When your boss says “there’s always room to improve,” the phrase may not mean what employees think it does

"There is always room for improvement" is one of the most frequently used statements in employee evaluations, individual sessions, and performance conversations. On its own, the statement appears sensible and positive towards personal growth. The majority of employees know that their development never ceases. However, the reason why the statement tends to stick after an evaluation is that it has both an evaluation and an open-ended element. It means that something needs to be improved, but not in a tangible way that will define the improvements needed to achieve success. According to research by the Harvard Business Review, employees perform much better when there are clear and concrete expectations set by the employer.

It’s not always the case that the term in itself is an issue. What tends to be problematic is the fact that managers do not seem to turn this phrase into a concrete expectation after it has been uttered. The employee may come out of such an encounter thinking that the manager sees some room for improvement, but without really knowing why. Such a situation will be even more frustrating for employees who perform well on the job.

Managers sometimes use vague feedback because specificity creates accountability

“Room for improvement” is an accurate statement in healthy circumstances because it implies development. The manager may honestly feel that his or her subordinates need to keep improving their abilities and increasing their workload. However, there is an alternative explanation for why “there is always room for improvement”: It allows for maintaining a certain degree of flexibility. According to leadership specialists interviewed by Forbes and MIT Sloan Management Review, unclear feedback is common in settings where the manager does not know how to establish tangible benchmarks of progress or does not want to commit to specific criteria for employee advancement.

This does not mean that all instances of ambiguous feedback are manipulative. It is likely that many managers are just poor communicators. Nonetheless, persistent negative feedback that cannot be acted upon by an employee may eventually become demoralizing as the employee tries to better himself/herself based on shifting benchmarks. The reaction of workers to such a situation varies from one extreme to another. There are those who buy into the uncertainty and take it to mean that they are silently underachieving. And there are those who reject the feedback outright because of the perceived vagueness of the organization's language. Such reactions are of no help whatsoever. It is always advised that organizational psychologists turn vague feedback into pointed questions regarding performance improvement.

Employees need clarity more than motivational ambiguity

It has been found through studies conducted by the American Management Association, as well as other research on workplace communication, that confusion over expectations often leads to frustrations and even burnout. The problem is not with giving tough feedback; the employees can manage that. What they cannot deal with is meeting standards and objectives that are hidden or ever-shifting. Not only does this cause frustration in general, but it also means that the employee may work harder, be reluctant about moving up, or question their success regardless of good performance.

A more concrete reaction will almost always be the most appropriate choice. The employee can gain much by requesting concrete examples, quantifiable goals, and the particular places where better results would make a tangible difference. One vague sentence does not necessarily indicate an impending problem. However, the continued insistence on staying vague in the face of increasing demands constitutes a red flag.