Managing feedback as a comms pro
Feedback gets blamed for a lot of things in workplaces: hurt feelings, awkward silences, disengaged teams, even sleepless nights for leaders but, feedback itself isn’t actually the issue. The real issue is how feedback is framed, delivered, received and whether the culture around it makes people feel safe enough to engage with it honestly.
So, how do we frame it better? How do we have these conversations? This blog covers it all: why feedback is so hard, what leaders often get wrong, and how to do it better without turning every conversation into a stress spiral. Rather than rehashing the usual “feedback tips”, this blog looks at the patterns underneath feedback, including the human stuff that quietly determines whether feedback leads to growth or shutdown.
Why leaders avoid feedback (even when they know they shouldn’t)
Most leaders don’t avoid feedback because they don’t care, but rather because they care too much. At the heart of feedback avoidance is the deeply human instinct to be liked, and when leaders worry that giving feedback will make them seem mean, unsupportive or unfair, they tend to avoid giving feedback at all. So instead of risking discomfort, they soften messages, delay conversations, or again, they avoid them.
Avoidance might feel kind in the moment, but clarity is kinder in the long run because avoiding the conversations, ironically, does far more damage. When feedback doesn’t happen:
small issues become big ones,
resentment builds quietly,
people are left guessing how they’re really going,
and trust erodes.
Feedback is everywhere (even when you say nothing)
One of the biggest blind spots in organisations is forgetting how many forms feedback actually takes. Feedback goes beyond performance reviews or formal conversations and it shows up in things like:
day-to-day coaching
recognition and praise
course correction in real time
silence when something goes wrong
surveys and anonymous input
reinforcement of what “good” looks like
Not to mention: no feedback is still feedback. So when leaders say nothing, people don’t just assume everything is fine, in fact, they usually assume the opposite.
Culture decides if feedback feels safe
Feedback doesn’t land well in cultures where it only appears once or twice a year. So what that means is: if feedback only shows up during formal reviews, it becomes loaded with anxiety and meaning, versus where feedback is normalised; it’s shared often, casually and constructively and therefore loses its sting and becomes useful.
One of the most powerful shifts leaders can make is moving from a performance cycle mindset to a continuous improvement mindset. What that looks like is:
asking for feedback as often as you give it
showing you can take it without becoming defensive
and making it clear that feedback is about learning, not punishment
Why the word “feedback” backfires
Sometimes the problem is in the words we use. For example, when people hear the word ‘feedback’, some people feel this signals criticism, judgement or trouble ahead. If you ask someone, “can I give you some feedback?”, you’ll often see their guard go up instantly. This is an opportunity for us to shift our language:
Ask for advice instead of feedback
Use open questions instead of yes/no ones
Focus on keep / change / improve rather than “good” or “bad”
Why the “feedback sandwich” needs to retire
Wrapping criticism in forced positivity doesn’t make feedback kinder, contrary to popular belief. It actually makes it confusing. The classic praise–criticism–praise approach often leaves people unclear about what actually needs to change. Thanks to how our brains work, people tend to remember the first and last thing said, which means the important part gets lost in the middle.
Frameworks like Action–Impact–Result (AIR) and Situation–Task–Action–Result–Alternative (STARR) work because they separate behaviour from identity and focus on outcomes, not character.
Neurodiversity changes the feedback equation
Feedback isn’t one-size-fits-all, especially in neurodiverse teams. For people who experience things like rejection sensitivity, feedback can feel far more intense, even when well-intended which is why context matters.
Explaining why feedback is being given, and anchoring it in belief, not doubt, can make a huge difference. For example: “I’m telling you this because I believe in you and I know you can do better” lands very differently to silence or vague criticism.
Not all feedback deserves equal weight
One of the most underrated feedback skills is actually discernment. Not all feedback is valid, well-informed or useful and patterns matter more than one-off comments, and trust matters more than volume.
Good feedback is:
specific,
observable,
grounded in context,
and focused on improvement.
Measure what actually matters
Finally, feedback often fails when it’s tied to the wrong metrics because when performance is reduced to numbers alone, people optimise for the metric, not the outcome. Which is exactly when shortcuts, disengagement and unhealthy competition creep in. Meaningful feedback looks beyond outputs and considers:
quality,
behaviour,
collaboration,
customer impact,
and long-term outcomes.
