Adversarial vs Collaborative Feedback

Even when delivered politely, most negative feedback or suggestions for improvement are inherently adversarial – in the sense that, one way or another, they imply, “You should abandon your way of doing things and adopt mine.”

This immediately triggers defensiveness, even if the suggestion is sound.

The trick is to avoid framing feedback as “me vs you” and instead frame it as “me and you vs a common problem.”

Let’s see a trivial example. “Your presentation should include more charts” is inherently adversarial, for it implies the recipient was wrong and the manager right. Conversely, “This presentation is very important, and we cannot afford the audience not being as engaged as possible. What if we added some charts?” frames both the manager and the employee as being in a vulnerable situation that requires change – which is proposed as an improvement that does not imply fault.

Moreover, the suggestion is not framed as “I arbitrarily decided this is not enough” but rather as “external circumstances require this to be better.”

Of course, it’s crucial that none of this is a lie or exaggeration and that the manager genuinely believes in what they are saying. But this is relatively easier, for in most cases, both the manager and the employee are truly fighting the same third-party problem (a competitor, a lack of funds, etc., or even whatever adversary the company’s mission is fighting, such as “lack of access to the company’s product”).

Let’s see a second example. “You need to dress better when going to clients.” Again, this implies that the employee is wrong. Moreover, it can be perceived that the manager is unreasonably picky about the dress code. Instead, consider the alternative: “New clients do not trust us enough – and how could they, if they never heard of our products? So, it is paramount we gather all sources of trust, including a professional dress code.” Again, this clarifies the objective need for change, presents it as an improvement without implying the previous approach was necessarily wrong, and positions the manager not as an Ivory Tower almighty sage but rather as a colleague fighting in the same trenches.

The less the manager's ego appears in the suggestion, the more the subordinate's ego can accept it.