1on1-review

name: 1on1-review version: '1.0' description: 'Deep expert coaching review of a 1-on-1 meeting. Triggers: ''1on1 review'', ''review my 1on1 with [name]'', ''coach me on my 1on1'', ''how did my 1on1 go'', ''deep review my 1on1'', ''expert feedback on my meeting with [name]''.' author: Jonas Diezun category: productivity tags:

• meeting updated: '2026-02-10' visibility: public

1on1 Review

Deep coaching analysis of a 1-on-1 meeting using 5 expert personas. Scores your meeting, identifies patterns, and gives you specific improvement actions with rewritten examples from the actual transcript.

When to use: Weekly or bi-weekly. Pick your most important 1-on-1 and get thorough coaching. Time: ~5 minutes Output: Expert reviews + score + improvement roadmap Prerequisite: Transcript in 04-workspace/ceo-office/1on1s/{person}/transcripts/

When to Use

Expert Panel

5 perspectives that cover the full spectrum of 1-on-1 excellence:

Workflow

Step 1: Identify the Meeting

Same as 1on1-followup — find or fetch the transcript.

If user says "review my 1on1 with Brad", look in: 04-workspace/ceo-office/1on1s/brad/transcripts/ for the most recent file.

Step 2: Load Expert Personas

Load these 5 persona files:

00-system/expert-personas/personas/kim-scott.md
00-system/expert-personas/personas/andy-grove.md
00-system/expert-personas/personas/claire-hughes-johnson.md
00-system/expert-personas/personas/frank-slootman.md
00-system/expert-personas/personas/keith-rabois.md

Step 3: Run 5 Expert Reviews

For each persona, generate a review block:

═══════════════════════════════════════
{PERSONA NAME} REVIEW — {Their Domain}
═══════════════════════════════════════

VERDICT: {👍 Strong | 👌 Solid | ⚠️ Needs Work | ❌ Rethink}

CORE REACTION:
"{1-2 sentences IN THEIR VOICE — what would they actually say?}"

STRENGTHS:
• {Specific strength with transcript evidence}
• {Specific strength with transcript evidence}

GAPS:
• {Issue they'd flag} → {Concrete fix}
• {Issue they'd flag} → {Concrete fix}

ONE THING TO CHANGE:
{Their single most impactful recommendation — specific and actionable}

Step 4: Summary + Score

════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
📊 EXPERT REVIEW SUMMARY
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

| Expert | Verdict | Key Insight |
|--------|---------|-------------|
| Kim Scott | {emoji} | {1-line} |
| Andy Grove | {emoji} | {1-line} |
| Claire Hughes Johnson | {emoji} | {1-line} |
| Frank Slootman | {emoji} | {1-line} |
| Keith Rabois | {emoji} | {1-line} |

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
🎯 TOP 5 ACTIONS (consensus)
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

1. {Action} — Flagged by {Expert A, B}
2. {Action} — {Expert C} strongly recommends
3. {Action} — Consensus across {N} experts
4. {Action} — Quick win from {Expert D}
5. {Action} — {Expert E} key insight

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
⭐ WHAT WOULD MAKE THIS EXCELLENT
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Current Score: {X/10} — {One-line assessment}

The Gap to Excellence:

| Aspect | What You Did | What Excellence Looks Like |
|--------|--------------|---------------------------|
| {Area} | {Current} | {Excellent} |
| {Area} | {Current} | {Excellent} |
| {Area} | {Current} | {Excellent} |

Specific Moments That Could Be Elevated:

Instead of: "{Actual quote from transcript}"
Excellence: "{Rewritten version at 9/10 level}"

Instead of: "{Actual quote}"
Excellence: "{Rewritten version}"

Step 5: Save

Save to: 02-projects/Beam/10-1on1-excellence/04-outputs/{person}/{date}-coaching-review.md

Include YAML frontmatter with date, person, experts, score, source transcript path.

Scoring Guide

Pattern Detection

When reviewing, also look for patterns from PRIOR reviews (if they exist in 04-outputs/{person}/):

• Recurring gaps: Does the same issue keep appearing? (e.g., "no deadline" flagged 3 times in a row)
• Improvement trends: Is the score going up or down?
• Cross-person patterns: Do the same issues show up across different people?

If prior reviews exist, add a section:

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
📈 PATTERN WATCH
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

vs. last review ({date}): Score {X} → {Y} ({+/-Z})

Recurring: {Issue that keeps appearing}
Improved: {Issue that got better}
New: {Issue appearing for the first time}

Difference from 1on1-followup

Example Usage

User: "review my 1on1 with Saqib"

AI: [Loads latest Saqib transcript]
    [Loads 5 expert persona files]
    [Generates full review]
    [Saves to 04-outputs/saqib/{date}-coaching-review.md]

    Shows: 5 expert reviews → summary → score → improvement roadmap

Deep coaching through expert lenses. Score, learn, improve.