I’ve always found giving feedback a bit awkward – even positive feedback where I was praising someone for a job well done. It has got easier now I have children, because frankly I get to practice giving feedback all day at home!
It’s also got easier knowing some of the theory, and while I was doing my mentoring training I got to understand several feedback methods in detail.
Here are some of my favorites (and a few I don’t rate much but might work for you!).
1. The feedback sandwich
The feedback sandwich is a common feedback method – I wasn’t able to find out where it originated from but it has been around a long time.
The sandwich is where you give positive feedback, talk about what could be improved or provide the constructive feedback, and then end with another good pat on the back. It’s common, but leaders don’t seem to like it (according to HBR) and you don’t have to work in an office for long before you can spot it.
It’s transparently obvious for most managers, and personally I think I would rather just be transparent, expressing my concerns and getting to the problem rather than trying to build in fake platitudes as ‘balance’.
Research with medical students concludes that it does not change performance anyway, so the evidence for this method being effective in driving behaviour change is not there. This would be my least likely to use method of providing feedback to a mentee or colleague.
2. Feedforward
Feedforward is a method originated by Marshall Goldsmith. In this article by Goldsmith, shared by the University of Michigan, he explains how to use it.
Participants (in pairs) select one behaviour they would like to change.
- They ask for feedforward on how to achieve that change from their partner – in other words, ideas and suggestions to implement in the future to grow that particular skill. The partner is not allowed to comment on past performance and can only provide ideas for what the person can change/do differently/learn to achieve the behaviour change they have identified.
- The person receiving the feedforward is not allowed to comment or pass judgement on the ideas, not even to acknowledge that an idea is good – I found this quite a restrictive aspect of the method as I would find it difficult to not at least be nodding along. The person receiving suggestions is supposed to listen and take notes.
- Then you swap, and later swap partners to repeat the exercise until time is up or you call a halt to the exercise.
I can see how this would work in a team setting, and it would be a great icebreaker. However, I’m not sure that I’d use it in a mentoring situation or with a project management colleague. If I were suggesting ideas, I would like to have some idea of whether my suggestions were landing appropriately with them.
For example, I might be offering tips they could never implement due to personal circumstances, but if I had that feedback, I would be able to change my ideas and through discussion we could come up with alternatives that might work better for them.
I do like the ethos behind it though: that it is more helpful to focus on what can change rather than what someone is doing wrong.
Plus, Goldsmith talks in the article about how this method works well with successful people, and to be honest, most of the individuals I work with day-to-day would fall into that category of experienced professional, and they would be more open to this kind of suggestion that is self-initiated than traditional “feedback”.
It’s a far more positive way to address broadly the same kind of development requirement.
I can see that taking this approach, even if we don’t implement the exercise exactly as Goldsmith designed it, would be useful in conversations around setting goals.
Read next: 11 project management skills employers expect you to have
3. SBI Model
The SBI model for giving feedback is another classic. You frame the conversation like this:
S: Situation (describe the situation/location)
B: Behaviour (describe what you saw happen)
I: Impact (describe the impact to the team/client etc)
Here’s an example of giving feedback using SBI:
“During the project check in this week (S) I noticed you didn’t have your plan ready (B) which meant we couldn’t give Jo the confidence in delivery dates I was hoping for (I).”
This model works best, in my opinion, if you are watching your mentee carry out activities. If you are not on the same team as them, it might be difficult to use as you won’t have the opportunity to carry out observations, and you would be relying on second hand information.
It could also be used in a mentoring session: “I just heard you say that you were in a meeting with Tech this week and felt like they weren’t listening to you, which meant you came out of the call without what you needed.”
But you’d have to go further than that – playing back what happened can’t be the end of the conversation. You’d need to continue the dialogue to talk about what the mentee could have done/could do next time.
The benefit of this model (and all the subsequent ones as they are very similar) is that you are using facts to provide the feedback. The University of Alabama says this makes it more likely that the person you are talking to is going to absorb the feedback.
The article I read from them also pointed out that feedback can be positive, so this model (and all the others) can be used to highlight strong performance as well as opportunities for improvement.
4. COIN Conversation Model
The COIN conversation model for feedback was developed by Anna Carroll in 2003.
COIN stands for:
C: Connect (establish a rapport).
O: Observe (state what you see).
I: Impact (talk about the impact).
N: Next steps (agree path forward or actions).
Here’s an example of giving feedback using COIN:
“Hello, lovely to see you (C). When we were talking about the contracting risk this morning, you weren’t clear about the impact on the project (O). I’m not sure what to put in the report (I). Can you take me through it again?”
This is very similar to SBI with the addition of an action step on the end. In reality, you’d need to use this action step to round out the conversation with SBI too.
I like the addition of the connection step as long as it feels natural. I think it’s just a reminder that you wouldn’t walk into a meeting room and start with the observation without making some effort at building rapport, but equally you wouldn’t want to spend ages on that and have the person wondering why they are in the room.
5. CEDAR Model
I read on LinkedIn that the CEDAR model is a useful feedback approach to take when the issues are complex, but I think it draws heavily on the other models and is not that different beyond the Review step. Read on to see what you think!
Anna Wildman created these steps in 2003 and they are:
C: Context (provide the background, similar to S in SBI but goes beyond that in providing the wider situation and how this feedback fits into their overall performance).
E: Examples (provide specific examples, same as B in SBI, suggestion is that you provide the positive examples and solicit constructive examples from the individual).
D: Diagnosis (explain the impact or your interpretation of the situation, same as I in SBI. MindTools goes further and says this is where you ask what led to where the individual is now – you co-create the diagnosis together rather than simply reporting what you see)
A: Action (explain what should be different/what needs to change, same as N in COIN, except more collaborative in this model, ideally you don’t simply tell someone what to do but ask for their suggestions).
R: Review (talk about how you will follow up together).
Here’s an example of how to give feedback using CEDAR:
“OK, so that’s great news you got a new job (C). It sounds as if you haven’t talked to your manager about a leaving date yet (E). If you don’t do that soon, it might make it hard for you to meet your new employer’s start date (D). When do you think you’ll be doing that? (A)….Great, let me know how it goes when we talk next week (R).”
Of all the models that provide a simple framework for conversation, I like this one the best. It’s clear, and it has enough additional steps, including the review stage.
You can add in consequences to the Action stage too. It’s collaborative and facilitative and doesn’t rely on you telling someone to be better.
6. DESC Script
DESC was created by Sharon and Gordon Bower. Yale describes it as an assertive way of providing feedback to someone else.
It breaks down like this:
D: Describe (state overview of situation – in this method and all the others below with a similar step, we stick to the facts here).
E: Express (state feelings/thoughts in an “I” statement”.
S: Specify (talk about next steps/what will be different next time).
C: Consequences (describe outcome of the new way of working).
Here’s an example of giving feedback using the DESC script:
“For the last programme board meeting, I couldn’t finish the deck until late the night before (D). “I felt rushed that day (E). For the next meeting, can we work together to make sure the deck is complete at least 3 days in advance (S). Then I can get it out to attendees, and they’ll have a chance to read it before the meeting.”
Phrasing feelings and thoughts in the first person is less likely to make someone defensive and turns the emphasis to the impact of their behaviour (“I felt disappointed,” compared to “You were late.”)
The consequences step isn’t as clear in the other similar models like SBI, but it is a good addition. You can add positive or negative consequences to highlight the impact of behaviour change, or lack of it.
Which feedback method to choose?
We all have to give feedback, and being able to do so is an essential skill for personal and professional development. And yet, it can often feel awkward or challenging to deliver positive or constructive feedback effectively.
Through understanding and practicing various feedback methods, you can improve your ability to provide constructive and impactful feedback, and make it feel less cringey for you at the same time.
So, which method should you choose?
The feedback sandwich, while common, often lacks the transparency needed for genuine improvement. Feedforward, on the other hand, shifts the focus to future growth and can be particularly beneficial for experienced professionals.
The SBI and COIN models provide structured approaches that emphasize observable behavior and its impact, with COIN adding a valuable step of establishing rapport.
The CEDAR model offers a comprehensive framework that includes collaborative diagnosis and follow-up, making it a robust choice for complex feedback situations.
Finally, the DESC script incorporates assertiveness and personal expression, ensuring that feedback is both clear and considerate.
But overall, they all enable you to have conversations and provide feedback, and you know what? It actually doesn’t matter which one you opt for – pick the one that feels most authentic and useful to you.
Each method has its strengths and is suited to different contexts and individuals. Select the approach that feels best for you (and the situation) and integrate the technique into what you do regularly to build up some practice using it.
Ultimately, effective feedback is about clear communication, mutual respect, and a commitment to growth, making it a powerful tool in any professional setting, and one that will help you build positive relationships with your colleagues.
This article first appeared on Rebel’s Guide to Project Management and can be read here: Mastering the art of feedback: 6 proven methods to boost performance
