“Hey Nadine, don’t get mad, okay… but Sven thinks you’re not always clear enough in meetings.”
Nadine looks up, spilling half her coffee on her laptop. Sven? Thinks that? Then why doesn’t he just say it himself?
Welcome to the curious world of secondhand feedback. Sometimes it’s a sign of care and engagement. Other times, it’s a silent assassin of your feedback culture.
And yes, let’s be honest: secondhand feedback is nuanced. In certain contexts — like preparing for a performance review or a 360-degree feedback cycle — secondary feedback, or systematically gathering feedback from third parties, can actually be incredibly valuable.
In this article, we’ll focus on the risks of unstructured secondhand feedback — not on the valuable applications within organized feedback processes.
Research by London and Smither (2002), among others, and work around multisource feedback (MSF) shows that secondary feedback can be a powerful tool for gaining performance insights and fueling development conversations.
But when secondhand feedback is unstructured and informal — like Anke just “dropping by to say something” — it more often leads to misunderstandings, noise, and the erosion of a healthy feedback culture.
Let’s take a closer look at what secondhand feedback really is, where the risks lie, and how to navigate it smartly.
Secondhand feedback: what’s really going on?
Secondhand feedback happens when person A (Sven) has a message for person B (Nadine), but delivers it through person C (Anke).
Often, the intention is good:
- someone wants to help.
- someone doesn’t have the courage to say it directly.
- someone thinks it will come across “softer” through a third party.
But good intentions don’t always lead to good outcomes.
Why should you be cautious with secondhand feedback?
Secondhand feedback comes with risks:
- lack of context: the message loses nuance, emotion, and explanation.
- blurred responsibility: who’s supposed to follow up — Anke, Sven, or Nadine?
- greater chance of misunderstandings: the message gets distorted along the way.
- indirect communication culture: teams learn to talk about each other, not to each other.
Secondhand feedback isn’t a sin — but it is a warning sign: there’s room for improvement.
The secondhand feedback triangle: Nadine, Sven, and Anke
In every secondhand feedback situation, you’ll find three key players:
1. Sven: the original feedback giver
- Risk: avoids having the conversation directly.
- Tip: take ownership of your message. Ask for support if needed, but deliver the feedback yourself.
2. Anke: the messenger
- Risk: unintentionally becomes part of a miscommunication.
- Tip: ask, “Have you talked to them directly?” and encourage direct contact.
3. Nadine: the recipient
- Risk: receives a message without context.
- Tip: thank the messenger, ask where the message comes from, and steer the conversation toward direct communication.
How do you handle it smartly?
- Appreciate the good intent — even if the approach isn’t ideal.
- Redirect gently but firmly. Encourage direct dialogue.
- Set clear team agreements: feedback should go directly, not through detours.
- Coach in the moment. Help people grow in direct communication.
In closing
Secondhand feedback may sound harmless. But in teams striving for openness and trust, it can be quietly destructive.
Appreciate the engagement — but consciously guide it toward real conversations between the right people.
That said, secondhand feedback doesn’t have to be a pitfall. In the right framework, it can even become one of your most powerful levers (but more on that later).
No whispers. No detours. Just human to human.
Sources and inspiration:
- London, M., & Smither, J. W. (2002). Feedback orientation, feedback culture, and the longitudinal performance management process. Human Resource Management Review, 12(1), 81-100.
- Atwater, L. E., Wang, M., Smither, J. W., & Fleenor, J. W. (2020). Are cultural characteristics associated with the relationship between self and others’ ratings of leadership?. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 41(6), 663-686.
- Levy, P. E., Tseng, S. T., Rosen, C. C., Law, C. Z., & Lueke, A. (2021). Feedback interventions: A meta-analytic examination and path forward. Journal of Management, 47(6), 1546-1576.
- Anseel, F., Beatty, A. S., Shen, W., Lievens, F., & Sackett, P. R. (2015). How Are We Doing After 30 Years? A Meta-Analytic Review of the Antecedents and Outcomes of Feedback-Seeking Behavior. Journal of Management, 41(1), 318-348.
