Tag Archive for: Feedback

Managers avoid difficult conversations because they care too much about the wrong things

 This post explores the common reasons managers delay or avoid difficult conversations and offers practical perspectives on how to shift their focus towards what matters most: clarity, fairness, trust, and growth.

  • Reading time
  • 10 Minutes
  • Target audience
  •  New and experienced managers who want to handle difficult conversations with more confidence, clarity, and empathy. 

Out of all the answers that our participants have given to the question “Why do managers avoid difficult conversations?”, the answer is never because they don’t care or don’t want to have the conversation. In their words, and perhaps in your own experience, it gets delayed because managers hope the problem will sort itself out. It gets postponed because everyone’s busy. Most of the avoidance comes from discomfort: the employee’s reaction, a fear of escalation, or the need to preserve team harmony. Managers often focus too much on discomfort and decide that it’s best to not have the conversation at all, or they offer a diluted, softened, ambiguous version because they don’t want to upset the other person.

In other words, managers avoid difficult conversations because they care too much – about the wrong things. Caring about preserving relationships, protecting harmony or preventing escalation is understandable but in reality it can come at the expense of clarity, fairness, trust and long-term effectiveness.

Caring less is not the answer. Caring more about the right things — clarity, fairness, development, trust, and long-term team effectiveness — is.

New Call-to-action

Not all difficult conversations are equally difficult

Conversations about tasks, deadlines, processes, or measurable outcomes are much easier to approach because they are grounded in observable facts. There is usually more clarity about what happened, what was expected, and what needs to change.

The difficulty increases when the conversation is about behaviour, communication style, attitude, or the impact someone has on others. These conversations are more personal and can feel less certain. Managers need to address not only what happened, but also how to communicate it in a way that preserves dignity, encourages reflection, and supports growth.

Naturally, this is where avoidance begins.

When managers avoid conversations about behaviour, they often compensate by focusing heavily on tasks and outcomes instead. They may discuss missed deadlines, incomplete work, or overall performance while avoiding the underlying behaviours that contribute to the problem. This can create an unbalanced conversation: the immediate issue is addressed, but the person has not been given the full picture, so they will probably not have the clarity or insight to implement change where it is most necessary.

When we ask managers across different industries what they consider a “difficult conversation”, three themes consistently emerge:

  • Unresolved conflict — between a manager and team member, or within the team itself.
  • Delivering negative feedback, particularly when it relates to behaviour rather than measurable performance.
  • Professional disputes — disagreements about direction or decisions, especially where escalation or indirect tactics have already occurred.

Using those themes, this post summarises some of the reasons managers avoid difficult conversations and offers suggested solutions, based on insights from our training solutions such as “A Practical Toolbox for Managers” and “Stepping into Management”.

The 5 most mentioned reasons why managers avoid difficult conversations (not an exclusive list and in no particular order):

  1. Lack of training
  2. Fear of damaging relationships
  3. Compassion and empathy can lead to avoidance
  4. Uncomfortable with conflict
  5. Fear about escalation

Lack of training

It’s likely that your technical expertise and experience got you the role of manager, not your track record in having difficult conversations. Many new managers receive instruction on how to do their job and what their new responsibilities are. Not many receive a lot of support for developing the necessary people skills that come with the job. This lack of training often leads to overwhelm and avoidance in the workplace.

Solution:

A little bit of know-how and confidence-building practice can counter the overwhelm. Our training solutions for new managers and high potentials help create the right mindset for having difficult conversations, supported by proven frameworks and communication techniques, explained and guided by a professional, practiced in a safe environment. Some of our clients choose a more personal approach and decide to hire a coach to support the manager’s ongoing development.

Fear of damaging relationships

Managers who fear damaging the relationship are limited in their ability to have honest conversations that foster growth. They often use softer language, explain too much and focus on how other people are reacting to their words. Or they avoid the conversation altogether.

While the fear they have is clear evidence that they care, and perhaps it’s realistic because relationships were damaged in the past, fear also keeps us in a fight or flight mode. From that state, the difficult conversation will not be as logical, respectful, open, and productive as it would be without the fear of causing damage.

When difficult conversations are approached with openness and respect, they create opportunities for more trust, more collaboration, and more authentic professional relationships. If resolving conflict or preserving team harmony is the focus of the conversation, you need to be open and respectful. Not fearful.

Solution:

Avoiding the difficult conversation because of fear rarely makes relationships better. When fear of damaging relationships is a factor, you can try to address the fear with the person, before you have the difficult conversation. Talk about how to avoid causing damage to the relationship. Try to figure out if your fear is valid, and does the other person have the same fear?

Or, you can wait until you see evidence that the difficult conversation has caused damage, and deal with it then. Fear catastrophizes. It makes you overestimate the impact. In most cases (especially when there is psychological safety), having a difficult conversation with someone doesn’t actually damage the relationship in any of the ways that you feared, if at all.

Compassion and empathy can lead to avoidance

Compassion driven avoidance leads managers to postpone a difficult conversation to the future, to when the team member is under “less stress” or because they are worried how the other person will react. They avoid conversations that put “even more” pressure on the other person, because the manager happens to know that the team member is going through a difficult time at home. Compassionate avoidance says: “I don’t want to stress them out more, so I won’t say anything yet about the missed deadlines”.

Healthy compassion says: “I care about them and I see they’re under pressure, which is why we should talk about deadlines now and see what kind of support they need.”

Empathy and compassion are usually helpful in difficult conversations, but they are not universally beneficial. They are strengths when used appropriately. They will allow you to recognize and acknowledge the other person’s emotions without putting those emotions at the centre of the conversation. Empathy and compassion help difficult conversations when they improve understanding and respect. They hinder difficult conversations when they prevent you from saying what needs to be said or doing what needs to be done.

While there is a clear place for compassion and empathy, some people become so emotionally aligned with another person’s state that they lose perspective. Excessive focus on feelings can easily obscure the message. Sometimes people need clarity more than emotional validation. A conversation that spends most of its time reassuring someone may leave them uncertain about the actual problem.

Solution:

Keep in mind that the vast majority of employees prefer clear, constructive, and timely feedback, even when they are under pressure.

The solution is not to reduce empathy or compassion, but to balance them with clarity, accountability, and fairness. The most effective difficult conversations tend to combine:

  • Enough empathy to understand the person’s experience.
  • Enough compassion to treat them respectfully.
  • Enough clarity to communicate reality.
  • Enough accountability to address the issue.

Uncomfortable with conflict

Nobody is naturally comfortable with conflict (though some people thrive on it), because conflict threatens belonging, status, predictability and safety. The irony is that avoiding conflict often creates more conflict later. If left unaddressed, concerns accumulate, misunderstandings increase, patience and empathy decrease, and problems become harder to address. And relationships suffer.

Solution:

Healthy conflict is never about disagreement between people, but rather how that disagreement is handled. It focuses on issues, ideas, decisions, expectations, and solutions. People who can handle conflict well have typically learned how to use conflict to improve the relationship. Instead of seeing conflict as a possible threat to the relationship, they see it as a normal part of healthy (and honest) communication between people.

Learning to handle conflict well doesn’t mean you will become comfortable with conflict, but you will learn over time that the temporary discomfort that these conversations create is manageable.

Characteristics of healthy conflict:

  • Focus on the issue, not on the person
  • Lead with curiosity
  • Be direct and specific
  • Regulate your emotions (without suppressing them)
  • Look for shared interests and goals

Worried about escalation

Many people are not afraid of expressing a concern, but they worry what might happen next. Difficult conversations contain several uncertainties that threaten fundamental psychological needs. Humans are generally averse to uncertainty. When the brain cannot predict an outcome, it’s going to simulate threats. As a result, people mentally rehearse worst-case scenarios.

Escalation may occur when people experience the conversation as a threat that must be defended against rather than a situation/problem that can be understood and solved. Emotions are involved, but so are cognition, identity, communication habits, and social dynamics.

The importance of low-self orientation in difficult conversations

One important thing we address in the training is the importance of low self-orientation in difficult conversations. This means shifting your attention away from protecting yourself and towards understanding and addressing the issue. It doesn’t mean ignoring your own needs or opinions. Rather, it means becoming less preoccupied with how you are being perceived, with how you feel, whether you are winning the argument, or whether the other person agrees with you.

In difficult conversations, high self-orientation often sounds like: How do I avoid looking incompetent? What if they don’t like me after this? How do I convince them?  Those concerns are understandable, but when they dominate our thinking, we tend to explain too much, listen too little, and become defensive.

Low self-orientation asks different questions. What is actually happening here? What does this person need me to understand? How can we solve this problem together? Shifting your attention in this way makes it easier to stay curious, regulate your emotions, and respond thoughtfully rather than reactively.

From this perspective, one of the most effective ways to prevent escalation is not a communication technique at all. It is the ability to hold your own ego more lightly. When less energy is spent on self-preservation, more energy becomes available for listening, learning, and resolving the conflict constructively.

Solution:

Focus on what you can control. Your tone, preparation, clarity, your ability to listen, etc.

Start early. Addressing small concerns in a timely manner will prevent the problem from coming bigger most of the time.

Low self-orientation questions to prevent escalation:

  • How can I communicate in a way that protects trust and the relationship?
  • How can I communicate respect even while disagreeing?
  • What part of my concern is about the issue itself, and what part is about my discomfort, or fear of damaging the relationship?
  • What outcome matters more than my need to be right/heard/understood in this moment?
  • What response would move this conversation forward?

Conclusion & Key takeaways

Every difficult conversation asks managers to choose between short-term comfort and long-term accountability.

Difficult conversations are an unavoidable part of management. The question is not whether they will occur, but whether they will be handled early and constructively or delayed until the consequences become harder to manage.

You don’t need to enjoy difficult conversations or feel completely comfortable having them. But you need to recognize that temporary discomfort is often the price of clarity, growth, and healthy working relationships. By combining empathy with accountability, respect with honesty, and confidence with curiosity, managers can have difficult conversations that strengthen trust, support development, and improve long-term team performance.

  • Managers often avoid difficult conversations because they prioritize short-term comfort over long-term clarity and accountability.
  • The five most common reasons for avoidance are lack of training, fear of damaging relationships, compassion-driven avoidance, discomfort with conflict, and fear of escalation.
  • Empathy and compassion are valuable leadership qualities, but they should be balanced with clarity, fairness, and accountability.
  • Difficult conversations become easier and more productive when managers use proven frameworks, prepare well, and address issues early.
  • Strong leadership is about caring enough about people to have honest conversations that build trust and support long-term team success.
by

The power of SCARF and how to make feedback work better, and feel better

,

This post explores how the SCARF model can help managers make feedback conversations more effective and meaningful and provides practical tips and insights on how managers can better understand reactions, build stronger connections and influence future behaviour.

  • Reading time
  • 7 Minutes
  • Target audience
  • Managers and leaders who want to better understand how to influence others, have better feedback conversations, and bring about positive change in the workplace.

The intention behind giving feedback is to bring about positive change in the workplace by influencing future behaviour and outcomes. Sometimes that means helping someone improve. At other times, it’s about recognising success, reinforcing effective behaviours, clarifying expectations, or addressing issues before they become bigger problems.

Whether a feedback conversation achieves its goal depends on many factors, but two stand out: the person giving the feedback and the person receiving it. Both play an active role in determining whether the conversation leads to understanding, acceptance and ultimately, positive change. When both have the skills and confidence to engage in an open, constructive dialogue, the chances of success increase significantly.

Of course, not all feedback conversations are equally challenging. Positive feedback—recognising good work or encouraging someone to continue doing what’s working well—is generally easier to give and easier to receive.

 

New Call-to-action

 

When the feedback is critical or corrective, the chances of success decrease because people are more likely to feel threatened or misunderstood.  The key word here is “feel”.

In feedback conversations, people don’t simply respond to the words they hear. They respond to what those words mean to them. A comment intended to be helpful can be interpreted as criticism. A suggestion can feel like a personal attack. When people perceive a threat—whether that threat is real or not—their ability to listen, reflect and respond is limited. Perceived threat invokes a primal response (fight or flight) and we can no longer hear what the rational brain is saying.

This is where the SCARF model, developed by neuroscientist David Rock, helps us understand what is happening beneath the surface.

The SCARF model: Minimize danger – Maximize reward

David Rock believes that our response has its roots in the way our brains deal with perceived danger and how we always seek to minimise threats and maximise rewards. He developed it into a model of 5 areas that influence our behaviour, the SCARF model.

Watch the video here:

 

Managers who want to influence others, their job is to find just the right levers to move people into that ‘maximize reward’ state. Leaders tend to know all about the carrot and stick. They use money and other external rewards to try to motivate people. Turns out there are often far more powerful rewards and threats going on inside people’s heads that are generating their behavior. So if you want to be the best that you can be at influencing others, you need to better understand what makes people tick.

Dr. David Rock

 

As Dr. Rock explains in the video, these five factors have a tremendous impact on our motivation on whether we are in a “reward” state or a “danger” state.

  • Status – our relative importance to others
  • Certainty – our ability to predict the future
  • Autonomy – our sense of control over events
  • Relatedness – how safe we feel with others
  • Fairness – how fair we perceive the exchanges between people to be

Understanding what happens beneath the surface is only valuable if it changes what we do above the surface. The SCARF model gives us insight into why people may react the way they do during feedback conversations, but the real benefit comes from using that understanding to adapt our approach. Small changes in how we prepare, communicate and involve others can make all the difference between feedback that creates resistance and feedback that creates positive change.

S – Status 

How we see ourselves in relation to others – do we feel respected, valued and competent.

Research shows that a perceived loss of status activates many of the same brain regions associated with physical pain. When people feel that their competence or value is under threat, they’re far less likely to listen openly to feedback.

The opposite is equally true. When feedback reinforces our sense of competence or recognises our contribution, it activates the brain’s reward response. That’s why genuine recognition from someone we respect can be so motivating.
Before giving feedback, ask yourself:

  • How might this person perceive my status in relation to theirs?
  • Am I reinforcing their sense of value, or unintentionally threatening it?
  • What can I do to reduce unnecessary status differences before giving the feedback?

Practical tips: 

  • Remember that status is personal. It isn’t only determined by job title or hierarchy; it’s also influenced by experience, expertise, reputation and how valued people feel.
  • Status derives from credibility but also from knowledge and competence, so if you lack credibility with a specific audience you can gain it from demonstrating what you know/can do
  • Build credibility before offering challenge. People are more receptive when they trust your intentions and believe you understand their work.
  • Use inclusive language. Words like we, us and our encourage collaboration, while excessive use of <emI and you can reinforce unnecessary hierarchy.
  • Protect status by recognising the person’s value, experience and contribution before addressing concerns. Genuine recognition helps protect a person’s sense of competence and reduces defensiveness.
  • Help people feel valued. Everyone wants to know that their contribution matters, regardless of their role.

C – Certainty

The brain is a certainty-seeking machine, constantly trying to predict what’s going to happen. When we have a clear understanding of what to expect, we generally feel safer and more able to focus on the conversation. When we don’t, uncertainty can quickly become a threat.

This is particularly relevant in feedback conversations. When people know why the conversation is happening, what will be discussed, or what is expected of them, they may spend less energy trying to interpret the situation and more on listening to the feedback. By creating clarity around the purpose, process and desired outcome of the conversation, managers can help people feel more prepared and more open.

Practical tips: 

  • Explain the purpose of the conversation. Don’t leave people guessing why you want to talk. A simple explanation can reduce unnecessary uncertainty.
  • Set expectations about the process. Let the person know what you would like to discuss and how the conversation will work.
  • Be clear about what is expected. People feel more confident when they understand their role, responsibilities and what success looks like.
  • Communicate even when there is uncertainty. If you don’t have all the answers, explain what you know, what you are still exploring and when you expect to know more.
  • Focus on what can be influenced. When outcomes are uncertain, clarity about purpose, priorities and next steps can provide stability.

A – Autonomy

Autonomy is our need to feel that we have some control over our work, our choices and the way we approach challenges. It is closely linked to motivation because people are more engaged when they feel they have ownership.

Autonomy is also closely connected to certainty. When we cannot predict what will happen, it can be difficult to feel that we have any control over our situation.

Autonomy is particularly important in feedback conversations. If feedback is intended to create growth and development, managers need to avoid simply prescribing the solution. Telling someone exactly what to do may create short-term compliance, but helping them reflect, explore options and find their own path builds greater ownership and commitment. The idea of having options, i.e. making choices, is important to a person’s sense of control.

Practical tips: 

  • Focus on the outcome, not every step. Be clear about needs to be achieved while allowing the person to consider how they will get there.
  • Ask before telling. Encourage reflection by asking questions such as, “How do you see the situation?” or “What options do you think would work?”
  • Offer choices where possible. Even small opportunities to make decisions can strengthen a person’s sense of ownership.
  • Create psychological safety. People need to feel they can share their perspective, admit mistakes and express concerns without fear of negative consequences.
  • Balance support with independence. Provide guidance and resources while allowing the person to take responsibility for their development.
  • The idea of having options, i.e. making choices, is important to a sense of control

R – Relatedness

Relatedness is about our sense of connection and belonging with others. It is the feeling that we are understood, respected and valued as individuals.

When we feel connected with the people around us we are more likely to be open, share our thoughts, and reflect on our own behaviours.

Relatedness is often communicated through small interactions: listening attentively, showing interest, acknowledging someone’s perspective, or simply demonstrating that their contribution matters. These signals help people understand that they are part of a supportive relationship rather than being evaluated.

Practical tips: 

  • Build trust before you need it. A strong relationship makes feedback conversations easier and more productive.
  • Show that you understand the person, not just the performance issue. Consider their perspective, circumstances and intentions.
  • Listen before responding. People are more open to feedback when they feel genuinely heard.
  • Use feedback as a two-way dialogue. Invite discussion and encourage the person to share their view.
  • Create connection across teams. Help people understand how their work contributes to a wider purpose and shared goals.

F – Fairness

Fairness is about our perception of whether things are reasonable, consistent and just. Importantly, fairness does not mean treating everyone exactly the same. People have different roles, responsibilities, experiences and circumstances. What matters is that people understand the principles behind decisions and feel they are being treated with respect.

Because fairness is subjective, two people can experience the same situation very differently. What feels reasonable to one person may feel unfair to another. When we perceive unfairness, our brain quickly moves into a defensive response. This is particularly relevant in feedback conversations; If someone believes they are being singled out, judged more harshly than others, or held to unclear standards, they are less likely to focus on the feedback . Instead, they may focus on whether the process feels fair.

Managers can reduce this threat by being clear about expectations, explaining the reasons behind decisions, and applying standards consistently. When exceptions are necessary, explaining the context helps people understand why a different approach is appropriate.

Practical tips:

  • Explain the “why”. Help people understand the reasoning behind decisions, expectations or changes.
  • Apply clear and consistent standards. People are more accepting of different outcomes when they understand the principles behind them.
  • Recognise contribution, not preference. Ensure rewards, opportunities and recognition are linked to achievements and behaviours rather than personal relationships.
  • Be transparent about decisions. Sharing the factors considered can help people see that decisions were thoughtful rather than arbitrary.
  • Consider different perspectives. Encourage people to explore situations from multiple viewpoints to build understanding and reduce assumptions.

Summary & Key Takeaways

Feedback conversations are about much more than the words being exchanged. Beneath every conversation, people are also responding to what the feedback means for them. Do they feel valued? Do they understand what is happening? Do they feel they have a voice? Do they trust the person giving the feedback? Do they believe the process is fair?

The SCARF model helps us understand these underlying responses through five social needs: Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness and Fairness.

When these needs are supported, people are more likely to feel safe, listen openly and engage constructively. When they are threatened, even well-intentioned feedback can trigger defensiveness, resistance or disengagement.

  • Remember the person behind the performance – Feedback is received by a person, not just a role or job title. Consider how your message may be experienced, not just what you intend to communicate.
  • Reduce unnecessary threats – People are less likely to engage when they feel their status, security, independence, relationships or sense of fairness are under threat.
  • Create clarity – Explain why you are having the conversation, what you want to discuss and what happens next. Reducing uncertainty helps people focus on the feedback itself.
  • Protect ownership – Don’t just provide answers. Where possible, involve people in finding solutions and deciding how they can move forward.
  • Build relationships – Strong relationships make it easier to have feedback conversations.Trust and connection make feedback easier to give and easier to receive.
  • Make fairness visible – Explain your reasoning, apply standards consistently and recognise that fair does not always mean identical.
  • Focus on the outcome, not just the conversation – The goal of feedback is not simply to deliver a message. The goal is to create understanding, encourage reflection and influence future behaviour.

To wrap up

We hope you’ll consider using the power of SCARF in your next feedback conversation. For more feedback content, these posts might be of interest to you:

by

Nobody likes giving negative feedback – but many of us want to hear it

If someone is unhappy with your performance at work, wouldn’t you want to know? At the very least, you’d like an opportunity to clear the air, or address the problem, or explain…or something. Yet when it comes to giving negative or difficult feedback, most of us feel reluctant to give it. We don’t want to hurt the other person or we are afraid of a conflict, so we end up avoiding it. No, giving negative feedback is not one of the enjoyable aspects of managing people. Doing it constructively is a challenge for the best of us, and even when we do it well – who’s to say that your feedback is taken on board and improvements are made?

The big (free) eBook of negotiations language

Here are 7 tips to get you started, and they are explained in more detail below:

  1. Be clear about what you want at the end before you begin
  2. Use language that focuses on the situation, not on the person
  3. Turn up to the conversation, stay there and speak out
  4. Be open, try to be objective, don’t judge
  5. Demonstrate understanding
  6. Give examples and share patterns – and the impact on you/others
  7. Believe in change

Be clear about what you want at the end before you begin

What is obvious to you is not always obvious to others. People cannot look into your head (or heart) and guess how you’d like things. You need to be able to explain, in simple and safe language, what you want from the conversation and why you are starting it. Think about it, picture it. Simply saying that you want something to improve is not enough, it means different things to different people. Be specific and focus on the future. A useful approach is to know if this is an A, B or C discussion.  Are you focusing on a specific Action, an ongoing Behaviour or possible Consequences ? Try not to mix them. Another approach my colleagues use in training is “feed forward not back”.

And finally, think about this: if you’re giving negative feedback because you want to ‘make a point’ – there really is no point.

Use language that focuses on the situation, not on the person

Giving negative feedback is always a very personal thing, for both parties. Keep this is in mind when the other person takes your feedback personal. There are no magic phrases to use when giving negative feedback but avoid language like “you did” and “you shouldn’t have”. Owning your sentence with “I” is a better place than judging or blaming with “you”. Try sentences that start with “I noticed” or “I saw”. Avoid using “I think” or “I heard” as this implies a personal feeling, gossip, and/or judgement. Do keep in mind though that the “I” isn’t magic. If you are blaming somebody, the “I” doesn’t change how they react. And if you are managing people consider sometimes using “our” or “we” as a replacement for “I”.

Given time to absorb and reflect, most of us are grown-up enough to move past the personal impact of what is being said. More often than not, once we look back on the situation, we’re glad that someone gave us the feedback and brought it to our attention so that we can try to change our behaviour, or take appropriate action.

Turn up to the conversation, stay there and speak out

If you are going to give difficult or negative feedback you need to be present in the moment. You are committed to the conversation because you believe both parties will benefit. Shut out unhelpful self-talk like “well it won’t make any difference” or “ I knew he would say that when I said this”.  You both need to focus on this conversation and the outcome. You owe it to both of you to say what you think and feel, taking responsibility for your words and the outcome.

Be open, try to be objective, don’t judge

Don’t be vague, don’t be ambiguous. If the situation is a big deal, don’t call it a minor issue. Be open to receiving feedback on your feedback. Listening is as important as talking. Effective feedback is always a two-way street. And remember, what is obvious to others is not always obvious to you.

It’s almost never a good idea to judge others by your standards. You would do this or that, if you were him or her in this situation? You’re not him or her, you’re you. Or, he or she should do this or that in this situation? Better yet, if you were him or her, you wouldn’t even be in this situation… None of that means anything, beyond that you are different people.

Demonstrate understanding

For feedback to lead to a positive outcome for both sides you need to demonstrate understanding.  You can do this by …

  • Actively looking to find truth and agreement in what they are saying and validating this.  If you disagree with everything they say, how likely is it that they will accept and embrace everything you are saying?
  • Keep calm, centred and actively side-step confrontation and escalation.
  • Summarize your understanding of the other persons feelings (and be open to them correcting you).
  • Summarize your understanding of what they have said (and again, they can correct you)
  •  Asking a straight question to build bridges

Give examples and share patterns – and the impact on you/others

Your vested interest and understanding of the situation are important and this should be clear early in the conversation. Models such as DESC build this in. If you are not clear about something, ask and listen. Stick to what was observed. And as mentioned earlier, know whether you want to focus on an action, a pattern of behaviours  or consequences.

Trainer tip

“When we talk about patterns of behaviour, people will typically ask for an example. You are obliged to give examples- but if somebody is behaving defensively be prepared for them to then pull the example apart (challenge facts, bring in new information that may or may not be relevant, argue it was a unique situation). Your task is to listen, learn AND keep the conversation focussed on the pattern, not on single events or actions.”

Believe in change, support change

The words you say, your thoughts, your body language – if you don’t believe this change can happen, it probably won’t. You are a part of this change. You are, in fact, one of the initiators. More often than not, you can do more than give negative feedback. For change to work, it can’t come at a cost of something else and it often isn’t the responsibility of only one person to make the change. Look to create a “safe” environment where change is made easier.

And finally, not every moment needs to be a feedback moment

Sometimes people are having a rough time, sometimes problems do correct themselves. Not everything needs to be addressed, not every situation is a feedback or learning moment. Sometimes choosing not to give negative feedback is okay too – unless avoiding it comes at a cost (e.g. your frustration, team spirit, the problem escalates). Not giving difficult or negative feedback doesn’t mean saying nothing and doing nothing. Try a different approach – the feed forward method focuses the discussion on common goals and what you need to see done differently going forward. Use the  CIA model (Control, Influence, Accept) to determine which parts apply to this situation – and finding techniques that will help you move past it, without giving negative feedback.

 

by

Giving feedback using the DESC model

,

Everybody understands that performance feedback should be constructive, focused and to the point. Effective feedback can resolve conflicts, overcome problems and improve individual and team morale. It doesn’t really need mentioning that ineffective feedback often accomplishes the opposite. Or that if you are skilled at giving effective feedback, your team will be more motivated, which leads to better performance.




Go to the eBook

hbspt.cta.load(455190, ‘720a6967-cb73-4d07-9ce8-4b78cd7111ac’, {});



“While feedback should focus on behaviour, performance feedback is still a personal conversation between people about people. Emotions always play a part in interpersonal communication. Effective feedback is as much about bringing the right message(s) across as it is about how your message is interpreted.”

Scott Levey

Some feedback facts*

  • 98% of employees will fail to be engaged when managers give little or no feedback
  • 69% of employees say they would work harder if they felt their efforts were better recognized
  • 78% of employees said being recognized motivates them in their job

*(source)

Giving positive feedback is easy

No matter how skilled the feedback giver is, if the receiver isn’t interested in hearing or taking the feedback, nothing will get through. The more difficult the feedback, the more the giver needs to consider the the emotional impact of the feedback. Giving positive feedback is easy.

What is and isn’t feedback?

In an interpersonal environment, feedback is communication about a person’s performance and how their efforts contribute to reaching goals. Feedback is not criticism. Criticism is evaluative; feedback is descriptive. Effective feedback is goal-referenced and tangible, actionable, personalized, timely, ongoing and consistent. As a leader, giving feedback is a task you perform again and again, to let people know where they are and where to go next in terms of individual, team, and company goals.

Giving feedback is a touchy thing. Think back over feedback you have received in the past. Chances are you’ve been given feedback that helped you develop. And, unfortunately, chances are somewhere in your career you’ve been given feedback that made you feel defensive, resistant or unmotivated. By putting yourself back in your old shoes, and thinking about how they actually gave you the feedback, you can improve your own feedback skills.

Common mistakes people make when giving feedback

  1. Avoiding giving feedback
  2. Focusing on the person and not the performance
  3. Giving feedback on what is going wrong, and never on what is going right
  4. Coming  across as judgmental
  5. Doing all the talking, and none of the listening
  6. Giving the feedback without any context
  7. Making generalized, vague statements
  8. Avoiding responsibility for what they are saying by referring to others
  9. Getting defensive if they don’t understand you, or you don’t understand them

“We can’t let our own success, education and advancement ride on whether the person giving us feedback happens to be talented or caring. We have to learn to learn from everyone around us, including people who are lousy at giving feedback, or who don’t have the time to do it thoughtfully. Our individual success depends on it, and so does the collective success of the organization.“

The DESC model

In our skills-based Leadership training, we use the simple 4-step model DESC for structuring feedback. Participants in our “Practical Toolbox for Managers” seminars often highlight DESC as one of the most valuable tools they take away. This model is designed to help you to get your message clear and it can even take the stress out of the feedback conversation for those of us that weren’t born with effective feedback-giving skills.

DESCRIPTION

Give an objective and concrete description of what you have observed using “I” statements.

EFFECT

Explain the effect or impact it had on your business, the team or its members. If the effect was an emotion, name it. Your body language and tone of voice will already be showing your elation or frustration – putting them out in the open can help you move things forward.

SOLUTION

Build the solution through a directive (“What I would like you to do next time is …”) or a participative approach (“What do you think we can do to avoid this next time?”).

CONCLUSION

Build a “contract of commitment”. Check your understanding of what has been agreed, and get commitment for the future.

Further Leadership resources:

by

Asking for feedback

1001meetingsphraseslargeI recently asked a colleague for some feedback following a presentation which I thought had been a bit shaky. ‘You did great’ was the reply, and the conversation moved on. Later on, when the warm glow of being told ‘well done’ had faded, I asked myself what I had actually learnt from that feedback and how would it help me improve. I realized that apart from thinking what a nice person my colleague was, I’d actually heard nothing which would help me do better next time. It then dawned on me that this was because of how I’d gone about asking for it. If I wanted to get meaningful feedback, then the way I asked for it had to be structured too.

Free eBook

Make your meetings matter

Basic steps to get the feedback you want

Getting feedback from peers is one of the most useful tools we have for enhancing our performance. Peer feedback is in real time, looks at learnt skills being used in real situations, and it’s from ‘end users’. But how we go about asking for this feedback has a huge influence on how useful what we hear will be. No more ‘Do you think my presentation was OK’? type questions, what do you really want to know?

Check with your peer that they are comfortable giving you feedback

If they say no, it’s not necessarily because they have nothing good to say! Not everyone is comfortable giving feedback, and those that aren’t tend to give the type of empty answers such as ‘great’ or ‘it was fine’.  A few ways to ask could be:

  • “I’m really hoping to improve my presentations skills and could use your help.  Do you mind giving me some feedback after my presentation?”
  • “Could you give me some feedback on my presentation afterwards?  It would help me a lot in improving my presentation skills.” 

Be specific about what you want feedback on

When asking for feedback, briefly explain what you would like to cover, and why it’s important to you.

  • “It would help me a lot if you could specifically pay attention to my body language during my presentation.”
  • “Could you try and focus on how I transition from point to point during my talk?”

And, if the other person is struggling to think of something to say, ask two basic questions:

  • “What did I do best?” 
  • “Is there something I can improve?” 

Don’t be afraid to dig deeper

For example, I was told that I had lost the audience in a presentation. By asking where I had lost them, why did they feel this had happened and did they have any suggestions for what I could do differently, I was able to think of ways to prevent this happening in my next presentation.                            

Since following these steps, I’ve found feedback far more useful and an increase in respect from both sides. There have only been a couple of times that I’ve winced at something somebody has said, but what they said was true. Ultimately, audiences at future presentations have benefited. So, take a big breath, smile and ask the question – could I ask you for some feedback?

by