SKILL

engaging-survey

Design, review or rewrite a survey or questionnaire so busy people want to answer it AND the answers are worth having; stakeholder and partner surveys, user-needs assessments, post-workshop or kickoff follow-ups, customer and community feedback forms, Google Forms / Typeform / Qualtrics drafts. Use whenever someone shares a survey draft, asks to "make this survey better / shorter / less boring / more engaging", asks what questions to put to users or partners, is turning a meeting or kickoff into a follow-up form, or calls a questionnaire long, dry, or a slog; even if they never say "survey" (e.g. "what should we ask the working groups", "draft the form for the stakeholders"). Not for bias-only wording audits of a finished instrument (a linter does that) or for interview guides alone.

原文 · 译文尚未补齐

适用对象:设计与内容创作。自动收录 · 待核查。

原作者说明节选

从固定版本的 SKILL.md 提取,保留原文语言。以下内容属于作者说明,本站尚未验证安装、兼容或运行结果。

查看原文

原文涵盖的主题

  • Engaging surveys: excitement in the frame, neutrality in the questions
  • The one idea
  • Step 1. Name the decisions before touching a question
  • Step 2. Set an honest budget
  • Step 3. Sharpen the questions you kept
  • Step 4. Write the frame (this is where the excitement goes)
  • Step 5. Check the platform and the rules before anyone builds it
  • Step 6. Pilot it on two or three real respondents

People answer when trust × reward outweighs effort (Dillman's social exchange, as Caroline Jarrett puts it). A survey about something exciting usually fails by being long and dry. The fix is to put the energy in the frame: who is asking, the picture of what this makes possible, what happens next, the thank-you. The questions stay neutral, concrete and quick. An exciting frame with neutral questions gets both enthusiasm and honest data. Loaded or promotional questions get neither (AAPOR: a survey must not be used to sell or to produce a predetermined result). So for every draft you touch, do two separate jobs: cut and sharpen the questions, then write the frame. Don't mix them. The evidence behind each rule, with sources, is in references/evidence.md. Read it when you need to justify a recommendation to the survey's owners; quoting their own field's guidance persuades better than your opinion does. Ask, or infer from the material: what will the owners do differently depending on the answers? Write 3–6 decisions down (e.g. "which working groups to staff first", "which heat variable to prioritise for the first product"). Then go through every question in the draft: Keep it only if you

这里只展示节选,请以完整原文和当前要求为准。

来源仓库
Lmandrake/MandrakeWorkflows
源文件
skills/engaging-survey/SKILL.md
固定版本
1874105936272447e2f9c81ba1dac48dae6ed074
阅读完整原作者说明 ↗

准备条件

  • 本条仅收录原作者的技能元数据;请阅读完整说明,确认依赖、许可与使用条件。

第一件可以尝试的小事

先阅读原作者说明,再决定是否在自己的 AI 工具中使用。

对应 AI 工具说明

作者有说明不等于本站实机验证。没有证据时,不自动标为兼容、安全或免费。

来源与内容状态

本条为自动发现的元数据,尚未完成人工文档核查;适用性与运行结果待核查。

原作者:Lmandrake/MandrakeWorkflows · 原作者仓库元数据。文档核查:未核查。最近来源检查:2026-11-11T03:01:44.637Z。

分类由名称、说明与路径规则生成,分类不代表已核实适配。

许可与权利归属

MIT。第三方内容及版权归原作者,使用条件以原文为准。

许可原文 ↗

本站没有因同步、复制或用户自报成功而将资源标为运行验证通过。

限制与注意事项

  • 元数据收录不代表本站已经安装、适配、实测或进行安全审查。