As the saying goes, “If you keep doing what you’ve always done, you’ll keep getting what you’ve always got.” No one is quite sure who first said it, but the message certainly applies to the way that feedback is given. There are many tried and true processes, and that’s why people tend to keep giving feedback in the way they’ve always done. There is a better way to give feedback, but we need to be prepared to take a different approach.

If done well, feedback can be transformational, but to achieve this, we need to be less hung up with perceptions of how it should be done and instead, more open to how it could be done.

The Problem with Giving Feedback

Mention the very word “feedback” to your team members and, even in a business where employees are well supported, it can create a range of emotions. For many, their relationship with exchanging feedback has become a frustrating and sometimes overwhelming process. Employees can feel trapped and as a result they grit their teeth and just try to get through it the best way they can.

Yet when feedback is done well, both managers and staff can liberate themselves and others from the space between a rock and a hard place that causes unnecessary anxiety, and instead step into a number of possibilities. Replacing that one single word “feedback,” that often controls and concerns us, with two new words, “sharing perspectives,” can make a huge difference. A perspective is not right or wrong, true or false, positive or negative; it is only an observation. And this can be a highly refreshing outlook when applied to feedback in the workplace.

 The “always done” methods.

In organizations, feedback has become a formalized, often high-pressure process, embedded in reviews and assessments, which can lead to abstract insights that fall short of fostering real growth. In my research for the book, some people even described what felt like a “fight” to get their views across and agreed with.

Feedback models can help structure organizational feedback, but they can also perpetuate the idea that it’s okay to rely on a one-size fits-all approach. This can make feedback feel like a check-the-box exercise and procedural. Despite these cons, these methods represent the “always done” side of feedback. Even worse, many managers recognize that feedback has been reduced to a mere formality, yet they lack the knowledge or tools to improve the process.

Three examples of over-used feedback models, include:

1. The feedback sandwich: The bread is the compliment holding the filling, the critical or constructive feedback. The feedback sandwich can encourage managers to be specific about what they observed, and offer examples. This can be useful for the receiver of the feedback. But the challenge is that the bread is never the main focus, it’s the filling. The employee receiving the feedback can be quick to dismiss the compliments and instead focus on bracing themselves for the message they suspect is coming. As a result, any genuine messages of appreciation, praise or learning can get lost. It’s not a particularly nourishing sandwich.
2. SBI and SAID models: The Situation, Behavior, Impact (SBI) model and the Situation, Action, Impact, Do (SAID) models are two of the most popular feedback frameworks. When used well, these models can become particularly useful for just-in-time feedback. For example, in the SBI model, feedback might be presented like this: Susan, in the team meeting we had this morning, you interrupted me twice and I felt like you were dismissing my opinion. The challenge with these two models is that, when not carried out well, the intention behind the behavior can be assumed or inferred by the provider, and the recipient can be left feeling responsible for the provider’s feelings, neither of which are useful nor accurate.
3. 360-degree feedback: This process involves someone collecting feedback from a variety of people, which might include their team, people they collaborate with and people who structurally hold more senior and junior positions within the organization. When done well, for the receiver, the 360° approach can be a useful way to gain insights and build awareness of how others perceive them in different situations and calibrate that against their own perceptions. One challenge with 360-degree feedback is that anonymous input can sometimes lead people to share blunt or overly critical opinions, which may feel overwhelming or confusing for the person receiving it.

A Fresh Approach to Giving Feedback

When giving feedback, it’s essential to communicate with clarity and intention, ensuring your team member knows exactly what is expected and how to act on it.

Here’s a better approach to effectively giving constructive feedback:

1. Be clear on the outcome: Start by being crystal clear about the desired outcome from your feedback. If there is an action that must be taken, leave no room for doubt. Be explicit in your expectations without being overly gentle, and make sure your team member understands the importance of completing the task.
2. Differentiate between direction, instruction and perspective.
3. Direction: Clearly state the action that must be taken. While the team member has the autonomy to decide how to complete the task, emphasize the consequences of failing to follow through and offer support where needed.
4. Instruction: In cases where a specific process or method must be followed, be explicit about how to do it. This is particularly important when compliance or safety protocols are involved.
5. Perspective: Share your point of view on a situation but make it clear that this feedback is merely an observation. Let the recipient know they have the freedom to decide how to use the information without fear of negative consequences.

This approach ensures that feedback is constructive, clear and actionable, fostering an environment of growth and trust within the team.

Conclusion

I’ve intentionally highlighted some of the most widely used feedback models to underscore what’s often missing in the workplace: the exchange and human connection that form the foundation of effective feedback. While these models have their advantages, they can sometimes lead to misunderstanding and anxiety, turning feedback into a transactional experience rather than a meaningful conversation. The risk is that employees may become disconnected from both the feedback itself and their work, and, in some cases, from you as the giver of the feedback.

When feedback is done right — such as through the direction, instruction, and perspective approach — it’s quite simple. At its core, it’s about two people having a conversation. It’s this human connection that makes feedback truly valuable.