The Quality page is the feedback equivalent of the Objectives Quality & SMART page. Compass scores every fast feedback entry on how well it’s written and surfaces patterns across the cohort.
What this page answers
How high-quality is the feedback being given? Where do quality issues cluster? Which dimensions of feedback writing are weakest? Where do people need coaching on giving feedback?
What’s on the page
Four headline KPIs
Avg Quality Score — Mean quality score across analysed feedback (1–10 scale)
Quality Issues — Count of distinct quality issue types detected
Feedback Entries — Total feedback in the period
Quality Analysed — Count of entries Compass has scored (if less than total, more is queued)
Feedback Quality Dimensions
A radar chart with the six dimension scores: Specificity, Actionability, Constructiveness, Balance, Professional Tone, and Clarity. The shape shows where the firm’s feedback culture is strong and where it’s weak.
Common patterns:
Dent in specificity — Feedback is too generic (“good job”, “you could be better”)
Dent in actionability — Feedback lacks concrete next steps
Dent in balance — Feedback is all positive (or all negative) without the other side
Quality Distribution
A donut chart binning feedback entries into quality categories. A heavy weighting toward “Excellent” or “Poor” tells you the firm’s overall practice.
Quality Trends
A line / area chart of average quality score over time. Useful for seeing whether training and culture work are improving the standard.
Common Quality Issues
A list of the top quality issues Compass detected, with count and description. Examples:
Too vague — Lacking specifics
Lacks examples — Claims without evidence
Poor actionability — No clear “what to do next”
Too brief — Not enough substance to be useful
Unprofessional tone — Language that doesn’t belong at work
The flags come from a fixed vocabulary of ten issue types — which ones appear, and how often, depends on your feedback data.
Where the data comes from
The whole page is built from the fast feedback quality analysis job. Completed feedback entries are queued in the background, and Compass scores each one 1–10 overall with sub-scores on the six dimensions. The page aggregates these per-entry scores into the cohort views.
Like all AI jobs, quality analysis runs in the background. If the queue is processing, the “Quality Analysed” KPI will be lower than “Feedback Entries”, and the queue status banner on the Introduction page will show the jobs still in flight.
How to read it
Read the radar first. Which dimensions are weakest? That’s your coaching target.
Trend over time matters most. A single snapshot tells you where you are; the trend tells you whether you’re improving.
Common quality issues is the operational training list. If “vague feedback” is the top issue affecting most entries, run a workshop on specific, evidence-based feedback.
Empty page? If no analysis has been run, the page shows a notice and returns early — wait for the queue or check whether AI is enabled.
Why feedback quality matters
A culture that gives lots of feedback isn’t necessarily a culture that gives good feedback. Volume on its own isn’t the win — useful feedback drives behaviour change, vague feedback doesn’t. This page is the closest analogue to a “is our feedback actually useful?” measurement.
It also pairs powerfully with the Sentiment page. High-volume, low-quality, mostly-positive feedback is the “everyone says nice things but nothing changes” pattern — common, comfortable, ineffective. Catching it here is the first step.
Tips
Quality is about the writing, not the content. A harsh but well-written feedback can score highly; a kind but vague one can score poorly. The score isn’t a value judgement on the opinion.
Coaching feedback-givers is more leveraged than coaching individuals. A manager who learns to give specific, actionable feedback improves dozens of conversations.
Don’t share individual quality scores back to the feedback-giver. This is for cohort and training analysis, not individual coaching at scale.
Re-check after training. A clear before-and-after radar chart is a great way to demonstrate the value of feedback training.