0
GrowGroup

Blog

The Brutal Truth About Feedback That Nobody Wants to Hear: Why Your "Constructive Criticism" Is Actually Destroying Your Team

Related Resources:

Here's something that'll make you uncomfortable: 73% of managers think they're brilliant at giving feedback, while only 26% of employees agree.

I've been training teams across Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane for the past 18 years, and if there's one thing that makes my blood boil, it's watching good managers destroy talented people with their so-called "feedback skills." You know what I'm talking about - those cringe-worthy performance reviews where someone walks out looking like they've been hit by a truck, while the manager sits there thinking they've just delivered a masterclass in professional development.

Let me tell you about Sarah from a tech company in Surry Hills. Brilliant developer, passionate about her work, consistently delivered quality code. Her manager decided she needed feedback on her "communication style" during team meetings. Instead of having a proper conversation, he announced in front of everyone that she was "too quiet" and needed to "step up her participation." Sarah's confidence plummeted. Within three months, she'd transferred departments. The manager? Still congratulating himself on providing "honest feedback."

The Problem Nobody Talks About

Most feedback fails because we're taught to follow formulas instead of having real conversations. You've probably heard of the "feedback sandwich" - positive comment, criticism, positive comment. It's rubbish. Absolute rubbish. People see right through it, and it dilutes the important message you're trying to deliver.

Here's what actually works, based on what I've observed in hundreds of Australian workplaces: specificity trumps everything. Instead of saying "You need to improve your presentation skills," try "During yesterday's client meeting, when you said 'um' seventeen times in five minutes, it made the proposal sound uncertain."

Harsh? Maybe. Effective? Absolutely.

The other thing that drives me mental is timing. I watched a manager at a Brisbane consulting firm wait three weeks to tell an employee about a client complaint. Three weeks! By then, the employee couldn't even remember the specific interaction. Feedback has a use-by date, people. After 48 hours, you're basically having an academic discussion about ancient history.

What I Got Wrong for Years

I'll admit something here that might surprise you. For the first eight years of my career, I was terrible at feedback. Absolutely terrible. I thought being direct meant being brutal, and I confused honesty with cruelty. I once told a junior employee that their report was "amateur hour" in front of their colleagues. I thought I was being efficient. Looking back, I was just being a complete tool.

That experience taught me something crucial: the messenger matters as much as the message. If people don't trust you, if they think you're trying to tear them down rather than build them up, your feedback becomes white noise at best, destructive criticism at worst.

The Melbourne Method That Changed Everything

A few years ago, I was working with a manufacturing company in Melbourne's west. The floor supervisor, Tony, had a unique approach to feedback that I initially thought was too soft. Instead of pointing out what went wrong, he'd ask: "Walk me through your thinking on that decision."

Revolutionary? Not really. Effective? Incredibly.

This approach works because it assumes positive intent and invites explanation rather than demanding justification. When someone explains their reasoning, they often identify the problem themselves. And when they identify it themselves, they own the solution.

Tony's team had the lowest turnover in the company and consistently exceeded production targets. The secret wasn't magical feedback techniques - it was treating people like thinking adults rather than children who needed correction.

The Australian Context Nobody Considers

Here's something most feedback training completely ignores: cultural context matters enormously. What works in a corporate office in Sydney might crash and burn on a construction site in Perth. Australians, generally speaking, value directness but hate being patronised. We're comfortable with robust discussion but allergic to corporate speak.

I've seen American-style feedback frameworks fail spectacularly in Australian workplaces because they're too scripted, too formal. A tradie in Darwin doesn't want to hear about "developmental opportunities" - they want to know if they're doing the job right and how to do it better.

The most successful feedback conversations I've witnessed in Australian workplaces start with: "Can we have a quick chat?" Not "I'd like to schedule some time to discuss your performance metrics."

The Uncomfortable Truth About Positive Feedback

Everyone bangs on about the importance of positive feedback, but here's what they won't tell you: most positive feedback is meaningless garbage that actually demotivates people. "Great job!" "Well done!" "Keep it up!" These phrases are the professional equivalent of participation trophies.

Effective positive feedback is as specific as effective criticism. Instead of "Your presentation was fantastic," try "When you used that customer data to illustrate the point about market trends, it made the entire proposal more credible." One version is forgotten by lunchtime; the other teaches someone how to replicate success.

I worked with a sales team in Adelaide where the manager thought he was being supportive by constantly saying "Good effort!" to everyone. The top performers started feeling insulted because their exceptional work was getting the same response as mediocre performance. Meanwhile, the struggling team members had no idea what specific behaviours to repeat.

Why Most Feedback Training Is Worse Than Useless

The corporate training industry has convinced us that feedback is a skill you can learn from a PowerPoint presentation. It's not. Feedback is relationship management, emotional intelligence, and communication skills rolled into one complex human interaction.

Those acronyms they teach you - STAR, GROW, COIN - they're training wheels. Useful for beginners, but if you're still following scripts after six months, you're not developing as a manager; you're performing a rehearsed play.

Real feedback happens in the moment, in context, with genuine care for the person's development. It's messy, imperfect, and sometimes uncomfortable. But it's also the difference between teams that thrive and teams that survive.

The Perth Construction Site Test

I have a simple test for whether feedback is effective: would it work on a construction site in Perth at 7 AM on a Monday morning? If your feedback approach requires a quiet conference room, three printed handouts, and a formal agenda, it's probably overcomplicated.

The best feedback I've ever seen was a site supervisor who simply said to a young apprentice: "Mate, see how Dave's holding that tool? Try it that way - you'll get better leverage and won't strain your wrist." Specific, immediate, helpful, and delivered with respect.

That's not to say all feedback should be casual - context matters. But the principle remains: if you can't explain what someone should do differently in plain English, you probably don't understand the problem well enough to be giving feedback in the first place.

The Bottom Line

Feedback isn't about following a process; it's about helping people grow. It requires courage to have difficult conversations, wisdom to choose the right moment, and skill to deliver messages that land effectively.

Stop hiding behind corporate buzzwords and fancy frameworks. Start having real conversations with real people about real work. Your team will thank you for it, even if they don't always like what you have to say.

The uncomfortable truth? Most managers avoid giving feedback because they're scared of conflict. They'd rather let problems fester than risk an awkward conversation. But here's the thing - avoiding feedback isn't kind; it's selfish. You're prioritising your comfort over someone else's development.

And that's not leadership. That's just poor management dressed up as consideration.