Giving feedback people can use: the SBI model and Radical Candor

Most feedback fails for a simple reason: the person hearing it cannot tell what to do differently. “Great job on the launch” and “you need to be more professional” both leave the listener guessing. Feedback people can use names a moment, describes what happened and explains why it mattered.

Two well-known tools help. The Situation-Behaviour-Impact (SBI) model from the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) gives you a structure for a single piece of feedback. Radical Candor, developed by Kim Scott, helps you check the spirit in which you give it. This article covers both, and how to give feedback upwards to your own manager.

The SBI model in three steps

CCL describes SBI as a three-step method. (CCL uses the American spelling, Situation-Behavior-Impact. The steps are the same.)

1. Situation: say when and where it happened. CCL’s example is “This morning at the 11 am team meeting”. Avoid vague timing such as “last week”, which leaves the person trying to work out what you mean.
2. Behaviour: describe what the person did that you could see or hear. Keep to facts. “You interrupted me while I was presenting the budget” is a behaviour. “You were rude” is a judgement.
3. Impact: explain the result, for you, the team, the customer or the work. CCL suggests naming the feeling, such as “pleased” or “worried”, so the person understands how much it matters.

CCL also describes an extended version, SBII, which adds a fourth step: ask about intent. Questions such as “What were you hoping to achieve?” or “What was going on for you?” turn a one-way message into a conversation and close the gap between what someone meant and how it landed. CCL says its research found SBI reduces anxiety for the person giving feedback and defensiveness in the person receiving it.

Radical Candor: care personally, challenge directly

Kim Scott’s framework places feedback on two axes. One is caring personally about the people you work with. The other is challenging directly, which means saying what you think instead of staying quiet. The combinations give four quadrants.

The Radical Candor site stresses that these are behaviours, not personality types. Everyone slips into each quadrant at times. Use the grid as a compass for a particular conversation, not as a label for a colleague.

The site also sets an order of operations: ask for feedback first, then give specific praise, then give criticism that is kind and clear. Praise counts as feedback, and it needs the same detail as criticism. “Nice work” teaches nothing. “The summary table on page one let the founders decide in five minutes” tells the person what to repeat.

How the two fit together

SBI is about content: what you say. Radical Candor is about stance: why you are saying it, and whether you are willing to say it at all. A well-structured SBI statement delivered with contempt still lands as Obnoxious Aggression. A warm chat that never gets to the behaviour is Ruinous Empathy.

One way to combine them: before the conversation, check that you are willing to say the hard part (challenge directly) and that your reason is to help the person (care personally). Then use SBI to say it, and the intent question to listen.

A worked example

An example (illustration only). Priya manages a small e-commerce team. On Monday, Sam, an analyst, sent the weekly sales report to the founders with a revenue figure that counted refunded orders twice. Priya wants to raise it without flattening Sam, who is usually careful.

The vague version: “You need to be more careful with the numbers.”

The SBII version:

“In Monday’s sales report to the founders, the revenue total counted refunded orders twice, so it came out about 8% too high. The founders quoted it in an investor update before we spotted it, and I had to send a correction, which I found uncomfortable. What happened with the refund column this week?”

The first sentence gives the situation and behaviour, the second gives the impact, and the question asks about intent. Sam explains that the export format changed and the refund column moved. The fix is a check step in the report process, not a lecture. In the same conversation Priya gives specific praise for Sam’s new stock dashboard, which the founders have asked to keep. She does not use the praise to soften the criticism. She gives both because both are true.

Giving feedback upwards

Feedback to your own manager carries more risk, so preparation matters more. Atlassian’s guide to giving your manager feedback suggests five things:

• Pick the time and place. Avoid the hour before a big presentation or a packed day.
• Use SBI. It keeps the message factual and less personal. The impact step, the “so what?”, is the one people most often skip and the one that makes the case.
• Bring a suggestion. Criticism with no possible way forward is harder to act on.
• Include praise. Managers rarely hear what is working.
• Give them time. Change may not be immediate, and they may have constraints you cannot see.

An example (illustration only): “In Tuesday’s planning meeting, the priorities changed after we had agreed them, and two of us had already started on the old list. We lost about a day. Could we confirm the list in writing at the end of each planning meeting?”

If you are the manager, make upward feedback easier to give. Kim Scott’s advice on asking for feedback is to have a go-to question that cannot be answered with “everything’s fine”, such as “What could I do or stop doing that would make it easier to work with me?” Then stay quiet. She suggests counting to six before you say anything else. When someone does tell you something, reward it. If you agree, change something visible quickly. If you disagree, first find the part you can agree with, then explain your reasoning.

Common mistakes

• Judging instead of describing. “Lazy”, “unprofessional” and “negative” are conclusions. People can argue with a conclusion. They cannot argue with a timestamp and a description.
• Waiting for the annual review. Feedback about something months old is hard to act on. Give it within days, while both of you remember the details.
• Using praise as packaging. Wrapping criticism in compliments you do not mean teaches people to distrust your praise.
• Skipping the impact. Without it, feedback sounds like a personal preference.
• Hearing only praise. Scott suggests tracking how much praise and criticism you receive. All praise and no criticism is a warning sign that people are holding back.
• Defending yourself when you ask for feedback. Repeat back what you heard instead, so the person knows it registered.

When to use these tools, and when not to

SBI suits specific moments: a meeting, a piece of work, a customer call. It works for praise as well as criticism. It is less suited to patterns that build over months, or to serious conduct problems. Persistent underperformance needs a documented performance process, and misconduct may need your organisation’s disciplinary procedure and HR advice. CCL notes that asking about intent early can stop problems reaching a performance review or disciplinary stage, which is a good reason to start small and early.

Radical Candor is a lens for checking your own behaviour. It is not a licence to be blunt, and quoting the book at someone while you criticise them misses the point. If you are unsure which quadrant you were in, ask the person afterwards how the conversation felt to them.