore/Deny: bring specific facts. Don't argue — present evidence calmly.
  • At Blame: don't let them escape into it. Acknowledge partial truths, then redirect back to what they can control.
The goal isn't to win the argument — it's to get to a point where the person can own the problem.
在处理绩效或行为问题时，人们通常会经历三个阶段才会接受反馈：
  1. 忽视——不承认问题存在
  2. 否认——主动反驳（“不是这样的”/“你错了”）
  3. 归咎他人——将责任转移到别处
在一次一对一沟通中，你通常可以引导对方走完这三个阶段。每个阶段的应对方式不同：
  • 忽视/否认阶段：提供具体事实。不要争论——冷静呈现证据。
  • 归咎阶段：不要让对方逃避责任。认可部分事实，然后引导他们回到自己可控的部分。
目标不是赢得争论——而是让对方能够承担问题。

Instead of the Compliment Sandwich

替代赞美三明治法

Starting with a compliment and ending with one — sandwiching criticism in between — backfires in two ways: the opening compliment feels insincere (they're braced for the hit), and the closing compliment can bury the critique due to recency effects.
Four steps that work better (from Adam Grant, based on research):
  1. Explain why you're giving the feedback. Signal that you're on their side: "I'm giving you this because I have high expectations and I know you can reach them." It's harder to reject a hard truth from someone who believes in you.
  2. Take yourself off a pedestal. Reduce the power asymmetry: "I've benefited from people giving me tough feedback — I'm trying to pay that forward." It makes the feedback less threatening.
  3. Give the criticism directly. No burying. Say the specific thing, the specific event, the specific impact.
  4. Invite them to respond. Ask what they think. Let them engage, not just receive.
先表扬、再批评、最后再表扬——这种赞美三明治法会产生两种反效果：开场的表扬显得不真诚（对方已经做好了被批评的准备），结尾的表扬会因近因效应掩盖核心批评内容。
有四个步骤更有效（来自Adam Grant的研究）：
  1. 说明反馈的原因：表明你和对方立场一致：*“我给你这些反馈是因为我对你有很高的期望，我相信你能够达到。”*来自信任你的人的逆耳忠言更难被拒绝。
  2. 放下架子：减少权力不对等：*“我也曾从他人的严厉反馈中受益——我现在只是把这份帮助传递下去。”*这会让反馈的威胁感降低。
  3. 直接给出批评：不要含糊其辞。说出具体的事情、具体的事件、具体的影响。
  4. 邀请对方回应：询问对方的想法。让他们参与沟通，而非被动接受。

Opening a Critical Feedback Conversation

开启批判性反馈对话

From The Making of a Manager (Zhuo): the moments right before a difficult feedback conversation feel uncomfortable — for both people. That discomfort is a good sign. It means the conversation is real.
Comfortable feedback conversations often aren't achieving anything. If neither person feels any friction, the feedback is probably not specific enough, not honest enough, or not about anything that actually matters.
What to say at the start:
The opening doesn't need to be elaborate. What it needs to signal is: you're saying this because you care about the person, not because you're judging them.
"I want to share something that's hard for me to say, and I'm saying it because I think it matters for where you're going."
Or simply naming what's happening: "I have some direct feedback for you. It might feel uncomfortable, and I want you to know it's coming from a place of caring about your success here."
Then say the thing. Don't circle around it. The opening sets the tone; the feedback itself has to be clear, specific, and direct. Softening after a strong opener defeats the purpose.
Silence is data. If someone goes quiet after critical feedback, don't rush to fill the space. Let them process. The silence often means they're actually taking it in — which is exactly what you wanted.
来自《成为管理者》（The Making of a Manager）：在艰难的反馈对话开始前的时刻，双方都会感到不适——这是好现象。说明对话是真实且有意义的。
舒适的反馈对话往往无法达成任何效果。如果双方都没有感到任何摩擦，说明反馈可能不够具体、不够坦诚，或者根本无关紧要。
开场话术：
开场无需复杂。关键是要传递这样的信号：你说这些是因为关心对方，而非评判对方。
“我想和你分享一些我很难说出口的事情，我之所以说出来，是因为我认为这对你的发展很重要。”
或者直接点明当下的情况：“我有一些直接的反馈要告诉你。可能会让你感到不适，但我想让你知道，这是出于对你在这里取得成功的关心。”
**然后直接说出核心内容。**不要绕圈子。开场奠定基调，反馈本身必须清晰、具体、直接。在有力的开场后再软化语气会适得其反。
**沉默是信息。**如果对方在听到批评反馈后沉默，不要急于填补空白。让他们消化。沉默往往意味着他们真正听进去了——这正是你想要的效果。

In-the-Moment Feedback

即时反馈

Waiting for the next 1:1 to give feedback costs most of its effectiveness. The closer feedback is to the event, the more likely the person can connect it to what they actually did.
Standup feedback — feedback given in the flow of work, at or near the moment it's relevant. Not a big formal conversation; a direct, brief comment. Example: a developer repeatedly delays code reviews for teammates. Raising this in the standup (or right after, in the hallway) is far more effective than bringing it up three days later in a 1:1 where the person may barely remember the specific instance.
The volume button. In-the-moment feedback doesn't need to be loud or intense. Think of it as tuning down the tone and volume — not the substance. Keep the content clear and direct; deliver it calmly and without drama. Brief, respectful, and close to the event beats formal, thorough, and a week later.
Why timing matters. Humans (like any animal) struggle to connect feedback to action when the gap is too long. Waiting days doesn't just reduce effectiveness — it trains the team to expect feedback only in formal settings, which reduces psychological safety in day-to-day work. Google's research on team effectiveness identified psychological safety as the #1 factor — and the team leader is the primary influence on it.
等到下次一对一沟通再给出反馈会大幅降低其有效性。反馈越贴近事件，对方就越容易将其与自己的具体行为联系起来。
站会反馈——在工作流程中，于事件发生时或附近给出的反馈。不需要正式的长篇对话；只需直接、简短的评论。例如：某个开发人员多次拖延队友的代码评审。在站会上（或会后立即在走廊里）提出这个问题，远比对三天后在一对一沟通中提出更有效——那时对方可能已经记不清具体的事件了。
音量按钮原则——即时反馈无需大声或激烈。可以看作是调低语气和音量，但不要弱化内容。保持内容清晰直接；冷静、不带戏剧性地传达。简短、尊重且贴近事件的反馈，胜过正式、详尽但延迟一周的反馈。
**时机为何重要。**人类（像任何动物一样）在反馈与行动间隔太久时，很难将两者联系起来。等待几天不仅会降低有效性——还会让团队习惯于只在正式场合接受反馈，从而降低日常工作中的心理安全感。Google关于团队效能的研究指出，心理安全感是排名第一的因素——而团队领导者是影响心理安全感的核心角色。

Speed Feedback: Building a Feedback Habit on the Team

快速反馈：在团队中建立反馈习惯

Teams that only give feedback in formal reviews are too slow. Speed feedback is a structured activity for building a team-wide feedback habit.
How it works: Team members pair up in a private space. Each person gets a fixed amount of time to give feedback to the other, then they switch. Pairs rotate until everyone has spoken with everyone else.
The goal isn't depth — it's normalization. Early rounds focus on appreciation and celebrating contributions. As the team gets comfortable, they naturally start including improvement suggestions. The activity makes feedback part of the team's rhythm rather than a once-a-year event.
Works best with 5–8 people. Can be run remotely with breakout rooms and a shared board. Does not replace regular 1:1 feedback — it supplements it.
只在正式评估中给出反馈的团队节奏太慢。快速反馈是一项结构化活动，用于在团队层面建立反馈习惯。
**操作方式：**团队成员两两配对，在私密空间交流。每个人有固定时间向对方提供反馈，然后交换角色。配对轮换，直到每个人都与其他所有人交流过。
**目标不在于深度——而在于常态化。**早期阶段专注于欣赏和表扬贡献。随着团队逐渐适应，他们自然会开始提出改进建议。这项活动让反馈成为团队日常节奏的一部分，而非一年一度的事件。
最适合5-8人的团队。可通过线上 breakout rooms 和共享白板远程开展。不能替代常规的一对一反馈——而是作为补充。

Getting Feedback from Your Team

从团队获取反馈

Bad managers have many problems, but most of them know it. Good managers have a few invisible ones. When you ask for feedback in a performance review, you'll usually get silence — or "everything's great!" There is always something you can improve.
Three methods that get past the surface:
1. Try different angles. Don't accept the first "I can't think of anything." Keep asking from a different direction: "A behavior you didn't like?" "Something specific to your growth or our 1:1s?" "Something the team as a whole could have done better?" Real feedback is often only reachable because the question kept changing.
2. Share your own difficulties. When you share what you struggle with, people become more comfortable criticizing you. It signals that honest assessment is welcome. If your team only finds out about your struggles via a LinkedIn post, the psychological space for that conversation doesn't exist in your 1:1s.
3. Make it about a specific situation. People won't easily criticize you as a person — but they will talk about a project or an event. Instead of "where can I improve?" ask "what could we have done better in project X?" Then push further: "if we had to do the same project again, what would you change?" The second question is where the real feedback lives.
糟糕的管理者有很多问题，而且大多数自己都知道。优秀的管理者则有一些看不见的问题。当你在绩效评估中询问反馈时，通常会得到沉默——或者“一切都很好！”但你总有可以改进的地方。
三种突破表面的方法：
**1. 尝试不同角度。**不要接受第一个“我想不到什么”的回答。换个方向继续问：“有没有你不喜欢的行为？”“关于你的成长或我们的一对一沟通，有什么具体建议？”“整个团队本可以做得更好的事情是什么？”真实的反馈往往需要不断变换问题才能获得。
**2. 分享自己的困难。**当你分享自己的挣扎时，人们会更愿意批评你。这表明诚实的评估是受欢迎的。如果你的团队只能通过LinkedIn帖子了解你的困难，那么在一对一沟通中就不存在进行这类对话的心理空间。
**3. 聚焦具体场景。**人们不会轻易批评你这个人——但他们会谈论某个项目或事件。不要问“我哪里可以改进？”而是问“我们在项目X中本可以做得更好的地方是什么？”然后进一步追问：“如果我们再做一次同样的项目，你会做出什么改变？”第二个问题才是真实反馈所在之处。

Dive Deeper

深入探索

If the user asks where a framework came from, wants to read the original article, or wants more context on any topic in this skill — read 
references/sources.md
 for the full list of source articles (with links), books, and course material.
若用户询问某个框架的来源、希望阅读原文或需要任何主题的更多上下文，请阅读
references/sources.md
获取完整的来源文章（含链接）、书籍和课程材料列表。

Related Skills

相关技能

  • 1on1s
    — Delivering feedback in a 1:1 context
  • performance-reviews
    — Formal written feedback at review time
  • 1on1s
    — 在一对一沟通场景中传递反馈
  • performance-reviews
    — 评估阶段的正式书面反馈