4 ms·

> Use the “hamburger method” If you are a manager or someone in a position of "power" no, please don't. This has to be one of the most overrated and misused f

> Use the “hamburger method” If you are a manager or someone in a position of "power" no, please don't. This has to be one of the most overrated and misused feedback methods. The problem with giving sandwich/hamburguer whatever feedback, is that you are undervaluing positive feedback. After you do this a lot of times, every time you want to give positive feedback to the person, she will be expecting the negative part, she will grow weary of your feedback and wont value the positive feedback. Better learn how to give effective feedback ( https://www.manager-tools.com/2005/07/giving-effective-feedback https://www.manager-tools.com/2005/07/giving-effective-feedb... highly recommended) whether it is positive or negative. And teach your collaborators to receive the feedback as what it is: just feedback.

roland35 6y ago
I am also not a fan of the hamburger method. I think it seems disingenuous, plus most people are aware of it too. Personally if I get negative feedback I would rather hear what I can do to make it better than hearing an arbitrary good thing to make up for the bad thing.
- svrb 6y ago
  Indeed, the real value of the hamburger method seems to be in making it difficult for the recipient to engage in productive conversation about the negative feedback, which the giver may find difficult.
throwaway2245 6y ago
I don't personally think the "hamburger method" is overrated (partly since I often see it criticised), even if it is cliché, and even if there are joke examples of taking it to an extreme. Feedback is improved by saying what you liked about someone's approach - by giving positive reinforcement to the parts that you liked and distinguishing the parts that would benefit from improvement. Maybe closer to my rule of thumb would be: 1. give genuine positive feedback whenever it is possible to do so, and negative feedback whenever it is necessary. 2. all negative feedback/criticism should be constructive. It should regard only how things could be improved when related situations comes up in the future (and in an achievable way). 3. on the receiving end, I also think you should demand that negative feedback is constructive - rather than wallowing in the negativity, you can normally train people to give you more useful and productive feedback. If the problem is something you can't do anything about, it's useful to identify that and reflect it back. People are much more receptive to constructive negative feedback if they know that you're recognising their positive efforts and have understood a more complete context. I've observed that people who say they dislike the hamburger method will still respond positively to it, compared to bluntly negative feedback.
- hinkley 6y ago
  A 'hamburger' tries to stuff all of the food groups into a single serving. What you're really after is a balanced diet of positive feedback, negative feedback, and neutral interactions. If you will, non-negative interactions are sort of the fiber that is missing from most of these diets. Being around someone where every interaction is going to be intense, regardless of whether it's a positive or negative interaction, is just exhausting.
- jrumbut 6y ago
  Where the hamburger gets ridiculous is when it's three totally unrelated items. The best criticism in my mind shows the path to success. So instead of: 1. You make a great cheese dip at office parties. 2. You gotta stop flaming people in code reviews. 3. Great presentation last week. Make it more like: 1. You're clearly committed to the project's success. 2. But the conversation on ticket #347 was too hostile, please don't call anyone an ignoramus again. 3. The way you handled #252 helped us settle a disagreement and reach a good compromise quickly. Showing the first step and general direction back to success is good. The next part is when it's over, it's over and not to hold grudges or play favorites, and hopefully get people to trust that you won't.
gowld 6y ago
A better alternative to "hamburger" feedback is: 1. Express appreciation for effort already investment, to show that the effort was well-spent. 2. Critique the work. 3. Express encouragement for future effort, to show that the recipient can solve these problems and succeed. Spamming 3 unrelated forced comments in a weird order just confused the recipient, making them not understand which of the comments is more important. That's only superficially like "positive comment, negative comment, positive comment", but below the surface similarity is where the important difference is.
- musingsole 6y ago
  I love this! This isn't about some ratio of good to bad. It's about engaging with the individual and encouraging more of what you want to see. Telling someone something is bad is helpful-ish. Telling someone the parts that are great -- that you want to see replicated again or extended in the future -- that's useful. And rewarding to everyone involved. It's really only useful to give negative feedback if it's something that SHOULD NOT happen. Otherwise, learning to accept people where they are in life goes a long way.
corty 6y ago
The problem with the hamburger method is that it is recognizably dishonest. Everyone knows the structure by now, everyone knows that the positives at either end are just there to cushion the negative. So positive feedback in a hamburger will not only be undervalued, it won't be believed at all.
throwaway987978 6y ago
I love the Manager Tools feedback model. It's succinct and the importance is on addressing behavioural change over time rather than one particular incident.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

roland35 6y ago

I am also not a fan of the hamburger method. I think it seems disingenuous, plus most people are aware of it too. Personally if I get negative feedback I would rather hear what I can do to make it better than hearing an arbitrary good thing to make up for the bad thing.

svrb 6y ago
Indeed, the real value of the hamburger method seems to be in making it difficult for the recipient to engage in productive conversation about the negative feedback, which the giver may find difficult.

throwaway2245 6y ago

I don't personally think the "hamburger method" is overrated (partly since I often see it criticised), even if it is cliché, and even if there are joke examples of taking it to an extreme. Feedback is improved by saying what you liked about someone's approach - by giving positive reinforcement to the parts that you liked and distinguishing the parts that would benefit from improvement. Maybe closer to my rule of thumb would be: 1. give genuine positive feedback whenever it is possible to do so, and negative feedback whenever it is necessary. 2. all negative feedback/criticism should be constructive. It should regard only how things could be improved when related situations comes up in the future (and in an achievable way). 3. on the receiving end, I also think you should demand that negative feedback is constructive - rather than wallowing in the negativity, you can normally train people to give you more useful and productive feedback. If the problem is something you can't do anything about, it's useful to identify that and reflect it back. People are much more receptive to constructive negative feedback if they know that you're recognising their positive efforts and have understood a more complete context. I've observed that people who say they dislike the hamburger method will still respond positively to it, compared to bluntly negative feedback.

hinkley 6y ago
A 'hamburger' tries to stuff all of the food groups into a single serving. What you're really after is a balanced diet of positive feedback, negative feedback, and neutral interactions. If you will, non-negative interactions are sort of the fiber that is missing from most of these diets. Being around someone where every interaction is going to be intense, regardless of whether it's a positive or negative interaction, is just exhausting.
jrumbut 6y ago
Where the hamburger gets ridiculous is when it's three totally unrelated items. The best criticism in my mind shows the path to success. So instead of: 1. You make a great cheese dip at office parties. 2. You gotta stop flaming people in code reviews. 3. Great presentation last week. Make it more like: 1. You're clearly committed to the project's success. 2. But the conversation on ticket #347 was too hostile, please don't call anyone an ignoramus again. 3. The way you handled #252 helped us settle a disagreement and reach a good compromise quickly. Showing the first step and general direction back to success is good. The next part is when it's over, it's over and not to hold grudges or play favorites, and hopefully get people to trust that you won't.

gowld 6y ago

A better alternative to "hamburger" feedback is: 1. Express appreciation for effort already investment, to show that the effort was well-spent. 2. Critique the work. 3. Express encouragement for future effort, to show that the recipient can solve these problems and succeed. Spamming 3 unrelated forced comments in a weird order just confused the recipient, making them not understand which of the comments is more important. That's only superficially like "positive comment, negative comment, positive comment", but below the surface similarity is where the important difference is.

musingsole 6y ago
I love this! This isn't about some ratio of good to bad. It's about engaging with the individual and encouraging more of what you want to see. Telling someone something is bad is helpful-ish. Telling someone the parts that are great -- that you want to see replicated again or extended in the future -- that's useful. And rewarding to everyone involved. It's really only useful to give negative feedback if it's something that SHOULD NOT happen. Otherwise, learning to accept people where they are in life goes a long way.

corty 6y ago

The problem with the hamburger method is that it is recognizably dishonest. Everyone knows the structure by now, everyone knows that the positives at either end are just there to cushion the negative. So positive feedback in a hamburger will not only be undervalued, it won't be believed at all.

throwaway987978 6y ago

I love the Manager Tools feedback model. It's succinct and the importance is on addressing behavioural change over time rather than one particular incident.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]