23 Apr Building Healthy Feedback Habits in Teams
Have you ever held back from saying something in a meeting, not because it wasn’t important, but because you didn’t want to “cause a scene”? Or maybe you’ve heard a colleague say, “I’d rather keep quiet than risk making things awkward,” or “I wish people would just be direct and say what they mean.” These aren’t just passing remarks, they speak volumes about how some people think of feedback at work, how some feel safer in silence, while others are more comfortable giving feedback. These themes have surfaced repeatedly in my recent debriefs with different team members building up to Teams That Talk. These feedback anxieties and discomforts are part of a complex, often invisible web of dynamics that can significantly shape how teams learn and perform.
Understanding feedback in teams
Cannon and Witherspoon (2005) in their book titled Actionable Feedback: Unlocking the Power of Learning and Performance, define feedback as “the art of helping people to discover what they are doing right and where they might improve, in a way that supports learning, motivation and performance.” When we use the term feedback in our work with teams, we refer to a mutual, growth-oriented exchange, not just general expressions of opinion or brainstorming, which are more characteristic of engagement activities. This distinction matters because when feedback is practiced intentionally, it becomes a powerful lever for team performance. According to Gallup, teams with strong feedback cultures are 14.9% more engaged than those where feedback is limited or one-directional (Gallup, 2019). And yet, many teams struggle to establish this culture. I wonder why and keep going back to how we need to acknowledge that feedback isn’t a one-size-fits-all process. Teams are made up of individuals with vastly different comfort levels around feedback. Some gravitate toward open, direct communication; others prefer subtle cues or avoid conflict entirely. These preferences are rooted in personal histories, inner narratives, and frameworks like the Enneagram help us understand this.
Our reactions to feedback are neurologically and psychologically complex. Dr. David Rock’s SCARF model outlines five key domains, namely, Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness, and Fairness – that influence our social threat and reward responses (Rock, 2009). When feedback threatens one of these domains, like when it challenges our sense of competence or social standing, it can activate the brain’s threat circuit board, similar to a physical danger response. That’s why feedback often feels so personal, even when it’s meant to be constructive. For individuals whose past experiences have made feedback feel punitive or humiliating, even neutral comments can trigger strong emotional reactions.
With the Enneagram lense, type 9, for instance, may avoid conflict to preserve harmony, while a type 8 might lean into feedback more directly, sometimes too forcefully for others. A type 4 may need feedback that recognises their uniqueness and emotional depth, whereas a type 1 might prefer feedback that is clear and fair, especially when it speaks to values and standards.
Understanding these patterns helps teams and leaders tailor feedback to different needs, not to “soften” it, but to make it land more effectively. Often when working with teams we find that simply naming these patterns brings immediate relief and insight: “Oh, this isn’t personal, this is just how we’re wired differently.”
Building feedback muscle
With that understanding, perhaps the next step is moving feedback from something formal and occasional into something habitual and integrated into team life. Instead of viewing feedback as a performance review or a monthly ritual, teams can start small. One way is to begin check-ins with reflective questions like “What’s working well?” and “What could be better?” These simple prompts can open space for constructive input without the pressure of formal feedback sessions.
Teams can also take time at the end of a project to reflect on what supported or hindered collaboration. These debriefs don’t need to be long or complicated, they just need to be consistent. In-the-moment feedback is also powerful. Encouraging team members to share thoughts or appreciations right after interactions helps feedback feel timely and relevant, not delayed or out of context. When these micro-practices are done consistently and visibly supported by leaders, they become part of the team’s rhythm. No one needs to wait for permission, feedback becomes something we do, not something we dread. So, teams that cultivate healthy feedback habits gain more than improved performance; they gain understanding. One of the most powerful moments in our Teams That Talk sessions is when someone says, “I never knew that’s how you preferred feedback,” and another responds, “That explains so much.” Suddenly, past misunderstandings dissolve. What once felt personal is reframed as difference, not deficiency. These lightbulb moments build empathy, connection, and momentum. Feedback becomes less about fixing and more about growing together.
If you’re curious about how your team could develop these habits, I invite you to subscribe to our newsletter, where we share insights on psychological safety and more. You can also reach out to learn more about our programmes like Teams That Talk, or explore how you might relook Strategy-Leadership-Teams to propel your organisational effectiveness and health.
What would shift in your team if feedback was a shared habit, not a scary event?
Written by: Mbali Masinga