In fast-paced product environments, engineering teams are often focused on delivery—pushing code, hitting milestones, clearing backlogs.
But behind every sprint, there’s a more subtle force shaping long-term success:
The quality of our feedback loops and the strength of our relationships.
Regular, constructive performance feedback—both within teams and between teams and their stakeholders—isn’t just a “nice leadership practice.” It’s a competitive advantage.
🧠 Feedback Creates Alignment
One of the most common mistakes I see with feedback is not asking for it in the first place—especially constructive criticism. Too often, we only hear about what’s going well, or we wait until something has gone wrong to raise concerns. That’s not feedback. That’s firefighting.
When it comes to feedback, there’s always an opportunity. Feedback should always include both positive reinforcement and areas for improvement. It doesn’t have to mean someone is doing something wrong. Sometimes it’s about highlighting what’s working so others can build on it. For example, I might say: “I’ve noticed one of our team members speaking up with solutions—I love that, and I’d like to see the rest of the team do the same.” That kind of feedback calls out great trends and encourages others to emulate them.
The flip side is harder: being open to criticism. Nobody enjoys hearing where they fell short, but if leaders (on both the agency and client side) aren’t willing to receive feedback, why would anyone else? For me, feedback isn’t just about what needs fixing—it’s about building awareness.
🧭 Collaboration: Clear Feedback Between Teams and Clients
Feedback from clients can sometimes be even more impactful than internal recognition. A simple, direct shout-out from a client can energize a team in ways no internal pat on the back ever could.
But when relationships with clients are superficial, things get harder. I’ve seen relationships break down because there wasn’t a strong foundation of trust. When critical issues piled up without regular check-ins, even small problems started to trigger negative responses, and rebuilding that trust was incredibly difficult.
By contrast, in partnerships where we invested in regular check-ins and built relationships across multiple levels, the dynamic was completely different. Not only did we resolve issues faster, but there was so much trust that clients supported our team’s well-being—even encouraging personal time off without hesitation. That level of collaboration only comes when feedback is treated as a shared dialogue, not a one-sided critique.
🌱 Relationships Are the Real Infrastructure
You can have the best tools, cleanest architecture, and the most refined agile processes—but if your team lacks strong relationships, everything feels fragile.
That’s why retrospectives are so important. They create a safe space to reflect on what went well and what could improve—without pointing fingers. Retros give everyone the chance to acknowledge what worked and what didn’t—without blame. They let people step back from “hands on keyboard” mode and think about the bigger picture: As an engineer, product manager, or QA, how did I grow? What would I do differently next time? It’s like those moments when you think of the perfect comeback too late—except here you get a structured opportunity to actually reflect and improve.
One-on-ones are just as critical. They’re a chance to build rapport, sometimes by talking about things completely unrelated to work. But they’re also the right place for tough conversations. Critical feedback should always be private. If I had to be told, “Chas, you need to talk less and listen more,” I’d want to hear that one-on-one, not in front of everyone else. Public criticism makes people shut down; private feedback creates space to actually listen, internalize, and improve.
🔄 Feedback Is a Two-Way Street
Feedback can’t only flow one way. Some of the best ideas and risk awareness come from engineers and non-leaders who see things from the ground level. But it can be intimidating for them to speak up.
One method I’ve used is “Start, Stop, Continue.” I’ll ask the team to anonymously post things I should start doing, stop doing, and continue doing. They nominate someone to walk me through the results, and I leave with a clear, honest view of what they need from me. For people who aren’t comfortable giving feedback directly, it’s a safe outlet.
Still, I believe leaders need to set the tone. If you want honesty and transparency from your team, you need to demonstrate it first. That means sharing updates openly, admitting when something didn’t go well, and even asking in the moment: “That meeting could’ve gone better—what could I have done differently?”
And when things go wrong, our role is to be a shield for the team. Instead of playing the blame game, we should recognize what went well, acknowledge what could have been better, and focus on improvement. It’s not about rehashing mistakes—it’s about saying, “Next time we face this scenario, we’ll be ready with a better plan.”
💬 Leadership Starts With Conversations
Whether you’re leading an engineering team or managing stakeholders, ask yourself:
- Are we treating feedback as a one-off or a habit?
- Do our engineers feel safe giving input—not just receiving it?
- Are our clients and partners part of the loop, not outside it?
For me, feedback is most powerful when it’s regular, open, and respectful. It’s how we build trust, not just solve problems.
And in the end, long-term success isn’t just built on the code. It’s built on conversations.
