Let’s be honest: giving constructive feedback that is well received is one of the hardest parts of being a manager. Even after more than 10 years in management, it is still a skill I actively work on and I know I am not alone. At every company I have worked for, “receives feedback regularly” reliably scores near the bottom of engagement surveys. And yet, feedback is one of the core responsibilities of the role.
The problem with feedback in 1:1s
1:1s are invaluable. They are great for building trust, staying close to the work, and handling day to day issues. When this is the regular cadence, delivering meaningful feedback can be hard because it is not the expectation of the meeting.
For me, 1:1s are driven by my direct report’s agenda. I create space to talk about goals, blockers, and what is top of mind in the moment. The downside is that deeper feedback conversations, especially the uncomfortable ones, tend to get deprioritized unless there is explicit intent. Something always feels more urgent.
While 1:1s work well for feedback on specific projects or recent decisions, they are a poor fit for broader conversations about patterns, skills, or long term development. Those discussions often get tacked onto the end of a meeting, rushed, or softened. Additionally, when the meeting is framed as “their time,” introducing hard feedback can feel like injecting my agenda.
My approach: the “2 and 1” framework
To address this, I started using a simple, structured monthly feedback routine that has changed how I give and receive feedback. Once a month, I set up a reoccuring meeting with everyone on my team where I give each team member two pieces of feedback, and I ask for one piece of feedback from them in return.
That is it.
This creates a dedicated space for growth oriented feedback, separate from tactical conversations. Both sides know what the meeting is for, and both come prepared. Asking for feedback myself has led to some of the most useful, actionable insights I have ever received, far more than what typically shows up in formal review cycles.
Designing the alliance
While taking CTI Coaching Fundamentals, I was introduced to the idea of “designing the alliance,” being explicit about how you want to work together. Saying something as simple as, “Once a month, I am going to give you two pieces of feedback and ask for one in return,” sets expectations early and removes ambiguity.
That clarity has had unexpected benefits. People will proactively ask to reschedule 2 and 1s if the timing does not work, because they understand the value of the conversation and want to show up fully. Feedback stops feeling like a surprise and starts feeling like part of the working relationship.
Designing the alliance lowers the emotional charge around feedback by making it routine. It creates space for honest conversations about skills, potential, and growth without crowding out the tactical focus of regular 1:1s.
How this simplifies annual reviews
This approach has completely changed how I experience annual reviews. Because feedback is shared and referenced throughout the year, recency bias all but disappears. Reviews stop being high pressure events and instead feel like a natural summary of conversations we have already had.
I always start reviews by saying, “None of this should be new.” In 2025 I went 100% no spurprises for annual and bi-annual reviews.
Wrapping it up
After 1 year of doing this consistently, the difference has been quite striking. Giving and receiving feedback feels easier. Writing reviews is faster and more thoughtful because I am practicing the skill year round, not trying to compress it into a single moment.
When feedback only happens during review season, it is almost impossible to get better at it. Making it a regular habit has helped me improve as a manager and removed most of the friction from formal reviews. For me and my team, it has been a genuine game changer.