High Performers Communicate Directly

When you have thoughts about someone's work performance at the office, what do you do?

Do you tell them directly?

Or do you choose to have it "conveyed gently" through someone else?

To state the conclusion first: truly talented business professionals tell the person directly if they have something to say.

"Wait, won't that cause friction?"

"Isn't there a risk of ruining the relationship?"

If you thought that, please wait a moment.

In this article, I will carefully explain what happens when you bypass direct feedback using specific cases. By the time you finish reading, you should realize that "bypassing is actually much riskier."

Case 1: The Problem with Giving Feedback to Other Departments "Via the Boss"

This is a common scene.

You're concerned about how a member of another department is working. Maybe the quality isn't up to standard, or there's an issue with their communication style—the reason doesn't matter. You want to give that person feedback.

Here, many people take this action:

"I'll contact their boss and have them relay the feedback instead."

On the surface, it seems rational. It respects the chain of command and avoids direct friction. It looks like a "mature response" following organizational rules.

However, there are two fatal problems with this decision.

Problem 1: Information Gets Twisted in a Game of Telephone

This might not even need explaining. Feedback is only accurately conveyed when it includes the choice of words, nuances, facial expressions, and tone of voice.

Suppose you wanted to say, "I was a bit concerned about this part, so I'd appreciate it if you could do it this way." The moment you go through a boss, it passes through their filter. The boss's interpretation, their choice of words, and the relationship between that boss and their subordinate all intervene, making your feedback arrive as "something else."

Information gets distorted by the number of people it passes through. This is the very principle of the telephone game. An uncontrollable gap is born between what you wanted to convey and what the other person received. Even if 70% is conveyed through one person, if it goes through two, it becomes 70% × 70% = 49%—less than half.

It gets as twisted as Kaidoh's Tornado Snake from The Prince of Tennis.

"If you want to convey something accurately, there is no choice but to tell them directly." This is a basic principle of communication.

Problem 2: Distrust Over "Why Didn't You Tell Me Directly?"

This is actually even more serious.

Suppose the feedback is conveyed via the boss. At this time, the source of the feedback—who said it—might be hidden or might not. The boss might accidentally let it slip.

If the person finds out, what happens?

"Why didn't you just tell me directly?"

This question will surely sprout within them. And this question turns into "distrust."

Think about it. If you were in their shoes, how would you feel? Could you trust someone who had concerns about you but said nothing to your face and instead consulted your boss behind your back? You couldn't.

In other words, the act of bypassing out of consideration for "not wanting to cause friction" results in creating even greater distrust. It's the definition of counterproductive.

Now, I'll write about another case I see often that you should be careful with. However, writing about it openly might cause some friction, so from here on, it's for members only.

Case 2: The Problem of "Tattling" During HR Interviews

If you're curious about the rest, I'd be happy if you could stop by the note below.

note: High Performers Communicate Directly