Feedback Challenges, Esq.
Mary is an ambitious young lawyer in Chicago. She was named partner at her firm at a young age and continues to be impressive in her field. She is well-practiced, bright, and confident in a courtroom. But she notes one significant challenge in her communication style: moments of feedback.
She’s pretty receptive when it comes to receiving feedback. Certain topics are trickier than others – like all of us, I suppose – but she is committed to growth and understands that receiving feedback is an essential piece of that process.
Giving and receiving feedback is not unique to lawyers. Her concerns should sound familiar to us all. Mary’s challenges are human challenges, and they apply to feedback and communication across domains.
All Feedback is Good Feedback
All feedback is good; that doesn’t mean all feedback is accurate. Good, because it’s data. High quality feedback can provide the obvious opportunity to get a handle on blind spots and help one progress in ways that would not otherwise have been possible. Low quality feedback can still shine a light on blind spots but can also on concerns with the deliverer (they might be jealous, or a loose cannon). In either case, and any case in between, there is an opportunity to learn.
In this way, Mary welcomes feedback with an open mind. A discerning filter as well. She works hard on not taking recommendations personally (ex: I need you to file the report sooner) and taking them to heart when they are about personal issues (ex: I’m having a long week, can you get me that report by tomorrow?). She listens well. She cares.
And yet, there are still moments with which she has trouble. She notes that her biggest challenges regarding feedback occur within a professional hierarchy. Let’s break down her concerns individually.
Primary Feedback Concerns
“I have a hard time interpreting tone and communication style from a superior.”
She acknowledges that she might be overinterpreting tone. She also notes that the legal profession can be high stress and that strained delivery from a superior might be a reflection of a long day, not necessarily something she has done. Still, in those moments, she is not also comfortable clarifying.
Notes: Our threat-detection systems tend to over-assign meaning to ambiguous cues, particularly when power dynamics are involved. A helpful frame is to consider contextual load: fatigue, stress, and pace of work. These factors can shape tonality more than intent. With this in mind, you might practice gentle clarification in low-stakes moments, building comfort with neutral statements such as, “I want to be sure I’m understanding correctly,” which creates clarity without confrontation. Notice that the “I want to be sure I am understanding” prefix puts the focus on you (or Mary) and does not risk ruffling the feathers of the superior. This approach often feels more accessible to people who report this concern.
“I hesitate to provide truly honest feedback.”
Every so often, her superior will ask for honest feedback about current project or leadership style. She is never convinced it will be received without consequence. This, she adds, has changed a bit over her career – mostly depending on who her boss is at the time. Certain leaders have been steadier than others. The one with whom she is currently working comes across as consistently on edge and quick tempered. It is understandable why, if that is the normalized temperament, Mary might not have great confidence that her feedback will be well-received.
Notes: Feedback exchanges are deeply shaped by the emotional climate set by a leader. If there’s a hierarchy at play, that’s natural. When someone appears on edge or reactive, the nervous system naturally becomes guarded, and caution becomes a form of self-protection (it does not necessarily signal avoidance). It makes sense that your willingness to give honest feedback has fluctuated across supervisors, because trust and steadiness vary widely in us all – their rank in your company does not make them any less human.
One strategy is to use structured, behavior-focused language that avoids interpretation and keeps the exchange contained to clear observations rather than evaluative statements, which can reduce perceived interpersonal risk. For example, “I notice you _______” – you’re just noticing, without necessarily assigning value to the other person’s actions. Far different that beginning feedback with “It frustrates me when you ________,” or “You messed up when you _________.”
“I go in and out of feeling comfortable advocating for myself.”
This depends on who she is communicating to, and for what she has to advocate. When it is work related, she’s fine. Advocating for a client, or to be put on a specific project, is not a problem. She is confident in her ability. But renegotiation compensation or asking for a new benefit package… she gets stuck. She hesitates, overthinks it, and is not her usually confident self.
Notes: Advocating for others is easier because the emotional distance lowers the personal stakes and reduces self-evaluative pressure. When the advocacy centers on your own compensation or benefits, the request can feel tied to your worth, which activates doubt and avoidance. This is a common dynamic in human development, even among highly capable professionals. Progress often comes from rehearsing concise, values-aligned language in advance, allowing you to enter these conversations with clarity. Easier said than done, especially if the conversation requires adaptation. Remember that self-advocacy is a professional skill, not a personal referendum. You’re discussing your job, not you as a person.
How to Sustain It
We can’t come up with notes and a script for every possible scenario Mary might encounter. Mary has to be able to put the full picture together. She must be honest with herself in certain situations and acknowledge what she might bring to the table. If there are specific topics that put her on edge, the broaching of those topics should create awareness. She should pause and settle in. She should do her best to listen without making assumptions, and slow down to take a breath when necessary. If she’s been grinding at work, and trying to have a complicated conversation on only a few hours of sleep, she should factor that in. Professionalism frequently comes from steady confidence, not from the person who is most rehearsed in conversation cues. The common denominator in all of Mary’s conversations is Mary.
So, awareness of her current state is important. Building confidence and practicing the art of delivering and receiving feedback is important. She can remind herself than uncertainty and hesitation are natural, but not necessary in these contexts.
The biggest component of her work is to see the other person – superior or not – as a person. That person might also be tired, stressed, and simultaneously trying to read Mary’s mannerisms, in hopes of peaceful collaboration. And if the other person is just a jerk, that’s good to know as well.
Aim for Agreement
One of the best bits of guidance I’ve heard regarding communication came from another lawyer – in fact, a lawyer turned University President, Jim Ryan. His recommendation began in courtroom conflict but extends to all matters of interpersonal exchange. His guiding question:
Can we both agree that ____________?
Simple. Profound. It points to the idea that in any situation involving one or more parties, the guiding sentiment can include an identification of common ground. It’s there, if you’re willing to look for it.
Consider some of the most polarizing discussions you might have – at work, or at the next family reunion. If all parties are willing to slow down and look for each other amid the muck of emotional disagreement, they can find stable ground.
Imagine the most heated political discussion – can we both agree that our country and its people are important? Okay, let’s start there. If we can get through the swirl of disagreements on the periphery of a discussion, and find its core, we have a chance. From there, we can build.
Regarding the reception and delivery of feedback, that agreement should not be hard to find. Mary now wonders out loud, can we both agree that we each can, and want to, improve? And then, would some feedback be helpful? And then, I noticed that ________, can you help me understand?
It’s a strategy that has worked for her. She continues to work on it. Hopefully we can all agree that it’s worth the effort.