The Wise, the Fool, and the Evil: Responding to Feedback
In my last newsletter, I explored the challenge a Leader faces when a complaint is brought to them about someone they oversee. We explored some of the complexity through the experience of Clive (Complainant), bringing a complaint forward to Grant (Leader) about Deya (Accused). As a Leader is discerning what to do and how to respond, a key element of discernment is how the Accused responds to this feedback they are getting about the impacts of their behaviour.
When feedback goes well, we rarely notice it’s happening. In Thanks for the Feedback, Stone and Heen note that, “Feedback includes any information you get about yourself. In the broadest sense, it’s how we learn about ourselves from our experiences and from other people—how we learn from life.” When it’s received well, it feels seamless. When it’s resisted, questioned, or outright denied, it can stump us. We try to rephrase it, soften it, or make it more palatable for the receiver, but ultimately, it comes down to whether they are willing to take it in.
It’s undeniably challenging to hear critical feedback about your performance. Our human instincts to protect ourselves kick into gear, as our deeper fears are exposed—will I be accepted? Do I belong? Am I enough? These questions, among others, haunt our internal landscapes, and rather than contending with those fears, it’s easier to armour ourselves against the incoming threat.
As a Leader, the ideal would be to cultivate a team culture that embraces feedback. If offering feedback is normative and framed as an opportunity to develop, individuals are then encouraged to seek out feedback. If this is the culture a Leader develops, then when an individual resists feedback it will stand out quite starkly that this individual may not be in alignment with the team’s values.
So, returning to the dilemma of processing a complaint against the Accused, the Leader has to discern the way forward.
I consistently come back to this framework from Henry Cloud when a Leader is discerning what to do in response to a complaint made against someone they oversee. Cloud breaks down three categories of typical responses to feedback. Each of these responses can give Leaders a grasp of where the Accused lands, and how they can respond as a result. Cloud calls them The Evil, The Wise and The Fool.
The Evil: Malicious intent and impacts
Depending on the nature of the complaint, you may have a more serious breach. I’ll address this category briefly, as it is less common than the other two, and hopefully a bit easier to discern. Essentially, the category of The Evil is when there is clear malicious intent, criminal behaviour, and it’s quite evident a firm ending needs to take place. In some cases, enlisting the help of professionals may be required.
What’s a Leader to do: When dealing with The Evil, leaders must act decisively and protectively. The priority is safety, integrity, and accountability—not reconciliation. Involve HR, legal, or external professionals, document everything, and remove access or authority swiftly. Compassion still matters, but clarity and boundaries are paramount.
The Wise: Apologetic, Responsive, Self-aware
If a Leader is dealing with The Wise, they can often breathe a sigh of relief. If this is truly the category the Accused lands in, the situation most likely wouldn’t even make it to the Leader’s attention.
The Wise hear critical feedback and are often taken aback. Not because they are shocked you would say that to them, but they are shocked that they’ve had this impact on you. They might be bristled at first (honestly, no one enjoys getting critical feedback) but after a day of processing it, they’ll probably come back to you, ready to understand more, prepared to apologize, and with a commitment to changing their ways.
If the issue has made its way to the Leader, the Accused may have not taken it as seriously as the Complainant meant it to be. Or the Complainant felt too uncomfortable delivering the feedback and needed the support of the Leader to help facilitate the conversation. While this might sting for the Accused, and they may wish it could have just been handled between them and the Complainant, they will ultimately understand the position the Complainant was in and seek to understand the feedback.
This could be an opportunity to coach the Accused on how to draw out feedback from those they lead, and to develop an openness from learning from those in positions under them.
People willing to receive feedback will be less concerned with how the feedback was brought to light, and more focused on what the feedback communicates. This is a posture that favours learning and development regardless of where it’s coming from and how it’s delivered.
These are the individuals you treasure on a team. They desire feedback, want to grow, and they care about the impact they have on others. These kinds of people are energizing to work with, as deeper levels of trust are fostered, and collaboration towards your shared goals comes together more seamlessly.
What’s a Leader to do: When dealing with The Wise, Leaders can implement accountability structures that keep this conversation in front of them and structure them in a way to promote growth. In healthy cultures, feedback and accountability is not punitive, but is viewed as an opportunity for development. The Wise will welcome this structure and the support you are providing in holding them accountable for the change they are also hoping for.
The Fool: Defensive, Deflective, Elusive
If you’ve ever dealt with a situation where you were utterly confused and lost as to what to do, you were most likely dealing with the category of The Fool. The Fool repels critical feedback. They defend, dismiss, or altogether deny. As a Leader, you’ll feel like you’re going crazy, the issues will be hard to pin down, you’ll be confused about who is at fault, and you’ll feel disillusioned with what your role is in the process. This is where many leaders get stuck, and accountability feels elusive.
Nothing you say sticks—there’s always an excuse, a rationalization, or someone else who’s at fault. Team members walk on eggshells around them, and the problems persist.
In fairness to the Accused, it’s only natural for someone to defend themselves in a situation like this. Receiving feedback of any kind can be disheartening or disorienting to say the least. But what we must remember is at this point in the process, the Complainant has already raised these concerns with the Accused. They have tried to name what they’ve experienced, and most likely have already heard these responses: it wasn’t their intention, they’re sorry, or they deny it.
In the example of Grant bringing the concerns to Deya, she assured him that she didn’t intend to have this impact. While this is helpful information, it’s not complete. The question remains if she can acknowledge the impacts her actions are having, and if she is willing to adjust to support the flourishing of the team.
If the charges are now being brought to the attention of the Leader, one can assume that changes have not taken place. In some cases, it’s not only that the patterns continue, but at this point, the situation becomes more dire for the Complainant. Voicing the concerns and not having them addressed leaves the Complainant vulnerable if they remain in that context. Clive naming his concerns with Deya, and then bringing in support from Grant, now puts Clive in a compromised position. For some, they may be subject to retaliatory actions or subtle antagonisms.
If the Leader doesn’t respond on their behalf, the Accused is indirectly endorsed, and typically it’s only a matter of time before the Complainant must explore other options.
It’s at this point where a Leader questions reality—who’s right? What’s true? And ultimately, what do I do in response?
I don’t envy Leaders put in this position. They’re stuck in a seemingly impossible predicament. But there are a couple of harsh realities they must contend with:
Managing the process of response is not an inconvenient distraction—it’s a critical responsibility of the Leader
A Leader’s inability to hold the tension is where many accountability processes fail
How a Leader responds has implications for the Accused, the Complainant, and the organization as a whole
So, with these realities in mind, our next newsletter will explore how a Leader can navigate this complexity and stay agile.