- name
- feedback-frameworks
- description
- Use when designing feedback rituals or training managers on giving and receiving feedback — covers SBI, Radical Candor, conditions for effective feedback.
# Feedback Frameworks
## When Feedback Helps and When It Hurts
Kluger & DeNisi's 1996 meta-analysis is foundational: feedback improves performance about ⅔ of the time and *hurts* performance about ⅓ of the time. The conditions for effective feedback:
- **Specific behavior**, not general character
- **Sincere**, from someone who cares about the outcome
- **Timely**, close to the event
- **Low-stakes**, separated from rating and pay
- **Skilled delivery**
When these are missing, feedback can backfire. The fix is not "more feedback" — it's better conditions.
## SBI (Situation-Behavior-Impact)
The most usable framework for everyday feedback:
- **Situation**: where, when, what context
- **Behavior**: what specifically did they do
- **Impact**: what was the effect
Example:
> "In yesterday's design review (S), when you cut Maya off three times in a row (B), I noticed she stopped contributing for the rest of the meeting (I). Was that the outcome you wanted?"
The closing question is optional but powerful — it invites reflection rather than defensiveness.
## Radical Candor (Kim Scott)
Two axes:
- **Care personally**: do they know I have their back?
- **Challenge directly**: am I willing to say what I see?
The four quadrants:
- **Radical Candor**: high care + high challenge
- **Ruinous Empathy**: high care + low challenge (most common; nice but unhelpful)
- **Manipulative Insincerity**: low care + low challenge (passive-aggressive, gossip)
- **Obnoxious Aggression**: low care + high challenge (effective short-term, corrosive long-term)
Most managers err toward ruinous empathy. Train for both axes.
## Specific Praise
Praise is feedback too. Same rules:
Bad: "Great job on the launch!"
Good: "The way you sequenced the launch — handling the partner objections first, then the comms team — meant we hit the date without surprises. That sequencing was the move."
The second is replicable, repeatable, motivating. The first is forgettable.
## Receiving Feedback
A separate skill (Stone & Heen, *Thanks for the Feedback*).
Three triggers that derail receiving:
- **Truth triggers**: "this is wrong" — focus on what's right rather than processing
- **Relationship triggers**: "consider the source" — dismissing based on who's giving
- **Identity triggers**: "this means I'm bad" — defending self rather than considering
Counter:
- Distinguish appreciation, coaching, evaluation feedback
- Notice the trigger; pause before responding
- Ask for one specific example
- "Thank you" is the only required response in the moment; processing happens after
Train managers on receiving as well as giving.
## Cadence
- **Real-time**: SBI in the moment when behavior is fresh — primary
- **Weekly 1:1s**: standing time for feedback exchange — both directions
- **Quarterly**: development conversation; broader patterns
- **Cycle / formal**: confirmation of patterns; no surprises
The annual review should contain zero new information. If it does, the manager has failed in the year-round.
## Upward Feedback
The kind managers receive least. Engineer for it:
- Direct invitation in 1:1s ("what should I start, stop, continue?")
- Anonymous channels (skip-level, surveys)
- Manager scorecards on cadence
- Cultural permission to push back (modeled by senior leaders)
Without upward feedback, managers operate on filtered information.
## Peer Feedback
For development: useful, asynchronous prompts (3–5 questions tied to competencies).
For evaluation: cautious. Use as input to manager assessment, not as a vote. Watch for sycophancy and retaliation.
## 360s
Use with care.
For development: well-suited. Aggregate input from manager, peers, reports, partners. Recipient owns the action plan.
For evaluation: high risk. Easily a popularity contest. If used:
- Anchored to specific competencies
- n ≥ 5–8 raters
- One input, not the rating
- Not used alone for pay or termination decisions
## Common Failures
- Vague praise / vague criticism — both information-free
- Sandwich feedback (positive-negative-positive) — recipients learn to brace for the middle
- Hoarding feedback for the annual
- Manager-only-down feedback (no upward)
- 360s used punitively
- Feedback culture as code for harshness or for niceness — both miss the point
## Manager Training Module
Suggested content:
1. Why feedback fails (Kluger & DeNisi)
2. SBI in practice (recorded examples)
3. Radical Candor framework
4. Specific praise practice
5. Receiving feedback
6. Role-plays with peers
7. Calibration on what "specific" looks like
Allow 3 hours minimum; role-play heavy.
## Cross-References
- `feedback-systems-designer` agent
- `manager-enablement-coach` agent
- `one-on-ones` skill
- `difficult-conversations` skill
## Key References
- Scott, K. (2017). *Radical Candor*.
- Stone, D., & Heen, S. (2014). *Thanks for the Feedback*.
- Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance.
- Buckingham, M., & Goodall, A. (2019). "The Feedback Fallacy." *HBR*.
Ver en GitHub