DIGNALEGI

Worth reading. A personal index selected by Ratipcan Uysal.

← All paths

Reading path · 2 pieces · About 17 min

Make feedback useful

Will this feedback change the work—or just express your frustration?

Begin with what you want another person to do differently. Then widen the lens from one conversation to a team’s early-work review. Two readings are enough here: the second changes the setting rather than repeating the first.

Who this is for: Managers and technical leads improving feedback conversations and reviews of unfinished work.

Take away: A specific request for change and a review format that invites useful input.

Start reading ↓

Read in this order

Estimates use 250 words per minute, rounded up for each piece. Allow extra time for the reflection at the end. Open a piece for its selection note and available summary, then continue to the original.

  2. 02 / Create room for unfinished work

    How we engineer feedback at Figma with eng crits ↗

    Figma’s engineering crits invite early exploration and parallel feedback without turning every session into approval. Notice how context, focused prompts and a separate decision process keep critique useful.

    figma.com · About 9 min

    Pause here: Are participants helping explore an idea, approving it, or unknowingly doing both?

How the pieces fit together

Kao focuses on the purpose and reception of a message; Figma focuses on the conditions in which a group can improve unfinished work. The first is not a reason to suppress disagreement, and the second is not a replacement for an approval process. The shared question is whether feedback helps someone take a better next step. Intent matters, but so do context, timing and clarity about who decides.

Digna Legi synthesis of the linked readings, not a claim that the authors endorse this combined approach.

Put five minutes aside

Put the idea to work

Use paper or your own notes app. These prompts are Digna Legi’s exercise, drawn from the readings.

  1. Write the observable change you want, rather than a judgment about the person or team.
  2. Draft one concrete example and a request. Remove material that only vents frustration, then leave room to hear their perspective.
  3. For a group review, state what is open for feedback and whether the meeting is advisory or a decision point.
  4. Name how feedback will be considered and who owns the next step. Ask the recipient what they understood rather than assuming agreement.

Before you leave: What observable change are you asking for, and is the next review advisory or a decision point?