Quick Start

Tell me:

Which meeting are you rating? (name, date, and who ran it)
Did it achieve its goal? (yes/no/partially)
What's the one thing you'd change?

I'll walk you through a structured evaluation, score the meeting across 5 dimensions, check for trends if this is a recurring meeting, and give you specific recommendations.

Shortcut: /meeting-feedback [meeting name] -- 3/5, pre-read was late -- and I'll build the full assessment.

Meeting Feedback Skill

Evaluate meeting effectiveness and identify improvements. Quick retrospective to make future meetings better.

When to Use This Skill

Immediately after important meetings (within 10 minutes)
After recurring meetings (to improve cadence)
When a meeting felt unproductive (diagnose what went wrong)
For team retrospectives on meeting culture

Quick Feedback

Use after any meeting:

Meeting: [Meeting name]
Date: [Date]

⭐ Rating: [1-5 stars]

What worked:
- [One thing that was effective]

What didn't:
- [One thing that was wasteful]

One change for next time:
- [Specific improvement]

Full Feedback

Use after high-stakes or recurring meetings:

Step 1: Meeting Details

Meeting: [Name]
Date: [Date]
Duration: [Scheduled time] → [Actual time]
Attendees: [Number of people]
Owner: [Who ran it]

Step 2: Objectives Assessment

## Did We Achieve the Goal?

Original purpose: [What the agenda said]

✅ / ❌ Goal achieved?

If no:
- What was missing? [Explanation]
- What blocked us? [Blocker]

Step 3: Effectiveness Scoring

Rate each dimension (1-5 scale) using these scoring anchors:

## Effectiveness Scores

### 1. Preparation (1-5): ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Scoring anchors:
  1 - No agenda shared, attendees didn't know the purpose
  2 - Agenda existed but was vague or shared less than 1 hour before
  3 - Clear agenda shared day-before, most attendees came prepared
  4 - Detailed agenda with pre-reads linked, all attendees prepared
  5 - Pre-reads reviewed by all, discussion started at full speed from minute one

- Pre-read sent on time?
- Attendees came prepared?
- Agenda was clear?

### 2. Time Management (1-5): ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Scoring anchors:
  1 - Started 10+ min late, ran over by 15+ min, no time for decisions
  2 - Started late or ran over, some agenda items skipped
  3 - Started roughly on time, mostly followed agenda, ended within 5 min of scheduled
  4 - Started on time, all agenda items covered, ended on time
  5 - Started on time, agenda covered with time to spare, ended early or used extra time for bonus discussion

- Started on time?
- Stayed on agenda?
- Ended on time?

### 3. Participation (1-5): ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Scoring anchors:
  1 - One person talked the entire time, multiple attendees were silent, wrong people in room
  2 - Two or three people dominated, several attendees disengaged or multitasking
  3 - Most people contributed at least once, some imbalance in airtime
  4 - Balanced discussion, facilitator drew out quiet voices, all key perspectives heard
  5 - Every attendee contributed meaningfully, active listening evident, diverse perspectives surfaced and built upon

- Right people in room?
- Everyone contributed?
- No one dominated?

### 4. Decisions (1-5): ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Scoring anchors:
  1 - No decisions made, unclear who had authority, meeting ended with "let's discuss more"
  2 - Decision was vaguely reached but not stated explicitly, rationale unclear
  3 - Decision made and stated aloud, decision-maker was clear, but rationale not documented
  4 - Decision made with clear rationale, dissent captured, communicated to stakeholders
  5 - Decision made using structured process (options evaluated, criteria applied), rationale documented, dissent recorded, communication plan in place

- Clear decision-maker?
- Decision was made?
- Rationale documented?

### 5. Action Items (1-5): ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Scoring anchors:
  1 - No action items captured, vague "we should do X" statements, no owners
  2 - Some action items noted but missing owners or deadlines
  3 - Action items listed with owners, but deadlines vague ("next week" instead of specific dates)
  4 - All action items have specific owners and due dates, sent to attendees within 2 hours
  5 - Action items with owners, dates, and success criteria; tracked in project management tool; follow-up mechanism confirmed

- Clear next steps?
- Owners assigned?
- Due dates set?

**Overall Score:** [Average] / 5

Step 4: What Worked

## What Worked Well

✅ [Strength 1]
   - Why it worked: [Explanation]
   - Repeat next time: Yes/No

✅ [Strength 2]
   - Why it worked: [Explanation]
   - Repeat next time: Yes/No

✅ [Strength 3]
   - Why it worked: [Explanation]
   - Repeat next time: Yes/No

Step 5: What Didn't Work

## What Didn't Work

❌ [Problem 1]
   - Impact: [How it hurt the meeting]
   - Root cause: [Why it happened]
   - Fix for next time: [Specific change]

❌ [Problem 2]
   - Impact: [How it hurt the meeting]
   - Root cause: [Why it happened]
   - Fix for next time: [Specific change]

Step 6: Meeting Smells

Common antipatterns - check for these:

## Meeting Smells (Check all that apply)

[ ] **Status report meeting**
    - People just shared updates (could've been async)
    - Fix: Send updates in doc, use meeting for decisions

[ ] **Too many people**
    - 10+ attendees, most silent
    - Fix: Required vs optional attendees, record for others

[ ] **Rehashing decisions**
    - Revisiting previously made choices
    - Fix: Document decisions, share context better

[ ] **No clear owner**
    - Unclear who was driving the meeting
    - Fix: Assign meeting owner in agenda

[ ] **Presentation, not discussion**
    - Someone read slides for 30+ minutes
    - Fix: Send deck as pre-read, meeting for Q&A only

[ ] **Meeting to schedule another meeting**
    - No decision, just agreed to meet again
    - Fix: Make decision now or cancel

[ ] **Hidden agenda**
    - Real topic emerged mid-meeting
    - Fix: Be explicit about purpose upfront

[ ] **No pre-read**
    - First 20 min wasted on context-setting
    - Fix: Send materials 24 hours before

[ ] **Action items unclear**
    - Vague next steps, no owners
    - Fix: Use action item template with owners + dates

Step 7: Recommendations

## Recommendations for Next Time

### Must Change
🔴 [Critical fix 1]: [Specific action]
🔴 [Critical fix 2]: [Specific action]

### Should Change
🟡 [Important fix 1]: [Specific action]
🟡 [Important fix 2]: [Specific action]

### Could Change
🟢 [Nice-to-have 1]: [Specific action]

Step 8: Meeting Continuation Decision

## Should This Meeting Continue?

For recurring meetings:

✅ Keep as-is: Meeting is working well
🔄 Keep with changes: Meeting is valuable but needs fixes
⏸️ Pause: Revisit in [X weeks/months]
❌ Cancel: Not providing value, eliminate

If keeping:
- Frequency: [Current] → [Recommended]
- Duration: [Current] → [Recommended]
- Attendees: [Add/remove who?]
- Format: [What changes to agenda/structure?]

Output Format

# Meeting Feedback: [Meeting Name]

**Date:** [Date] | **Duration:** [X min] | **Attendees:** [Count]

---

## Overall Assessment

**Rating:** ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (4/5)

**Goal achieved?** ✅ Yes / ❌ No

---

## Effectiveness Breakdown

| Dimension       | Score      | Notes                 |
| --------------- | ---------- | --------------------- |
| Preparation     | ⭐⭐⭐     | Pre-read sent late    |
| Time Management | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | Started/ended on time |
| Participation   | ⭐⭐⭐⭐   | Good discussion       |
| Decisions       | ⭐⭐⭐     | Decision unclear      |
| Action Items    | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | Clear owners          |

**Overall:** 4.0 / 5

---

## What Worked

✅ **[Strength 1]**

- [Why it worked]

✅ **[Strength 2]**

- [Why it worked]

---

## What Didn't Work

❌ **[Problem 1]**

- Impact: [Consequence]
- Fix: [Specific change]

❌ **[Problem 2]**

- Impact: [Consequence]
- Fix: [Specific change]

---

## Meeting Smells Detected

- [ ] Status report meeting
- [x] Too many people (12 attendees, 5 silent)
- [ ] Rehashing decisions
- [x] No pre-read sent

---

## Recommendations

### Must Change

🔴 Send pre-read 24 hours before (not day-of)
🔴 Reduce attendees to 6-7 (make others optional)

### Should Change

🟡 Add explicit decision-maker to agenda

### Could Change

🟢 Try 45-minute slot instead of 60

---

## Meeting Continuation

**Decision:** 🔄 Keep with changes

**Changes to implement:**

- Frequency: Weekly → Biweekly
- Pre-read requirement: Mandatory
- Attendee list: Cut from 12 to 7

**Next review:** [Date in 1 month]

When to Trigger a Team Retro

Automatic trigger: Suggest a team meeting retrospective when ANY of these conditions are met:

3+ meetings scored below 3.0 on the same dimension within 30 days
Same "meeting smell" detected in 3+ consecutive meetings of the same type
Action items from meetings are consistently not completed (tracked via /meeting-cleanup)
A stakeholder gives feedback that meetings are unproductive

How to connect: "Based on the last month of meeting feedback, [Dimension X] has scored below 3.0 in [N] meetings. This suggests a systemic issue rather than a one-off problem. Want to run a team retrospective focused on improving [Dimension X]?"

This turns the retro section from a standalone module into a natural escalation from individual meeting feedback.

Team Retrospective Format

For team-wide meeting culture assessment:

# Team Meeting Retrospective

**Period:** [Last month/quarter]
**Meetings evaluated:** [Count]
**Total time spent:** [Hours]

---

## Meeting Inventory

| Meeting     | Frequency | Duration | Attendees | Avg Rating | Keep? |
| ----------- | --------- | -------- | --------- | ---------- | ----- |
| [Meeting 1] | Weekly    | 60 min   | 8         | ⭐⭐⭐⭐   | ✅    |
| [Meeting 2] | Daily     | 15 min   | 5         | ⭐⭐⭐     | 🔄    |
| [Meeting 3] | Monthly   | 120 min  | 15        | ⭐⭐       | ❌    |

---

## Time Analysis

**Total meeting time:** [X hours/week]

- Valuable meetings: [Y hours] ([Z%])
- Low-value meetings: [A hours] ([B%])

**Goal:** Reduce low-value meeting time by 50%

---

## Common Issues Across Meetings

1. **[Issue 1]** - Seen in [X/Y meetings]
   - Fix: [Team-wide change]

2. **[Issue 2]** - Seen in [X/Y meetings]
   - Fix: [Team-wide change]

---

## Team Meeting Norms

Based on feedback, we're establishing:

**Preparation:**

- [ ] Pre-reads sent 24 hours before
- [ ] Attendees review materials before joining
- [ ] Can decline if unprepared

**Execution:**

- [ ] Start/end on time (no grace period)
- [ ] 25/50-minute slots (not 30/60)
- [ ] Notetaker rotates
- [ ] Decisions documented in real-time

**Follow-up:**

- [ ] Action items sent within 2 hours
- [ ] Owners confirm receipt
- [ ] Next meeting reviews action item progress

---

## Meetings to Experiment With

**Cancel for 1 month:**

- [Meeting X] - Let's try async updates instead

**Change format:**

- [Meeting Y] - Move from weekly 60min to biweekly 30min

**New meeting to trial:**

- [Meeting Z] - Monthly deep dive on [topic]

**Review date:** [One month from now]

Meeting Cost Calculator

Help teams visualize waste:

Meeting: [Name]
Frequency: [Weekly/Monthly/etc.]

Attendees & Costs:
- [Name 1]: $150/hr × 1hr = $150
- [Name 2]: $125/hr × 1hr = $125
- [Name 3]: $100/hr × 1hr = $100
[...]

**Per-meeting cost:** $800
**Annual cost:** $800 × 52 weeks = $41,600

**Question:** Is this meeting worth $41K/year?
If not, what changes would justify the cost?

Pro Tips

Rate immediately: Memory fades fast
Be specific: "Meeting ran long" → "Started 10 min late, no time for decisions"
Celebrate good meetings: Positive reinforcement works
Track trends: One bad meeting is data, three is a pattern
Share feedback: Don't keep it private, send to meeting owner
Act on insights: Feedback without action is pointless
Review quarterly: Look at meeting portfolio, not just individual meetings

Common Mistakes to Avoid

❌ Generic feedback ("meeting was fine") ✅ Specific observations ("pre-read sent day-of, not 24hr before")

❌ Blaming people ("John talked too much") ✅ Blaming process ("No facilitator to manage airtime")

❌ Collecting feedback, never acting ✅ Implement top 1-2 fixes for next meeting

❌ Only noting problems ✅ Also capture what worked well (repeat it)

Integration with Other Skills

Before meeting:

/meeting-agenda - Create structured agenda

After meeting:

/meeting-notes - Document decisions and action items
/meeting-cleanup - Batch process day's meetings

Recurring use:

Run meeting-feedback monthly on recurring meetings
Team retrospective quarterly on meeting culture

Quick Questions for Any Meeting

After any meeting, ask yourself:

Value: Was this worth [cost in time/money]?
Async: Could this have been an email/doc?
Attendees: Did everyone need to be there?
Outcome: Did we make a decision or just talk?
Next time: One change that would make this 20% better?

Trend Tracking

After scoring, check thoughts/shared/product/meeting-notes/ and previous feedback files for the same recurring meeting. If previous feedback exists, show a trend:

## Meeting Effectiveness Trend: [Meeting Name]

Last 3 ratings: 3.0 -> 3.5 -> 4.0 (improving)

Dimension trends:
| Dimension       | 3 Weeks Ago | 2 Weeks Ago | This Week | Trend      |
|-----------------|-------------|-------------|-----------|------------|
| Preparation     | 2           | 3           | 4         | Improving  |
| Time Management | 4           | 4           | 4         | Stable     |
| Participation   | 3           | 3           | 3         | Stagnant   |
| Decisions       | 3           | 4           | 4         | Improved   |
| Action Items    | 3           | 3           | 5         | Improving  |

Key insight: Preparation has improved since we started sending pre-reads 24hr before.
Attention needed: Participation has been flat at 3 for three weeks -- consider
assigning a facilitator or using round-robin format.

If no previous feedback exists, note: "This is the first feedback for this meeting. Future ratings will show trends."

Save feedback files with consistent naming: thoughts/shared/product/meeting-notes/feedback-[meeting-name]-[date].md to enable trend tracking.

Feedback Delivery Guidance

How to share meeting feedback constructively:

For meetings you organized:

Share feedback openly with attendees
Frame it as: "Here's how I'm planning to improve our next session based on what I observed"
Commit to specific changes and ask for input

For meetings others organized:

Frame as: "I noticed [specific observation] -- would you be open to trying [specific change]? I think it could help us [benefit]."
Lead with what worked well before suggesting changes
Never share raw scores without context or explanation
Offer to help implement changes (e.g., "I can send pre-reads next time if that helps")

For team-wide patterns:

Aggregate feedback across meetings before raising systemic issues
Present data: "Over the last month, 4 of our 6 recurring meetings scored below 3 on Preparation"
Propose a team norm rather than calling out individuals

What NOT to do:

Don't share scores publicly without discussing privately first
Don't use feedback as ammunition in unrelated discussions
Don't wait months to share -- feedback is most useful within a week

Evaluating Meetings You Didn't Attend

When asked to evaluate a meeting you weren't in (e.g., PM asks "how was my team's sprint retro?"):

Use the meeting notes as primary input (from /meeting-notes output or raw notes)
Score only observable dimensions: Decisions, Action Items, and Time Management can be assessed from notes. Participation and Preparation usually cannot -- note them as "Unable to assess from notes."
Flag the limitation: "Note: This evaluation is based on meeting notes, not direct observation. Participation and Preparation scores may not be accurate."
Suggest: "For a more complete assessment, ask an attendee to answer 3 quick questions about preparation and participation."

Output Quality Self-Check

Before delivering the feedback, verify:

Specific observations: Every "what worked" and "what didn't" cites a specific moment, not generalities
Scoring anchors used: Each dimension score matches the anchor description, not just gut feeling
Actionable fixes: Every problem identified has a specific, implementable recommendation
Balanced: At least one "what worked" item is included (even for bad meetings)
Trend checked: If this is a recurring meeting, previous feedback was searched for trend data
Delivery guidance included: Feedback includes advice on how to share it constructively
Meeting smells checked: The antipattern checklist was reviewed against this meeting
Continuation decision made: For recurring meetings, a keep/change/pause/cancel recommendation is included
Root causes identified: Problems trace to process issues, not blamed on individuals
Time cost noted: The meeting cost (attendees x time) is contextualized against its value

If any check fails, revise before delivering.

Remember: Meeting culture is built one feedback loop at a time. Small improvements compound into massive time savings.

Context Routing Strategy

When the PM uses /meeting-feedback, I automatically:

1. Check Meeting Norms from Context

Source: Past /meeting-feedback outputs, team patterns

What I look for: What has worked well in your team's meetings before
How I use it: Tailor feedback recommendations to your meeting culture
Example: "Your team values async pre-reads, emphasize that in feedback"

2. Reference Related Decisions

Source: thoughts/shared/product/decisions/ if this meeting made a decision

What I look for: Decision that came out of the meeting
How I use it: Note whether decision was crisp and clear
Example: "Did the meeting achieve the decision that was supposed to be made?"

3. Track Meeting Effectiveness Trends

Source: Past meeting feedback (if available)

What I look for: Patterns in what's working or failing
How I use it: Flag if this is 3rd week of the same problem
Example: "This is 3rd week 'pre-read sent late' — escalate as systemic issue"

4. Pull Attendee Context

Source: thoughts/shared/pm/context/stakeholder-template.md

What I look for: Attendees' roles, personality styles
How I use it: Calibrate feedback (e.g., "Person X dominates, needs facilitation")
Example: "VP Sales tends to redirect, consider appointing strong facilitator"

5. Route for Process Improvement

Routing logic:

Individual meeting: Quick feedback loop
Recurring meeting: Suggest changes for next occurrence
Team pattern: Suggest /meeting-cleanup to batch-process and identify systemic issues
Major issue: Flag for leadership discussion or team retrospective