When Feedback Feels Personal: Staying Curious Long Enough to Learn

Feedback is relatively easy to receive when we agree with it. The harder—and often more useful—work begins when someone offers an observation that feels inaccurate, unfair, or inconsistent with how we understand ourselves.

Illustration created with AI

Our natural response in those moments is often to evaluate the feedback before we have really considered it. We explain the context, identify what the other person may not understand, or begin building the case for why their assessment isn’t quite right. Sometimes, of course, it isn’t. Feedback is inherently subjective, and not every observation deserves the same weight.

But feedback does not have to be entirely accurate to contain useful information.

I often encourage leaders to separate intent from impact when they are trying to make sense of difficult feedback. We tend to evaluate our own behavior with the benefit of knowing our intentions, while everyone around us experiences that behavior primarily through its impact. A leader may know that she is thoughtful and collaborative, for example, while others experience her reluctance to speak early in a meeting as a lack of confidence. Another may believe he is being direct and decisive while his team experiences the same behavior as dismissive.

The question, then, is not simply, “Is this feedback true?” A more productive question is, “What might someone be experiencing that caused them to reach this conclusion?”

That subtle shift matters because it replaces defensiveness with curiosity without requiring us to accept every piece of feedback as fact. Ask for examples. Look for patterns rather than isolated comments. Consider whether the perception changes depending on the audience or environment. Most importantly, resist the urge to explain your intention before you fully understand the impact.

This is particularly important as leaders become more senior. Leadership is not only about what we intend to communicate; it is also about our ability to recognize how our behavior is being interpreted by the people around us. Perception should not dictate every decision, but neither can it simply be dismissed because it does not match our own assessment.

The goal of feedback is not to construct a perfectly accurate description of who you are. It is to give you information about how your leadership is being experienced.

You can disagree with some of that information and still learn from it. In fact, sometimes the feedback we are most inclined to reject is precisely the feedback worth examining a little longer.

The Art of the Follow-Up: How to Push Without Being Pushy

Photo by Mariia Berezovsky on Unsplash

In my last post, I wrote about what happens when communication breaks down: decisions stall, priorities become unclear, and small gaps in accountability can eventually create very real operational consequences.

But recognizing the need for clarity is one thing. Asking for it—particularly when you are waiting on a peer, senior leader, or another department—is another.

Many leaders struggle with the follow-up. They don’t want to appear impatient, overstep, or create unnecessary tension. So they wait. Or they send a vague “just checking in” message that is easy to overlook and does little to move the work forward.

There is a better approach.

Effective follow-up is not about applying more pressure. It is about providing more context. Instead of simply asking someone for an answer, explain what depends on that answer. “I need your decision by Wednesday” can feel like a demand. “We need a decision by Wednesday in order to keep production on schedule” communicates the same urgency while also explaining why it matters.

That distinction is important. When people understand the impact of their response—or lack of one—they are better equipped to prioritize. You are no longer asking them to respond simply because you need something. You are giving them information they need to make a decision about the work.

The same principle applies when priorities compete. Rather than repeatedly pushing for your request to move to the top of someone’s list, ask for clarity about where it belongs. “If this needs to move behind the other priorities this week, that’s fine. I just need to understand the timing so we can plan accordingly.”

That is not passive, and it is not aggressive. It is clear.

Strong leaders learn how to create urgency without creating unnecessary friction. They communicate the need, connect it to the broader impact, and give the other person an opportunity to respond or reprioritize.

Sometimes leadership means making the decision. Other times, it means making it easier for someone else to make one.

Either way, the goal is the same: less ambiguity, better alignment, and work that keeps moving forward.

How to Delegate

A lot of the topics I cover are team-minded. Regardless of our KPIs, we are leaders of people at the end of the day… and leaders have their work cut out for them: Balancing managerial responsibilities with their own workflows, and aiming to be an effective communicator throughout it all. 

But what happens when a manager doesn’t know how to delegate? The responsibilities become even greater.

We often see managers become managers because of their success in being an individual contributor (IC). This is where I come in to help the IC learn how to manage effectively. But let’s pretend I’m not in the picture. What often happens when an IC turns into a manager is that he/she forgets that they are no longer an IC — and they can have a really hard time relinquishing control. 

What’s harder than being responsible for a team? Being responsible for the team and taking on the work of the team. Back to my point about delegation and skill building. 

If you’re drowning in work, here’s a checklist to get you started with delegation:

1) Identify what tasks can be delegated. What’s appropriate to divide among the team? How does this align with their yearly goals? 

2) Choose the right person to manage each task. You must match skill and experience. This provides insight into skill gaps and opportunities for professional development. Seniority may come into play here, too. 

3) Provide a roadmap. What is the project, when must it be done, and how involved will you be? And, perhaps most importantly, what does success look like for completion? 

Having a hard time delegating? Let’s discuss. 

Repairing the Relationship

Just as most things in life change, such as seasons or careers, our relationships change too. As some relationships evolve, this can be incredibly advantageous or fulfilling. Whether your network has expanded or you’ve been fortunate to make a lifelong friend, the dynamic of relationships will change. But in some cases, relationships may start to feel stagnant, especially in the workplace. This unwelcome change in interpersonal communication can cause conflict and be the thread that starts to unravel a functional team. 

I have written plenty about conflict but when a team’s cohesion is strong and then an interpersonal dynamic alters the course, it can be incredibly challenging to diagnose the issue and manage it appropriately. Some managers may be stumped. “Everything was going fine.” If you happen to be in this situation, ask yourself what has changed. Then, consider group feedback: take a temperature on the workgroup dynamics… Including how you may have changed in your recent engagements. Then, seek resolve. Is the conflict among team members, with you and another member of the group, or something else?

Signs of disengagement will tell you when you need to intervene and bring the team’s communication back to the forefront. (These signs include frequent mistakes in work, complaining regularly, hearsay and gossip, using time unwisely, entitled behavior, and more.) You may need to change how you motivate, or you may need to come up with an action plan with the member who is seemingly changing the dynamic with the team. 

The first step: get to the source and aim to connect before redirecting. What this entails is to aim to remove ego from the situation. Seek to understand, not yet “to fix.” Once a team member understands your interest in listening, he or she is more likely to open up. Then, reflect on that conversation and craft a plan for next steps.

These next steps might include the creation of a team charter, new accountabilities or a change in responsibility, a change in reporting structure, and/or a regular (not necessarily frequent) 1:1 to repair the damaged relationship.

People management is simply not easy. But, typically, there is a solution to combating disengagement and repairing the relationship. Not sure where to start? Let’s brainstorm.