Nobody ever thinks about it. When we talk about systems, management and efficacy of communication, the mind wanders and one thinks of the issuer, that is, the person who talks (tells, does, orders, etc), who communicates something. Nobody ever thinks of the receiver, that is, the person who elaborates and (sometimes) learns lessons from what is said. Communication is a never-ending table tennis tournament, in which one player bounces the information as he has understood it back to the other, a match in which player 1 hits the ball into the area of player 2, who interprets the game (the exchange of information) as he sees it. It is the response to the concept, once elaborated, that is indicative and descriptive of the situation. To quote Gestalt “the whole is something else than the sum of its parts” and, in this sense, feedback is more than the sum of different opinions. It is a new product in its own right, different from the original opinion. In this sense, feedback is a present, a gift from the person who receives it. If feedback is a present and improves the original conditions, we can think of a continuous feedback between the players in a corporate setting. The results would be exceptional: communication would be fluid and dynamic, there would never be any fossilization and the continual evolution would always produce new conditions, concepts and settings in which to work better. And this is the philosophy on which social networks base their existence: the human being’s propensity to interpret what happens to him and to return answers, opinions and comments that populate the virtual platforms but that are a reflection of what happens every day in groups of individuals. If managed correctly, feedback becomes an interesting method of managing human resources and is called continuous feedback, which is now adopted in many structured organizations as a tool for managing internal communication, relations between managers and collaborators and also between colleagues. Continuous feedback is an extremely powerful tool based on the following factors: the first is the predisposition in terms of internal culture to accept feedback by members of the group; the second is the visibility of the organizational repercussion of the feedback; the third, which is last but not the least important is the ability to manage the feedback, which in structured organizations requires IT tools that can process the volume of data that continuous feedback manages to offer. The use of IT tools for managing continuous feedback is particularly valued by companies that have plants, divisions and subsidiaries geographically delocalized both in Italy and overseas or a large number of employees. In fact, it would be unthinkable to be able to organize the information, a visible and above all measurable effect of the impact of the continuous feedback on large, structured and complex organizations without the aid of tools supporting the HR department and the management in handling the information. Consequently, if the tool is already applied in the management of human resources rather than a tool for the future, its efficacy is due to its correct management, which must be accompanied in an comprehensive and coordinated manner. Otherwise there will be no continuous feedback and the organization will not evolve.