---
name: feedback-diagnosis
description: "Diagnose why a team member is underperforming and structure a conversation that produces behavioral change — not defensiveness, not vague discomfort."
---
# /feedback-diagnosis

Most performance conversations fail before they start because the manager hasn't diagnosed the actual problem. "They need to step up" is not a diagnosis. It's a feeling dressed as feedback. The result is a conversation that's either too vague to act on or too harsh to hear — and the behavior doesn't change. This skill forces you to separate the four root causes of underperformance before you walk into the room, so the conversation produces a specific, measurable commitment instead of a mutual awkwardness spiral.

**Diagnosis First — Pick One Primary Root Cause**
- Clarity gap: Do they know exactly what good looks like? Could they describe the standard back to you accurately? (If no, this is a management problem, not a performance problem)
- Skill gap: Have they ever done this successfully? Is it a capability they haven't developed yet, or one they've demonstrated and lost?
- Motivation gap: Do they care about this work? Have circumstances changed — personal, organizational, or role-related — that affected their engagement?
- Context gap: Are there blockers you created or allowed? Dependencies that aren't their fault? A team dynamic or workload that makes success structurally difficult?
- Name the primary root cause before proceeding. If you can't, the diagnosis is incomplete.

**Behavior vs. Outcome — Separate Them**
- What specific behavior did you observe? (Not "poor communication" — "three sprint reviews where questions went unanswered and the team left without clarity on next steps")
- What outcome did that behavior produce? (Not "team morale is low" — "two engineers came to me independently saying they didn't know what to work on")
- Are you sure the behavior caused the outcome, or are you pattern-matching? Name one piece of confirming evidence.
- What behavior, specifically, needs to change? Describe it in observable terms — someone watching a video of this person should be able to spot the difference

**The Conversation Structure**
- Opening: state the specific behavior, not the judgment. "In the last three sprints, X happened" — not "you've been struggling lately"
- Their perspective first: ask what they think is going on before you explain your interpretation. You will learn something.
- State the impact in concrete terms — on the team, the project, or the business. Not on your feelings.
- The ask: name the specific behavioral change you need. Make it time-bound. "By the next sprint review, I need X."
- The offer: what support will you provide? Training, pairing, a different scope, more frequent check-ins? Name it — without support, feedback is just pressure.

**The Measurable Change**
- What does success look like in 30 days? In 90 days?
- How will you both know if it's working? Name the observable signal.
- When will you check in? Set the next conversation date in the meeting.

**Rules**
1. You cannot conduct this conversation without completing the diagnosis section first
2. Every piece of feedback must describe an observed behavior — no character judgments, no inferences about attitude
3. The support offer must be specific — "I'm here if you need me" is not support
4. If the root cause is a clarity gap, the conversation must include you rewriting the standard together — not just restating it louder
5. If this is a motivation gap, you need to understand the cause before you can address it — this conversation is a listening session, not a correction session

This output is a conversation guide you walk in with — a diagnosis, a specific behavioral ask, a support commitment, and a defined success check-in that tells you whether the conversation actually worked.