Are We Giving Too Much Feedback, or the Wrong Kind?
Performance feedback is supposed to be the bedrock of employee growth. But what if the very thing we rely on to build engagement is actually doing the opposite?
Across many organisations, a troubling trend has emerged: employees report receiving more feedback than ever, yet are often unclear on how to act on it. A 2023 Gallup study found that only 26% of employees strongly agree that the feedback they receive helps them improve their performance.
Despite a rise in weekly check-ins, pulse surveys, and quarterly reviews, the impact on morale and performance is mixed, at best.
A recent internal analysis of our employee engagement data revealed something unexpected: when feedback is poorly delivered, irrelevant, or perceived as unfair, it can actively lower engagement.
So, what’s going wrong?
Is It Time to Rethink What Feedback Really Means?
The best organisations are shifting away from the old performance review mindset and reframing feedback around one core idea: it’s not about how often feedback is given, it’s about how it’s experienced.
They’ve evolved their feedback practices by focusing on three essential questions:
- Do employees feel they receive enough feedback to understand their performance?
Quantity matters, but only if it leads to clarity. Without enough insight, lack of context or examples about how they’re doing, employees are left to guess where they stand. - Is that feedback actually helping them improve and do their jobs better?
Feedback must be developmental. If it’s vague, outdated, or disconnected from day-to-day work, it becomes noise rather than guidance. Real-time feedback enables employees to adjust and improve quickly. - Does it come across as constructive, fair, and well-intentioned?
The perception of feedback is as important as its content. When feedback feels biased or punitive, it damages trust, even if the intention was good.
That’s why high-performing companies no longer ask, “How often do I give feedback?” Instead, they ask, “What is the quality and impact of the feedback experience?”
Because here’s the uncomfortable truth: feedback that feels unfair, unhelpful, or irrelevant might be worse than no feedback at all.
Why Traditional Feedback Falls Short
The traditional model of feedback, where managers tell employees what they’re doing right or wrong, no longer fits today’s collaborative, fast-moving work environment. In fact, this approach often triggers anxiety and defensiveness, creating more confusion than clarity (Harvard Business Review, 2019).
It’s one reason why companies like Deloitte & Adobe have moved away from formal annual performance reviews in favour of frequent, real-time, two-way developmental conversation that is relevant, actionable and feels more like support instead of criticism (LinkedIn, 2024).
Instead of focusing on the act of giving feedback, these organisations now prioritise how feedback is received and used. Because in today’s environment, feedback must feel safe, relevant, and actionable to have any real impact.
From Feedback to Feedforward
One of the most promising shifts we’re seeing is toward feedforward, offering insights that focus on future possibilities, not past mistakes. This idea, popularised by executive coach Marshall Goldsmith, has gained traction in high-performance cultures as a more effective and motivating way to improve.
Feedforward conversations are:
- Actionable: They provide guidance employees can apply right away.
- Constructive: They focus on what’s possible, not what went wrong.
- Energising: They promote optimism and accountability.
According to the NeuroLeadership Institute, future-focused feedback reduces threat responses in the brain, increasing receptiveness and behavioural change.
The Bottom Line
The question isn’t whether to give feedback. It’s whether we’re giving the right kind. Feedback that feels sufficient, constructive, and well-intentioned creates clarity, builds trust, and helps people improve.
But feedback that feels vague, biased, or unfair? That’s not performance management, it’s performance damage.