Library
The Mirorly libraryof feedback questions.
Not a survey builder, not a form generator. Each question came from research, was tested, was kept or cut. The ones that stayed earned their place.
Why most feedback questions fail.
Open Google Forms, Microsoft Forms, SurveyMonkey, anything. Search “feedback questions for managers.” You'll get the same list every time — twenty variants of *rate your manager from 1 to 5 on the following dimensions.* Communication. Leadership. Empathy. Vision. Each one a vague abstraction the respondent has to translate into something specific before answering, and most don't bother. So they answer the abstraction with another abstraction, and you end up with averages of opinions about words.
The fix isn't a longer list of dimensions. It's a different kind of question. A good feedback question names a moment, not a trait. It asks about behavior, not personality. It's specific enough that the respondent has to think about something real to answer it. And it's sharp enough that you can do something with what they tell you.
What makes a question worth asking.
Four properties. Miss any one and the question slides back toward “rate your manager 1 to 5.”
01
Specific.
“Did Tuesday’s product review go well?” beats “are you a good leader?” Specific questions get specific answers.
02
Behavior-focused.
Behavior is observable. Personality isn’t. Respondents can tell you what they saw — they struggle to tell you who they think someone is.
03
Recent.
Memory fades fast. A question about something last week is a different question than one about something last quarter.
04
Actionable.
If the answer wouldn’t change anything you’d do, the question wasn’t worth asking.
Every question in the Mirorly library passes all four. Most questions in “feedback templates” you find online pass none.
How the library is built.
Each template starts with research — academic papers on feedback, leadership development, team performance. Not the kind of research you'd Google to assemble a top-10 listicle, but the kind where you read the methodology section and notice the sample size and the effect size. We pull questions from the studies, distill them down, rewrite them in language that sounds like a real human asking a real question, then test them against the four properties above.
AI is in the workflow, but only as the first draft. Every published question has been written, rewritten, and approved by a human who's actually used the templates with their own colleagues. That's the part that doesn't scale, and it's also the part that matters most.
The library changes over time. We rotate questions, retire ones that consistently get vague answers, add new ones when we find better source material. This isn't a feature; it's how you build a library that stays useful.
About the sources themselves — when the library is live, each template will link to the specific papers it draws from. “Research-backed” is easy to write; the bibliography is the only proof that matters. We'll show ours.
Six clusters
The library has a structure, not just a list.
Twenty templates organized by the moment they're for, not just the topic. The cluster tells you when to use it. The questions inside are calibrated for that moment. The cadence chip on each template tells you how often it's meant to be used — annual, quarterly, one-shot, or per event.
Once a year
Annual anchor
The broad scan. One template — Core leadership behaviors. 18 questions across 6 dimensions. The place to start, and the place to come back to.
One per cycle · rotate
Quarterly deep-dives
Single-skill focus. Eight templates: Decision-making, Delegation, Coaching, Difficult conversations, Strategic thinking, Self-management, Adaptability, Communication. Pick whichever you scored low on last anchor.
One-shot · when relevant
Career moments
For specific transitions. Three templates: First 90 days in a new role, First-time manager check-in, Promotion readiness. Use only at the moment — not on a schedule.
Per their own cadence
Natural rhythms
Designed for recurring moments. Four templates: Quarterly check-in, Year-end self-review, Post-project retrospective, Pre-1:1 prep. Some are self-only (no peers needed).
About one connection · annual
Relationship-specific
Focused on a specific working relationship. Two templates: Upward feedback (your direct reports' view of your managing), Peer feedback (your teammates on collaboration). Send rarely, dig deep.
Replaces standard if it fits
Context-specific
For specific leadership contexts. Two templates: Remote / distributed leadership, Solo founder. Same depth as the standard deep-dives, calibrated for your situation.
Considered, not constant
Mirorly is built for considered, not constant. The same peers shouldn't see a feedback request from you more than 1-2 times a year. The cluster structure is the safety rail — follow it and you'll never accidentally read as a narcissist sending weekly surveys to the same five people.
The library, by question topic.
Beyond the cluster structure above, the templates also span seven question topics — the kinds of dynamics that actually show up at work. Below: sample questions from each topic — the kind of question that ships in the actual library.
Leadership and decisions
How you decide, when you delay, what you communicate about your reasoning. Specific decisions and how they landed.
- “When I decided on [specific recent call], did the reasoning come through — or did the decision feel like it appeared out of nowhere?”
- “What’s something I’ve been postponing that you’ve noticed I’m avoiding?”
- “Was there a decision in the last quarter where you would have pushed back if I’d asked first?”
Communication and clarity
How you come across when you’re explaining, listening, pushing back. The gap between what you said and what landed.
- “Was there a moment in the last month when you weren’t sure what I actually wanted from you?”
- “Is there a phrase or way of saying things I keep using that lands differently than I intend?”
- “When I push back in meetings, does it feel like a real conversation, or like the conversation is closing?”
Delegation and trust
What you hold onto, what you let go of, and whether the team experiences your delegation as trust or as supervision.
- “Of the things I delegate to you, which ones feel like real ownership — and which ones feel like I’m going to redo them anyway?”
- “Is there something on my plate right now that you’d take over if you were given the chance?”
- “When I check in on something I delegated, does it feel like support, or does it feel like I’m watching to see if you’ll fail?”
Team collaboration
How you contribute to the team’s working dynamic — how you handle disagreement, what you tolerate vs endorse. Patterns visible to teammates long before they’re visible to you.
- “When two people on the team disagree, do you feel like I help resolve it, or do I let it run too long?”
- “Is there a recurring frustration on the team that I might be contributing to without realizing?”
- “Whose voice in our meetings doesn’t get enough room — and whose role is it to fix that?”
Coaching and developing others
Whether you’re a manager who develops people or a manager who manages tasks. The difference shows up in 1:1 time, in what you notice about other people’s growth.
- “In our 1:1s, do you feel like we work on your growth, or do we mostly catch up on tasks?”
- “What’s something you’ve gotten better at in the last six months — and what role, if any, did I play in it?”
- “Is there a skill I’m not helping you build that I should be?”
Giving and receiving feedback
Feedback about feedback. How you receive what people tell you, how you ask for what you want to know, whether you create the conditions for honesty or for politeness.
- “When you’ve given me feedback in the past, did it feel like I actually heard it, or did it feel like I defended myself first?”
- “What’s something you’ve held back from telling me because you weren’t sure how I’d take it?”
- “Do my feedback requests feel real — or do they feel like I’m fishing for reassurance?”
Adapting under pressure
How you handle change, ambiguity, and the moments when the original plan stops working. Whether the team experiences you as steady or reactive.
- “When something unexpected hits, do I hold steady, or does the team feel the panic?”
- “Is there a recent situation where I clung to a plan longer than I should have?”
- “When the team is anxious, do I help them think clearly — or do I add to the anxiety without realizing?”
What you won't find in the library.
- Generic 1-to-5 ratings without context. *Rate your manager 1 to 5 on communication* makes the respondent guess what you mean and you guess what they meant. Two layers of guessing is not feedback.
- AI-generated questions. AI helps draft, but every question that ships has been written and approved by a human who has actually used these templates. The kind of questions you get from *generate 50 feedback questions about leadership* don't survive the four-properties test.
- Personality assessments dressed up as feedback. *Are you a Type A or Type B?* is not feedback. It's a horoscope.
- Engagement surveys. Engagement is a corporate concept measured by HR for aggregate reporting. That's not what you're trying to do here. You're trying to see how you're doing.
- Buzzword categories. *Synergy.* *Empowerment.* *Stakeholder alignment.* If the category sounds like it came from a 2008 HR consulting deck, it's not in the library.
The library is what you're actually buying.
The dashboard, the tracking, the reminders — those are scaffolding around the questions. The questions are the product. The sample ones above are real; they're roughly what ships.
$99 a year. 30-day full refund — no questions asked.