By observing what they did and how they did it for myself, I'd be able to "own" any feedback that I gave. As well as this, I learned that I should adopt the mindset of trying to "catch people doing the right thing," rather than trying to catch them out. So far, so good.

Reserving Judgment

Another piece of advice I'm always given is to ensure that feedback is "non-judgmental." In other words, to observe behavior and performance without labeling it as "good" or "bad," "right" or "wrong."

Instead, I should feed back what I observed and, then – through open discussion – allow the person being observed to make their own sense of these observations and come to their own conclusions about what, if anything, they'd like to change.

I've found this approach to be highly effective in achieving behavioral change, as long as the way you give the feedback allows a safe space for reflection and personal development.

The Feedback Sandwich

The advice I hear most often is to use the "feedback sandwich" in performance-related conversations. Essentially, this is when you sandwich any negative observations between two pieces of positive ones.

Advocates give various reasons for this approach. They say that it's best to start the discussion on a positive note to help put the person at ease, before raising the trickier issue of any poor performance. Then the feedback can end on a "feel-good" note so the person doesn't go away feeling upset or demotivated. I take great exception to this advice, but I'll come back to that later.

Great Feedback Can Be Transformational

I don't think many would argue with the fact that, as a manager or team member, you need to give and receive feedback that's timely, of good quality and engaging. But giving the right amount, in the right way, at the right time can be challenging. Yet, done well, it can be absolutely transformational.

Think of a time when you received feedback that created real impact for you. What was it that made it stand out? Did it open your eyes to something you'd not noticed or were unaware of, thereby allowing you to develop your skills in a targeted way? Or was the impact negative? Was it delivered ineffectively, insensitively or with bad intentions? In either case, I'm certain you'll remember how it made you feel.

To my mind, good feedback needs to:

• be timely.
• be specific.
• encourage self-awareness.
• build insight.
• be descriptive, rather than evaluative.
• be constructive.
• focus on areas of improvement.
• be practical.
• be necessary.
• be helpful.
• be kind.

How Does Feedback Relate to Observation and Judgment?

And this brings me to my contemplation about feedback, and how it relates to observation and judgment.

You can describe observation as watching in order to carry out a detailed examination of something, before analysis, diagnosis or interpretation. Other words often associated with observation include reviewing, noticing, monitoring, considering, inspection, and scrutiny.

Judgment is an opinion or estimate formed by examining and comparing. It’s the ability to make considered decisions and come to sensible conclusions. Words associated with judgment include perception, reason and shrewdness.

Feedback, in the context of the workplace, is usually described as a tool that can help people evaluate themselves and their work by hearing how others perceive them. In other words, it's "part and parcel" of managing people and teams, and usually forms part of a performance management approach.

Getting the Balance Right

Getting the right balance of feedback, observation and judgment is tricky.

You should observe non-judgmentally, yet elements of observing require you to review, monitor and scrutinize, all of which require some element of judgment.

How do you know what you should feed back on, based on your observations, without applying some element of perception and reason (i.e. judgment)?

And how can you give feedback on how someone is doing in their job, or how well their behaviors align to company values, without making some judgment about their performance and how it matches up to what’s required?

Well, here's what I've concluded.

People respond well to kind, helpful and well-intentioned feedback. It might be developmental, designed to help them build their competence, or motivational, intended to build confidence. It can be a powerful tool to focus activity and effort, and enhance performance. It's also an opportunity to provide support and empower people, and to make sure that they feel equipped and happy to carry out their jobs effectively.

Observation is impactful, but I am not convinced feedback can or should always be without judgment. We're all human and we arguably make judgments all the time, whether we're conscious of it or not. My approach is to be as objective as possible and consciously reserve judgment where it's not appropriate. Instead, I try to keep the focus on the individual and what will be most helpful to them.

Oh, and about that "feedback sandwich." That’s never the way to do it. Be honest, respectful, engaging, focused, and sensitive – no sandwiches required!

What's Next?

Giving balanced feedback can be tricky. You’ve got to pitch it just right and get the outcomes you’re looking for, while keeping your team member engaged and receptive. So how good is your feedback?

Chances are, even if you’re pretty good at it, you’ll find room for improvement. Check out our articles The Feedback Matrix and Giving Feedback for more insights.

Tip of the Week

How to Cope With Ambiguity

By Simon Bell, Mind Tools Content Editor

Ever had to make an important decision based on unclear and shifting information? Most of us have. Ambiguity stymies decision making across teams, organizations, and even outside work. It affects everyone, from strategic leaders restructuring businesses to frontline managers considering where best to focus limited resources.

But you can overcome it. Reduce ambiguity simply by focusing on key information and seeking clarification. Ask for specific details wherever possible. For example:

• Why are we doing this?
• What outcomes do we want?
• Who's responsible for key tasks?
• When do we need to get it done?

Information gets lost or misinterpreted as it moves through an organization, so keep your communication precise, and encourage your colleagues to do likewise. And remember: "too much information” is a real thing. Be as informed as you can be, but don’t get overloaded by data. That can waste time and cloud your judgment.

Pain Points Podcast

Don't miss the latest episode of our “Pain Points” podcast!

This week, Jonathan Hancock and guests discuss “What’s a Meaningful Conversation?” They’ll be talking about the hallmarks of meaningful conversations, why they’re tougher to have in remote or hybrid teams, and how to handle the challenges of performance reviews, conflict resolution and brainstorming.

Hear stories, insights and tips from people who understand the challenges we all face at work – in “Pain Points,” the new podcast exclusive to Mind Tools members.

Subscribe today!

News Roundup

This Week's Global Workplace Insights

Tough at the Top: New Challenges for the C-suite

Today's leaders face unprecedented challenges, with predictable results. According to research by talent solutions provider LHH, over 65 percent experience burnout and 60 percent feel unsupported. Since the pandemic, expectations of CEOs have surged, leading to increased stress.

A lack of role models complicates matters further, leaving leaders to navigate uncharted territory. Succession planning is also a concern, as Gen Zers are advancing faster into leadership roles, highlighting the need for a robust leadership pipeline.

While some fear a shortage of future leaders, others see opportunities for growth, especially with the rise of remote work. Ongoing challenges such as remote work, hybrid offices and AI further complicate leadership dynamics, requiring leaders to adapt rapidly.

As we navigate the transformative 2020s, the ability to embrace change and prepare for the unknown remains paramount for leaders.

Low Spirits: The Scourge of Ghost Jobs

In a tightening labor market, job seekers are encountering a new hurdle. There’s a rising trend of "ghost jobs," as reported by BBC Worklife. Ghost jobs are seemingly open positions that were never intended to be filled. Despite appearing on platforms like LinkedIn and Indeed, many of these listings remain stagnant, labeled as "Posted 30+ days ago."

Some are remnants of filled positions, while others serve as promotional tools or to gather resumes without real vacancies. Clarify Capital's survey found that nearly 70 percent of jobs stay open for over 30 days, with some remaining unfilled for more than six months.

Employers admit to listing jobs indefinitely to signal growth, motivate employees, or pacify overworked staff. While not all stagnant postings are intentional, they create frustration and disillusionment for job seekers, leading many to reconsider their application strategies.

Ghost jobs may initially benefit employers, but they risk damaging their reputation and deterring potential hires in the long run. They sound like a recruitment mistake to us. What do you think?

See you next week for more member-exclusive content and insight from the Mind Tools team!