Describe behaviour and impact, not character
'You were unprofessional in the client call' is a conclusion a tribunal will want unpicked. 'You spoke over the client twice and the meeting overran by fifteen minutes because the agenda wasn't followed' is an observation anyone can check against a record. Always aim for language a neutral third party — someone who wasn't in the room — could evaluate from the words alone.
Timing: give feedback close to the event
Feedback given weeks or months after the fact is inherently less reliable, and both parties know it. Aim to record feedback — even a two-line note — within a few days of the event. This is the core problem with annual, retrospective reviews: by the time they happen, the details that would make feedback fair have usually been forgotten by both sides.
Separate the private note from the shared record
A manager's working notes (suspicions, first impressions, things still being verified) are different from what's shared with the employee. Keep the private note private, and only put confirmed, evidenced points into anything shared or used in a formal process. Mixing the two — sharing a half-formed suspicion as if it were an established fact — is one of the fastest ways to lose an employee's trust and to weaken the record if it's challenged.
Let the employee respond, and record that too
A one-sided record — even an accurate one — is weaker than a record that shows the employee had the chance to explain their side and how that was considered. If they disagree with a point, note the disagreement and your reasoning for maintaining it, rather than silently dropping it or silently overriding it.
Be consistent across employees
Tribunals and grievance processes often examine whether an employee was treated differently from colleagues in a similar position. Keep feedback and standards consistent: if a deadline slip gets a documented conversation for one employee, an equivalent slip should get comparable treatment for another, absent a genuine difference in circumstances.
Use a consistent structure
A simple, repeatable structure — what happened, when, what the expectation was, what the impact was, what's agreed going forward — makes feedback faster to write, easier for the employee to understand, and much easier to defend later, because every note follows the same evidentiary pattern rather than reading as an ad hoc collection of opinions.
Frequently asked questions
Should feedback always be written down?
Anything that could feed into a future formal process (a PIP, a disciplinary, a dismissal) should be. Routine day-to-day coaching doesn't need a formal record every time, but recurring issues should start being logged as soon as a pattern emerges.
Can voice notes or verbal feedback count as evidence?
Yes, if transcribed or summarised in writing with a date, and ideally shared with the employee so they've had the chance to see and respond to it. An unrecorded verbal comment, recalled only from memory later, carries far less weight.
What if the employee refuses to engage with the feedback?
Record that they were given the opportunity to respond and chose not to, or disagreed without giving reasons — this is still a useful, honest part of the record, and shouldn't be smoothed over or omitted.
This is general guidance on UK workplace practice, not legal advice. If a case is contested, high-risk, or involves discrimination, ill-health or long service, take advice from a solicitor or ACAS before acting.
Next step
GoMediation.ai's Employee Reviews module lets managers type or dictate dated, factual notes through the year, so feedback is recorded close to the event rather than reconstructed later.
See review notes captured as they happen