How do you approach giving feedback to a colleague?

Example answer

I prepare feedback by identifying an observable behavior, a specific example and its effect on the work. I separate that evidence from my interpretation and check whether I understand the expectation we had agreed. My aim is to make a useful change possible, not to assign a personality label.

I choose the channel for the situation. Routine comments about a shared document can stay in its normal review process; sensitive personal feedback usually needs a private conversation. I ask whether it is a suitable time, describe what I observed and invite the colleague's perspective. For example: “The handoff omitted the failure cases we agreed to include, so support could not route two of the example issues. Was there a constraint I missed?”

After listening, I agree on a specific next step and offer relevant help. We might add the missing cases and use a short checklist for the next handoff. I confirm who will do what and when we will check whether it helped. At that follow-up, I refer to the agreed behavior, recognize improvement and discuss remaining problems without moving the goalposts.

I remain open to feedback about my own contribution. If the issue involves serious misconduct or an immediate safety concern, I use the appropriate reporting route rather than assume an informal peer conversation is sufficient.

Follow-up to practice

How would your approach change if the colleague disputed the facts or your authority to set the expectation?