Keep this life skill for later
Sign in to save
← All life skills

Communication · a life skill

Deliberate Feedback Framing

aim it at the work, not at them

Feedback doesn't always help. In a review of 607 tests of it, over a third made performance worse. What decided it was less whether the news was good or bad than where it sent the listener's attention: to the work in front of them, or to themselves.

  • Moderate to start
  • High impact
  • Learn it: 2-4 weeks
  • For reviews, coaching and one-to-ones
where a sentence sends attention
Three levels a piece of feedback can land on, and how often feedback backfired. Top level, the self: “You're a natural.” Middle level, effort and rank: “Try harder.” Bottom level, the task itself: “Line 12 counts the tax twice”, with errors falling from 9 to 4. Below, 100 squares with 38 marked: in a review of 607 effects from 131 papers, more than 38 in 100 made performance worse. Three places a sentence can land The self who am I to them? “You're a natural.” Effort and rank how hard, how far behind? “Try harder.” The task itself what do I change? “Line 12 counts the tax twice.” Errors 9 4 Pooled tests of feedback, out of every 100 38+ made it worse 607 effects from 131 papers Red: performance fell after the feedback.

The sentences are examples. The squares are from Kluger and DeNisi's 1996 review, which found that more than 38% of measured effects were negative.

The habit

Try it now.

  1. Write the sentence you'd say

    Before the meeting, put the feedback in one line. Spoken on the fly, it drifts toward the person.

  2. Check where it lands

    On them (“you're careless”), on effort or rank (“try harder”, “behind the team”), or on the task (“line 12”)? The lower, the better.

  3. Take out the person words

    Praise too. “You're a natural” sends attention to the self as surely as “you're careless” does.

  4. Give the right answer, or the next move

    Name the part and what it should be: “line 12 counts the tax twice; it should be 4,200.”

  5. Compare with their last attempt

    “Errors went from 9 to 4.” Change over time keeps attention on the task. Comparing them with others pulls it back to the self.

    One sentence, about one part of the work, with what it should be.

When to break the rule: when the work is finished and won't come back, there's nothing left to aim at. Say thank you and stop.

The aim check

Where does your sentence land?

Type the feedback you're about to give. The ladder shows where it seems to land, from the words in it. Then rebuild it lower down: the part, what it should be, and what's changed since last time.

Start from an example

Rebuild it on the task

Where the sentence lands The self who am I to them? Effort and rank how hard, how far behind? The task itself what do I change? HERE

Words it went by

    Rebuilt on the task

    Nothing you type is saved or sent anywhere. This is a rough read from a list of words, not a judge of tone. You know the person; it doesn't.

    The study behind it

    Feedback helped on average, and often hurt.

    Avraham Kluger and Angelo DeNisi gathered every usable study of feedback and performance they could find: 131 papers, 607 effects, over 23,000 observations. On average, feedback helped by a moderate amount.

    But more than 38% of the effects were negative: people did worse after the feedback than without it. Chance didn't explain that, and neither did whether the news was good or bad.

    Their explanation is a ladder of attention. Feedback that keeps someone on the details of the task tends to help. Feedback that pulls them up, to how hard they're trying or, higher still, to what it says about them, tends to help less or backfire, because the attention that went to the self is no longer on the work.

    The theory was offered as preliminary, and a review can only show which kinds of feedback went with better results, not prove why. The direction has held up well enough to plan by.

    607effects, from 131 papers
    38%+made performance worse

    Went with weaker effects

    • Praise
    • Discouraging feedback
    • Feedback that threatens self-esteem

    Went with stronger effects

    • Giving the correct answer
    • Showing change since last time
    Direction only, from the review's moderator analysis. Kluger and DeNisi, “The effects of feedback interventions on performance”, Psychological Bulletin, 1996.

    The idea

    Why it works.

    Attention is limited. A sentence about the person (good or bad) hands the listener a bigger question than the work: am I good at this, do they rate me, am I behind? They answer that one first, and sometimes the easiest answer is to protect themselves rather than fix the thing.

    A sentence about the work leaves the self out of it. There's nothing to defend, only a line to change. And the right answer, or their own improvement, gives them somewhere to go next.

    When it goes wrong

    Habits that help.

    • Praise the work, not the worker. “The opening example made the point land” teaches more than “you're a great writer”.
    • Leave out the league table. Ranking someone against the team turns a note about the work into a note about where they stand.
    • Bring the fix if you have it. Feedback that included the correct answer did better than feedback that only said “wrong”.
    • Keep a record of last time. You can't say “from 9 to 4” unless you wrote down the 9.

    Go deeper

    Keep going.

    Keep this going in the app.

    HourLife turns these ideas into a daily system — goals, habits, focus, and reflection in one private place.

    Download on the App Store Download on the Mac App Store See everything HourLife does