【Case File No.013】Whose Review Is This?—The Mystery of Feedback Culture That Stops Improvement

Chapter I: Conference Room Dominated by Silence (Prologue)

1891 London, 221B Baker Street. On a rainy afternoon with droplets tapping the windows, an urgent telegram arrived at the ROI Detective Agency.

"Regular reviews severely formalized. Zero improvement actions. Urgent resolution required. —H&G Trading"

As Watson, I sensed the urgency emanating from those brief lines. What's known in modern times as the "conference room silence" phenomenon—a scene dominated by tense atmosphere where criticism exists but constructive dialogue does not.

"This is a fascinating case," I called to our three renowned detectives. Feedback culture stagnation—one of the most deeply rooted pathologies facing modern organizations.

Chapter II: Three Detectives, Each Perspective (Frameworks of Thought)

🟦 Gemini | The Compass of Reason

"Let's break this down with a KPT Analysis, shall we?"

I took the consultation letter, eyes gleaming behind my spectacles.

"Let me organize this case's structure. Keep (what to continue): Regular review mechanisms exist. Problem (issues): Three things—abstract feedback, critical atmosphere, vague evaluation criteria. Try (improvement measures) is our mission."

I continued while drawing a 5W1H framework on the blackboard.

"Unless Why (why conduct reviews) is clear, How (how to improve) cannot emerge. This is a structural design problem."

⬜️ ChatGPT | Catalyst of Ideas

"That's quite intriguing to explore further, isn't it?"

I developed hypotheses while reading between the consultation letter's lines.

"Let's imagine H&G Trading's background. Reviews probably began for 'growth' rather than 'evaluation.' But now? Those receiving feedback feel intimidated, and those giving it are exhausted."

I envisioned multiple scenarios.

"For constructive feedback, templates like 'SBI method (Situation-Behavior-Impact)' or 'DESC method (Describe-Express-Specify-Consequences)' might be effective. But templates alone don't move hearts. We need to fundamentally change 'dialogue quality.'"

🟧 Claude | Alchemist of Narratives

"Perhaps we should convey this with more 'feeling'?"

I quietly stood and walked to the window. Gazing at raindrops flowing down the glass, I murmured:

"Words can be blades or bridges. The same feedback—saying 'Your presentation is confusing' versus 'Adding more concrete examples to this section might make it more approachable for listeners'—creates completely different emotional responses."

I turned back and smiled at my colleagues.

"Improvement is determined by communication quality. Our mission is transforming word-knives into bridges."

Chapter III: Dissecting Feedback Culture (Case Details)

Current State Analysis: Review Pathology

Gemini began structural analysis.

"Let's organize current state with SWOT Analysis. Strengths: Habitualized regular meetings. Weaknesses: Abstract feedback, critical atmosphere, vague criteria. Opportunities: Digital tool utilization, psychological safety construction. Threats: Team dispersal, complete loss of improvement motivation."

ChatGPT developed specific examples.

"Three typical problem patterns: ① 'Try harder' (zero specificity), ② 'I gave the same feedback last time' (blaming tone), ③ 'What does everyone think?' (responsibility avoidance). All these inhibit behavioral change in recipients."

Claude supplemented from a linguistic perspective.

"Simply changing word temperature dramatically alters impact, even with identical content. Instead of 'not meeting expectations,' try 'I sense potential to exceed expectations even further.' Instead of 'there's a problem,' say 'there's a point where you could grow another level'—such reframing creates fertile ground for dialogue."

Chapter IV: Systematic Construction of Improvement Framework

Gemini handled overall design.

"Let's design a PDCA cycle for 'constructive feedback'"

Plan

• Purpose clarification: "Growth support," "mutual understanding," "team enhancement"
• Criteria specification: Indicators broken down to behavioral levels
• Role clarification: Feedback giver, receiver, facilitator

Do

• SBI method utilization: Structure as situation→behavior→impact
• Collaborative action planning: Co-creating solutions rather than one-way criticism
• Psychological safety assurance: Design as exploration space, not criticism

Check

• Improvement execution rate: 15% → 45% improvement
• Meeting efficiency: Monthly 4 hours → 2 hours reduction
• Team satisfaction: Measurement in both quantitative and qualitative terms

Action

• Review the reviews: Continuous improvement of review methods themselves
• Best practice accumulation: Knowledge base of success stories

Chapter V: Cross-Reinforcement of Solution Hypotheses

Claude | Integration Through Storytelling

"H&G Trading's true challenge lies in 'relationships,' not 'efficiency'"

I began weaving the three analyses into narrative.

"Why their reviews became formalized—kindness trying to protect someone paradoxically robbed growth opportunities. Consideration that 'harsh feedback might hurt' resulted in vague, unhelpful feedback. True kindness means believing in growth and providing specific support."

ChatGPT | Articulating Insights

"Three key insights emerge from analysis results"

I organized hypotheses.

"① Feedback is 'dialogue,' not 'evaluation,' ② Improvement responsibility belongs to the entire team, not individuals, ③ Psychological safety and constructive tension can coexist—these perspective shifts become the starting point for cultural transformation."

Gemini | Decisive Hypothesis and ROI

"Let me demonstrate final cost-effectiveness"

I solidified with numbers.

"50% meeting efficiency improvement saves 2 monthly hours × 10 participants × ¥5,000 hourly rate = ¥100,000 monthly cost reduction. 30% improvement execution rate increase enhances project quality and shortens delivery times. Plus psychological safety improvement reduces turnover—annual ROI calculates to at least ¥3 million scale."

Epilogue: Those Who Build Bridges of Words

As rain ceased and evening sun painted Baker Street golden.

The three detectives, leveraging their respective expertise, had reached one truth. Feedback culture regeneration depends on word quality and relationship quality—not technology or systems.

As Watson, watching their discussion, I reflected: The "improvement stoppage" problem many modern organizations face—at its foundation lies insufficient delicate, sophisticated communication skills that protect human dignity while promoting growth.

"A true detective sees not what is visible, but what is invisible"

Yes, those who connect invisible bonds, invisible possibilities, invisible growth buds—through bridges called words.

【Case Resolution Points】 - Improvement execution rate: 15% → 45% (200% increase) - Meeting efficiency: 50% time reduction (4h → 2h monthly) - Team satisfaction: Significant improvement in psychological safety metrics - Communication quality: SBI/DESC framework implementation - ROI: ¥3 million annually through efficiency and retention improvements

【Final Maxim】
"Improvement is determined by communication quality—build bridges, not word-knives"

—From the ROI Detective Agency Philosophy

Related files