In an ideal world, everyone would feeling sufficient belonging, and be comfortable enough in vulnerability towards each other, that this post didn’t need writing. We’re not there yet.
The most effective, kind, and valuable type of feedback is the accurate type. The type that isn’t wrapped in layers of extra-communication to soften the blow. The type that helps the receiver enter directly into a discussion to establish the truth of a matter.
“In the end, accuracy and kindness are the same thing”
Ray Dalio (Principles, chpt. 9.3 a)
In a professional organisation, there’s an opportunity to design a culture, and align a team around that culture. It’s possible to coach and lead an organisation to such a level of belonging and trust, that accurate feedback, concisely formed and delivered, is the norm.
However, in everyday life, there are many types of feedback that do not fit this description.
- Feedback to friends is often not expected to follow the direct mode of feedback.
- Accurate feedback in low-connection relationships can backfire due to low levels of belonging and trust.
- Feedback in family contexts is often frowned upon.
In these cases, there is a choice. You can conform to the norm, and deliver feedback in a conventional model (maybe sandwich it up) – or you can gradually try to make the world better by spreading belonging and vulnerability, and delivering feedback to help uncover truth.
I’m guilty of taking the easy way out far too often, and softening the blow (as well as the effect) of feedback oriented communication.
I’m also guilty of a less obvious error. I will deliver feedback directly without first building the prerequisite base of belonging and shared vulnerability.
This breaks relationships. Don’t do it.
In summary – back down or step up, but don’t step up halfway. Make connections that matter, then help people for the better.