ave you ever been in a situation like this? You need to give someone some negative performance feedback and you are concerned that you might get a defensive reaction.To reduce this possibility, you begin by sharing some positive feedback, then give the negative feedback, and then finish with some more positive feedback. For example, you might begin by saying,"Jan, I think you've done a solid job addressing the difficult issues on the ABC project." After a few sentences of praise, you might say something like,"But I'm concerned you haven't taken steps to develop your team's capacity; as a result your team isn't producing as much as it should be." After sharing your thoughts on this subject and perhaps developing a plan of action, you finish by saying something like,"Keep up the good work on the ABC project; the clients are really satisfied with the work."
Many leaders use this "sandwich" approach to feedback when they're faced with a challenging conversation. (Even if you don't use it, you've probably experienced it as a recipient.) The reasoning underlying the strategy is that starting off on a positive note makes the person more comfortable and more receptive to hearing negative feedback and less likely to challenge you; ending on a positive note maintains the person's self-esteem and reduces the potential for anger.
But the approach creates unintended consequences. People often discount the positive feedback and feel set up, which leads them to distrust you. By controlling the conversation to reduce the chance that someone will express concerns, you also reduce your chance to learn how differently your colleague may be thinking about the situation. Consequently, you may think you have commitment to change when you don't.