I've watched so many founders conflate "being empathetic" with "being soft" - like understanding why someone missed a deadline means you cant actually hold them accountable for the next one. The cognitive piece you're describing is the thing that actually works: I get *why* they're struggling, so I can be clearer about what needs to happen next, not vaguer. It's the difference between lowering the bar and raising the conversation. Do you find that leaders who get this distinction also tend to be better at difficult feedback, or is that a separate skill entirely?
Sorry, this is a longer response than I initially expected to write!
That distinction you're drawing, lowering the bar vs. raising the conversation, is exactly it, and I'd probably put it on a wall somewhere!
To your question: yes, I do think they tend to be better at difficult feedback, and I don't think it's a coincidence. The leaders who've developed cognitive empathy have usually also done the work of separating someone's experience from their output. That separation is what makes hard feedback deliverable without it feeling like an attack.
The ones who struggle with difficult feedback are often the same ones who've collapsed those two things. They either avoid the conversation because they don't want to hurt someone, or they deliver it bluntly because they've decided empathy and accountability can't coexist. Both patterns come from the same confusion.
What I've seen in leaders who get this right is that difficult feedback actually becomes less dramatic over time. Not because standards drop, but because the relationship has enough clarity and trust built into it that the conversation doesn't carry as much weight. The feedback lands as information, not a verdict.
So I'd say it's less a separate skill and more a downstream outcome of getting the empathy distinction right in the first place.
Side note: the Employee-Led 1:1s I talk about help alleviate the pressure of having those conversations, since there would be less chance for the problem to get “down the road”.
Thanks, I appreciate the thoughtful reply. I had a mentor once who told me that hardest skill to develop as a manager, is providing feedback without putting people on the defence. I've agreed with that for a long time, but always struggled with how to coach people on getting better at that. You've reinforced my instinct that this is a path to develop that skill - thank you!
A thoughtful piece Ryan. This skill is learned, and must be practiced so it becomes habitual. I'd suggest using scenarios to train high potentials to employ cognitive empathy before they need to use it. I don't think we can learn it completely by observing others -- although we do emulate behaviors. Thanks for reinforcing this important listening technique!
Great piece. I hope this is on LinkedIn. (I did search for it and didn't see it, but that could just be me!)
Thanks, Bill! I do try and post on LinkedIn as well. Here’s the link to it on there: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ryan-carnes_httpslnkdingtgquf8r-activity-7437162845512949760-0ZQg?utm_medium=ios_app&rcm=ACoAABqEzWIBrJjC-CxDdO2fQa2ytheU6MVYGT0&utm_source=social_share_send&utm_campaign=copy_link
Ah cheers! I clearly didn't look hard enough! Reposted on LinkedIn.
Thank you, I appreciate it!
I've watched so many founders conflate "being empathetic" with "being soft" - like understanding why someone missed a deadline means you cant actually hold them accountable for the next one. The cognitive piece you're describing is the thing that actually works: I get *why* they're struggling, so I can be clearer about what needs to happen next, not vaguer. It's the difference between lowering the bar and raising the conversation. Do you find that leaders who get this distinction also tend to be better at difficult feedback, or is that a separate skill entirely?
Sorry, this is a longer response than I initially expected to write!
That distinction you're drawing, lowering the bar vs. raising the conversation, is exactly it, and I'd probably put it on a wall somewhere!
To your question: yes, I do think they tend to be better at difficult feedback, and I don't think it's a coincidence. The leaders who've developed cognitive empathy have usually also done the work of separating someone's experience from their output. That separation is what makes hard feedback deliverable without it feeling like an attack.
The ones who struggle with difficult feedback are often the same ones who've collapsed those two things. They either avoid the conversation because they don't want to hurt someone, or they deliver it bluntly because they've decided empathy and accountability can't coexist. Both patterns come from the same confusion.
What I've seen in leaders who get this right is that difficult feedback actually becomes less dramatic over time. Not because standards drop, but because the relationship has enough clarity and trust built into it that the conversation doesn't carry as much weight. The feedback lands as information, not a verdict.
So I'd say it's less a separate skill and more a downstream outcome of getting the empathy distinction right in the first place.
Side note: the Employee-Led 1:1s I talk about help alleviate the pressure of having those conversations, since there would be less chance for the problem to get “down the road”.
https://thereadyset.substack.com/p/flip-the-script-why-your-11s-should
Thanks, I appreciate the thoughtful reply. I had a mentor once who told me that hardest skill to develop as a manager, is providing feedback without putting people on the defence. I've agreed with that for a long time, but always struggled with how to coach people on getting better at that. You've reinforced my instinct that this is a path to develop that skill - thank you!
Also, 100% agreed on employee-led 1:1's 👍
I appreciate your engagement and the questions you ask!
A thoughtful piece Ryan. This skill is learned, and must be practiced so it becomes habitual. I'd suggest using scenarios to train high potentials to employ cognitive empathy before they need to use it. I don't think we can learn it completely by observing others -- although we do emulate behaviors. Thanks for reinforcing this important listening technique!