New Manager Giving Feedback to Underperformer at Amazon: A 1on1 Cheatsheet Use Case

The conference room in Seattle on 2023‑11‑02 smelled of stale coffee. Maya Patel, an Amazon L6 manager for Prime Video, opened the 1‑on‑1 with Alex Liu, a junior PM whose last two sprints missed the 5 % CTR target by 12 % and 9 % respectively. The clock on the wall read 09:45 am. The HR partner, Jenna Ross, sat two seats away with a notebook titled “Amazon Performance Plan Template Q4‑2023”. The tension was palpable.

How should a new Amazon L6 manager structure the first feedback 1‑on‑1 with an underperformer?

Details to include:

  • Manager Maya Patel (Amazon L6, Prime Video)
  • Direct report Alex Liu (Amazon PM, Prime Video)
  • Date 2023‑11‑02, time 09:45 am, Seattle office
  • Metric drop: 12 % CTR, 9 % CTR, target 5 %
  • Amazon Leadership Principles (LP) Bar Raiser rubric, “Customer Obsession” score = 2/5
  • 4‑1 debrief vote (4 yes, 1 no) on “coach vs. performance‑plan” decision
  • Compensation: $175,000 base, $20,000 sign‑on, 0.04 % equity

Maya started with data, not with empathy. “Your recommendation CTR fell 12 % this quarter, and the ‘Customer Obsession’ LP score is 2 / 5,” she said. The script was rehearsed from the Amazon 1‑on‑1 Playbook. The manager referenced the 7‑1‑1 feedback model: 7 minutes data, 1 minute impact, 1 minute next steps.

Alex could not deflect with “I need more data”. The debrief later noted that the opening fact‑first approach turned a vague chat into a concrete coaching moment. Not a performance review, but a data‑driven coaching session. Not “let’s talk feelings”, but “here’s the metric you own”.

The outcome was a 30‑day improvement plan signed on 2023‑11‑03. The plan listed three deliverables: (1) a 3 % CTR lift by week 2, (2) a post‑mortem doc for the last sprint, (3) a stakeholder alignment deck for the next feature. The plan referenced the “Amazon Metrics Ownership” framework (AMO‑2023). The manager’s email after the meeting read: “Alex, attached is the formal plan. Please acknowledge by EOD.” The email had a subject line “Action Required: 30‑Day Performance Plan – Prime Video”.

What Amazon‑specific criteria determine when feedback turns into a performance plan?

Details to include:

  • Amazon Bar Raiser rubric, “Deliver Results” score = 1/5 for Alex
  • HR partner Jenna Ross, “Performance Plan Checklist” version 5, dated 2023‑10‑15
  • 4‑1 debrief vote (4 yes, 1 no) on “plan vs. continue coaching”
  • Compensation: $175,000 base, $15,000 annual bonus, 0.03 % equity
  • Timeline: 30‑day plan, 60‑day review, 90‑day final decision
  • Product area: Amazon Prime Video recommendation engine, weekly sprint cadence of 2 weeks
  • Prior warning email sent on 2023‑09‑20, subject “Performance Notice – CTR”
  • Metric: CTR target 5 % vs. actual 3.5 % in Q3‑2023

The bar raiser rubric forced the shift. Jenna Ross flagged that Alex’s “Deliver Results” score of 1 / 5 breached the Amazon “Two‑Strike” policy. The policy, outlined in the internal “Amazon Performance Guidelines v2.1” (2023‑08‑01), mandates a formal plan after two consecutive metric failures.

Not a casual check‑in, but a documented plan. Not “keep talking”, but “apply the policy”. The hiring committee, convened on 2023‑11‑04, voted 4‑1 to move to a plan. The lone dissent came from a senior PM who argued for more coaching, but the majority cited the rubric.

The plan’s content reflected Amazon’s “Write‑Clear‑Docs” principle. Alex received a template with sections numbered 1‑4, each labeled with a deadline (e.g., “Deliverable 1 – 2023‑11‑15”). The template included a line: “Failure to meet any deliverable will trigger a 60‑day review.” The HR partner attached the “Amazon Performance Plan FAQ” PDF (12 pages). The decision was recorded in the internal “Talent Review System” (TRS‑2023) with a status flag “PIP‑Active”.

How does the Amazon Bar Raiser rubric influence the language used in a 1‑on‑1?

Details to include:

  • Bar Raiser rubric sections: “Customer Obsession”, “Earn Trust”, “Deliver Results”
  • Scorecard for Alex: 2 / 5, 1 / 5, 1 / 5 respectively
  • Quote from Alex: “I thought the UI changes were enough, but the data says otherwise.”
  • Manager script: “Your ‘Earn Trust’ score dropped because you didn’t share the sprint retrospective with the data science team.”
  • Date of rubric rollout: 2023‑07‑01, internal memo “Bar Raiser Updates” (Amazon)
  • Compensation: $175,000 base, $30,000 sign‑on, 0.05 % equity
  • HR email template dated 2023‑11‑03, subject “Feedback Summary – Prime Video”

The rubric forced precise language. Maya quoted the exact scores: “Customer Obsession = 2 / 5, Earn Trust = 1 / 5, Deliver Results = 1 / 5.” The script avoided vague praise. Not “you’re doing okay”, but “your scores are below expectations”. The manager cited the rubric’s definition: “Earn Trust requires transparent communication with cross‑functional partners.” Alex’s reply—“I thought the UI changes were enough”—was recorded verbatim in the meeting minutes. The minutes later appeared in the TRS‑2023 audit log (entry #20231102‑001).

The language shifted the conversation from subjective to objective. Not “I feel you’re slacking”, but “the data shows a 12 % CTR decline and a rubric score of 1 / 5”. Not “let’s figure it out together”, but “here’s the concrete gap and the steps to close it”. The debrief note from senior PM Carlos Mendoza (Amazon L7) highlighted that the rubric phrasing “Your Deliver Results score is 1 / 5” reduced defensiveness and increased acceptance of the plan.

When is it appropriate to involve HR in an Amazon underperformance discussion?

Details to include:

  • HR partner Jenna Ross, email dated 2023‑11‑02, subject “HR Presence – 1‑on‑1”
  • Amazon “HR‑Involvement Policy” version 3, effective 2023‑01‑15
  • 4‑1 debrief vote (4 yes) to include HR after the first 1‑on‑1
  • Compensation: $175,000 base, $25,000 bonus, 0.04 % equity
  • Timeline: HR joins after second data‑driven meeting, typically by day 10 of the plan
  • Product area: Amazon AWS Marketplace, quarterly sprint cycle of 3 weeks
  • Prior HR involvement in a similar case on 2022‑05‑18 (Amazon S3 team) resulted in a 90‑day plan

HR entered the room after Maya delivered the data. Jenna Ross sat with a folder labeled “HR Performance Plan Template v3”. The policy states HR must be present once the Bar Raiser score falls below 2 / 5 for two consecutive metrics. Not a casual observer, but a compliance officer. Not “just a note‑taker”, but “policy enforcer”. Jenna opened with, “We’re here to document the plan per Amazon HR‑Involvement Policy.” The script was aligned with the “Amazon HR Presence Checklist” (2023‑09‑30).

The presence of HR changed the tone. Alex stopped arguing about “resource constraints” and focused on the deliverables. The debrief on 2023‑11‑04 recorded that HR’s participation lowered the risk of a future “Performance Review Dispute”. The HR partner added a line to the plan: “HR will review progress on 2023‑12‑02 and 2024‑01‑01”. The timeline was locked in the internal “Performance Calendar” (PC‑2023).

Preparation Checklist

  • Review the Amazon 7‑1‑1 feedback model (7 minutes data, 1 minute impact, 1 minute next steps).
  • Study the Bar Raiser rubric version 2023‑07‑01; note scores for “Customer Obsession”, “Earn Trust”, “Deliver Results”.
  • Read the internal “HR‑Involvement Policy” (v3) dated 2023‑01‑15; understand when HR must join.
  • Draft a 30‑day plan template using the “Amazon Performance Plan Template v5” (2023‑10‑15).
  • Work through a structured preparation system (the PM Interview Playbook covers Amazon’s LP‑driven feedback loops with real debrief examples).

Mistakes to Avoid

BAD: “You’re not meeting expectations.” GOOD: Cite the exact metric: “Your CTR dropped from 5 % to 3.5 % this quarter, violating the ‘Deliver Results’ LP target.”

BAD: “Let’s talk later.” GOOD: Schedule the next 1‑on‑1 within 7 days and record the agenda in the TRS system.

BAD: “I’m not sure how to involve HR.” GOOD: Follow the HR‑Involvement Policy and invite Jenna Ross by day 10 of any performance plan.

> 📖 Related: Amazon PM vs Google PM Interview Prep After Layoff: 2026 Comparison

FAQ

When should a new Amazon manager trigger a formal performance plan?

After two consecutive metric failures that push any Bar Raiser LP score below 2 / 5, the policy mandates a written plan. The 4‑1 debrief vote on 2023‑11‑04 confirmed this rule for Prime Video.

How much detail belongs in the 1‑on‑1 script?

Every sentence must contain a concrete number or Amazon‑specific term. Use the 7‑1‑1 model, reference the exact CTR drop, and quote the Bar Raiser scores. The script used on 2023‑11‑02 included “12 % CTR decline” and “Customer Obsession = 2 / 5”.

What compensation impact does a performance plan have?

A 30‑day plan does not alter the base salary of $175,000 but can affect the annual bonus eligibility of $20,000 if the plan is not completed. The HR note on 2023‑11‑03 warned that failure to meet deliverables would trigger a 60‑day review impacting the bonus.amazon.com/dp/B0GWWJQ2S3).

Related Reading

  • Review the Amazon 7‑1‑1 feedback model (7 minutes data, 1 minute impact, 1 minute next steps).