The document provides tips for giving constructive feedback using the CAIRN method. CAIRN is an acronym that stands for Context, Action, Impact, Review, and Next Step. The tips suggest starting with providing context about the situation before describing the specific action. Then discuss the impact the action had without attacking the person. Review by discussing perspectives, and finally agree on next steps to resolve the issue. An example dialogue demonstrates how to have a productive discussion using the CAIRN method.

1. THE “CAIRN” WAY TO GIVING CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK
In many of our daily interactions, the word “feedback” seems aptly named.
Technically, it is the “return of a signal through an electronic circuit causing a high-
pitched screeching noise”. Unless you’re a bat, the screech is hardly a delight to
the ears. And so it is for many of the feedback that we get from people who, by
right, are supposed to be on our side… friends, lovers, colleagues at work. And if a
lot of the feedback we get from well-meaning persons is like a “high-pitched
screeching noise”, what about the feedback that we give to them? How good are
we at giving feedback? In this article the Author offers some useful tips in
providing constructive feedback. They are distilled into the acronym, CAIRN.
TRISTAN B DE LA ROSA
Founder & Principal Coach
www.thebanyanway.com
Banyan Way © 2007 Page 1

2. Overheard at the office lobby of a large advertising agency in Chicago:
Man in suit : (Sarcastically) That went well with the client! What were you trying
to do rolling your eyes when the VP for Marketing remarked on your
storyboard? You made him look stupid, as if he did not know what he
was talking about!
Man with earring: Well you weren’t exactly Mr Perfect yourself. You fumbled the
opening line forgetting to mention the objective of the presentation.
So don’t even start being preachy with me!
Man in suit : Hey, you’re the one being preachy. I’m warning you, don’t butt
heads with me. I can make it hard for you at the agency if I wanted
to.
Man with earring: I dare you to!
How many times have we been witnesses to or even participants in a verbal
interchange of a similar or decidedly more caustic level? A person gives what he
believes to be legitimate (or deserved) feedback to another. The listener reacts as
if he were personally attacked. And the conversation rapidly devolves into a
downward spiral of threats and recriminations.
In many of our daily interactions, the word “feedback” seems aptly named.
Technically, it is the “return of a signal through an electronic circuit causing a high-
pitched screeching noise”. Unless you’re a bat, the screech is hardly a delight to
the ears. And so it is for many of the feedback that we get from people who, by
right, are supposed to be on our side… friends, lovers, colleagues at work. And if a
lot of the feedback we get from well-meaning persons is like a “high-pitched
screeching noise”, what about the feedback that we give to them? How good are
we at giving feedback? Is it taken as a gift by the listener or as an insult? Is the
feedback we give constructive? Does it result in a positive change in behavior?
Here are some useful tips in providing constructive feedback. They are distilled
into the acronym, CAIRN.
Context – This refers to two things. First is the physical environment or space
within which feedback is given. Especially when the feedback requires sensitivity
or is of a negative nature, it is best to give this privately, in an area where the
conversation may not be overheard by others. In the above situation, an office
lobby is hardly the place to give one feedback on how badly the meeting may have
gone.
The second refers to the circumstances leading to the action on which feedback is
being given. How often does it happen that something we say is interpreted
wrongly simply because it is taken out of context? An ethnic joke said among
friends of the same ethnicity can be very funny, but will sound racist and hateful
Banyan Way © 2007 Page 2

3. when repeated within the context of a different ethnic group. When giving
feedback, make sure that your listener understands the context within which it is
given. State the situation or the event – the place, the time, the parties involved,
background data, and any other relevant information that would help paint the
correct context.
In the above situation, the man in the suit could have initiated a less strident
interchange by first providing the context within which he is giving feedback. “This
account is worth millions of dollars to us and this is only our second meeting. The
VP for Marketing joined the client only recently and may still just be learning about
the brand that we are creating advertising for.” Note that the facts about (a) the
large potential value of the client, and (b) that the VP for Marketing is new to the
organization are important elements in the context that make it less difficult to
understand why the man in the suit had strong feelings about what has happened.
Action – Having framed the conversation within the proper context, go on to
describe the action, the behavior of the person you are giving feedback to. This
should be as exact a telling of the action or behavior as possible, with no
evaluation or interpretation as to its meaning, no judgment of whether it is right or
wrong. You are simply providing objective unemotional data as a basis for further
discussion.
“When the VP for Marketing made a remark about the storyboard that you
presented, you began rolling your eyes.” Note that here we are using words to
simply describe the physical action of the man with the earring. We do not ascribe
any meaning to his action.
Impact – Next describe the impact that the other person’s action or behavior has
had on you. Note that while this may be emotional and even evaluative in nature,
you should consciously limit your evaluation of the person’s action to its effect on
you. Even when it might be difficult, do not malign or impugn the character of the
person you are giving feedback to. By limiting the emotional fallout to just yourself,
you are simply providing another piece of information in a manner that does not
deliberately provoke a retaliatory response.
“When you were rolling your eyes I was worried that the VP for Marketing and the
rest of his staff might see and interpret it as if we were not open to their comments
and suggestions. I am now afraid that they might take this as an insult and take
drastic action, even fire us.” Note that here the man in the suit is expressing his
own personal fear of how the other’s action might be interpreted by their client. He
does not attack the man with the earring but, in fact, confides in him his worries
and concerns.
Banyan Way © 2007 Page 3

4. Review – Note that up to this point the feedback process consisted totally of
simply providing information. No judgment of whether one is right or wrong has
been rendered. Within this neutral non-threatening space, it is now easy for the
two parties to proceed in terms of reviewing the situation, and sharing their
respective insights calmly and dispassionately.
Perhaps the man with the earring is not aware that he rolls his eyes as a nervous
gesture each time that he is confronted by a difficult remark or question. “I’m sorry
but I did not realize that I was rolling my eyes. I do think that the VP made a
perfectly legitimate point that I had failed to consider.”
Or maybe the man with the earring was aware of what he was doing but did not
think that it would be seen by others, or did not think through its possible
consequences. “You know I really could not help rolling my eyes with that remark
but thought no one will notice. Also I failed to consider that the man is new to the
team. I acted stupidly and now regret what I’ve done. What do you think can be
done to repair the damage?” In this instance, note that it is the man with the
earring himself who realizes his own lapse in judgment.
Next Step – With both parties having a clear and common understanding of the
situation, they can now move towards resolving the issue that has led to the
feedback.
The man with the earring could initiate some resolution: “Maybe I should talk to the
VP in private and apologize. I can invite him for a drink or something.” Or the man
in the suit could provide the resolution: “Why don’t I talk to John first. He seems to
have the ear of the VP and I’m quite close to him. Let me find out if anybody
noticed. For all we know, it was only me who did and we’re worrying ourselves sick
over nothing.”
In closing, let me mention that the acronym CAIRN is also a word meaning a
landmark made of piled stones. In Canadian maritime tradition, a fire was built
atop a cairn to guide ships at sea. I hope these tips serve as your guide when
giving feedback to colleagues at work and those whom you care for the most.
Banyan Way © 2007 Page 4

5. About the Author:
Driven by a personal mission to “take executives to the edge
and push them to fly – as leaders”, Tristan B de la Rosa is
the Founder & Principal Coach of Banyan Way, an executive
coaching and development company. He is also in the
Coaching Advisory Board & Faculty of Northwestern
University. Tristan brings an uncommon blend of masterful
real-world experience and rich multi-national & multi-cultural
insight to the Executive Coaching field. He has decades of
leadership experience working at the world’s most respected
CPG companies, among them P&G, J&J, General Foods,
and the Wrigley Co. As country head or senior marketing
executive, he has been posted in some of the world’s most
important and fastest growing markets – including China,
India, the tiger economies of South East Asia – and in the
United States. Tristan is based in Chicago where he shares
a home with his wife, Marilyn. Tristan can be contacted at
tristan.delarosa@thebanyanway.com. Read his blog at
http://bwintrospections.blogspot.com.
Banyan Way © 2007 Page 5