Forget the 'compliment sandwich.' Try this 3-step approach to sharing constructive criticism instead.
How do you effectively deliver constructive criticism to a colleague at work? Everyone who's ever done it (and anyone who's struggled to) knows it's not an easy conversation to have.
You probably also know, all too well, the makings of the "compliment sandwich," a long-relied-on fallback in cases like these.
It goes something like this: You open with a compliment to ease into the conversation, then segue into the critique you're really there to give, and finally close with another piece of praise to end on a good note.
While a compliment sandwich can be a solid starting framework (though it's not without its critics), a variation on it might offer a more effective way to share constructive feedback.
Daniel Post Senning and Lizzie Post, etiquette experts with the Emily Post Institute, told us about that method. Their book, "Emily Post's Business Etiquette," went on sale May 20.
"Compliment sandwiches work, I understand that idea too: You want to give someone enough positive reinforcement that they can take the negative," said Post Senning. "But let's take one of those positive reinforcements and try to make it as constructive as possible."
One 3-step alternative riffs on elements of the compliment sandwich while advancing it a step further. It's the praise-concern-suggest method.
Before you get into the conversation, give your colleague a heads-up about what kind of talk it's going to be — think of priming them for a difficult conversation.
"This lets someone know, 'Am I about to say yes to a conversation about something I need to take very seriously, something I need to be open-minded about, something really great to share?'" said Post. "Because 'Do you have a minute to talk?' could be about anything."
During the actual conversation, mention why you're bringing up the issue and what your coworker, not just you, stands to gain from the discussion and any resulting solution.
"Don't assume that someone else understands your good intentions, but be willing to state them, be explicit, and say the obvious thing," said Post Senning. "Directly talk about it being for their benefit as well. Make it clear that you care about them, particularly if it's going to be more difficult."
You might say you're raising the concern because you care about the success of a project you're working on together, or about their success at work, or your professional relationship with each other.
Then, you'd start the same way you would with a compliment sandwich: Offer a piece of praise, as some workplace research has indicated that this can be important.
"Don't just start off with the bad; wading into the shallow end first, not diving too deep too quick, gives you a chance to feel someone else out and get a sense of their response or reaction," said Post.
For many people, the hardest step is bringing up the issue at hand. You want to be direct and clear, and remember why you're having the conversation in the first place.
It can be challenging, however, "you have to be willing to raise problems if you want change," said Post Senning.
Where this method differs from the compliment sandwich is its ending. Rather than closing on a compliment, you offer a possible solution or action step to address the issue you just raised.
"The cost of admission to raising an issue where you want change in someone else's behavior is a willingness to participate in the solution in some way," said Post Senning. "They may or may not take it, but just having done enough work to offer some future direction, some willingness to participate, to not just dump a problem on someone's lap, is important."
Lastly, it can help to depersonalize the criticism so it's about the issue, not the person. One way to do this is to say something like, "If the shoe were on the other foot, I would hope that you would feel comfortable talking to me about this."
It's a way of saying, "This isn't about you, this is about what's going on here, the work that we're doing, and I would really hope the same standards would apply to me" if the roles were reversed, said Post Senning.
And, of course, the conversation doesn't necessarily end with your closing suggestion.
"Be ready to listen, be ready to negotiate," said Post Senning. "You might have an idea. It's one thing to listen, but then there's a follow-up step. You also have to be willing to stay flexible and actually hear what you've just been listening to and reformulate your thinking in relation to it in terms of priming yourself mentally on the other side of that equation."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Omada Health IPO signals healthier market, avoids 'down-round' trend
The IPO market is starting to feel healthier. Omada Health, a 14-year-old company providing virtual care for chronic conditions like diabetes and hypertension between office visits, closed its first trading day on Friday at $23 a share, a 21% jump from the IPO price of $19. The IPO valued the company just above $1 billion (excluding employee options), a figure that's nearly identical to Omada's last private valuation of $1 billion set in its previous VC round. The debut is one of the first among recent IPOs that was not a so-called down-round. Many of the latest public listings, including Hinge, ServiceTitan, and Reddit, priced below their private market highs, though have faired well as public companies. For founder and CEO Sean Duffy, the successful public offering validates his decision to start a company that he believed the market desperately needed. In 2011, he dropped out of Harvard Medical School after realizing that chronic illness patients required more continuous support than the existing healthcare system delivered. Before the offering, he owned 4.1% of the company, according to Omada's offering document. Other significant shareholders included Revelation Partners (10.9%), US Venture Partners (9.9%), Andreessen Horowitz (9.6%), and FMR (9.3%). Duffy told TechCrunch that over his 14-year journey as a founder, he had many harrowing moments. "I didn't think our series A was going to come together because we were working on this commercial deal that didn't materialize, and that spooked one investor," he said. "As a young business, something tries to kill you every month," he continued. "And then as the business grows, it turns into like every quarter or six months, year, two years." One of the recent challenges for many digital health businesses is navigating the "collapse" of the market post-COVID boom. Omada steered through the turbulent times by seeking new, rising markets. It recently expanded its offerings to include diet management support for GLP-1 patients.
Miami Herald
7 hours ago
- Miami Herald
More federal workers are flooding the job market, with worsening prospects
After Matt Minich was fired from his job with the Food and Drug Administration in February, he did what many scientists have done for years after leaving public service. He looked for a position with a university. Minich, 38, was one of thousands swept up in the mass layoffs of probationary workers at the beginning of President Donald Trump's second administration. The shock of those early moves heralded more upheaval to come as the Department of Government Efficiency, led by tech billionaire Elon Musk, raced through agency after agency, slashing staff, freezing spending and ripping up government contracts. In March, about 45 minutes after Minich accepted a job as a scientist in the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, the program lost its federal grant funding. Minich, who had worked on reducing the negative health impacts of tobacco use, observed that he had the special honor of 'being DOGE-ed twice.' 'I'm doubly not needed by the federal government,' he said in an interview. He is still hunting for work. And like hundreds of thousands of other former civil servants forced into an increasingly crowded job market, he is finding that drastic cuts to grants and contracts in academia, consulting and direct services mean even fewer opportunities are available. Some states that were hiring, another avenue for former federal government employees, have pulled back. So, too, have the private contractors typically seen as a landing place. The situation is expected to worsen as more layoffs are announced, voluntary departures mount and workers who were placed on administrative leave see the clock run out. With Musk's time in Washington now done, a fuller picture of just how completely he and Trump have upended the role of government is coming into view. Federal tax dollars underpin entire professions, directly and indirectly, and the cuts led by Musk's operation have left some workers with nowhere to go. In Washington, D.C., and the surrounding area, the disruption has the hallmarks of the collapse of an industrial cluster, not unlike the disappearance of manufacturing jobs in the upper Midwest during the 2000s. Except this time, it is moving at lightning speed. In January, just as Trump was taking office, the civilian federal workforce across the country had reached a post-World War II peak of 2.3 million, not including the Postal Service. Few agencies have publicly stated how many people have been fired or voluntarily resigned, but a rough count shows that federal agencies have lost some 135,000 to firings and voluntary resignation, with another 150,000 in planned reductions. Contracted and grant-funded workers -- which the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta estimated to be as many as 4.6 million people -- are harder to track in official data. The first contractor layoffs began in February with organizations that received funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, like Chemonics and FHI360. As more grants and contracts that were under review across government are terminated, job cuts have gained steam. Booz Allen Hamilton, a consulting firm based in Northern Virginia that gets 98% of its revenue from the federal government, announced that it was cutting 7% of its 36,000-person staff. Even providers of Head Start, the low-income preschool program, have issued layoff notices because funding has been in doubt. While the national labor market remains stable, job loss is starting to become notable in the capital region. Unemployment rates in the District of Columbia and most of its surrounding counties have been on the rise since December. The number of people receiving unemployment insurance has been elevated in Virginia and D.C. over the past several months. Job postings in Washington have dropped across the board, according to the hiring platform Indeed, including in administrative assistance, human resources and accounting. Local government agencies around Washington are hosting dozens of hiring events, and most of them are packed. Elaine Chalmers of Woodbridge, Virginia, was among 750 people who attended a recent resource fair in Arlington, Virginia, just outside Washington. The event offered free consultation for updating resumes, as well as professional headshots and workshops, including one on managing personal finances during a transition in employment. It was the fourth one she attended in the month since she left the Agriculture Department, where she had worked for 20 years, most recently in the division that ensured equal access to grants for rural communities. She resigned to escape the stress and uncertainty created by new mandates, such as erasing words like 'equity' and 'diversity' from department communications. 'It just became almost a character question for myself,' said Chalmers, 53. 'I couldn't honorably stay.' Like many of the federal workers who chose to take a deferred resignation or early retirement, one of the tools the administration has used to shrink the workforce, she is on leave and will be paid through September. It is a relief, she said, because she is the sole caregiver for her mother and 15-year-old son. But the prospects do not look good. Chalmers said she expected to have to take a pay cut. She said she applied for more than 100 jobs in the week before the job fair and received several automated emails informing her that she did not get the position. For many government workers, career transitions can be especially daunting because their jobs are often extremely specific, performing functions that do not exist in the private sector. 'For a lot of them, it's almost like starting from scratch,' said Laura Moreno-Davis, a spokesperson for WorkSource Montgomery, a workforce agency for Montgomery County, Maryland, just outside D.C. 'If they really have a wealth of experience and knowledge, how can we best use that?' A new group formed by two former federal employees is trying to help people do that. 'How do you translate these skills that you've learned in the federal government that are so complex and seem to be so unique into something that can be communicated easily outside of the federal government?' said Julie Cerqueira, co-founder of the group, FedsForward. Cerqueira's partner, Karen Lee, said that people who worked in federal disaster recovery and resilience jobs, for example, had expertise that could easily transfer to private-sector work in contingency planning and supply chains. But it is not so simple for everyone. Chelsea Van Thof, 33, is a public health veterinarian who focused on diseases that spread from animals to humans, and humans to animals -- a niche job even in government. A few weeks after the inauguration, the contract she worked under at the State Department was placed on hold for a 90-day review and ultimately terminated. Van Thof immediately lost her health insurance and took on a housemate to cover her rent. Plans for the future changed, too, as she had been counting on public-sector loan forgiveness to pay off her $250,000 in veterinary school debt, a prospect that now seems increasingly remote. She sometimes feels as if she is sending resumes into a void. 'I was just thankful when I got a rejection because it meant they saw my application,' she said. Like others in the science field, including Minich, she is looking for jobs outside the country. And in the meantime, she helped form a support group of about 80 wildlife protection conservationists who are in similar predicaments. People working on government contracts are hit especially hard because they are not eligible for the deferred resignation plans available to federal employees and cannot look forward to their pensions. Todd Frank, of Westminster, Maryland, was given just a few minutes' notice before he was laid off as a technical writer on a contract with the Department of Homeland Security's science and technology directorate, helping get the appropriate gear out to military personnel in the field. Frank, 54, is now wrestling with whether to uproot his family to find a new job, which would come with steep trade-offs. His wife runs her own business -- a licensed day care out of their home. His teenage sons do not want to leave their high school, he said. Lately, he is looking at the family's budget for where to make cuts. 'Not being able to buy a suit for prom sounds like rich people problems, but you don't want to turn around and tell your kid, 'You can't do this,' or, 'You can't do that,'' Frank said. Several states had advertised their eagerness to hire people laid off by the federal government in the early days of federal cuts. In March, Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania said the state would give hiring preference to former federal workers. Since then, the state government has received more than 7,300 applications from people who said they had federal experience, his office said, and so far, state agencies have hired 120 of them. But state jobs have gotten a lot more popular in recent months. Since March, former and current federal employees have sent in nearly 700 applications, California's human resources office said. Some states are having their own budget problems, in part brought on by uncertainty around the continuation of federal funding. Alaska, Massachusetts, Indiana, Louisiana and New Hampshire have implemented hiring freezes. Public health agencies in Ohio and Alaska have laid people off as grants were canceled. And a broad swath of universities have also paused new hires, including the University of California system, the University of Pennsylvania, and Emory University in Georgia. With the Trump administration's firings of scientists and grant cancellations from agencies including the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health, science and consulting have been hit especially hard, according to Indeed. Companies and nonprofits that helped evaluate whether federal programs were working, like American Institutes for Research, have let go up to a quarter of their payroll. Paro Sen, a research scientist in Cincinnati, was laid off in May along with most of the people in her office at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. She worked on industrial hygiene, studying worker exposures that cause chronic health problems, and visited Washington in May with her union to talk to members of Congress about the need to restore these jobs to the federal government. 'This was my dream job that I have been ripped from,' she said in an interview. Sen and her colleagues work in such a specialized field that they are competing for very few available jobs, especially if they want to stay where they are. 'The job market right now is not amazing,' said Sen, 29. 'Cincinnati is not a very big city, and you've got, suddenly, some of the smartest people in this field all applying and competing for the exact same jobs at the same time.' This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Copyright 2025
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump-Musk showdown threatens US space plans
SpaceX's rockets ferry US astronauts to the International Space Station. Its Starlink satellite constellation blankets the globe with broadband, and the company is embedded in some of the Pentagon's most sensitive projects, including tracking hypersonic missiles. So when President Donald Trump threatened on Thursday to cancel Elon Musk's federal contracts, space watchers snapped to attention. Musk, the world's richest person, shot back that he would mothball Dragon -- the capsule NASA relies on for crew flights -- before retracting the threat a few hours later. For now, experts say mutual dependence should keep a full-blown rupture at bay, but the episode exposes just how disruptive any break could be. Founded in 2002, SpaceX leapfrogged legacy contractors to become the world's dominant launch provider. Driven by Musk's ambition to make humanity multiplanetary, it is now NASA's sole means of sending astronauts to the ISS -- a symbol of post–Cold War cooperation and a testbed for deeper space missions. - Space monopoly? - The company has completed 10 regular crew rotations to the orbiting lab and is contracted for four more, under a deal worth nearly $5 billion. That's just part of a broader portfolio that includes $4 billion from NASA for developing Starship, the next-generation megarocket; nearly $6 billion from the Space Force for launch services; and a reported $1.8 billion for Starshield, a classified spy satellite network. Were Dragon grounded, the United States would again be forced to rely on Russian Soyuz rockets for ISS access -- as it did between 2011 and 2020, following the Space Shuttle's retirement and before Crew Dragon entered service. "Under the current geopolitical climate, that would not be optimal," space analyst Laura Forczyk told AFP. NASA had hoped Boeing's Starliner would provide redundancy, but persistent delays -- and a failed crewed test last year -- have kept it grounded. Even Northrop Grumman's cargo missions now rely on SpaceX's Falcon 9, the workhorse of its rocket fleet. The situation also casts a shadow over NASA's Artemis program. A lunar lander variant of Starship is slated for Artemis III and IV, the next US crewed Moon missions. If Starship were sidelined, rival Blue Origin could benefit -- but the timeline would almost certainly slip, giving China, which aims to land humans by 2030, a chance to get there first, Forczyk warned. "There are very few launch vehicles as capable as Falcon 9 -- it isn't feasible to walk away as easily as President Trump might assume," she said. Still, the feud could sour Trump on space altogether, she added, complicating NASA's long-term plans. SpaceX isn't entirely dependent on the US government. Starlink subscriptions and commercial launches account for a significant share of its revenue, and the company also flies private missions. The next, with partner Axiom Space, will carry astronauts from India, Poland, and Hungary, funded by their respective governments. - Private power, public risk - But losing US government contracts would still be a major blow. "It's such a doomsday scenario for both parties that it's hard to envision how US space efforts would fill the gap," Clayton Swope, deputy director of the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told AFP. "Both sides have every reason to bridge the disagreement and get back to business." Signs of a rift emerged last weekend, when the White House abruptly withdrew its nomination of e-payments billionaire Jared Isaacman -- a close Musk ally who has twice flown to space with SpaceX -- as NASA administrator. On a recent podcast, Isaacman said he believed he was dropped because "some people had some axes to grind, and I was a good, visible target." The broader episode could also reignite debate over Washington's reliance on commercial partners, particularly when one company holds such a dominant position. Swope noted that while the US government has long favored buying services from industry, military leaders tend to prefer owning the systems they depend on. "This is just another data point that might bolster the case for why it can be risky," he said. "I think that seed has been planted in a lot of people's minds -- that it might not be worth the trust." ia/dw
