Simiyu works in a logistics firm near Mombasa Road in Nairobi and eventually reaches the breaking point with his department.
He blasts his supervisor in their team WhatsApp group while also sending copies to executives and directors and accuses his boss of constant scope creep and late-night managerial message barrages that catch the team off guard. Fellow staff on the team freeze and feel enormously uncomfortable. The supervisor hardens.
Handoffs for the project are stopped, Simiyu loses allies, and his big issue gets lost in drama with everyone focusing on the poor message delivery rather than the legitimate complaints he raised. Seven days down the road is an appraisal session, reputations are scarred, and a decent work overload problem goes ignored and sinks down the proverbial organisational drain.
Wairimu faces quite a similar problem in Upper Hill, but she takes a few days to ponder how to best approach the situation. She submits a request for a brief one-on-one meeting with her supervisor.
Then Wairimu starts off in the meeting with a calm purpose statement, asks to be allowed to make an observation, and sticks to hard facts that had an effect on levels of service.
She ties each example into customer metrics, invites her supervisor’s viewpoint and opinion, and suggests two feasible adjustments that protect deadlines without starving of cooperation.
Would-be tension melts away and the two compromise on a minuscule pilot change, and a follow-up note from Wairimu puts future action in motion without any accusations.
Author Tijs Besieux reminds professionals to treat upward feedback to supervisors as an art.
The research recommends timing with regard to avoiding departmental peak pressure cycles, giving managerial feedback in one-on-one settings, seek permission to give the meeting’s first opening substantive statement, and give attention only to specific behaviours and their effects instead of motives or labels or blame.
The research deplores email for first attempts at resolving upward work conflict and instead advises employees to invoke a solution frame of mind in the meeting while making one’s voice come off in a curious tone as if looking for mutual betterment instead of like a legal courtroom brawl with insults.
Due to the power distance imbalance reality, the employee or team must first prepare evidence before the meeting, anticipate and plan for managerial reactions, and keep the goal tied to the department’s desired outcome, not a personal win.
Professor Alicia Bones offers a full practical field-tested handbook on how to get hard conversations to stick with one’s superiors.
She recommends clear intent upfront, thoughtful word selection, and an abbreviated short agenda beginning with appreciation for the manager’s time and agreeing to have the meeting then moving toward one or two observable patterns that affect the department or firm’s business impact.
“I” statements in the first person from the employee’s perspective are more effective than “you” statements in the second person in the perspective of the manager. She agrees with author Tijs Besieux in that a private one-on-one meeting is best for delivering such news. Come to the meeting with multi-stakeholder input where necessary.
End the meeting with a future-oriented close that requests a small pilot experiment, a timeline, and light follow up, which shows partnership between employee, team, and manager while diminishing defensiveness.
Dr Jonathan Westover adds further advice that stresses the role of psychological safety and manager openness during feedback meetings.
He asks workers to try first by feeling open, to use a micro yes to obtain permission, and to ground the feedback message in shared goals and facts and not subjective interpretation.
A simple format for the meeting that states the situation, the observed behaviour, and the direct impact on work, and then pose a question to co-design a solution with your manager. This approach compares similarly to the above other two researchers.
The combined approach reduces risk, improves the quality of conversation, and is more likely to result in lasting change for the employee.
In conclusion, on the employer side, firms that formalise upward candor realise faster course adjustments, better employee morale, and stronger customer results.
Upward conversation guides can use a simple checklist for employees. Define the purpose in one sentence. Determine two specific examples with dates and measurable ripple effects. Set a short private recess.
Have a management or leadership issue, question, or challenge? Reach out to Dr. Scott through @ScottProfessor on X or on email [email protected]
Unlock a world of exclusive content today!Unlock a world of exclusive content today!
