Partly this is because the process has become so carefully structured (thanks to the formalisation of the process in many places) that it feels like a legal proceeding rather being a collegiate and helpful process. Everyone is on eggshells about what is being said and worried about future liabilities that it is hard not to play it “safe” in offering feedback. The true winners in this, ironically, are the more troublesome employees and employers who will get called out less.

Secondly, these used to be to help provide mentorship but managers are now often not around long enough due to restructures. In one corporate role I had 9 managers in 3 years.

With little in the way of experience or involvement in hiring the employee, the adjustments can be turbulent for everyone and a true long-term strategy or view of improvement more unlikely. Even HR representatives are rotated frequently (or outsourced) adding to the disjointed view.

Thirdly, many employees don’t plan on hanging around long (and employers also not making any commitments and minimal investments in them) so there is more of a “take it or leave it” sense about the feedback and its value or ability to influence an employee who is on the constant lookout for the next role.

We need a better and more realistic approach to how to provide feedback in a much more fluid work environment.