That said, there are many cases where without a spoonful of sugar, the medicine simply would not go down. In my mind, there are two major situations where a “sandwich” feedback approach is the most expedient – and sometimes only – way to get a point across.

First is in giving feedback up the chain of command to an insecure / authoritarian leader. Without baiting the hook, you won’t get the time of day. Unless your harried boss has been recently reminded that (a) they have real strengths and (b) you notice and appreciate those strengths, they won’t take you seriously, writing off your feedback as mere “whining”.

Second is in giving feedback to an insecure co-worker or subordinate. Again, without reminding the individual that (a) they have real value for the organization and (b) that you are well aware of that value – they will just shut down in defensive anger and/or tears when you try to offer constructive criticism.

The issue is that the above two cases are not able to act properly as “adults”. But that doesn’t mean we don’t have to deal with these personalities in the real workplace. Ideally, we could kick them out of a workplace for not having grown up, but that isn’t always practical – or even possible.

Nevertheless, I think that a “sandwich-free” feedback world is a noble goal to work towards. Not only that, although I have a habit of delivering sandwich-formatted feedback (years in Toastmasters made for a hard-to-change habit), I personally prefer to take my feedback straight, and until you put your finger on it, I couldn’t quite figure out why. Thanks for the straight-talk.

Great post and very well written and stated!

I am reading a great book at the moment called “Made to Stick” by Dan and Chip Heath. In one chapter it talks about the ‘Lead’. Their whole discussion about making something “sticky” or memorable or reinforce the main point is NOT to bury it within extraneous facts.

Start with the main point, make it short, concise, and memorable.

It’s my practice to separate the “developmental” criticism from the celebratory praise. This can be done with respect, dignity and honour of the other person without wrapping it with conversational confusion.

As an employee I want to know what the talk is really about. Confusing the main point with the “bread” can be equally confusing to the employee especially in this global environment in which we find companies more and more involved. Sugar coating the topic with someone who is speaking English as a second language can be harmful to gaining the results you desire.

Thanks for bringing this point forward to your readers!

Good advice!

I find that many people–including managers–don’t know how to offer feedback in a direct and respectful way. I teach people to use this framework:

Create an opening so you are sure it’s a good time for the person to hear you… not when he’s getting ready for a big meeting or rushing to pick up his kid.

Describe behavior or results. Use neutral language and examples. If the person doesn’t recognize himself in the description or agree with the data, the conversation is over. Labels, comparatives, and absolutes raise defenses.

Describe the impact. If there’ s no impact, why are you having the conversation?

Make a request. You may have a specific behavior in mind, or you may want to engage in problem solving. It depends on the situation.

Finally, don’t sell past the close. If the person gets the point after you describe the behavior, zip it. Otherwise, it feels like you are beating a dead horse.

My experience is that people are likely to accept critical feedback when:

1) the giver or source is believed to be reliable
2) the receiver trusts the intentions of the giver
3)the receiver has a chance provide clarifications
4) the process is fair — both the way the feedback was developed and the way the feedback was communicated

Praise sandwich tends to erode trust in the feedback givers intentions, and once that’s gone, there’s not much chance any useful information will get through.