The CEDAR Feedback Model: A Framework for Difficult Conversations

The most dangerous moment in a feedback conversation is when the employee nods and says, “Sure, I’ll do that.”

It looks like agreement, but often it is just compliance. They want to end the uncomfortable meeting, so they agree to your solution without actually acknowledging the root problem. Two weeks later, the bad behavior returns, and you find yourself having the same conversation again.

To break this cycle of repetition, you need to move from a monologue (telling them what to fix) to a dialogue (diagnosing why it’s broken).

Standard models like AID or SBI are excellent for quick corrections, they help you deliver a clear message about a specific event. But when you are dealing with complex performance issues or behavioral patterns, a short, sharp message isn’t enough. You don’t just need them to hear you; you need them to think with you.

The CEDAR model, developed by Anna Wildman, is designed to solve exactly this problem. It slows the conversation down to ensure the problem is actually solved, not just reported.

The CEDAR Framework

 

The CEDAR acronym stands for Context, Examples, Diagnosis, Actions, and Review.

While all five stages are necessary, the model’s true power lies in the middle: The Diagnosis. Most leaders skip from the problem straight to the solution. CEDAR forces you to stop and ask: “What is actually driving this behavior?”

This approach moves you from a “Parent/Child” dynamic (telling) to an “Adult/Adult” dynamic (coaching).

 

Context

Great conversations fail when they start with a shock. If you call someone into your office and immediately launch into a list of errors, their brain triggers a threat response (fight or flight). Their pre-frontal cortex, the part of the brain responsible for logic and learning, shuts down.

Context is about “setting the stage” to lower the cortisol levels in the room. You must clarify the importance and the intent of the meeting before you deliver the content. This isn’t about “softening the blow”; it is about framing the conversation as a support mechanism rather than a punishment.

  • The Setup: “I’d like to spend 20 minutes discussing the Q3 project because I know how important this client is to your portfolio.”

  • The Stake: Explain why this matters. Is it about their career growth? The team’s efficiency? The client’s trust?

Context questions to consider:

  • Have I chosen a private, neutral environment?

  • Have I framed this as a conversation about future improvement rather than past failure?

  • Does the person understand why we are having this meeting before we start?

Examples

This stage mirrors the “Observation” phase of other models. You must strip away your opinions (“You’ve been lazy”) and stick to the facts (“You missed three deadlines last week”).

The goal here is to put the data on the table. This is not the time to argue or analyze; it is simply about establishing a shared reality. Using specific examples reduces the chance of the employee saying, “I don’t know what you’re talking about.”

  • Be Specific: Don’t say “You’re disengaged.” Say, “In yesterday’s meeting, you didn’t contribute to the brainstorming session and you were on your laptop while others were presenting.”

  • Use the ‘Camera Test’: If a video camera had been recording, what would it have seen? It sees actions; it does not see “attitude.”

Examples questions to consider:

  • Do I have concrete dates, times, or documents to back up my points?

  • Am I using judgment words (rude, sloppy, uninterested) or descriptive words (interrupted, typos, silent)?

  • Have I provided enough examples to show a pattern, rather than just a one-off event?

Diagnosis

This is the most critical stage. This is where CEDAR diverges from almost every other feedback model, and where you defeat the “Illusion of Agreement.”

In a standard feedback loop, the manager says: “Here is what you did wrong, please do X next time.” In CEDAR, the manager says: “Here is what I saw. What is your perspective on this?”

You are diagnosing the root cause. Performance issues generally stem from one of two places: Skill (they don’t know how) or Will (they don’t want to). If you assume it’s a “Will” issue but it’s actually a “Skill” issue, you will punish someone who just needs training.

During Diagnosis, the manager should talk less and ask more. You are looking for:

  1. External factors: Are they overloaded? Is the software broken?

  2. Internal factors: Are they confident? Are they burnt out? Do they realize the impact of their actions?

Diagnosis questions to consider:

  • “What was your thought process at that moment?”

  • “What obstacles were getting in your way?”

  • “On a scale of 1-10, how confident did you feel handling that task?”

Actions

Once you have agreed on the root cause (Diagnosis), you move to the cure. Crucially, the ideas should start from the person receiving the feedback.

This is the psychological key to commitment. If you tell them what to do, it is your plan. If they suggest what to do, it is their plan. People fight to protect their own ideas.

Your role here is to coach, not to command. If they come up with a weak solution, ask a guiding question: “That sounds like a good start, but how would that handle the issue if the client calls after 5pm?” Guide them until the action is robust.

  • Co-creation: “Given what we’ve discussed, what is the first step you can take to fix this?”

  • Support: “What do you need from me to make that happen?”

Actions questions to consider:

  • Am I jumping in to solve it for them, or am I letting them do the thinking?

  • Are the actions specific, measurable, and time-bound?

  • Do they have the resources/authority to actually complete these actions?

Review

The conversation does not end when they leave the room. Research into the “Forgetting Curve” suggests that up to 70% of new information is lost within 24 hours if not reinforced.

The Review stage covers two distinct horizons:

  1. The Immediate Check: “To make sure we are on the same page, how would you summarize what we’ve agreed to today?” This prevents the ‘illusion of agreement’ where they nod along but haven’t really understood.

  2. The Future Check: Set a specific date to review progress. “Let’s put a 15-minute placeholder in the diary for two weeks from now to see how these new actions are working.”

Review questions to consider:

  • Have we set a concrete date for the follow-up?

  • Does the employee leave the room feeling clear on what success looks like?

  • Who is responsible for booking the follow-up meeting?

CEDAR in action: A leadership scenario

To understand the difference CEDAR makes, let’s look at a scenario involving a talented but chaotic Project Manager, Sarah. She delivers great results but is consistently late with her reporting, causing stress for the finance team.

The “Standard” Approach (Compliance)

Manager: “Sarah, your reports are late again. The finance team is chasing me. You need to be more organized and get them in by Friday.” Sarah: “Okay, sorry. I’ve just been so busy with the client launch.” Result: Sarah complies for one week because she was told to. But the underlying blocker remains. She soon slips back into old habits.

The CEDAR Approach (Commitment)

Context: “Sarah, I want to take 15 minutes to look at our internal reporting process. I know the client launch is going well, but we have a friction point with Finance that we need to resolve.”

Examples: “In the last two months, the monthly reconciliation report has arrived four days after the deadline. This has delayed the board pack twice.”

Diagnosis: “I know you are incredibly busy with the client side. Help me understand what is happening during that last week of the month that makes the reporting difficult to clear?” (Sarah opens up: “Honestly, I don’t get the data from the sales team until Thursday, so I have to rush it. I’m not forgetting it; I’m just blocked.”)

Actions: “I see. So it’s a dependency issue, not a time-management issue. What can we do to clear that blockage with Sales?” (Sarah suggests: “If I set a recurring meeting with the Sales Lead on Tuesday, I can get the data early.”)

Review: “That sounds like a solid fix. Let’s agree that you will send that invite today. Let’s catch up next Friday for ten minutes to see if the data came in on time.”

Result: The manager identified the real problem (Sales data), Sarah felt heard rather than scolded, and the solution (Tuesday meeting) was her own idea.

Frequently Asked Questions about CEDAR

1. This seems to take a long time. Do I need to use CEDAR for everything? No. CEDAR is a “heavy lifting” tool. You do not need a five-step diagnosis to tell someone they have a typo in an email. Use AID or BOOST for quick, transactional feedback. Use CEDAR for behavioral patterns, performance reviews, or when you suspect there is a deeper underlying issue blocking performance.

2. Does CEDAR work effectively with remote or hybrid teams? Yes, but the Diagnosis stage requires more effort. In an office, you can see if someone is stressed or distracted; remotely, you often only see the output. When using CEDAR remotely, you must broaden your Diagnosis questions to cover the “invisible” environment: “Is your home setup allowing you to focus?” or “Do you feel you have enough access to me during the day?” Remote employees often underperform due to isolation, not lack of skill, and CEDAR is excellent at uncovering this.

3. What if I ask “What do you think?” in the Diagnosis stage, and they just say “I don’t know”? Silence is often a defense mechanism. The employee is waiting for you to take control back so they can just comply and leave. Do not fill the silence. If they say “I don’t know,” wait five seconds. If they still don’t speak, reframe the question: “If you did know, what might the reason be?” or “What was the biggest friction point you felt during that task?” You must gently force them to turn their brain back on. If you answer for them, the model fails.

4. What if they refuse to admit there is a problem? If you ask for their view and they say “I think I’m doing fine,” you have a “reality gap.” You must revert to the Examples stage. Do not argue opinions. Say: “I hear that you feel confident, but I have three specific examples where this behavior caused a client complaint. We cannot move past this stage until we agree that these outcomes are real.” Stick to the evidence until they acknowledge the reality.

5. What do I do if they get emotional (crying or anger)? High emotion means the Context or Examples stage triggered a threat response.

  • If they cry: Pause. Offer water. Do not retract the feedback (“It’s okay, don’t worry about it”). Instead, validate the emotion: “I can see this is upsetting, and that isn’t my intention. Do you want to take five minutes, or shall we continue?”

  • If they get angry: Do not match their energy. Stay in the Diagnosis phase: “I can see you are frustrated. Tell me why this feedback feels unfair to you.” Use their anger to uncover the root cause.

6. What if they claim it is a ‘Skill’ issue just to avoid responsibility (The Training Trap)? Employees often say, “I just haven’t been trained on that,” to deflect blame. In the Diagnosis stage, you must test this. Ask: “If I sent you on that training course tomorrow, could you guarantee this mistake would never happen again?” If they hesitate, it is likely a Will (attitude/focus) issue, not a Skill issue. CEDAR helps you distinguish between a genuine training need and a convenient excuse.

7. What if they suggest the ‘wrong’ Actions? Since you want them to own the solution, it is tempting to accept any idea they offer. But if their solution is weak, you are setting them up to fail. Use “consequence questioning” to guide them.

  • Them: “I’ll just work faster.”

  • You: “I appreciate the commitment, but if you work faster, how will you ensure the data accuracy doesn’t drop? Is there a process change we can make instead?”

8. Can I use CEDAR to manage upwards (give feedback to my boss)? Yes, but you must frame the Context carefully. Do not frame it as “correcting” them; frame it as “unblocking” yourself.

  • Context: “I need to discuss how we handle the Monday briefings, as I’m struggling to get my team aligned afterwards.”

  • Diagnosis: “From your perspective, what is the main goal of those briefings?”

  • Actions: “To help me deliver that goal, could we try…” This positions you as a partner solving a problem, not a subordinate critiquing a superior.

9. Can I use CEDAR for positive feedback? Absolutely. It is a powerful tool for retention and decoding high performance.

  • Diagnosis: “Why do you think that presentation landed so well with the Board?” (This helps them codify their intuition into a repeatable skill).

  • Actions: “How can we structure your role so you are doing more of this and less of the admin?” This turns a compliment into a career strategy session.

10. Why is the ‘Review’ stage so often missed, and does it matter? Managers skip the Review because they are relieved the difficult conversation is over. They mistake the end of the meeting for the end of the problem. However, without the Review, you have no accountability. If you don’t check back, you are tacitly telling the employee that the issue wasn’t actually that important. The Review is the only part of the model that ensures the behavior change sticks. Always book the follow-up meeting before you leave the room.

Conclusion: From compliance to commitment

The shift from standard feedback to the CEDAR model is a shift in power. In traditional feedback, the manager holds the power, the data, and the solution. In CEDAR, you share the data, but you ask the employee to hold the power of diagnosis and solution.

It requires patience. It requires you to sit through uncomfortable silences while your team member processes the question. But the payoff is a team that solves its own problems, rather than waiting for you to fix them.

Leader’s Self-Reflection

Before you schedule your next difficult conversation, run your plan through these three quality checks: 

  1. The Dialogue Ratio: “How will I ensure they speak for at least 50% of this meeting?” (If you are doing all the talking, you are lecturing, not diagnosing. Prepare questions, not just statements.)

  2. The Silence Threshold: “Am I prepared to wait 10 seconds for an answer?” (The real truth usually appears after the awkward pause. If you jump in to rescue them, you kill the insight.)

  3. The Stickiness Test: “Is the Review date already in the calendar?” (Feedback without a follow-up date is just a complaint. If it’s not in the diary, the behavior will return.)

Beyond this post

If you would like support embedding CEDAR into your leadership practice, coaching programmes, or team culture, this is where to explore further.

  • The Hub: There is a range of resources and other models in the Feedback Models Hub.

  • The Library: Feedback, both giving and receiving, is included in the 100+ capabilities shared on the Leadership Library page.

  • Preparation: CEDAR works best when your facts are solid. Use the BOOST Framework to stress-test your examples before you enter the room.

  • The Alternative: CEDAR is a heavy-lifting tool. For simple, everyday corrections where a full diagnosis isn’t needed, use the AID Feedback Model instead.

  • Troubleshooting: If you are dealing with a team member who pushes back even when your evidence is clear, this article on handling feedback defensiveness will help you navigate the friction.

Do you have any tips or advice for preparing and delivering feedback?

What has worked for you?

Do you have any recommended resources to explore?

Thanks for reading!