Det finns en typ av manager som de flesta medarbetare verkar uppskatta – tills de får en avgångsintervju. Den som alltid är positiv. Som aldrig kritiserar. Som löser konflikter genom att undvika dem.
In that conversation, the employee rarely says anything about a bad manager. But they often say: I never knew where I stood. I never found out what I needed to improve.
The kind manager believed they were protecting their people. What they were actually doing was depriving them of the opportunity to grow.
Why staying silent feels safer
Difficult feedback feels risky. What if the person feels bad about it? What if motivation drops? What if the relationship deteriorates?
Those fears are human and understandable. But they belong to the manager. And letting them determine what gets said is choosing your own comfort over the employee's opportunity to develop.
What feedback that works tends to contain
It is specific. "You need to get better at communication" is not feedback. "In yesterday's meeting, you presented the solution before you seemed to have understood the problem — I could see it in the clients' reaction" is feedback.
It is close in time. Feedback delivered three weeks after the event is difficult to use. Feedback given the following day is actionable.
It separates observation from conclusion. What you saw. What it led to. What you need instead.
A closing reflection
Kindness and honesty are not opposites. The best feedback conversations I have seen are both.
But if you have to choose — and you do, when you stay silent — you have already chosen.
If you have thoughts, questions, or simply want to talk something through — feel free to get in touch. I am happy to have an initial conversation with no agenda.
Right person. Right place. Everything changes.