iscover
Most Australian workplaces aren’t providing feedback correctly – leaders need to realise the inherent opportunities available, writes Raechel Gavin.
In too many Australian workplaces, feedback has become something to dread. It’s often reactive, vague, and perceived as criticism – not guidance. Delivered poorly, feedback undermines confidence, damages morale, and quietly erodes trust within teams. In fact, Gallup has found that only 26 per cent of employees strongly agree that the feedback they receive helps them do better work. It’s no wonder people start scanning job boards the moment a “Can I share some feedback?” lands in their inbox.
We’ve normalised a version of feedback that is counterproductive at best – and corrosive at worst. Managers dress it up in soft language, avoid specificity, or worse, avoid the conversation altogether. In doing so, they don’t spare feelings; they damage performance and stall growth. Leaders should remember that clarity is kindness.
Let’s be clear: when feedback lacks clarity, it ceases to be useful. Ambiguity, sugar-coating, and jargon dilute the message. We end up with employees confused about expectations, leaders frustrated by stagnation, and a workplace culture built on “keeping the peace” rather than progress.
The truth is feedback should be a tool for development, not a compliance task or an emotionally charged interaction. If you don’t genuinely enjoy coaching others and helping them grow, improve, and succeed, you shouldn’t be in a leadership role. Leadership is about creating clarity, not comfort. It’s important to remember that growth is often uncomfortable.
Beyond the coaching benefits, creating a culture of meaningful feedback also helps organisations meet their obligations under work health safety (WHS) regulations. Proactive, consistent feedback allows your workplace to reduce the risk of psychosocial harm to your people by tackling several psychosocial hazards directly. And with psychosocial injury claims costing Australian organisations billions of dollars each year, every chance to minimise the chance of this impact should be taken seriously.
There are a few different feedback models to consider, but aim to pick one and standardise it with the wider business. An example of one tried and tested approach is the Situation-Behaviour-Impact (SBI) model. It works because it removes emotion and subjectivity and focuses on observable facts. It helps leaders deliver feedback in a way that is structured, respectful, and productive. Here’s how:
- Situation: What actually happened, without dancing around the truth.
- Behaviour: The specific behaviour that needs addressing.
- Impact: The tangible consequences of that behaviour for people, progress, and the bottom line.
This method avoids making the feedback personal. It reframes it as a growth conversation delivered in plain language, not a character judgement. And it creates space for real dialogue – which is how trust is built.
Let’s stop pretending that vague positivity or silence is kinder than constructive honesty. Avoidance is just cowardice wrapped in niceness. It’s costing businesses dearly in retention, in productivity, and in engagement.
If you’re a people and culture leader, it’s time to lead the shift. Training managers to deliver feedback with precision, courage, and empathy must become a non-negotiable. We must champion clarity over comfort and move away from a culture where feedback feels like a reprimand rather than a roadmap.
Because when we get this right, feedback becomes not just a leadership tool – but a cultural cornerstone. And that’s where high-performing, psychologically safe teams begin.
Raechel Gavin is the chief people officer at Sonder.
RELATED TERMS
Coaching differs from training in that it frequently focuses on a narrower range of abilities or jobs. This might be done as a part of personnel upskilling or performance management. Both internal trainers and outside coaches may carry out this task. Coaching occasionally includes assessments and performance feedback.
