In Lugano, should managers give feedback on correct work?
A compliant file or a correct answer does not always show whether an employee has mastered what they have just done. The managerial question is specific: should managers revisit correct work when the person is unsure why it was right?
What the literature establishes
Andrew C. Butler, Jeffrey D. Karpicke and Henry L. Roediger III (2008, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition) studied the effects of feedback on correct answers given with different levels of confidence. In their experiments, feedback improved subsequent retention of answers that were initially correct but given with low confidence. Feedback can therefore do more than replace a wrong answer: it can also consolidate knowledge that a person doubts.
Confirmation is not simply praise
In her review of formative feedback, Valerie J. Shute (2008, Review of Educational Research) distinguishes verification of accuracy from information that elaborates on or explains an answer. For managers, this distinction suggests separating “this is right” from “here is the criterion that makes this work correct”. The first message conveys an assessment; the second provides a usable reference point, although it is not guaranteed to be superior in every situation.
The premature conclusion
One might conclude that every successful piece of work needs a comment. The findings justify neither that generalisation nor an increase in praise: the issue here is learning a correct response, not recognition in general. A narrower implication is to identify uncertain successes and check whether feedback on the relevant criterion helps people reproduce them. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What the evidence cannot promise
The experiments cited concern knowledge tasks, not the handling of banking files or decisions in a family business. In actual work, an apparently correct outcome may depend on outside assistance or favourable circumstances; a statement of confidence is not enough to establish mastery. A further comparable performance therefore needs to be observed, rather than treating an employee's agreement during the discussion as evidence of learning.
A practical check in Lugano
Within SHR — Swiss Human Resources' programme “L'art du feedback”, a local exercise could use anonymised cases: document checks in banking, order compliance in fashion, clause verification in trading, or the application of a procedure in an Italian-speaking family SME. Using practice cases with verifiable answers, ask participants to respond in Italian and indicate whether they are confident or uncertain, then randomly assign their uncertain correct answers either to confirmation of the criterion or to feedback delayed until after assessment. One week later, present equivalent cases without assistance and compare the proportion of correct answers under the two conditions, retaining the case counts and scoring rules. This local test would examine whether learning can be reproduced, without delaying any feedback required for safety or compliance in actual work. To go further: explore the The Art of Feedback training in Lugano in the canton of Ticino, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: The Art of Feedback in Lugano
- the art of feedback
- Lugano
- research
- training lugano