I mean, obviously, in this particular instance with this particular person, it was effective, and for all I know, the manager is a really sharp observer of her reports and knew this was the right approach in this situation. I don't think it's a good general approach, and I'm afraid people are going to take away the wrong thing from this article. It's not good managerial advice to say, "Tell your employees they sound stupid if they are bad public speakers!" It's better managerial advice to say, "Know your employees, and how each individual might be best motivated, and don't accept complacency." You have to be really careful when taking cues from drill sergeants, because for a lot of people, that approach will backfire horribly, and the message will be overshadowed by the delivery style.
Are people going to hear critiques if they don't want to? The message getting through is what matters, that's a person by person problem. Saying something make someone sound stupid is certainly not "taking cues from drill sergeants".
> It's not good managerial advice to say, "Tell your employees they sound stupid if they are bad public speakers!" It's better managerial advice to say, "Know your employees, and how each individual might be best motivated, and don't accept complacency."
I completely agree with this, and I got this from the article/video as well. In the "um" story, the manager tries twice to tell her in a nice way, offering to bring in a coach, etc, but she doesn't get it. Knowing her employee, she tells her that she sounds stupid and this works. Kim says in her talk that Sheryl had done several things to establish trust in their relationship previously, so she knew that this case was not a personal attack.
In my opinion, the whole point of this talk is that giving honest feedback without tact is better than no feedback at all. If someone just doesn't get it when you say it diplomatically, just cut the fluff and say what you need to say.