"we currently xxxx, and although yyyyy, zzzz is still better. Make the case against your own argument or for an alternative first, to show you understand both sides, can exhibit some empathy, and to prevent the inevitable rebuttal. If your argument isnt well received, youve still framed the counter-argument in a way that leaves the subsequent conversation about moving forward with it in an easier place, because now everyone knows you understand what is being asked of you.
However you order it, though. Be honest and direct, and include corrections to give them a path forward. That's the best way to end on a positive note.
OK, I think your comment is the best example of why lots of people don't like the shit sandwich. You're literally acknowledging that the goal was to deliver the shit and that the ordering is just a detail on delivering it (i.e. the details of the compliments are rather unimportant, but the details of the shit are). Furthermore, the goal wasn't even to deliver the shit, but to "include corrections".
I would strongly recommend people read good communications books (e.g. Difficult Conversations, Crucial Conversations, etc). If your goal is to deliver a message, with corrective action already prepared, you are not having a discussion, nor are you having a conversation. What is generally missing in such interactions are:
- Discussing your role in creating the other person's bad performance. Take this a number of degrees further (the role of your team, department, organization, etc)
- Getting the other person's perspective
- Identifying barriers to better performance
And quite a bit more.
Perhaps many managers are open to discuss all of the above, but they never indicate it, and their posture doesn't match. Certainly, delivering shit with corrective action at the ready does not.
Yes, you do want to have those conversations where you try to discover and work through the reasons behind behavioral or performance problems.
When communicating the problem, however, you often need to communicate expectations. Discussing and listening to feedback on the expectations is vital. But clarity in presenting your view of the problem is just as vital, so as to be talking about the same thing.
The initial discussion I was responding to was about delivery of an assessment. You should have many conversations and observations before you reach the point of assessment. Once there, you've moved on to instigation of correction or improvement (either for you or for the other person, often both).
False trichotomy?
Set up a culture of honest feedback. And set up a culture promoting change vs sticks. Lots of other approaches. You can't divorce the culture from the presentation. If your focus is only on how you present your feedback without examining the wider culture, then you're focusing on theater.