A new teammate can know where to find a document without knowing what their manager needs to make a decision. Onboarding is a useful moment to discuss those working expectations directly.
For HR teams, a personal user guide offers a simple conversation aid: a short record of what a colleague wants others to know about working with them. It should invite questions and corrections rather than promise an instant understanding of a person.
Enter the Personal User Guide
A Personal User Guide, sometimes called a PUG, is a short document that tells your colleagues how to work with you effectively. Not your resume. Not your personality type label. A practical, living guide to your communication preferences, stress responses, feedback style, work rhythms, and collaboration needs.
Atlassian includes a User Manual exercise in its Team Playbook to help people discuss how they work. This article offers a starting template for an onboarding conversation, not a customer case study. Atlassian User Manual
A personal user guide template
Complete only what you want colleagues to know. Use concrete examples and leave personal details out when they aren't needed.
| Prompt | Illustrative answer to adapt |
|---|---|
| When asking me for a decision | Share the question, options and deadline in writing. |
| Before a meeting | Send the document section we will discuss so I can prepare. |
| When giving me feedback | Tell me the specific situation; ask whether I want time to reflect before we discuss it. |
| When priorities collide | Help me understand which task should move and who needs to know. |
| When this guide needs updating | Ask me whether the preference still fits the work we're doing. |
These answers are fictional examples, not a recommended personality profile. Ask the employee to revise the wording and decide what is appropriate to share.
A solid PUG typically covers five areas:
How I communicate best. Do you prefer Slack or email? Do you like small talk before business, or do you want to get straight to the point? Are you someone who thinks out loud in meetings, or do you need time to process before responding?
What I need from my team. Some people thrive with daily check-ins. Others feel micromanaged by anything more than a weekly sync. Some people want to be included in every decision; others want you to bring them the final call.
How I handle stress. This one matters more than most people realize. Some people get quiet when overwhelmed. Others get louder. Some withdraw from the team; others lean in harder. Ask what support would be useful rather than interpreting behavior on their behalf. Sharing personal stress details should be optional.
How I prefer to receive feedback. Direct and blunt? Wrapped in context? Written first, discussed later? Ask for an example of useful feedback rather than assuming a preferred style. (For more on this, see Feedback That Actually Lands: Matching Delivery to Personality.)
What drains me vs. what energizes me. Back-to-back meetings might fuel one person and flatten another. Ambiguous projects might excite a creative thinker and paralyze a structured one.
Make a preference specific enough to discuss
If you've ever had someone say "Oh, I'm an INTJ, so I need alone time" and then watched the room nod politely without knowing what to do with that information, you've seen the limitation of labels. Personality assessments like DISC and MBTI are valuable for self-awareness, but they often stop at categorization. You get a type. A quadrant. A color. And then you're expected to figure out the rest on your own.
PUGs take a different approach. Instead of telling your team what you scored, they tell your team what to actually do. Instead of "I'm a high-D," it's "When you need a decision from me, give me the options and a deadline; I'll pick fast." Instead of "I'm an introvert," it's "I do my best thinking in writing. If you need my input on something complex, send me a doc before the meeting."
That specificity is what makes PUGs actionable. A label describes who you are. A PUG describes how to work with you.
Review generated wording with the person it describes
AlignWithMe's documented workflows include interviews and generated personal guides. This is not evidence that the system infers emotions from tone, is more accurate than an employee's own account, or shortens relationship-building by a measured amount.
If you use generated wording, compare it with the person's actual answers. Ask what is accurate, what is missing and what they want colleagues to see. Confirm the review and sharing process available in your chosen tool before collecting information. These are recommended checks, not a claim that every product provides the same controls.
People may prefer spoken or written reflection. Either way, a specific example they confirm is more useful to this conversation than an unverified interpretation of their vocal delivery.
Use the guide in the next onboarding conversation
A manager can choose one preference and ask how it applies to a task coming up this week. For example: “You mentioned wanting written context before a decision. What should I include in the request?”
Agree on the next step and check back afterward. A guide does not replace manager training, observation or the relationships built through working together. This article makes no claim of a PUG-specific productivity or retention gain.
Making PUGs Part of the Culture, Not Just the Process
Treat the guide as a document to revisit in one-to-ones and project kickoffs. Check whether its descriptions still fit the person and the work.
Some practical ways to embed PUGs into your team culture:
Agree on visibility. Put the guide somewhere its intended readers can find it, with the employee's agreement and appropriate access controls. Don't default to organization-wide sharing.
Set a review date. A quarterly review is one possible cadence; also revisit the guide when responsibilities or team arrangements change. Ask what needs correcting.
Use them to prepare questions. If two people disagree, ask each what happened and what they need. A guide does not establish the root cause of a conflict and should not replace an appropriate resolution process.
Model correction. A leader can demonstrate that preferences are open to discussion: “This is what usually helps me. Tell me if it makes your work harder.” Don't make personal disclosure a condition of participation.
Start with one practical preference
Give a new teammate the template and invite them to change it. Then choose one upcoming task and discuss what would make collaboration easier.
The guide earns its place when it helps people ask a useful question and agree on an action. It is a starting point for getting to know someone, not a shortcut around that work.
References
- Atlassian: How to create a personal user manual for work. Practical precedent for discussing working preferences, not evidence for a PUG-specific business outcome.
Editorial correction, September 7, 2026: removed the unverified case-study framing, vocal-inference claims and unsupported productivity/relationship-building claims; added an illustrative template. The original publication date and URL are preserved.