Add product ops handoff

skills/team-motivation-ops/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,171 @@
+# Team Motivation Ops — Standup + Weekly Meeting + 1:1 System for AI Startup COO
+
+> 🌍 **Language / 语言**: [中文](../../SKILL.md) | [English](README.md) | [日本語](../ja/README.md) | [한국어](../ko/README.md)
+
+> **Core principle**: Freedom and accountability are two sides of the same coin. Standups help people think clearly. Weekly meetings create alignment. 1:1s make people feel seen. When all three work, motivation isn't managed into existence — it grows on its own.
+
+**Best for**: COOs and tech leads at AI startups, teams of 3–30, high-autonomy or remote/hybrid setups.
+
+---
+
+## Layer 1: Daily Standup — Information Layer
+
+### Design Philosophy
+
+A standup isn't a status report. It's a ritual that forces clarity. If you can write it out, you've thought it through. If you can't, you probably haven't figured out what you're actually doing today.
+
+Vagueness is contagious — the COO's standup sets the tone. Write yours first, and write it well.
+
+### Standard Format (3 required fields)
+
+1. **What I did today**: Concrete deliverables. "Continued development" doesn't count.
+2. **What I'll do tomorrow**: Specific enough that someone else can tell whether you did it.
+3. **Blockers / topics to discuss**: Stuck points, unclear ownership, anything worth a sync.
+
+### Sample Good Standup
+
+```
+What I did today
+- Finished the XX API endpoint, tested with 50 local records, avg 80ms — 2x faster than the previous version
+- Helped a teammate debug a WhatsApp conversation list render lag — root cause was no virtual scrolling. Pointed them to react-window, they fixed it in 10 minutes
+- Honest truth: I zoned out for an hour in the afternoon. Used the time to archive a competitor's new case study into our competitive intel folder. Partial credit.
+
+What I'll do tomorrow
+- Push the bulk quote API to staging and run it against real data
+- Write the interface docs I skipped today
+
+Blockers / Sync topics
+- The XXX architecture decision is still unresolved and it's blocking my side. Want to align on it tonight.
+```
+
+### COO Principles
+
+- Don't demand perfection — demand honesty. If someone slacked off, fine, just own it and document what they did accomplish.
+- Don't criticize short standups — ask "what specifically did you deliver today?" The issue is specificity, not length.
+- Publicly praise one great standup. Never shame a bad one. Specificity is contagious too.
+- Repeat this framing: a good standup is a gift to your teammates.
+
+---
+
+## Layer 2: Weekly Meeting — Alignment Layer
+
+### Design Philosophy
+
+A weekly meeting isn't a progress report. It solves the "presence problem" — making sure everyone knows where the company stands, and hears each other commit publicly to something. Neither of those can be done async.
+
+### Agenda Structure (25 minutes, hard stop)
+
+| Segment | Time | Content |
+|---------|------|---------|
+| Company update | 8 min | Current progress / next week's plan / decisions the team needs to make |
+| Individual round | ~3 min/person | Did you hit last week's commitments? / 1–3 specific commitments for this week / what do you need from the team? / current state: 0–10 |
+| Group discussion | Remaining | Open discussion after individual round; anything that needs 1:1 follow-up gets moved offline |
+
+**Never skip the "current state: 0–10" check.** It's the only channel that lets someone say "I'm struggling" without having to explain it on the spot. Follow up on low scores — but privately, in a 1:1, not in front of the group.
+
+### Scrum Master Rotation
+
+Rotate the facilitator role weekly. Their job: keep the speaking order and the clock. Rotation reduces COO-dependency and gives everyone ownership over the meeting's flow.
+
+### COO Principles
+
+- Individual commitments must be specific enough that others can judge completion. COO models this standard first.
+- 25 minutes is a hard constraint. Overruns mean problems weren't triaged in advance, not that people talked too much.
+- Fix overruns by maintaining a "decisions needed" list before the meeting. Route the rest to 1:1s or async.
+
+---
+
+## Layer 3: 1:1 Meeting — Individual Layer
+
+### Design Philosophy
+
+The 1:1 is the highest-information, hardest-to-run part of this system. It's not a top-down communication channel. It's a window for the COO to understand exactly where each person is stuck and why.
+
+**"Stuck-at" diagnostic framework**: information gap / authority gap / collaboration friction / capability ceiling / unclear direction. Each requires a completely different fix. Confusing them wastes everyone's time.
+
+### Part 1: Quantified Pulse Check (5 minutes)
+
+Rate each dimension 1–5 (1 = bad / 3 = acceptable / 5 = great):
+
+| Dimension | Notes |
+|-----------|-------|
+| Energy (mental/physical state) | |
+| Goal clarity | Do they know their top 1–2 priorities and what success looks like? |
+| Mission alignment | Connection between their work and the company's direction |
+| Autonomy vs. support | Is their decision-making space matched with the support they need? |
+| Sense of growth | |
+| Pace sustainability | Could they keep this up for another month? |
+| Flow time | Quality and quantity of deep work |
+| Technical growth | |
+| Tooling & dev experience | |
+
+> Precision isn't the point — trends are. Three consecutive weeks of "pace sustainability: 2" is more alarming than one week of "1." Keep historical records. Open each 1:1 by reviewing last session's scores.
+
+### Part 2: Deep Question Bank (15–20 minutes, pick 3–4)
+
+**About the work itself**
+- What's been most satisfying in the past two weeks? Why?
+- What's been your biggest blocker? Where exactly are you stuck — info gap, authority, collaboration, capability, or direction?
+- Is how you're spending your time aligned with what you think is highest leverage? Where's the gap?
+- If you could eliminate one task next week, what would it be? Why haven't you?
+
+**About decisions and ownership**
+- Is there anything you could have decided yourself but came to me for anyway? Why?
+- Is there anything that obviously needs to happen but nobody's doing?
+- Flip side: did you make a call you probably should have aligned on first?
+
+**About honesty** (hardest to ask, most valuable)
+- Is there anything you've been meaning to say but haven't?
+- Is there a problem quietly developing in the team that nobody's talking about yet?
+- What decision have I made recently that you didn't understand or agree with?
+
+**About growth**
+- What's one skill you've clearly improved this month? How would you prove it?
+- What's the one thing you'd most like to deliberately practice in the next 90 days? What would you need?
+- What part of your current toolchain / codebase / LLM workflow is dragging you down the most?
+
+**About people and org**
+- Who on the team do you most enjoy working with or learning from? Who's hardest to collaborate with? Why?
+- If you were CEO, what's the first thing you'd change tomorrow?
+
+### Part 3: Bilateral Feedback (5–10 minutes)
+
+Don't skip the "them → you" direction. The quality of feedback you receive determines the speed at which you can improve.
+
+| Direction | Questions |
+|-----------|-----------|
+| Them → you | What am I doing that's most helpful (keep doing)? / What am I doing that makes your life harder (stop doing)? / What should I start doing? |
+| You → them | What they're doing well / What they need to adjust / One specific expectation for the coming week |
+
+### COO Principles
+
+- The pulse scores are keys, not grades. A "2" is a prompt to ask why, not a performance metric.
+- Model candor first — share a decision you've been second-guessed on. That's what makes it safe for others to tell the truth.
+- Every 1:1 must end with at least one action item. No-action 1:1s feel like just venting.
+
+---
+
+## Common Failure Modes & Fixes
+
+**Nobody's writing real standups?**
+Check your own first. Is it specific enough? Vagueness and specificity are both contagious. Praise one good example publicly. Don't shame bad ones.
+
+**Weekly meeting turned into a status report?**
+Replace "what did you do this week" with "did you hit what you committed to last week?" Yes/no creates more accountability — and takes less time.
+
+**1:1 always gets "I'm fine"?**
+Ask yourself whether you've ever given people real evidence that honesty won't be punished. That takes a few concrete instances to build — it doesn't come from asking better questions.
+
+**Team grew, can't do 1:1s with everyone?**
+Bi-weekly is fine. Teach the pulse check to tech leads and line managers. Reserve the COO-level 1:1 for escalations when scores turn red.
+
+---
+
+## Output Format Guide
+
+When a user asks about a specific situation, lead with:
+1. **Diagnosis**: Which layer is the problem at? (Information / Alignment / Individual)
+2. **One action they can take today**: Concrete, specific, doable now
+3. **One guardrail**: What the COO needs to do first to prevent it from bouncing back
+
+Skip "I recommend improving communication." Go straight to "move this from the weekly meeting to a 1:1, because what it actually needs is..."

skills/team-motivation-ops/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,213 @@
+---
+name: team-motivation-ops
+description: |
+  Your team has high autonomy — and standups are vague, weekly meetings drift into status reports, and 1:1s produce nothing but "I'm fine." This playbook fixes all three layers at once.
+
+  What's inside:
+  • Daily Standup system — 3-field format, good sample, 4 COO principles to keep it honest
+  • Weekly Meeting — strict 25-min agenda, Scrum Master rotation, 0–10 pulse check
+  • 1:1 Framework — 9-dimension quantified pulse, 5-group deep question bank, bilateral feedback structure
+  • Diagnostic layer — "stuck-at" detection: info / authority / collaboration / capability / direction
+  • FAQ for 4 common failure modes (dead standups, status-report meetings, "I'm fine" 1:1s, scaling beyond 10 people)
+
+  🇨🇳 你的团队自由度很高——但 standup 越来越糊，例会变成汇报，1:1 问不出真话。这套三层 Motivation 操作手册解决的正是这件事：standup 是信息层，例会是对齐层，1:1 是个人层。三件事做好了，motivation 不是管出来的，是长出来的。
+
+  🇯🇵 チームの自律性は高いのに、スタンドアップは曖昧で、週次ミーティングは進捗報告になり、1on1では「大丈夫です」しか返ってこない——このプレイブックは、その3層すべてを同時に解決します。
+
+  🇰🇷 팀의 자율성은 높은데 스탠드업은 두루뭉술하고, 주간 회의는 진척 보고가 되어버리고, 1:1에서는 진심을 들을 수 없다면 — 이 플레이북이 세 레이어 모두를 동시에 해결합니다.
+
+  Triggers: "团队 motivation" | "standup 没人写" | "例会变成汇报" | "1:1 问不出真话" | "高自由度团队管理" | "COO 如何管人" | "team motivation" | "standup best practices" | "1on1 framework" | "weekly meeting template" | "チームモチベーション" | "팀 동기부여" | "AI startup team ops" | "remote team alignment" | "engagement下降"
+tags:
+  - team-management
+  - motivation
+  - standup
+  - 1on1
+  - weekly-meeting
+  - coo-playbook
+  - ai-startup
+  - remote-team
+  - team-ops
+  - engagement
+  - leadership
+  - high-autonomy-team
+  - meeting-framework
+  - feedback-culture
+  - scrum-master
+metadata:
+  category: management
+  source: https://my.feishu.cn/docx/SbSodyg5LolUiqxJWKFch5NPnzc
+---
+
+> 🌍 **Language / 语言**: [中文](#团队-motivation-操作手册) | [English](references/en/README.md) | [日本語](references/ja/README.md) | [한국어](references/ko/README.md)
+
+# 团队 Motivation 操作手册
+
+> 这套体系的底层逻辑：自由和责任是一体的。Standup 是让人想清楚，例会是让人对齐，1:1 是让人被看见。三件事做好了，motivation 不是管出来的，是长出来的。
+
+适用场景：AI 科技公司 COO 或团队负责人，团队规模 3-30 人，高自由度、远程或半远程。
+
+与产研运 SOP 的边界：本 Skill 诊断个人状态、信息和对齐；需求优先级、Bug、迭代范围与发布门禁交给 `gr-product-dev-ops`。1:1 发现的问题只有进入明确负责人、截止时间和验证方式的 Action Item，才算闭环。
+
+---
+
+## 第一层：每日 Standup — 信息层
+
+### 设计哲学
+
+Standup 的本质不是汇报，是一种强迫自己想清楚的仪式。写得出来，说明真想清楚了；写不出来，通常是因为自己也没搞清楚今天要干什么。
+
+含糊是会传染的——COO 自己的 standup 要先写好，模式从上往下渗透。
+
+### 标准格式（三个必填项）
+
+1. **今天做了什么**：具体交付，不写「继续开发」
+2. **明天要做什么**：具体到别人能判断你做没做完
+3. **遇到什么困难 / 晚上要聊什么**：卡点、ownership 不清楚的事
+
+### 好 Standup 样本
+
+```
+今天做了什么
+- 把 XX 接口写完，本地 50 条数据跑通，平均 80ms，比上一版快一倍
+- 帮队友定位 WhatsApp 会话列表渲染卡顿，根源是没做虚拟滚动，指了 react-window 方案，他十分钟搞定
+- 实话实说，下午摸鱼了一小时，顺手把竞品新发的 case study 存进竞品库，算将功补过
+
+明天要做什么
+- 把批量报价接口推上 staging，拿真实场景跑一遍
+- 补今天没写的接口文档
+
+遇到什么困难 / 晚上要聊
+- XXX 架构决策还没拍板，影响我这边进度，想今晚对一下
+```
+
+### COO 使用原则
+
+- 不要求写完美，要求写真实。摸鱼了就写摸鱼了，但写清楚摸鱼之外做了什么。
+- 不批评短 standup，但要追问「今天具体交付了什么」。问题在具体性，不在长度。
+- 公开表扬一条好 standup，不批评烂的。具体也会传染。
+- 好 standup 是送给队友的礼物，这个认知要反复说。
+
+---
+
+## 第二层：每周例会 — 对齐层
+
+### 设计哲学
+
+例会不是进度汇报会。它解决的是「在场感」——让每个人知道公司整体在哪，让每个人当众说出自己承诺了什么。这两件事��不能靠异步完成。
+
+### 议程结构（25 分钟严格计时）
+
+| 段落 | 时长 | 内容 |
+|------|------|------|
+| 公司板块 | 8 分钟 | 目前进展 / 接下来一周规划 / 需要团队决策的事 |
+| 个人板块 | 每人约 3 分钟 | 上周承诺做到没 / 本周承诺 1-3 件具体事 / 需要团队帮什么 / 当前状态（0-10 分）|
+| 集体讨论 | 剩余时间 | 个人分享完后统一讨论；需要 1:1 的问题改为会后单聊 |
+
+**「当前状态 0-10 分」不能省。** 它是唯一一个让人可以不解释、直接表达现在感受的通道。低分要追问，但不要当众深挖，改为 1:1 后续。
+
+### Scrum Master 机制
+
+每周轮换，职责是维持发言顺序和时间节奏。轮换制会降低对 COO 的依赖感，让每个人对会议流程有主人翁感。
+
+### COO 使用原则
+
+- 个人承诺要具体到「别人能判断你做没做完」，COO 先示范这个标准。
+- 25 分钟是硬约束。超时意味着问题没提前分流，不是大家话太多。
+- 例会超时的解法：提前建「需要决策」列表，分流到会后或 1:1。
+
+---
+
+## 第三层：一对一会议 — 个人层
+
+### 设计哲学
+
+1:1 是这套体系里信息密度最高也最难做好的部分。它不是向下传达信息的渠道，是让 COO 真正知道每个人「卡在哪一层」的窗口。
+
+**卡层诊断框架**：信息不够 / 权限不够 / 协作不顺 / 能力边界 / 方向不清。不同的卡层对应完全不同的解法，混淆了会白费功夫。
+
+### 一、量化脉搏（5 分钟）
+
+每项 1-5 分（1=很糟 / 3=普通可接受 / 5=非常好）：
+
+| 维度 | 说明 |
+|------|------|
+| 能量（精力状态）| |
+| 目标清晰度 | 最重要的 1-2 件事是什么、成功长什么样 |
+| 使命认同 | 工作和公司方向之间的连接感 |
+| 自主与支持 | 决策空间 vs 所需支持的匹配度 |
+| 成长感 | |
+| 节奏可持续性 | 再持续 1 个月扛得住吗 |
+| 心流时间 | 深度工作的时长与质量 |
+| 技术成长 | |
+| 工具与开发体验 | |
+
+> 量化脉搏的意义不在于精确，而在于趋势。连续三周某人「节奏可持续性」都给 2 分，比某次给 1 分更值得警惕。建议 COO 把历史数据记下来，1:1 开头先回顾上次。
+
+### 二、深度展开问题库（15-20 分钟，选 3-4 个）
+
+**关于工作本身**
+- 这两周最有成就感的一件事是什么？为什么？
+- 最让你卡壳的一件事是什么？卡在哪一层——信息 / 权限 / 协作 / 能力 / 方向？
+- 你花时间最多的事 = 你认为最高杠杆的事吗？差距在哪？
+- 如果下周可以砍掉一项工作，你会砍哪个？为什么没砍？
+
+**关于决策与担当**
+- 有没有事你其实可以自己拍板、但来问了我？为什么？
+- 有没有「明显该做但没人在做」的事？
+- 反过来，有没有你自己拍了但事后觉得该先对齐的？
+
+**关于坦诚**（最难问，也最值得问）
+- 这段时间有没有「想说但没说」的事？
+- 团队里有没有正在悄悄发生问题、但还没被讨论的事？
+- 我做的什么决定你不理解或不同意？
+
+**关于成长**
+- 这个月你在哪个能力上明确变强了？怎么证明？
+- 接下来 90 天最想刻意练习的能力是什么？需要什么资源？
+- 现在的工具链 / 代码库 / LLM 工作流，哪一处最拖后腿？
+
+**关于人和组织**
+- 团队里最愿意请教 / 协作的人是谁？最难协作的是谁？为什么？
+- 如果你是 CEO，明天会立刻改一件什么事？
+
+### 三、双向反馈（5-10 分钟）
+
+「他 → 我」那部分不能跳过——你收到的反馈质量，决定了你能改进的速度。
+
+| 方向 | 问题 |
+|------|------|
+| 他 → 我 | 我做的什么最有帮助（继续做）/ 我做的什么让你更难（停止做）/ 我应该开始做什么 |
+| 我 → 他 | 你做得很好的地方 / 你需要调整的地方 / 我对你接下来 1 周的一个具体期待 |
+
+### COO 使用原则
+
+- 量化脉搏的分数是开门的钥匙，不是评分。「2 分」要问为什么。
+- 先示范坦诚——说出自己某个决定被质疑了，才有人愿意说真话。
+- 1:1 结束时必须有 Action Items，哪怕只有一条。没有 action 的 1:1 会让人觉得只是说说而已。
+
+---
+
+## 常见卡点解法
+
+**Standup 没人认真写？**
+先检查自己的 standup 是不是够具体。含糊传染，具体也传染。公开表扬一条好的，不批评差的。
+
+**例会变成进度汇报？**
+把「这周做了什么」改成「上周你承诺的 X 做到了吗」。是/否比进度汇报更有张力，也更短。
+
+**1:1 对方总说「还好」？**
+检查自己有没有创造过「说真话不会被惩罚」的证据。这件事需要用几次真实案例建立信任，不是靠一个好问题。
+
+**团队规模大了，没精力做每个人 1:1？**
+每两周一次即可。先把量化脉搏教给 tech lead 或 line manager，COO 保留���脉搏异常」的升级通道。
+
+---
+
+## 输出格式建议
+
+当用户问到具体场景时，优先给：
+1. **诊断**：当前卡在哪一层（信息 / 对齐 / 个人）
+2. **一个立刻能用的动作**：具体到「今天就能做」
+3. **防止反弹的护栏**：一两条 COO 需要先做到的前置条件
+
+不要给通用的「建议加强沟通」，要给「把这个问题从例会板块挪到 1:1，因为它需要的是……」这种具体的操作建议。

skills/team-motivation-ops/references/en/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,171 @@
+# Team Motivation Ops — Standup + Weekly Meeting + 1:1 System for AI Startup COO
+
+> 🌍 **Language / 语言**: [中文](../../SKILL.md) | [English](README.md) | [日本語](../ja/README.md) | [한국어](../ko/README.md)
+
+> **Core principle**: Freedom and accountability are two sides of the same coin. Standups help people think clearly. Weekly meetings create alignment. 1:1s make people feel seen. When all three work, motivation isn't managed into existence — it grows on its own.
+
+**Best for**: COOs and tech leads at AI startups, teams of 3–30, high-autonomy or remote/hybrid setups.
+
+---
+
+## Layer 1: Daily Standup — Information Layer
+
+### Design Philosophy
+
+A standup isn't a status report. It's a ritual that forces clarity. If you can write it out, you've thought it through. If you can't, you probably haven't figured out what you're actually doing today.
+
+Vagueness is contagious — the COO's standup sets the tone. Write yours first, and write it well.
+
+### Standard Format (3 required fields)
+
+1. **What I did today**: Concrete deliverables. "Continued development" doesn't count.
+2. **What I'll do tomorrow**: Specific enough that someone else can tell whether you did it.
+3. **Blockers / topics to discuss**: Stuck points, unclear ownership, anything worth a sync.
+
+### Sample Good Standup
+
+```
+What I did today
+- Finished the XX API endpoint, tested with 50 local records, avg 80ms — 2x faster than the previous version
+- Helped a teammate debug a WhatsApp conversation list render lag — root cause was no virtual scrolling. Pointed them to react-window, they fixed it in 10 minutes
+- Honest truth: I zoned out for an hour in the afternoon. Used the time to archive a competitor's new case study into our competitive intel folder. Partial credit.
+
+What I'll do tomorrow
+- Push the bulk quote API to staging and run it against real data
+- Write the interface docs I skipped today
+
+Blockers / Sync topics
+- The XXX architecture decision is still unresolved and it's blocking my side. Want to align on it tonight.
+```
+
+### COO Principles
+
+- Don't demand perfection — demand honesty. If someone slacked off, fine, just own it and document what they did accomplish.
+- Don't criticize short standups — ask "what specifically did you deliver today?" The issue is specificity, not length.
+- Publicly praise one great standup. Never shame a bad one. Specificity is contagious too.
+- Repeat this framing: a good standup is a gift to your teammates.
+
+---
+
+## Layer 2: Weekly Meeting — Alignment Layer
+
+### Design Philosophy
+
+A weekly meeting isn't a progress report. It solves the "presence problem" — making sure everyone knows where the company stands, and hears each other commit publicly to something. Neither of those can be done async.
+
+### Agenda Structure (25 minutes, hard stop)
+
+| Segment | Time | Content |
+|---------|------|---------|
+| Company update | 8 min | Current progress / next week's plan / decisions the team needs to make |
+| Individual round | ~3 min/person | Did you hit last week's commitments? / 1–3 specific commitments for this week / what do you need from the team? / current state: 0–10 |
+| Group discussion | Remaining | Open discussion after individual round; anything that needs 1:1 follow-up gets moved offline |
+
+**Never skip the "current state: 0–10" check.** It's the only channel that lets someone say "I'm struggling" without having to explain it on the spot. Follow up on low scores — but privately, in a 1:1, not in front of the group.
+
+### Scrum Master Rotation
+
+Rotate the facilitator role weekly. Their job: keep the speaking order and the clock. Rotation reduces COO-dependency and gives everyone ownership over the meeting's flow.
+
+### COO Principles
+
+- Individual commitments must be specific enough that others can judge completion. COO models this standard first.
+- 25 minutes is a hard constraint. Overruns mean problems weren't triaged in advance, not that people talked too much.
+- Fix overruns by maintaining a "decisions needed" list before the meeting. Route the rest to 1:1s or async.
+
+---
+
+## Layer 3: 1:1 Meeting — Individual Layer
+
+### Design Philosophy
+
+The 1:1 is the highest-information, hardest-to-run part of this system. It's not a top-down communication channel. It's a window for the COO to understand exactly where each person is stuck and why.
+
+**"Stuck-at" diagnostic framework**: information gap / authority gap / collaboration friction / capability ceiling / unclear direction. Each requires a completely different fix. Confusing them wastes everyone's time.
+
+### Part 1: Quantified Pulse Check (5 minutes)
+
+Rate each dimension 1–5 (1 = bad / 3 = acceptable / 5 = great):
+
+| Dimension | Notes |
+|-----------|-------|
+| Energy (mental/physical state) | |
+| Goal clarity | Do they know their top 1–2 priorities and what success looks like? |
+| Mission alignment | Connection between their work and the company's direction |
+| Autonomy vs. support | Is their decision-making space matched with the support they need? |
+| Sense of growth | |
+| Pace sustainability | Could they keep this up for another month? |
+| Flow time | Quality and quantity of deep work |
+| Technical growth | |
+| Tooling & dev experience | |
+
+> Precision isn't the point — trends are. Three consecutive weeks of "pace sustainability: 2" is more alarming than one week of "1." Keep historical records. Open each 1:1 by reviewing last session's scores.
+
+### Part 2: Deep Question Bank (15–20 minutes, pick 3–4)
+
+**About the work itself**
+- What's been most satisfying in the past two weeks? Why?
+- What's been your biggest blocker? Where exactly are you stuck — info gap, authority, collaboration, capability, or direction?
+- Is how you're spending your time aligned with what you think is highest leverage? Where's the gap?
+- If you could eliminate one task next week, what would it be? Why haven't you?
+
+**About decisions and ownership**
+- Is there anything you could have decided yourself but came to me for anyway? Why?
+- Is there anything that obviously needs to happen but nobody's doing?
+- Flip side: did you make a call you probably should have aligned on first?
+
+**About honesty** (hardest to ask, most valuable)
+- Is there anything you've been meaning to say but haven't?
+- Is there a problem quietly developing in the team that nobody's talking about yet?
+- What decision have I made recently that you didn't understand or agree with?
+
+**About growth**
+- What's one skill you've clearly improved this month? How would you prove it?
+- What's the one thing you'd most like to deliberately practice in the next 90 days? What would you need?
+- What part of your current toolchain / codebase / LLM workflow is dragging you down the most?
+
+**About people and org**
+- Who on the team do you most enjoy working with or learning from? Who's hardest to collaborate with? Why?
+- If you were CEO, what's the first thing you'd change tomorrow?
+
+### Part 3: Bilateral Feedback (5–10 minutes)
+
+Don't skip the "them → you" direction. The quality of feedback you receive determines the speed at which you can improve.
+
+| Direction | Questions |
+|-----------|-----------|
+| Them → you | What am I doing that's most helpful (keep doing)? / What am I doing that makes your life harder (stop doing)? / What should I start doing? |
+| You → them | What they're doing well / What they need to adjust / One specific expectation for the coming week |
+
+### COO Principles
+
+- The pulse scores are keys, not grades. A "2" is a prompt to ask why, not a performance metric.
+- Model candor first — share a decision you've been second-guessed on. That's what makes it safe for others to tell the truth.
+- Every 1:1 must end with at least one action item. No-action 1:1s feel like just venting.
+
+---
+
+## Common Failure Modes & Fixes
+
+**Nobody's writing real standups?**
+Check your own first. Is it specific enough? Vagueness and specificity are both contagious. Praise one good example publicly. Don't shame bad ones.
+
+**Weekly meeting turned into a status report?**
+Replace "what did you do this week" with "did you hit what you committed to last week?" Yes/no creates more accountability — and takes less time.
+
+**1:1 always gets "I'm fine"?**
+Ask yourself whether you've ever given people real evidence that honesty won't be punished. That takes a few concrete instances to build — it doesn't come from asking better questions.
+
+**Team grew, can't do 1:1s with everyone?**
+Bi-weekly is fine. Teach the pulse check to tech leads and line managers. Reserve the COO-level 1:1 for escalations when scores turn red.
+
+---
+
+## Output Format Guide
+
+When a user asks about a specific situation, lead with:
+1. **Diagnosis**: Which layer is the problem at? (Information / Alignment / Individual)
+2. **One action they can take today**: Concrete, specific, doable now
+3. **One guardrail**: What the COO needs to do first to prevent it from bouncing back
+
+Skip "I recommend improving communication." Go straight to "move this from the weekly meeting to a 1:1, because what it actually needs is..."

skills/team-motivation-ops/references/ja/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,171 @@
+# チームモチベーション運用マニュアル — スタンドアップ・週次MTG・1on1 システム（AI スタートアップ COO 向け）
+
+> 🌍 **Language / 语言**: [中文](../../SKILL.md) | [English](../en/README.md) | [日本語](README.md) | [한국어](../ko/README.md)
+
+> **根本的な考え方**: 自由と責任は表裏一体。スタンドアップは思考を整理する場、週次MTGは認識を揃える場、1on1は個人が「見てもらえている」と感じる場。この3つがうまく機能すれば、モチベーションは管理されるのではなく、自然に育ちます。
+
+**対象者**: AIスタートアップのCOO・テックリード。チーム規模3〜30名、高自律・リモート/ハイブリッド環境。
+
+---
+
+## 第1層：デイリースタンドアップ — 情報レイヤー
+
+### 設計思想
+
+スタンドアップの本質は進捗報告ではなく、自分の思考を強制的に整理する儀式です。書けるということは、本当に考えられているということ。書けないときは、たいてい自分でも今日何をすべきか把握できていないのです。
+
+曖昧さは伝染します。COOが率先して具体的なスタンドアップを書くことで、チーム全体にその文化が浸透します。
+
+### 標準フォーマット（3つの必須項目）
+
+1. **今日やったこと**：具体的な成果物。「開発を継続した」はNG
+2. **明日やること**：他者が完了を判断できる粒度で
+3. **困っていること・夜に話したいこと**：詰まっているポイント、オーナーシップが不明確な事項
+
+### 良いスタンドアップのサンプル
+
+```
+今日やったこと
+- XXのAPIエンドポイントを完成させ、ローカルで50件テスト、平均80ms — 前バージョンの2倍速
+- チームメンバーのWhatsAppリスト描画の遅延を調査。仮想スクロール未実装が原因、react-windowを提案したら10分で解決
+- 正直に言うと、午後1時間ぼーっとしてしまった。その時間で競合の新しいケーススタディを競合情報ライブラリに保存した。まあプラマイゼロ
+
+明日やること
+- 一括見積もりAPIをstagingへプッシュして実データで検証
+- 今日書けなかったAPIドキュメントを補完
+
+困っていること・同期したいこと
+- XXXのアーキテクチャ決定がまだ保留中で自分の進捗に影響している。今夜認識合わせしたい
+```
+
+### COO が守るべき原則
+
+- 完璧を求めない——誠実さを求める。サボったならサボったと書いていい。ただし、それ以外に何をしたかは明確に。
+- 短いスタンドアップを責めない——「今日具体的に何を完成させた？」と聞く。問題は長さではなく具体性。
+- 良いスタンドアップを1件、公の場で褒める。悪いものを批判しない。具体性も伝染する。
+- 「良いスタンドアップはチームメイトへのプレゼント」というフレームを繰り返し伝える。
+
+---
+
+## 第2層：週次ミーティング — 整合レイヤー
+
+### 設計思想
+
+週次MTGは進捗報告会ではありません。「存在感」の問題を解決する場です——会社全体が今どこにいるかをみんなが知ること、そして各自が人前で自分のコミットメントを宣言すること。この2つは非同期では代替できません。
+
+### アジェンダ構成（25分厳守）
+
+| セクション | 時間 | 内容 |
+|------------|------|------|
+| 会社アップデート | 8分 | 現状の進捗 / 来週の計画 / チームの意思決定が必要な事項 |
+| 個人ラウンド | 約3分/人 | 先週の約束を守れたか / 今週のコミットメント1〜3件 / チームに必要なサポート / 現在の状態（0〜10点）|
+| グループ議論 | 残り時間 | 個人ラウンド後にオープン議論。1on1が必要なトピックは会後に |
+
+**「現在の状態：0〜10点」は省略禁止。** これは、説明なしに「しんどい」と伝えられる唯一のチャンネルです。低いスコアはフォローすべきですが、全員の前で深掘りしてはいけません——1on1に回してください。
+
+### スクラムマスターのローテーション
+
+毎週交代でファシリテーターを担当。役割は発言順序と時間の管理。ローテーション制はCOO依存を減らし、全員がミーティングの流れに主体性を持つようになります。
+
+### COO が守るべき原則
+
+- 個人のコミットメントは「他者が完了を判断できる」粒度にすること。COOが先にそのモデルを見せる。
+- 25分はハードコンストレイント。超過はトリアージ不足のサイン。話しすぎが原因ではない。
+- 超過の解決策：事前に「要決定事項リスト」を作り���残りは1on1または非同期に振り分ける。
+
+---
+
+## 第3層：1on1ミーティング — 個人レイヤー
+
+### 設計思想
+
+1on1はこのシステムの中で最も情報密度が高く、最も難しいパートです。情報を伝えるためのチャンネルではなく、各メンバーが「どのレイヤーで詰まっているか」をCOOが把握するための窓口です。
+
+**詰まりレイヤー診断フレームワーク**: 情報不足 / 権限不足 / 協働の摩擦 / 能力の限界 / 方向性の不明確さ。レイヤーが違えば解決策もまったく異なります。混同すると時間を無駄にします。
+
+### Part 1：定量パルスチェック（5分）
+
+各項目を1〜5点で評価（1＝最悪 / 3＝普通 / 5＝とても良い）：
+
+| 項目 | 補足 |
+|------|------|
+| エネルギー（心身の状態）| |
+| 目標の明確さ | 最優先事項1〜2つを把握しているか、成功の形が見えているか |
+| ミッションへの共感 | 自分の仕事と会社の方向性のつながり |
+| 自律性とサポートのバランス | 意思決定の裁量と必要なサポートのマッチ度 |
+| 成長感 | |
+| ペースの持続可能性 | あと1ヶ月このペースを続けられるか |
+| フロー時間 | 深い集中作業の質と量 |
+| 技術的成長 | |
+| ツール・開発体験 | |
+
+> スコアの精度より傾向が重要。「ペースの持続可能性」が3週連続2点の方が、1週間だけ1点より深刻です。過去のデータを記録し、1on1の冒頭で前回のスコアを振り返る習慣を。
+
+### Part 2：深掘り質問バンク（15〜20分、3〜4問選択）
+
+**仕事そのものについて**
+- この2週間で最も達成感があったことは何か？なぜか？
+- 最も詰まっていることは何か？どのレイヤーで詰まっている？（情報・権限・協働・能力・方向性）
+- 最も時間をかけていることと、最高レバレッジだと思うことは一致しているか？ギャップはどこか？
+- 来週1つ仕事をなくせるとしたら何をなくすか？なぜまだなくしていないか？
+
+**意思決定とオーナーシップについて**
+- 自分で決められたのに私に聞いてきたことはあるか？なぜそうしたか？
+- 「誰かがやるべきだが誰もやっていない」ことはあるか？
+- 逆に、自分で判断したが後から「先に共有すべきだった」と思ったことはあるか？
+
+**率直さについて**（最も難しく、最も価値がある）
+- 言おうと思いながら言えていないことはあるか？
+- チームで静かに問題が進行しているが、まだ誰も話していないことはあるか？
+- 私が最近した決断で、理解できなかった、あるいは同意できなかったものは何か？
+
+**成長について**
+- 今月、どのスキルが明確に上がったか？どう証明するか？
+- 次の90日間で最も意識的に磨きたいスキルは何か？何が必要か？
+- 現在のツールチェーン・コードベース・LLMワークフローで最もボトルネックになっているのはどこか？
+
+**人と組織について**
+- チームで最も一緒に働きやすい、または学びやすい人は誰か？最も協働しにくいのは誰か？なぜか？
+- もし自分がCEOだったら、明日すぐに変えることは何か？
+
+### Part 3：双方向フィードバック（5〜10分）
+
+「相手→自分」の方向は絶対にスキップしないこと。受け取るフィードバックの質が、改善速度を決めます。
+
+| 方向 | 質問 |
+|------|------|
+| 相手 → 自分 | 私の何が最も助かっているか（続けてほしいこと） / 私の何があなたを難しくさせているか（やめてほしいこと） / 私が始めるべきことは何か |
+| 自分 → 相手 | うまくいっていること / 調整すべきこと / 来週に対する具体的な期待1つ |
+
+### COO が守るべき原則
+
+- パルスのスコアは評価ではなく、扉を開く鍵。「2点」はなぜかを聞くためのきっかけ。
+- まず自分が率直さをモデルとして見せる——自分の決断が疑問視された話をすることで、他者も本音を言いやすくなる。
+- 1on1の終わりには必ずアクションアイテムを1つ以上設ける。アクションのない1on1は「ただ話した」だけに見える。
+
+---
+
+## よくある失敗パターンと対策
+
+**誰もちゃんとスタンドアップを書かない？**
+まず自分のスタンドアップを確認。十分具体的か？曖昧さも具体性も伝染する。良い例を1つ公の場で褒め、悪い例は批判しない。
+
+**週次MTGが進捗報告会になってしまう？**
+「今週何をしたか」を「先週コミットしたXはできたか」に変える。Yes/Noの方が緊張感があり、短く済む。
+
+**1on1でいつも「大丈夫です」と返ってくる？**
+「本音を言っても罰せられない」という証拠を過去に作ったことがあるか振り返る。これは良い質問よりも、実際の出来事を通じて信頼を積み重ねることで生まれる。
+
+**チームが大きくなって全員の1on1が無理になった？**
+2週に1回で十分。パルスチェックの手法をテックリードやラインマネージャーに教え、COOは「異常なスコア」があったときのエスカレーション窓口として機能する。
+
+---
+
+## 出力フォーマットのガイドライン
+
+ユーザーから具体的な状況を聞かれたら、次の順で回答する：
+1. **診断**：問題はどのレイヤーか（情報 / 整合 / 個人）
+2. **今日できるアクション1つ**：具体的で、すぐに実行可能なもの
+3. **ガードレール1つ**：COOが先に行動しないと元に戻ってしまうこと
+
+「コミュニケーションを改善しましょう」は言わない。代わりに「このトピックを週次MTGから1on1に移してください。なぜなら必要なのは……」という具体的な操作提案を。

skills/team-motivation-ops/references/ko/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,171 @@
+# 팀 모티베이션 운영 플레이북 — 스탠드업 + 주간 미팅 + 1:1 시스템 (AI 스타트업 COO용)
+
+> 🌍 **Language / 语言**: [中文](../../SKILL.md) | [English](../en/README.md) | [日本語](../ja/README.md) | [한국어](README.md)
+
+> **핵심 원칙**: 자유와 책임은 하나다. 스탠드업은 생각을 정리하게 해주고, 주간 미팅은 방향을 맞추고, 1:1은 개인이 '보여지고 있다'고 느끼게 한다. 이 세 가지가 제대로 작동하면 모티베이션은 관리되는 게 아니라 자연스럽게 자라난다.
+
+**적용 대상**: AI 스타트업 COO 및 테크 리드, 팀 규모 3~30명, 고자율·원격/하이브리드 환경.
+
+---
+
+## 1층: 데일리 스탠드업 — 정보 레이어
+
+### 설계 철학
+
+스탠드업의 본질은 보고가 아니라 생각을 강제로 정리하는 의식이다. 쓸 수 있다는 건 제대로 생각했다는 뜻이고, 쓰지 못한다는 건 본인도 오늘 뭘 해야 할지 아직 모른다는 뜻이다.
+
+모호함은 전염된다 — COO가 먼저 구체적인 스탠드업을 써서 패턴을 위에서 아래로 퍼뜨려야 한다.
+
+### 표준 형식 (3가지 필수 항목)
+
+1. **오늘 한 것**: 구체적인 결과물. "계속 개발 중"은 안 된다.
+2. **내일 할 것**: 다른 사람이 완료 여부를 판단할 수 있을 정도로 구체적으로.
+3. **막힌 것 / 저녁에 얘기할 것**: 걸림돌, 오너십이 불명확한 사안.
+
+### 좋은 스탠드업 예시
+
+```
+오늘 한 것
+- XX API 엔드포인트 완성, 로컬에서 50개 데이터 테스트, 평균 80ms — 이전 버전보다 2배 빠름
+- 팀원의 WhatsApp 대화 목록 렌더링 지연 문제 디버깅. 가상 스크롤 미적용이 원인. react-window 추천해줬고 10분 만에 해결
+- 솔직히 말하면 오후에 1시간 딴짓을 했다. 그 시간에 경쟁사의 새 케이스 스터디를 경쟁 정보 라이브러리에 저장했으니 그나마 다행
+
+내일 할 것
+- 일괄 견적 API를 스테이징에 푸시하고 실데이터로 테스트
+- 오늘 못 쓴 API 문서 보완
+
+막힌 것 / 싱크할 것
+- XXX 아키텍처 결정이 아직 안 됐고 내 진행에 영향 중. 오늘 저녁에 맞춰보고 싶음
+```
+
+### COO 원칙
+
+- 완벽함이 아닌 솔직함을 요구한다. 딴짓을 했으면 딴짓을 했다고 써도 된다. 단, 그 외에 한 일은 명확히.
+- 짧은 스탠드업을 비판하지 말고 "오늘 구체적으로 무엇을 완성했나요?"라고 물어라. 문제는 길이가 아닌 구체성이다.
+- 좋은 스탠드업 하나를 공개적으로 칭찬하라. 나쁜 것은 비판하지 않는다. 구체성도 전염된다.
+- "좋은 스탠드업은 팀원에게 주는 선물이다"라는 인식을 반복적으로 심어라.
+
+---
+
+## 2층: 주간 미팅 — 정렬 레이어
+
+### 설계 철학
+
+주간 미팅은 진척 보고가 아니다. '존재감' 문제를 해결하는 자리다 — 모든 사람이 회사가 지금 어디에 있는지 알게 하고, 모든 사람이 공개적으로 자신의 커밋먼트를 말하게 한다. 이 두 가지는 비동기로는 대체할 수 없다.
+
+### 아젠다 구성 (25분 엄수)
+
+| 섹션 | 시간 | 내용 |
+|------|------|------|
+| 회사 업데이트 | 8분 | 현재 진행 상황 / 다음 주 계획 / 팀의 결정이 필요한 사안 |
+| 개인 라운드 | 인당 약 3분 | 지난주 약속 이행 여부 / 이번 주 1~3가지 구체적 커밋먼트 / 팀에 필요한 지원 / 현재 상태 0~10점 |
+| 그룹 토론 | 남은 시간 | 개인 라운드 후 오픈 토론. 1:1이 필요한 주제는 회의 후로 |
+
+**"현재 상태 0~10점"은 절대 생략 금지.** 이것은 설명 없이 "힘들다"고 표현할 수 있는 유일한 채널이다. 낮은 점수는 팔로우해야 하지만 공개석에서 깊게 파고들지 말고 1:1에서 다뤄라.
+
+### 스크럼 마스터 로테이션
+
+매주 교대로 퍼실리테이터를 담당한다. 역할은 발언 순서와 시간 관리. 로테이션 제도는 COO 의존도를 낮추고 모두가 미팅 흐름에 주인의식을 갖게 한다.
+
+### COO 원칙
+
+- 개인 커밋먼트는 "다른 사람이 완료 여부를 판단할 수 있는" 수준으로 구체화. COO가 먼저 그 기준을 시연한다.
+- 25분은 강제 제한. 초과는 사전 트리아지 부족 신호지, 사람들이 말을 많이 한 게 아니다.
+- 초과 해결법: 사전에 "결정 필요 목록"을 만들고 나머지는 1:1 또는 비동기로 배분.
+
+---
+
+## 3층: 1:1 미팅 — 개인 레이어
+
+### 설계 철학
+
+1:1은 이 시스템에서 정보 밀도가 가장 높고 가장 하기 어려운 파트다. 위에서 아래로 정보를 전달하는 채널이 아니라, COO가 각 구성원이 "어느 레이어에서 막혀 있는지"를 실제로 파악하는 창구다.
+
+**막힌 레이어 진단 프레임워크**: 정보 부족 / 권한 부족 / 협업 마찰 / 역량 한계 / 방향 불명확. 레이어가 다르면 해결책도 ���전히 다르다. 혼동하면 시간 낭비다.
+
+### 1부: 정량적 펄스 체크 (5분)
+
+각 항목 1~5점 (1=매우 나쁨 / 3=보통 / 5=매우 좋음):
+
+| 항목 | 설명 |
+|------|------|
+| 에너지 (신체·정신 상태) | |
+| 목표 명확도 | 최우선 1~2가지를 알고, 성공의 모습이 보이는가 |
+| 미션 공감도 | 자신의 일과 회사 방향의 연결감 |
+| 자율성과 지원의 균형 | 의사결정 공간과 필요한 지원의 매칭 |
+| 성장감 | |
+| 페이스 지속 가능성 | 한 달 더 이 페이스를 유지할 수 있는가 |
+| 플로우 시간 | 깊은 집중 작업의 질과 양 |
+| 기술적 성장 | |
+| 툴링 & 개발 경험 | |
+
+> 정확도가 중요한 게 아니라 추세가 중요하다. "페이스 지속 가능성"이 3주 연속 2점이면 한 번의 1점보다 더 심각하다. 과거 데이터를 기록하고 1:1 시작 때 지난번 점수를 먼저 되돌아보라.
+
+### 2부: 심층 질문 뱅크 (15~20분, 3~4개 선택)
+
+**업무 자체에 대해**
+- 지난 2주 동안 가장 보람 있었던 일은 무엇인가? 왜인가?
+- 가장 막혔던 일은 무엇인가? 어느 레이어에서 막혔나? (정보 / 권한 / 협업 / 역량 / 방향)
+- 가장 많은 시간을 쓰고 있는 일 = 가장 레버리지가 높다고 생각하는 일인가? 차이가 있다면 어디인가?
+- 다음 주에 일 하나를 없앨 수 있다면 무엇을 없애겠나? 왜 아직 없애지 않았나?
+
+**결정과 오너십에 대해**
+- 스스로 결정할 수 있었는데 나에게 물어본 일이 있는가? 왜 그랬나?
+- "누군가 해야 하는데 아무도 안 하고 있는" 일이 있는가?
+- 반대로, 스스로 결정했는데 나중에 "먼저 공유했어야 했다"고 생각한 일이 있는가?
+
+**솔직함에 대해** (가장 어렵고, 가장 가치 있는)
+- 말하고 싶었는데 못 한 것이 있는가?
+- 팀에서 조용히 문제가 진행되고 있는데 아직 아무도 얘기하지 않은 것이 있는가?
+- 내가 최근에 한 결정 중 이해가 안 됐거나 동의하지 못한 게 있는가?
+
+**성장에 대해**
+- 이번 달 어떤 역량이 명확히 향상됐나? 어떻게 증명할 수 있나?
+- 다음 90일 동안 가장 의도적으로 연습하고 싶은 역량은 무엇인가? 무엇이 필요한가?
+- 지금 툴체인 / 코드베이스 / LLM 워크플로우에서 가장 발목을 잡는 부분은 어디인가?
+
+**사람과 조직에 대해**
+- 팀에서 가장 같이 일하거나 배우고 싶은 사람은 누구인가? 가장 협업하기 어려운 사람은? 왜인가?
+- 만약 당신이 CEO라면 내일 당장 바꿀 것은 무엇인가?
+
+### 3부: 양방향 피드백 (5~10분)
+
+"상대 → 나" 방향은 절대 건너뛰지 않는다 — 받는 피드백의 질이 개선 속도를 결정한다.
+
+| 방향 | 질문 |
+|------|------|
+| 상대 → 나 | 내가 하는 것 중 가장 도움이 되는 것 (계속 해달라) / 내가 하는 것 중 힘들게 하는 것 (그만해달라) / 내가 시작해야 할 것 |
+| 나 → 상대 | 잘 하고 있는 것 / 조정이 필요한 것 / 다음 1주일에 대한 구체적 기대 한 가지 |
+
+### COO 원칙
+
+- 펄스 점수는 평가가 아니라 문을 여는 열쇠다. "2점"은 왜인지 물어보기 위한 신호다.
+- 먼저 솔직함을 모델로 보여라 — 내 결정이 의문시된 적이 있다는 얘기를 하면, 비로소 다른 사람도 진심을 말할 수 있게 된다.
+- 1:1이 끝날 때는 반드시 액션 아이템이 하나 이상 있어야 한다. 액션 없는 1:1은 그냥 수다로 느껴진다.
+
+---
+
+## 자주 발생하는 실패 패턴과 해결책
+
+**아무도 제대로 스탠드업을 안 쓴다?**
+내 스탠드업이 충분히 구체적인지 먼저 확인한다. 모호함도 구체성도 전염된다. 좋은 예시 하나를 공개적으로 칭찬하고, 나쁜 것은 비판하지 않는다.
+
+**주간 미팅이 진척 보고가 됐다?**
+"이번 주에 뭘 했나"를 "지난주에 약속한 X를 했나"로 바꾼다. Yes/No가 더 긴장감 있고 짧다.
+
+**1:1에서 항상 "괜찮아요"만 돌아온다?**
+"솔직하게 말해도 불이익이 없다"는 증거를 과거에 만든 적이 있는지 점검한다. 좋은 질문 하나로 되는 게 아니라, 실제 사례를 통해 신뢰를 쌓아야 한다.
+
+**팀이 커져서 모든 사람과 1:1을 할 수 없다?**
+2주에 한 번으로도 충분하다. 펄스 체크 방법을 테크 리드나 라인 매니저에게 가르치고, COO는 "이상 신호"가 있을 때의 에스컬레이션 창구로 기능한다.
+
+---
+
+## 출력 형식 가이드
+
+사용자가 구체적인 상황을 물어볼 때는 다음 순서로 답한다:
+1. **진단**: 문제가 어느 레이어인가 (정보 / 정렬 / 개인)
+2. **오늘 당장 할 수 있는 액션 1가지**: 구체적이고 바로 실행 가능한 것
+3. **가드레일 1가지**: COO가 먼저 해야 반동이 생기지 않는 것
+
+"소통을 강화하세요"는 절대 쓰지 않는��. 대신 "이 주제는 주간 미팅에서 1:1로 옮기세요. 왜냐하면 필요한 것은…"과 같은 구체적인 조작 제안을 한다.