Who is this research for? Managers, HR leaders, and executives responsible for employee feedback, performance management, and workplace effectiveness.
Top Answer
Negative feedback may hurt employee performance when it leaves employees without a clear path forward, significantly disrupts how they normally work, or makes them question their ability to succeed. New research suggests these characteristics can reduce employees’ sense of competence, while feedback that is novel or disruptive may also drain cognitive resources. The implication is not that managers should avoid negative feedback. Instead, managers may improve feedback conversations by providing actionable guidance, clarifying what needs to change, identifying what can remain the same, and giving employees an opportunity to ask questions about how to respond.
Executive Summary
Negative feedback is supposed to help employees improve. But why does it sometimes appear to make employees less effective instead? New research from Christopher C. Rosen (Department of Business Management, Sam M. Walton College of Business), Emily S. Corwin (Bentley University), Hun Whee Lee (The Ohio State University), Lauren S. Simon (University of Denver), and Russell E. Johnson (Michigan State University) examined that question by looking beyond whether feedback was simply negative. Instead, they studied the characteristics of the feedback experience itself.
The researchers focused on three characteristics of feedback. Novel feedback lacks clear or familiar guidelines for how an employee should respond. Disruptive feedback requires substantial changes to an employee’s normal work activities. Critical feedback makes addressing the performance problem particularly important or consequential.
In their main study, the researchers recruited a sample of U.S. employees who worked at least 30 hours a week and had a direct supervisor. Their final sample included 798 weekly observations over the course of 10 weeks, gathered from 293 employees who reported receiving negative feedback from a supervisor or coworker. Most of those feedback events were informal rather than formal performance reviews.
The findings indicate that all three feedback characteristics were associated with employees feeling less competent. Those feelings were associated with less progress toward work goals, less interpersonal helping, and more work withdrawal. Novel and disruptive feedback were also associated with greater cognitive depletion, similarly linked to less goal progress and more withdrawal.
For leaders, the research points toward a useful question: What will employees need in order to respond effectively? Managers can provide actionable guidance, clarify which work routines need to change and which can continue, provide feedback frequently enough to create familiarity, and encourage two-way conversations that allow employees to clarify expectations. Negative feedback may still be uncomfortable or consequential, but giving employees a clearer path forward may help preserve the resources and confidence they need to act on it.
Expert Insights: What should leaders know about negative feedback?
How can managers tell when negative feedback is becoming too disruptive for an employee?
Dr. Christopher C. Rosen notes: “From a managerial perspective, recognizing that feedback might be disruptive involves understanding an employee’s typical work routine. Feedback is considered disruptive when it requires employees to add, change, or remove something about the way they usually do their job.
Managers can do a pulse check after providing the feedback by asking employees questions like ‘What will you need to do differently to respond to this feedback?’ or ‘Will you still be able to get your other work done?’ Doing so might shed some light on whether employees feel they have the resources and confidence needed to respond to the feedback, or alternatively, whether perceived disruptions may be a bit much for the employee to manage.”
→ Takeaway: Check whether the feedback requires major changes to an employee’s normal work and whether they have the capacity to make those changes. A quick follow-up conversation can reveal when the path forward feels manageable or overwhelming.
What should a manager include in a negative feedback conversation to give an employee a clear path forward?
Dr. Christopher C. Rosen explains: “Our findings suggest that managers should help employees think through how to act on the negative feedback, which might mean talking about what can stay the same and what needs to change. Managers don’t need to have all the answers. They can work together with employees to map out a clear path forward so that employees leave the conversation feeling more confident and energized to succeed.”
→ Takeaway: Don’t stop at identifying what went wrong. Work with employees to clarify what should change, what can stay the same, and what practical steps they can take next.
How can managers deliver high-stakes feedback without unnecessarily undermining an employee’s confidence?
Dr. Christopher C. Rosen notes: “High-stakes feedback doesn’t have to ‘feel good’ in the moment to be effective, but it also doesn’t need to leave employees doubting their capacity to improve. What’s most important is that they feel confident they can act on the feedback. Managers can explain why they’re giving the feedback in the first place, offer clarity about what needs to change, and work with employees to identify a realistic game plan. Managers themselves can be a resource for employees in responding to the feedback by communicating that while improvement is needed, the manager is there to help the employee be successful.”
→ Takeaway: High-stakes feedback can be candid without leaving employees doubtful about their ability to improve. Pair clear expectations with a realistic action plan and visible managerial support.
What should organizations change about their feedback culture if they want difficult conversations to lead to improvement?
Dr. Christopher C. Rosen adds: “Organizations can make difficult conversations more useful for development by making frequent feedback a part of everyday work. That gives employees the chance to practice responding to feedback effectively. Additionally, when feedback is frequent, employees may feel less pressure riding on any single feedback conversation.
It’s also important that feedback culture foster productive two-way dialogue. Receiving negative feedback isn’t fun, and there is a tendency for feedback recipients to become defensive or to attempt to offer explanations when given the chance to respond to the feedback message. Instead, creating a culture where employees are actively involved in understanding the feedback message through asking questions and brainstorming potential responses along with their manager is more likely to lead to subsequent improvement.”
→ Takeaway: Make feedback frequent and two-way so employees gain experience responding constructively. Encourage questions and collaborative problem-solving so difficult conversations become opportunities for improvement rather than isolated high-pressure events.
Link to the Original Research
Published in Human Resource Management (2026)
Frequently Asked Questions
Why can negative feedback hurt employee performance?
Negative feedback may become particularly difficult when employees lack a clear way to respond or must substantially change how they work. The research suggests these experiences can reduce employees’ sense of competence and, when feedback is novel or disruptive, increase cognitive depletion. Those reactions may leave employees with less confidence or fewer cognitive resources for pursuing work goals. The important distinction is that negative feedback itself is not necessarily harmful. Its characteristics and the way employees experience the conversation may help determine what happens afterward.
What is novel negative feedback?
In this research, novelty does not simply mean that negative feedback is surprising. Novel feedback lacks established rules, routines, or clear guidance that employees can use to determine how to respond. An employee may understand that performance needs to improve but still be unsure what to do next. The study suggests this kind of feedback is associated with lower felt competence and greater cognitive depletion. Providing actionable guidance may therefore help employees devote less effort to figuring out a response and more effort to improving their performance.
Should managers avoid giving critical negative feedback?
The research does not suggest that managers should avoid important or high-stakes feedback. Some performance problems genuinely require immediate attention. Instead, the findings indicate that critical feedback may affect employees differently from novel or disruptive feedback. Criticality was associated with lower felt competence, but its relationship with cognitive depletion did not meet the study’s threshold for statistical significance. When feedback must be critical, managers can still clarify why the issue matters, what successful improvement looks like, and what the employee should do next.
How can managers make negative feedback more effective?
The researchers recommend accompanying negative feedback with actionable guidance, particularly when the feedback requires substantial changes or is highly consequential. Managers can clarify what employees should do differently, identify which existing work routines can continue, and encourage a two-way conversation so employees can ask questions about expectations and priorities. More frequent feedback may also help employees develop familiar ways of responding rather than treating every difficult conversation as an unfamiliar event.
