A character label changes the argument
Tell someone “you’re careless” and the conversation can quickly become a debate about whether you understand them. They might explain how much effort they put in or point to work they completed well. Meanwhile, the missing figures in the report remain missing.
In a company of 10–50 people, that unresolved work still needs an owner. Your feedback should make the problem easier to identify and address. A judgement about someone’s personality gives them very little guidance about what to do tomorrow morning.
Use the one-swap rule before you speak
Whenever you catch yourself thinking “lazy”, “irresponsible” or “disorganised”, replace the label with a sentence describing what happened. Ask yourself: what did I see, hear or check that led me to this conclusion?
These specific feedback examples show the swap:
| The label | The observation |
|---|---|
| “You’re careless.” | “The Q3 report you submitted on Monday was missing revenue figures in sections 2 and 4.” |
| “You’re irresponsible.” | “You agreed to send the client brief by 3pm on Tuesday. It arrived on Wednesday morning.” |
| “You’re not a team player.” | “In yesterday’s planning meeting, you started speaking before Maya finished her update on two occasions.” |
Each observation gives the employee a particular event to discuss. They can confirm it, correct your account or explain something you did not know.
Watch for labels disguised as observations. “You showed that you don’t care about deadlines” still claims to know what someone thinks. The late brief is evidence you can discuss; their motivation needs a question.
Keep responsibility clear without assuming the cause
Removing personal judgement does not mean hiding who did what. In the report example, “we missed some numbers” is appropriate if responsibility was shared. If one person prepared and submitted the report, naming that action keeps ownership clear.
You still need to check why the figures were absent. Ask: “What happened with sections 2 and 4?” Finance may not have supplied the data, the template may have been unclear, or the employee may have missed the check. Each calls for a different correction.
If you supplied the wrong template, own that part. If the employee missed an agreed check, address it directly. Behaviour-based feedback should help you identify the actual problem before deciding what needs to change.
Explain the impact and agree the correction
The Center for Creative Leadership’s SBI feedback model separates the situation, the observed behaviour and its impact. Its extended approach adds a question about intent so the manager can check their interpretation.
For the report example, you might say: “Without those figures, I couldn’t compare revenue with the forecast at Monday’s review.” That explains why the omission mattered. Avoid adding consequences you cannot substantiate, such as “everyone has lost confidence in you”.
Once you understand what happened, agree the correction. If the source data is available, that might mean adding it by 3pm and checking the report before resubmitting it. If the data is unavailable, agree who will obtain it and how the gap will be communicated.
Keep the request proportionate. Two missing sections need a clear correction; they do not automatically justify a speech about someone’s commitment to the company.
Describe repeated problems with actual examples
A pattern deserves attention, but “you always do this” makes the claim broader than the evidence. Name the instances: “The last three reports arrived after the agreed deadline, on these dates.”
Then discuss what has already been tried and what remains unresolved. Specific feedback does not require you to treat every incident as isolated or avoid holding someone accountable.
It also does not guarantee a calm response. Someone may disagree with your account or find the conversation upsetting. Hear them out, check any new information and return to the work that needs addressing.
Use profiles to ask better questions
Understanding someone’s working preferences can help you choose how to approach a conversation. You might ask whether they would find it useful to see the report first or review it together. Their answer is more useful than assuming what they need.
Cooperly’s Manual of Me provides a shareable description of strengths and needs, with notes for the person’s manager. Use it to start that discussion.
Keep those descriptions open to correction. “You’re a creative type, so details aren’t your strength” would introduce another label. Whatever their profile says, the feedback should still refer to the report they submitted and the check you need them to complete.