The Full Communication Model as a Feedback Tool

If you are looking for tools to improve your communication or simply lack ideas on how to reach others – the Full Communication Model will work for you.

In a study conducted in 2014 by J. Zenger and J. Folkman 94% of respondents stated that corrective feedback improves their performance when it is delivered well. A significant percentage, but what does it really mean? Let’s focus on the key phrase: ‘delivered well.’ In this context, we understand ‘good’ as constructive, as opposed to a friendly pat on the back or giving a ‘feedback sandwich’.

It might seem simple; there is a specific list of characteristics that valuable feedback should possess:

Honest
Timely
Specific
Direct
Free from judgement
Based on facts
With an indication of consequences/effects

It turns out, however, that giving constructive feedback is often challenging. This is hindered by feedback contamination: mixing facts with opinions, using slogans and generalizations, relational gaps, and more. There are many communication models designed to help systematize feedback. One example is the 3K model, which guides us along the line Specific → Consequences → Contract. Establishing the Contract offers some hope for the future, but the 3K model is somewhat stripped of emotional content. It works perfectly when a manager needs to take quick and decisive action, or when conveying specific feedback from a project manager to a team member or subcontractor. However, it is not the best tool for delicate, complex matters that require a preliminary conversation about the reasons behind a situation or an employee’s behavior before communicating our expectations (or needs). A solution for these situations can be the widely used FUKO model, which divides the message into four parts ( Fact, Feelings, Consequences, Expectation). FUKO has been described many times in other publications, and it is not the only model that serves as a valuable tool for systematizing feedback. An alternative and an extension of the idea of effective communication is the Full Communication Model.

The Full Communication Model

The basic assumption of the FCM It is an attempt to create an environment in which we can clearly express our internal experiences and fully describe them. This offers hope for mutual understanding between interlocutors and a complete comprehension of the current dynamics of the relationship, ultimately leading to a situation that is better for everyone. The tools used in full communication are four types of expression:

Observations:the ‘driest,’ and probably the easiest to describe of the types listed, involves talking about what our senses provide us and what we perceive, for example:

“This meeting is lasting longer than planned.”
“He told me that he plans to wear a kilt to the client meeting.”
“Today I came to work by train.”

Each of these examples describes our experiences or direct observations.

Thoughts: arise from our experiences and are an attempt to make sense of what we have just observed. Thoughts also include our judgments and beliefs about whether a particular event was right or wrong:

“She must be afraid of her boss; she hardly ever speaks up when the boss is around” (opinion)
“Drinking cow’s milk is unethical” (belief)
„Źle zrobiłeś, że odrzuciłeś tę ofertę pracy” (osąd wartościujący)

These examples describe theories, opinions, and conclusions that someone has drawn based on their experiences.

Feelings: They are probably the hardest to express. For this reason, we very often choose to hide them—forgetting that it is our feelings that make us who we are. Sharing feelings with another person is the foundation of close relationships. When we allow others to know our feelings, two outcomes are possible: first, understanding and the chance for empathy increase; second, we can expect behavior to be adjusted to take our emotions into account. Examples of expressing feelings might include:

“I feel excited at the thought of my first day at work after receiving a promotion.”
“I am home alone, and it makes me feel anxious.”
“I feel angry because, amid this overload of work duties, I don’t have time to spend with my family.”

It is worth noting that sometimes we may camouflage observations or judgments under the guise of our own emotions—for example, the statement ‘I feel that you are being unfair to me’ is a disguised judgment

Needs: We often hope that others are intuitive enough to identify them on their own. However, this is usually in vain—therefore, it is worth remembering that needs in themselves are not wrong, and expressing them does not constitute an accusation.

“I had a lot of meetings during the week – can we stay in this weekend?”
“I’m attached to this mug – could you please not use it?”
“I would like to talk about this calmly – could we do it in more favorable conditions, for example, after the team meeting?”

These are all examples of expressing needs—messages that signal what could help you or bring relief.

The Full Communication Model uses all four types of expression mentioned above, combining them into a coherent whole. By precisely sharing your observations, clearly communicating conclusions, and consciously expressing emotions and needs, excellent results can be achieved. Of course, not every situation requires the use of every type of expression—for example, a librarian could inform you that a book is overdue and impose a fine without communicating their thoughts or emotions regarding the situation. Consciously using specific channels of expression facilitates communication and builds trust, directly impacting the quality of relationships both at work and in personal life. Unconscious or partial expression is simply less effective, sometimes resulting in wasted time on repetitions or hurt feelings from people who do not understand our needs.

How to use the Full Communication Model in the feedback process?

To verify whether our communication was complete, we should ask ourselves the following questions:

Did I talk about the facts?
Did I clearly express my conclusions and inferences?
Czy wyraziłem swoje uczucia i potrzeby bez obwiniania i osądzania?

Incomplete communication occurs when we use only some forms of expression. Let’s look at the example below.

“I see that you are tense again.” – spoken in an irritated tone, with underlying anxiety and resentment. This is a remark from a wife who has returned home after a two-day business trip, directed at her husband, who has remained silent for thirty minutes. Has everything been conveyed here? Let’s break it down.

Observation: I see that you haven’t spoken to me since I got home.
Thoughts: When I see this, I wonder what happened and think that you are angry with me.
Feelings: I am afraid of your reaction and feel upset because I don’t know what you mean.
Needs: I would like to know what happened. I would like to talk.

A message constructed in this way uses all four channels of communication and increases the chances of successful understanding. Let’s consider how the conversation might look if the wife began the interaction with: ‘You haven’t said anything since I got home. I assume you are upset. When you withdraw like this, I get angry too. I would prefer to talk.

The basics of the CPC model closely align with best practices for providing valuable feedback. Consciously applying this model makes it easier to prepare and standardize feedback delivery. Above all, important is Self-awareness: Do I know the goal I want to achieve? Have I communicated the same goal to the other party? What do I need? These questions help lay the groundwork for a constructive meeting. It is also important to consider Awareness of others: What state is my interlocutor in? Are they open to receiving what you want to communicate? Is this the best moment for the conversation? Of course, valuable feedback should be given as soon as possible, but paying attention to the recipient’s current disposition increases the effectiveness of the feedback when there are no external obstacles. That is why it is important to consider Awareness of the setting – Is the environment in which I provide feedback comfortable for both me and the recipient? Will we be free from interruptions? A sense of threat associated with exposing oneself during the conversation increases the risk of incomplete communication from the recipient, so it is worth ensuring a setting that is comfortable and appropriate for both parties.

Providing feedback in the workplace is almost always influenced by conflicting interests or differently understood needs. It is very easy to get lost between our own expectations of the recipient, fears of accountability and responsibility, and the pressing need to improve the situation. This often leads to overly critical feedback, which has little chance of being constructive, because the recipient automatically starts defending themselves against the accusations or stops communicating—and it’s hard to blame them. Therefore, both before and during the conversation, it is worth reflecting: ‘Do I want to win this conversation, or truly reach understanding?’ Answering this question will help prioritize, and combined with the conscious use of the four types of expression, will allow effective communication both at work and in personal life.

Author:

Błażej Płaczynta-Brudnik He is the Vice President of the Board at the training company MindLab, a psychologist, and a trainer with 15 years of training experience. He specializes in implementing projects for industrial companies, including in the area of building a safety culture.