Lesson overview

Topic: Giving and receiving feedback effectively

Audience: New managers, 6-18 months in role

Duration: 60 minutes | Class size: 16 learners | Format: Virtual (Zoom) | Assessment: Live application + written reflection

Learning goal: Learners will be able to deliver one piece of constructive feedback using a structured framework, and identify what makes feedback land well vs. poorly.

Segmented lesson flow

0:00 – 0:05 | Open and orient

Facilitator welcomes group, confirms audio/video, and sets the session norm: cameras on, chat active throughout. A single slide is visible: the central question for the session.

0:05 – 0:10 | Activation poll

Poll launches immediately. Results are shown and briefly narrated – no long debrief yet.

0:10 – 0:18 | Short input – what makes feedback fail

Facilitator delivers a focused 8-minute input using two real-scenario examples (one feedback conversation that went wrong, one that worked). Learners are told to type one word in chat when the bad example is read: how the receiver likely felt.

0:18 – 0:25 | Framework introduction

The SBI framework (Situation, Behaviour, Impact) is introduced with a visual. Learners are given 3 minutes to rewrite the bad example from the input segment using SBI structure – typed directly into the chat or a shared doc.

0:25 – 0:40 | Breakout practice

Pairs in breakout rooms. One person delivers a prepared feedback scenario using SBI. The other responds as the employee, then gives 60 seconds of observer feedback. Roles swap. Each pair has a task card visible in the shared doc.

0:40 – 0:48 | Whole group debrief

Two volunteers share what felt natural and what felt forced. Facilitator draws out patterns using chat responses: “Type G if it felt genuine, S if it felt scripted.”

0:48 – 0:55 | Consolidation task

Each learner writes one real feedback message they need to deliver in the next two weeks, using SBI. Typed into a private reflection doc or chat to facilitator only.

0:55 – 1:00 | Close

Facilitator reads two anonymised examples from the consolidation task (with permission), names what worked, and restates the core principle. Exit poll launches.

Interactive elements

Activation poll (0:05)

• “How often do you avoid giving critical feedback to your direct reports?” – Never / Sometimes / Often / Almost always

Chat prompt during input (0:10)

• “As I read this example, type one word in chat: how do you think the employee felt after this conversation?”

Framework rewrite task (0:18)

• “You have 3 minutes. Rewrite the bad example using SBI. Type it in chat or the shared doc – go.”

Breakout task card prompt

• Scenario: Your team member has been consistently late to team meetings – three times in two weeks. Deliver feedback using SBI. You have 2 minutes to deliver, 1 minute for the other person to respond naturally, then 60 seconds of observer feedback.

Debrief pulse check (0:40)

• “Type G if the feedback felt genuine when you delivered it, S if it felt scripted, B if it felt like both.”

Exit poll (0:55)

• “How confident are you to deliver this feedback conversation in the next two weeks?” – 1 (not at all) to 5 (very confident)

Facilitator script notes

Opening

“Before we get into content, one quick norm: I’ll be using chat a lot today – it’s not side conversation, it’s part of how we learn together. Please keep it open.”

Launching the breakout

“I’m opening breakout rooms now – you’ll be in pairs. The task card is in the shared doc, page 2. Person A delivers first. You have exactly 12 minutes – I’ll send a 2-minute warning to the rooms. If you finish early, discuss: what felt hardest about delivering it?”

Returning from breakout

“Welcome back. Before anyone speaks – type G, S, or B in chat right now based on how it felt to deliver that feedback.” [Pause 15 seconds.] “Let’s look at what we’ve got…”

Closing

“You’ve each written one real message today. That’s the work. The framework only helps if you actually use it – so the ask is simple: send that message before next Friday.”

Engagement strategy

• No segment exceeds 8 minutes of passive listening
• Chat is used as a low-stakes response tool in every segment – removes the pressure of speaking aloud
• Breakout pairs (not groups) reduce social loafing and guarantee every learner speaks
• Consolidation task is personal and real – not hypothetical – which increases investment
• Facilitator names chat responses aloud to signal that contributions are seen

Contingency plan

• Breakout rooms fail: Switch to chat-based roleplay – Person A types their feedback message, Person B replies as the employee, facilitator debriefs in plenary
• Shared doc inaccessible: Facilitator pastes the task card text directly into Zoom chat
• Poll tool unavailable: Use hand raises or typed numbers in chat (1-4) as substitute
• Low participation in chat: Name two or three learners directly and invite a one-word response – keeps norm alive without pressure

Assessment method

Understanding is checked three times during the session without formal testing:

• Framework rewrite (0:18): Facilitator scans chat responses for correct SBI structure – misapplications are addressed immediately with a short model correction
• Breakout debrief pulse (0:40): G/S/B responses signal whether learners felt competent or mechanical – facilitator addresses the S cluster directly
• Consolidation task (0:48): Real feedback message using SBI serves as the summative check – facilitator reviews after the session and follows up individually where structure is missing

[…]