Latest / New Manager Conversations with Fexingo: First 90 Days, Managing Former Peers, and Leadership Basics / How New Managers Can Give Constructive Feedback to Underperformers
Transcript
- Lucas: So you've been a new manager for maybe three months now. Your team is generally solid, but there's one person — let's call him Dan — who keeps missing deadlines. His code is sloppy. He used to be fine before you got promoted. Now everyone's looking at you to fix it. What do you actually say? Luna: Yeah, that's the million-dollar question. Most new managers I've talked to either avoid it entirely or come in way too hot. Lucas: Exactly. And both approaches damage trust. So today I want to walk through a very specific framework for giving feedback to an underperformer — one that keeps the relationship intact while raising the standard. It's called situation behavior impact. Luna: SBI. I've seen that in a few leadership books. But let's ground it in a real case. Who's the example? Lucas: A friend of mine — actually, she's a product manager at a mid-size SaaS company called FieldStack. She got promoted to lead a team of five engineers last year. One of them, a senior engineer named Raj, had been there for seven years. He knew the codebase inside out. But after she became his manager, his output dropped. Tickets started slipping. He'd submit pull requests with obvious bugs. Luna: Classic — he might have been resentful she got the role. Or maybe he just felt he didn't need to prove anything anymore. Lucas: Right. She waited six weeks hoping it would fix itself. It didn't. So she set up a one-on-one and used SBI. Situation: 'In the last three sprints, when you've submitted pull requests for the billing module.' Behavior: 'I noticed three instances where the test coverage was below our threshold, and there were logic errors we caught in code review.' Impact: 'That meant the team had to delay the release by two days to fix it. It also erodes confidence in the module's stability.' Luna: That's clean. No judgment, no 'you're lazy.' Just facts and consequences. Lucas: And she told me the key was the pause after the impact statement. She literally stopped talking. Raj sat there for maybe 10 seconds, then said, 'I didn't realize it was that bad. I've been rushing.' Luna: That's the moment. He took ownership because she didn't make him defensive. Lucas: Look, if we've helped you think through a career move or a tough conversation like this one, I want to mention something. This show stays ad-free because of listener support — small contributions that add up. A couple of dollars a month is genuinely what keeps these going. Luna: Yeah, it makes a real difference. If you've gotten value from this episode or any of our previous ones, you can support us at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. Lucas: And that goes directly into recording, editing, research. So thank you. Now — let's dig into what happens after that first SBI conversation, because the follow-up is where most new managers drop the ball. Luna: What did Raj do after that meeting? Lucas: He agreed to a two-week check-in. She set a clear expectation: 'By our next one-on-one, I'd like to see your code quality metrics inline with the team standard. Let's review your PRs together before you submit them.' That's specific and measurable. Luna: So she's not just dumping feedback and walking away. She's creating a scaffold. Lucas: Exactly. And that's the piece a lot of new managers miss. They deliver the feedback, feel brave for having done it, and then they never follow up. The underperformer assumes it was a one-time thing and reverts. You have to track it. Luna: I've seen that too. A friend of mine gave feedback to a direct report about being late to meetings. She said it once. He was on time for a week, then back to old habits. She never circled back. Lucas: Right. So the SBI framework isn't a one-and-done. It's the first step in a cycle. After the initial conversation, you set a specific observable goal — something like 'I want to see your code review comments addressed within 24 hours of feedback.' Then you schedule a follow-up within two weeks to review progress. Luna: What if the person doesn't improve after two or three cycles? Lucas: Then you escalate. But most people do improve if they know the feedback is serious and backed by consequences. In Raj's case, he actually became one of her best performers after about six weeks. He just needed a wake-up call that was firm but fair. Luna: Let's talk about the language. A lot of new managers I coach default to 'you need to step it up' or 'you're not meeting expectations.' That feels vague and accusatory. Lucas: Totally. The beauty of SBI is it removes the 'you' accusation. You're describing a situation and a behavior, not labeling the person. Compare 'You're being careless' with 'In Tuesday's client presentation, the revenue numbers in slide seven were from last quarter.' One triggers defensiveness. The other invites correction. Luna: And what about timing? Should you wait for the formal review cycle? Lucas: Never wait. The research on feedback timing is clear: the closer to the event, the more effective. If you wait three months, the behavior is stale and the person feels blindsided. My rule of thumb is within 48 hours, ideally in a scheduled one-on-one, not in the hallway. Luna: But don't you risk the person feeling ambushed if it's too fresh? Lucas: That's why the one-on-one is the right container. You have a regular cadence — weekly or biweekly — so feedback becomes part of the normal conversation. It's not a surprise meeting. You just say, 'Hey, I want to use some of our time today to talk about the billing module PRs.' Luna: And you open with the situation, not the judgment. That's the sequence. Lucas: Precisely. Now let's talk about a different scenario: what if the underperformance isn't about skill, but about attitude? Like the person is competent but disengaged. Luna: That's trickier. You can't SBI your way into someone caring. Lucas: You can, actually, if you adjust the impact statement. Instead of talking about output, you talk about team morale or culture. 'When you roll your eyes in meetings, the junior engineers notice and hesitate to share ideas.' That's an impact they might not have considered. Luna: That's powerful. It reframes the feedback as a leadership issue, not a personal critique. Lucas: And if the person still doesn't shift, you have to ask yourself: is this a fit problem? Maybe they need a different role. But that's a conversation for another episode. Luna: We should do that one. 'When to pivot from coaching to performance managing.' Lucas: Noted. For now, I want listeners to take away one concrete action: before your next one-on-one with a direct report who's underperforming, write down three things: the specific situation, the specific behavior, and the specific impact. Use that as your script. Don't wing it. Luna: And if you're the one receiving feedback? How do you model openness? Lucas: That's a whole other angle. But the short version: say 'thank you,' pause, and ask one clarifying question. 'Can you give me an example of what you mean?' That shows you're listening without getting defensive. Luna: Good advice. I think the key theme here is that feedback, done well, is a gift. It's how people grow. Lucas: And it's how new managers build credibility. If you can handle the hard conversations with grace and structure, your team will trust you more, not less. That's the paradox. Luna: Thanks, Lucas. And thanks to everyone listening. We'll be back next week with another conversation.