GreymatterCollective
Learning & toolsLeadership Mirror V1
Leadership Mirror

Leadership Mirror · Explore · 6 min read

Feedback & Difficult Conversations

Being specific while staying curious

After a difficult conversation, does the other person know what to do differently?

Feedback often becomes difficult before anyone speaks. You may anticipate defensiveness, worry about damaging a relationship or feel frustrated that the issue has happened again. It can then be tempting to soften the message until it becomes vague, or sharpen it until the person hears a judgement about who they are.

A useful conversation gives the other person something they can examine and act on. It describes what happened, explains why it matters and makes room for information you do not yet have. Support and candour can work together when both serve learning and clear expectations. Use this exploration to examine how you prepare, how you respond to disagreement and whether the conversation ends with an understood next step rather than a temporary sense of relief.

What might be happening?

A difficult message can threaten how someone sees their competence or their relationship with you. That may lead to explanation, disagreement or silence. These responses do not automatically mean that the person refuses to learn. They may be trying to understand the example, correct a missing detail or work out whether their account will receive a fair hearing.

Start by distinguishing an observation from your interpretation. “The handover document arrived after the meeting” is something you can check together. “You do not care about the team” attributes a motive. Even if the impact was serious, the second statement directs the conversation towards defending character rather than improving the handover.

The impact also needs examination. Explain what happened next and what part you know directly. If you are inferring how others felt, say so. Invite the person’s account without using the question as a trap. Good intentions can coexist with an unhelpful effect; understanding the intention may reveal a resource gap, competing instruction or assumption that needs attention.

Consider a colleague who interrupts during a planning discussion. You could name a specific meeting, describe the interruption and explain that another contribution was left unfinished. Then ask what was happening from their perspective. You can still be clear that colleagues need room to finish. The enquiry helps you choose a workable adjustment rather than asking for an abstract change of attitude.

End with an agreement about future behaviour. What will the person try? What support or change will you provide? When will you review it? If the issue requires a formal process, use that process clearly and fairly. An informal experiment should not replace established responsibilities. For routine developmental feedback, a short follow-up can show whether the conversation changed the work.

The leadership tension

Support

The person receives a fair hearing and appropriate help. Excessive cushioning can hide the point and leave them unsure that change is needed.

Candour

The behaviour, impact and expectation are explicit. Candour delivered as a personal verdict can make the useful information harder to hear.

Prepare a message specific enough to act on and a conversation open enough to discover what you have missed.

Research lens

A few useful ideas can help make sense of this behaviour. The practical connections below are Greymatter’s interpretation of the research; these sources do not validate your Mirror result.

Feedback and the focus of attention

Research-supported construct

Kluger and DeNisi’s meta-analysis found that feedback interventions improved performance on average, but some reduced it. Their feedback intervention theory considers where feedback directs attention, including towards the task or towards the self. The findings challenge the assumption that providing more feedback necessarily produces better work. Content and the way a message is understood matter.

A practical implication is to ask what your message directs the person to examine. A global judgement can invite concern about status or identity, while a concrete example can make the next action easier to discuss. Specificity is not a guarantee of success: timing, the relationship and the task still matter. Check understanding and review the actual behaviour afterwards. The research supports careful design of feedback rather than a promise that one script always works.

Source: Avraham N. Kluger & Angelo DeNisi (1996) (opens in a new tab)

Observation, impact and intention

Established practice model

The Center for Creative Leadership’s Situation–Behavior–Impact model structures a message around a particular situation, observable behaviour and its effect. Its extension adds an enquiry about intention. This is a practical conversation framework, rather than a diagnostic theory. It helps a speaker separate what they observed from the meaning they attributed to it, and helps the listener add information.

Use the structure flexibly. Describe the meeting and action, explain the work consequence and ask what the person was trying to achieve. Be ready for your own interpretation to change. If the impact remains a concern, discuss it directly even when the intention was reasonable. The purpose is a more accurate account and a useful agreement, rather than winning a dispute about whose description is correct.

Source: Center for Creative Leadership (opens in a new tab)

When this helps and when to watch it

When this helps

  • A specific behaviour can be observed and discussed.
  • The person has a realistic opportunity to act differently.
  • A concern needs attention before it becomes a repeated pattern.
  • Both people can contribute information about the event.

When to watch it

  • The message uses character labels or uncheckable motives.
  • Several unrelated issues are saved for one overwhelming conversation.
  • A question about intention is used to corner the person.
  • The conversation ends without an understood action or review point.

Experiment

Try it this week

Prepare one example and one enquiry

  1. Choose a routine work issue that is appropriate for a developmental conversation. Write down the situation, the behaviour you directly observed and the effect on the work. Remove claims about character or motive. If you cannot describe an example, gather clearer information before presenting a verdict.
  2. Arrange a suitable private moment. Describe the example and ask for the person’s account. Listen before repeating your conclusion. Check any disagreement about facts, then explain the expectation that still needs attention. Ask what would help make that expectation workable.
  3. Agree one next action and when to review it. Include your own commitment if information, resources or competing priorities contributed. Afterwards, examine whether the person could describe the requested change in their own words. At the review, discuss evidence of what happened rather than whether the conversation felt sufficiently firm.

Reflect afterwards
What became clearer when I separated the behaviour from my explanation of the person’s motive?

Think about it

  • Which conversation am I postponing, and what makes it hard to begin?
  • Do I become vague when I want to be kind, or personal when I want to be clear?
  • What evidence would show that my feedback helped the work?

A useful feedback conversation can remain uncomfortable. Judge it by whether the issue was understood, the other account was heard and the next step became workable. You can ask for feedback on how you handled it too. That turns the conversation into an opportunity for both people to learn while keeping responsibility for the original issue clear.

Explore further

These are three curated starting points. External resources open in a new tab.

Leadership MirrorExplore all leadership topics