The more senior a leader becomes, the harder it is to see everything happening across the organization. Feedback from the team is therefore an important source of information that helps leaders identify blind spots, manage risks, and make better decisions.
However, employees are often reluctant to give feedback to their managers. This means that beyond employees' ability to give feedback, how leaders invite, listen to, and act on dissenting views plays a decisive role.
Feedback skills refer to the ability to share observations, comments, and suggestions that help an individual, team, or organization understand the current situation, identify areas for improvement, and achieve better results. Rather than judging people, effective feedback focuses on specific behaviors, decisions, ways of working, or outcomes that can be changed.
Feedback can flow in multiple directions: from leaders to employees, from employees to managers, among colleagues, or across departments. An organization only develops a genuine feedback culture when information flows both ways rather than solely from the top down.
Employees who work directly with customers, processes, and day-to-day operations often detect early warning signs. They may notice changes in customer reactions, process bottlenecks, poor coordination between departments, or risks that were not considered in the original plan. Yet the more senior a leader becomes, the harder it may be to access unfiltered information because employees tend to report what feels safe or what they believe the leader wants to hear.
When employees are encouraged to speak up, leaders have more opportunities to test their assumptions and adjust decisions before mistakes lead to serious consequences. Feedback then serves as an early warning mechanism, allowing the organization to address issues while they are still manageable and less costly to resolve.
Important decisions can rarely be made effectively from a single perspective. Each function views an issue through different data, expertise, and experiences. Gathering feedback enables leaders to examine more dimensions of a situation before deciding on a course of action.
Supportive views can validate the strengths of a decision, while dissenting perspectives can reveal untested assumptions, potential risks, or unintended consequences. Feedback should therefore not be treated as resistance, but as valuable input that improves the quality of thinking and decision-making.
Feedback helps employees recognize the gap between current results and expectations, allowing them to build on their strengths and promptly adjust ineffective approaches. Regular feedback also enables learning to take place within the flow of work rather than being postponed until a formal performance review.
At the organizational level, feedback from employees, customers, and projects helps the company capture lessons, improve processes, and establish more effective ways of working. As a result, execution capabilities and overall performance can improve continuously.
Employees tend to be more engaged when they feel heard and believe their contributions matter. Having the opportunity to provide feedback on work, decisions, or the workplace enables them to become more than task executors; they become active participants in improving the organization.
Regular feedback allows important issues to be raised and discussed promptly rather than hidden because of fear or power distance. This helps the organization identify risks earlier, resolve disagreements based on relevant information, and strengthen shared accountability for outcomes.
When leaders actively listen, respect dissenting views, and act consistently, employees feel that their voices are valued. This strengthens psychological safety and trust, making feedback a natural part of the organizational culture.
Upward feedback is always more difficult than feedback between peers because employees must consider both what they need to say and the possible consequences of saying it.
Employees may worry that expressing a different opinion will cause them to be seen as resistant, uncooperative, or disrespectful. When managers directly influence performance reviews, recognition, and promotion decisions, employees become even more cautious about sharing feedback that may cause discomfort.
Differences in title and decision-making authority can make it difficult for employees to speak candidly with their managers. In hierarchical environments, questioning a decision or pointing out a leader's mistake may be interpreted as overstepping boundaries. Employees may therefore share only safe information or what they believe their managers want to hear.
When psychological safety is low, employees do not believe they can ask questions, admit mistakes, or express different views without being ridiculed or disadvantaged. Even a few instances in which people are criticized for speaking up can teach the entire team that remaining silent is the safer choice.
If leaders frequently interrupt, justify themselves, dismiss concerns, or question the motives of those offering feedback, employees will conclude that honest input is not genuinely welcome. Even when leaders explicitly ask for feedback, one defensive response can undermine trust and make employees more cautious the next time.
When feedback is acknowledged but followed by no action or update, employees may conclude that their input has no value. Repeatedly contributing ideas without seeing any change can erode motivation and gradually lead employees to remain silent, even when they identify important issues.
Not every employee knows how to present feedback clearly, respectfully, and with supporting evidence. If the organization lacks suitable channels such as one-on-one conversations, anonymous surveys, or post-project reviews, employees may struggle to determine when, how, and to whom they should provide feedback.
To encourage employees to speak up, leaders need to reduce the perceived risks of doing so and help the team see that their input creates value.
Psychological safety is the belief that employees can ask questions, admit mistakes, and express different views without fear of ridicule or negative consequences. Leaders can create this environment by acknowledging that they do not have all the answers, openly learning from their mistakes, and inviting the team to point out what may have been overlooked.
More importantly, those who speak up must be protected from criticism or retaliation. When employees see dissenting views being treated with respect, they gradually begin to regard feedback as an expected behavior rather than a risk to avoid.
Employees are unlikely to give honest feedback to leaders whom they believe do not care about them. Leaders therefore need to demonstrate genuine concern by listening, providing resources, keeping commitments, and making decisions that help the team succeed.
Trust also requires leaders to protect the dignity and confidentiality of those who offer feedback. When employees believe their feedback will not be used against them, the relationship becomes a foundation for more candid conversations.
Leaders should not wait for employees to speak up, especially when there is a significant power difference between them. Instead, they should explicitly invite feedback by asking specific questions such as:
In some situations, employees may find it easier to offer "advice" than "feedback." Leaders can therefore ask, "What advice would you give me?" to reduce pressure and open a more natural conversation.
Employees need different ways to provide feedback depending on how sensitive the issue is. Organizations can offer one-on-one conversations, post-project reviews, anonymous surveys, or internal feedback channels.
Leaders should also choose an appropriate time and setting. An employee may not be willing to express a dissenting view in a large meeting but may speak openly in a private conversation. The simpler, safer, and more accessible the feedback channel is, the more likely employees are to use it proactively.
When receiving feedback, leaders should focus on understanding the issue rather than preparing a response. Allow the employee to explain fully, then ask questions to clarify the examples, context, and impact.
Questions such as "Could you share a specific example?" or "How has this affected the team?" can help leaders understand the feedback more deeply. Paraphrasing the main points also confirms that both parties have a shared understanding of the issue.
Critical feedback can make leaders feel challenged or judged. However, immediately justifying a decision, dismissing the feedback, or questioning the employee's motives will discourage them from speaking up in the future.
When leaders notice themselves becoming defensive, they should pause, acknowledge the input, and give themselves time to reflect. They might say, "Thank you for sharing this. I would like some time to consider it carefully before I respond." The objective is to identify the best course of action, not to protect the leader's viewpoint or ego.
Giving feedback to someone in a position of authority often requires courage. Leaders should acknowledge that honesty and thank employees even when they do not fully agree with what has been said.
Expressing appreciation does not mean committing to every suggestion. It demonstrates that the employee's contribution is respected. A constructive response today helps employees feel safer about speaking up again in the future.
Action is the clearest evidence that feedback has value. After receiving input, leaders may gather more data, adjust their own behavior, change a process, allocate additional resources, or reconsider a decision.
Not every piece of feedback will be accurate or feasible, but every sincere contribution deserves serious consideration. When a suggestion is appropriate, leaders should translate it into concrete action. When it cannot be implemented, they should explain why rather than allowing the feedback to disappear into silence.
After making a decision, leaders should update those who provided input on what happened next. Let them know what changed because of their feedback, what additional information is needed, or why a suggestion could not be adopted.
Closing the feedback loop helps employees see the impact of speaking up. When they know their input has been heard and addressed, they are more likely to continue sharing feedback in the future.
Feedback is unlikely to become a habit if it depends entirely on individual initiative. Organizations should integrate it into management practices such as one-on-one meetings, performance reviews, employee surveys, post-project reviews, and leadership development programs.
The ability to ask for, receive, and act on feedback should also be included in manager performance criteria. When feedback follows a regular cadence and clear ownership exists for follow-through, speaking up gradually becomes a natural part of how the organization learns and operates.
Ultimately, feedback only creates value when leaders listen proactively, build trust, and turn what they hear into action. Connect with Blanchard Vietnam to explore how leaders can strengthen communication, empower their teams, and create an environment where employees feel confident speaking up, contributing ideas, and improving results together.
