Yatan: Likes the simplicity and straightforwardness of the model but suggests explaining "cultural contribution" at the start. Recommends allowing users to select and review only colleagues they've worked with directly.

Nickolay: Views it as a significant improvement, appreciates the dual assessment aspects (cultural and work), and the proactive feedback questions. Suggests hiding results until all assessments are complete to avoid bias and calls for a more streamlined way to access colleagues' work contributions.

Roso: Finds the model simple and easy, valuing the opportunity for team feedback and the 1-5 rating scale. Suggests making comment sections optional for colleagues they haven't worked with.

Hessam: Generally positive, but provided specific comments in a related thread.

Rezvan: Finds it easy to use and appreciates the dual perspective on colleagues' cultural and work contributions.

Drea: Uncertain but sees potential; notes that the rating system might misrepresent quality with frequency/consistency. Suggests that the requirement for ratings was not clear.

Daniel: Finds providing feedback burdensome and suggests improvements for user experience, like declaring interaction levels before assessing, to reduce cognitive load.

here's some people for work that are a bit grey area for me as I sort of interacted with them but not a lot.

I feel a bit of uncertainty and loss of control not knowing the impact of what I'm qualifying

i'm missing a recap about what people achieved the last month, if only to refresh my memory

The UX is not great. I think I would like to first declare who I worked with, and then have only culture or culture + work show.

BTW, thinking about this, there are 3 tiers for assessing people:

• no inetraction at all: I don't assess them
• limited/from a distance: I assess only culture
• collaborated: I assess culture+work

(maybe collaborated could be broke down intwo two: collaborated a lot, collaborated a bit. And that way the weight of my assessment is adjusted). If selecting firts how much i engaged with each person, then that's low cognitive load decision. As opposed to having the how much we engaged+assessement at the same time doing 1 person at a time)

DAOLexa: Thinks the model is logical, especially as it focuses on people they've collaborated with directly. Withholds detailed feedback until more data is gathered.