I should have told you sooner

Feedback becomes unusable when it is left too long. Hearing “Parts of that were hard to follow” two weeks after a presentation gives you little to work with.

Was it the background? Or was the proposal at the end unclear? Often, the other person no longer knows either. The impression remains, but the example is missing. Right after the presentation, we could have looked at the relevant slide together.

The first two posts were about messages I receive: first writing down what is actually there, then asking what we are talking about. This time, it is about the other direction: What do I say when I notice something?

Three things help me: ask early, stay specific, describe the impact.

Ask early

After presenting something myself, I call two or three colleagues. As soon as possible afterwards. Where I felt unsure, I ask specifically:

“When I explained my proposal, I was not sure whether the connection was clear. How was it for you?”

I also want to know what helped. If an example made something easier to understand, I use it again next time.

It works the other way around too: If I notice something in a colleague’s presentation, I call them right afterwards. I do not need a regular check-in for that.

Stay specific

“You are always so unstructured” is a judgment about the person, even right after a presentation. In the first post, I made this distinction for myself: What is a fact, and what is an assumption? “Unstructured” is my assessment, not an observation. The same distinction applies to feedback, except this time I say the result out loud.

Suppose a colleague presents a proposed solution before explaining the background. I would address it like this:

“In your presentation earlier, you went straight from the title slide to the proposed solution. The background came afterwards. I was missing the context at that point. I could not yet follow which problem your proposal was meant to solve.”

Perhaps they thought everyone knew the background or had explained it in another meeting. We can talk that through and discuss what they will do differently next time.

Describe the impact

The other person can check the order of the slides afterwards. They will only learn from me that I lost the thread because of it. So I say what happened for me: that I was missing information, that I became unsure.

In doing so, I reveal something about myself. In the four-ears model, this is self-revelation: the side that shows something about me. That is exactly what is missing when I only describe the behavior. And I speak only for myself. I do not know whether everyone else in the room had the same difficulty.

The same applies when I found something helpful. “Good presentation” leaves open what I liked. A more specific version would be:

“You showed both options using the same example. That helped me understand the differences and form an opinion about your proposal.”

Three questions to prepare

The Center for Creative Leadership’s SBI model names three elements: Situation, Behavior, Impact. Before a conversation, I ask myself:

• Which specific moment am I referring to?
• What did the other person do or say?
• What impact did that have on me?

In the example: the presentation earlier, the order of the proposed solution and the background, my difficulty putting the proposal into context.

It is the same three-part structure as in the first post, only directed outwards: situation and behavior are the facts, impact is what it brings up for me. Assumptions stay out of it.

This helps me notice beforehand whether I can be specific enough about what I want to address. It does not have to turn into a memorized three-part script in the conversation. I am also interested in the other person’s perspective, so I usually ask: “What did you have in mind?” That is the feedback version of “What are we talking about?”

Good wording still does not rule out irritation. Even carefully phrased feedback has a relationship side, and how it is received does not depend on my sentence alone.

Actually have the conversation

I have put off critical feedback even though I wanted to raise it. Afterwards, I regretted the missed opportunity. Preparing the right words helps me. Starting still takes some courage at times.

I do not want to react in the first flush of anger. Nor do I want to surprise someone with criticism in front of others. The first post was about gaining some distance before replying quickly. The same works with feedback: briefly write down what I want to say, then find a moment to speak privately.

I just need to make sure that sorting out my thoughts does not become more postponement. A later conversation can still help. If I have waited a long time, I say so: that I should have raised it sooner and would still like to discuss it.

One question is enough to start: “Do you have a little time today? I would like to discuss something from our meeting.”