Why interviewers ask this question
This question tests whether you can be direct and honest with someone in a way that is genuinely useful, without being either needlessly harsh or so softened that the message gets lost entirely. Interviewers are particularly interested in this for roles involving any people management, mentoring, or peer review responsibility, since avoiding necessary difficult conversations is a common and costly failure mode at work.
How to structure your answer using STAR
Choose a real example of feedback that was genuinely difficult to give, not a minor or low-stakes comment. Briefly explain the situation and why the feedback needed to be said, then focus the action on how you prepared and delivered it: choosing a private, appropriate setting, being specific and behaviour-focused rather than personal, and balancing honesty with genuine respect for the person. Close with the result, including how the person responded and what changed afterward.
A strong example answer
"A team member I worked closely with was consistently missing details in their handover documents, which was creating rework for the team picking up their tasks. I asked to speak privately, described the specific pattern I had noticed with two concrete recent examples rather than a vague generalisation, and asked for their perspective before suggesting a simple checklist approach. They were initially a little defensive but ultimately appreciated the specificity rather than a vague complaint, and their handover quality improved noticeably over the following weeks."
Mistakes to avoid
Avoid a story where the feedback was actually quite minor or low-stakes, since the question is specifically testing your ability to handle genuine discomfort. Avoid describing feedback delivered publicly or without preparation, since this suggests poor judgement about how to have a difficult conversation constructively rather than destructively.