Subscribe to the Tuesday Briefing
Tuesday Briefing 路 No. 26 路 4 Aug, 2026
More feedback doesn't reliably produce more change. Gallup's research links frequent feedback to higher engagement, but only when it's timely, concrete, and comes from someone the recipient trusts. What actually moves behaviour is the conditions around the feedback - timing, specificity, and trust - far more than the volume of it.

Emily Rust
Founder, Stones
Featured
Somewhere in the last few weeks you probably sat down with someone and talked about how they're showing up. It felt like a real conversation. You felt relieved to have had it. They engaged, maybe pushed back a little, seemed to take it in. Then more weeks passed, and you're watching the same patterns.
This is one of the most common and quietly frustrating experiences in leadership. Not because the feedback was wrong. Not because the person doesn't care. But because the conditions that make feedback land weren't in place before you delivered it.
The research
Gallup's workplace research consistently links frequent, meaningful feedback to higher engagement - but the relationship is specific and correlational. It holds when the feedback is timely, concrete, and comes from someone the recipient genuinely believes is on their side. Strip those conditions away and the connection between feedback and behaviour change is far weaker than most leaders assume.
The instinct to give more feedback is understandable. It's also usually the wrong lever. What moves people is the environment the feedback arrives into, not the frequency of delivery.
It arrives too late
Feedback given weeks after the event asks someone to reconstruct a moment their memory has already rewritten. The closer to the event, the more usable it is.
It names behaviour, ignores conditions
A conversation can be completely accurate about what's happening and entirely silent on why. Someone who isn't clear on expectations, lacks the tools to do the work, or is carrying more than they can hold won't be fixed by being told the output isn't good enough.
It travels through a relationship that can't carry it
The same words from two different leaders produce completely different responses, depending on whether the person believes you have their interests at heart.
Self-check
None of these are failures. They're signals about what to adjust.
Start with conditions, not conversation
Before any feedback lands, three things do most of the work: the person knows what good looks like, believes you want them to succeed, and hears it close enough to the event to act on it. Get those right and the conversation almost has itself.
Make it specific and behavioural
The Center for Creative Leadership's situation-behaviour-impact structure travels well: name where it happened, what you observed, and the effect it had, then stop and listen. "You need to communicate better" gives someone nothing to hold. "In Tuesday's client call, when you answered the pricing question before checking the brief, the client looked confused and we spent ten minutes recovering" gives them something they can picture and change.
Pair care with direct challenge
Kim Scott's work on Radical Candor adds a useful pairing: feedback that works comes from caring about the person and being willing to challenge them directly, at the same time. Challenge without care reads as harsh. Care without challenge slides into avoidance.
Close the loop
If you gave someone feedback three weeks ago, come back to it - not with an unspoken "did you fix it?" but with real curiosity about how it's been sitting.
Opening the conversation
"I want to share something I've been noticing, because I think you're capable of more than what I'm seeing right now. I'll be specific, then I'd like to hear how it looks from your side."
Giving specific, behavioural feedback
"In [situation], I noticed [behaviour]. The impact was [effect]. I'd like us to look at what could be different."
When the same feedback hasn't landed
"I've raised this before and I don't think I've explained it in a way that's useful yet. Can you tell me what you're hearing? I want us to get to something that actually helps."
Closing the loop weeks later
"I wanted to check how that conversation's been sitting with you. What's come up since?"
Name what's stopping you
Notice a piece of feedback you've been sitting on, and be honest with yourself about why. If it's discomfort, that's worth admitting. If it's timing, make the time this week rather than waiting for a moment that won't come.
Ask before you tell
In your next feedback conversation, open with "How do you think that's going?" before "here's what I noticed." Often people already know, and that changes what the conversation needs to be.
Check for repeated feedback without change
If anyone on your team keeps hearing the same thing without shifting, ask the harder question: have the conditions changed, or has the same message been delivered into the same situation and expected to produce a different result?
Go deeper
Feedback works best as a relationship practice, not a corrective practice.

That's all for this week's briefing.
Emily Rust 路 Founder, Stones
The archive
Browse the back catalogue. One leadership idea per week, all in one place.
The Tuesday Briefing
Join the leaders who start their week with one practical idea worth acting on.