Feedback: Start, Stop, Continue
This method encourages team members to provide constructive feedback to enhance trust and communication. Participants reflect on behaviors or actions that should start, stop, and continue, fostering self-awareness and openness within the group.
Copione di facilitazione
- 1
Open by naming the purpose: 'This session is about giving each other direct, usable feedback — not about evaluation or blame.' Set three ground rules on a flipchart: describe observed behaviour, not character; the receiver listens first and decides later what to do with it; what is said here stays here.
10 min - 2
Explain the three prompts — 'Something I would like you to START doing is..., STOP doing is..., CONTINUE doing is...' — and model one example aloud, ideally directed at yourself, so the room hears the expected level of specificity. Remind everyone: skip any prompt where you have nothing genuine to say, and sign what you write.
10 min - 3
Split participants into small teams of 4–6 who have actually worked together. Run silent writing: each person completes the three sentences for every other member of their small group, one recipient per sheet, starting each sheet with 'To [Name]:'.
20 min - 4
Run the sharing rounds: one person at a time receives their feedback read aloud by each giver. The receiver listens without defending — the only permitted response is 'thank you' or one clarifying question such as 'Can you give me an example?'. Keep the rounds moving; protect the no-debate rule firmly.
25 min - 5
Open a group discussion once every member has received their round: 'What patterns did you notice? What surprised you?' Steer away from re-litigating individual items and toward what the feedback says about how the team works together.
10 min - 6
Close with commitments: each person names one thing they will start, stop, or continue based on what they heard. Capture the commitments visibly and agree a check-in point — a retrospective in four to six weeks — where the team revisits them.
10 min
Suggerimenti
Ensure the environment is supportive and safe for sharing feedback.
Encourage honesty, but remind participants to be constructive in their comments.
Consider using simpler feedback methods for newer groups before this exercise.
Errori comuni
Skipping the framing and jumping straight to writing — the safety rules and a modelled example determine whether people write 'you interrupt me in reviews' or vague pleasantries
Letting STOP items drift from behaviour into character — 'stop being so negative' is an accusation; 'stop reopening decisions we closed last week' is something a person can act on
Giving receivers no protected listening role, so the session collapses into point-by-point self-defence and the remaining feedback gets softened in real time
Treating it as a one-off event — without captured commitments and a follow-up date, the feedback evaporates and the team learns that honesty here changes nothing
Variazioni
You can adjust the group size or the number of feedback prompts based on the team's experience. Alternatively, use this method in one-on-one sessions for more personalized feedback.
Casi d'uso
Quando usarlo
An established team has worked together long enough that members have real observations about each other's behaviour and wants a structured way to exchange them
A project or milestone has just closed and individual habits — good and bad — are about to carry over unexamined into the next phase
A team's retrospectives keep producing process fixes while the actual friction is interpersonal: how people communicate, hand over work, or show up in meetings
Feedback culture is thin and people need a sentence-level scaffold — three concrete prompts beat 'give each other some feedback' for anyone who freezes at open-ended honesty
Quando non usarlo
The group is newly formed with no shared working history — feedback needs observed behaviour to point at; run a team charter or Appreciative Inquiry session first and save this format for later
There is active conflict or visibly low trust in the room — signed, person-addressed feedback can escalate a standoff; address the conflict directly or work with a mediator before attempting this
The team needs improvements to its process or tooling rather than to individual behaviour — a classic retrospective or Starfish format targets the system instead of the people
You are looking for a substitute for performance reviews — this is peer development among equals, not evaluation; formal assessment belongs in a proper 360-degree feedback process with HR involvement
Metodi correlati
Domande frequenti
How long does a Start Stop Continue feedback session take?▾
Plan 60–120 minutes depending on group size: the writing itself is quick, but the sharing rounds and closing discussion need unhurried time to be safe and useful. With subgroups of 4–6 people, around 90 minutes is a realistic total for framing, writing, sharing, and commitments.
How many people can take part in Start Stop Continue?▾
The format works from 2 to about 40 participants, but feedback is always exchanged in small teams of 4–6 who share real working history. With larger groups, run several subgroups in parallel and bring everyone back together only for the closing discussion.
Can Start Stop Continue be run remotely?▾
Yes — use breakout rooms of 4–6 and give each recipient a private document or board frame where others write their three sentences before the call. Keep the sharing rounds live on camera rather than text-only; tone of voice carries much of what makes personal feedback land constructively.
What is the difference between Start Stop Continue and a Starfish retrospective?▾
The three categories work at two levels: as a retrospective, the team applies start, stop, and continue to its own ways of working, while this peer-feedback format addresses the sentences to named individuals. Starfish expands the frame to five categories (adding 'more of' and 'less of') and stays at the process level — choose it when the team needs nuance about working practices rather than personal feedback.
Should Start Stop Continue feedback be anonymous or signed?▾
In this format, signed — accountability is part of the design, and it allows the receiver to ask clarifying questions and follow up later. If the group only feels able to give feedback anonymously, that is a signal trust is too low for this method; work on psychological safety first rather than working around it.
Pianifica il tuo prossimo workshop con l'IA
Workshop Weaver ti aiuta a combinare metodi come Feedback: Start, Stop, Continue in un'agenda completa e temporizzata in pochi minuti.
Prova gratisMethod descriptions on Workshop Weaver are original content written by our team, based on established facilitation practices. This method was inspired by work from SessionLab. Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.