feedback-sticks · deliverable

Workshop Design Brief — "Feedback That Sticks"

Fictional client: Brinkhaven Facilities Group (1,100 employees; 80 team leads; post-restructure) Designed by: I Wayan Usada — Learning & Development Format: 90-minute live workshop (max 14 participants) + pre/post digital touches Status: fictional case; nothing here has been run, and every figure is an illustrative premise

1. Needs signal → learning objective

Premise of the case: engagement-survey comments cluster into one pattern, "I give feedback; nothing changes", and exit interviews mention "no honest conversations" more often than a year ago. Team leads are not avoiding feedback; they deliver it in a form that triggers defensiveness (pattern claims such as "always", motives instead of behaviour, no agreed next step). Terminal objective (proposed):

By the end of the workshop, every participant has delivered one complete feedback conversation in a role-play using SBI-C (Situation–Behaviour–Impact–Commitment), and the observers' rubric total rises from round one to round two.

Enabling objectives:

Distinguish observation from interpretation ("Could a phone camera have recorded it?")
Rewrite judgement phrases into specific, timed, behaviour-anchored statements
Handle two defensive reactions (deflection, counter-attack) with two prepared moves (bridge, refocus on the record)
Score a peer's conversation on the five-line rubric within one point of the other observers (so the round-to-round delta means something)
Book one real conversation within 5 working days before leaving the room (transfer device)

2. Design decisions & rationale

Decision	Why
90 min, not half-day	Leads' calendars; depth via pre-work, not seat time
Pre-work: one reflection prompt (a 5-minute video is planned, not produced)	Frees workshop time; primes the memory of a conversation that went sideways
Fishbowl demonstration round before the triads	One pair in the middle, six observers score line 1: the room calibrates on one shared example before scoring each other
Role-play with observers + rubric, not demo-then-discuss	Behaviour practice is the only way the objective moves; observers learn as much as players
Commitment card, booked in the calendar before leaving	The transfer moment happens in the room
Volunteer-first pairing, opt-out stated aloud	Feedback practice on demand is coercion; psychological safety is a design condition
No slides in the first 30 min	Attention on the skill, not the deck

3. Flow at a glance (detail in the facilitator guide)

Segment	Time	Method
Landing + norms	5'	Practice space, not performance space; pass is always allowed
Interpretation vs observation warm-up	10'	Card-sort in pairs
SBI-C structure teach-back	15'	Micro-lecture + rephrase drill
Round 1: fishbowl, then triads	6' + 19'	One volunteer pair in the middle, observers score line 1; then doer / receiver / observer rotations, full rubric
Defensive-moves clinic	15'	Two scripted hard moments, whole-group practice
Round 2 (same triads, new scenario)	12'	Same rubric; the delta is the learning evidence
Debrief + commitment + calendar	8'	Name the delta, park side stories on the board, book the conversation

4. Not a training problem

If leads have no protected time for one-to-ones, a commitment card books a conversation that the calendar will cancel. Protected one-to-one time is a management decision.
If HR's performance process rewards "no surprises" reviews, leads will keep feedback for the annual form. The process owner, not the workshop, can change that.

5. Success measures (proposed; detail in the evaluation plan)

L1: exit poll, three questions
L2: rubric delta, round two minus round one, with the difficulty of the two scenarios noted
L3: share of booked conversations held within 10 working days (lead self-report + a one-question manager pulse)

Prefer the source? Download the raw markdown.