When Feedback Becomes a Public Performance

Many people actually value feedback from their manager. It helps you understand whether you are heading in the right direction, whether your work is landing as intended, and whether there is anything you could be doing differently. Good feedback can create clarity, reassurance and a sense of openness. It can also prevent small issues from growing into bigger ones when they are addressed early. 

However, how feedback is delivered matters just as much as the intention behind it. 

It might show up in a team meeting. A manager raises a behavioural issue and says that someone within the team acted inappropriately. They explain they will speak to the person afterwards. Nothing is named, no context is given, and the rest of the team is left sitting with a low level sense of discomfort. 

It can initially be interpreted as a manager taking action. However, the impact on the team is often very different. 

The silent impact on teams 

The moment an issue is raised in this way, most people do not think about the behaviour itself. They think about themselves. 

Did I do something wrong? Could this be about me? Will I be next? 

This is known as anticipatory anxiety. When a threat is unclear, the brain treats it as more dangerous than a known one. Because nobody knows where the issue sits, everyone absorbs the stress. 

Even people who were not involved begin to feel unsettled. The nervous system goes into a low level threat response, and the meeting shifts from being a collaborative space into something that feels unpredictable and unsafe. 

Over time, this has a subtle but powerful effect. People become more cautious. They speak less. They take fewer interpersonal risks. Not because they are disengaged, but because they are protecting themselves. 

Why public correction rarely leads to learning 

From a psychological perspective, people learn best when feedback is: 

• Specific 

• Private 

• Respectful 

• Focused on behaviour, not identity 

• 
  

Public, vague feedback does none of these things. It does not help the individual involved understand what to change. It does not give them a chance to reflect or respond. And it does not build skill or insight. 

What it often teaches instead is: 

Do not draw attention to yourself. Do not make mistakes in public. Do not challenge or question. 

So, while the manager may believe they are setting standards, the team is learning to stay quiet.

When management becomes performative 

In many cases, this approach is not driven by poor intent. Managers often want to be seen as fair, firm or proactive. They may feel pressure to demonstrate that they take issues seriously. 

But when feedback is raised publicly and not properly followed up, it becomes symbolic rather than practical. It signals authority without actually resolving anything. 

The focus shifts from supporting behaviour change to managing impressions. Leadership becomes something that is performed rather than practised. 

The stress that never gets measured 

These moments rarely show up in formal data. They do not appear in absence records or wellbeing surveys. People do not usually raise them as complaints. 

Instead, they show up as: 

• Tension before meetings 

• Overthinking small interactions 

• Emotional self monitoring 

• A gradual loss of trust 

  
  

This is not acute stress. It is low grade, chronic psychological strain. The kind that builds quietly and slowly reduces confidence, voice and motivation. 

Culture versus climate 

This is where the gap between culture and climate becomes important. 

Culture is what an organisation says it values. Respect, openness, accountability, communication. 

Climate is how it actually feels to work there. 

A workplace can promote a positive culture on paper, but if people do not feel able to speak openly in meetings, the impact goes far beyond discomfort. Meetings are where ideas are developed, risks are raised and decisions are improved. When people hold back, important perspectives are lost. This is when the everyday experience of work begins to tell a different story to the one written in policies and values. 

What good feedback looks like 

Effective management does not require public signalling. It is about how issues are handled day to day, how conversations are followed up, and whether people feel respected in the process. 

Good feedback tends to be: 

• Delivered privately 

• Addressed once and properly 

• Clear about expectations 

• Focused on learning, not image

Feedback is a necessary part of management, but the way it is delivered shapes how teams operate. Approaches that create caution and silence reduce effectiveness over time. Approaches that support trust and openness tend to improve both working relationships and outcomes.