That is a far-cry from the behavior this article (and the Forbes one) is cautioning against. You sound like you didn't burn bridges and you provided your critiques in a professional manner.
That's different than using the exit interview as the opportunity to let out all your frustrations and to "get back" at the company.
The article's advice is specifically "be nice" and hold your tongue, which is silly. Say whatever you want. Obviously calling people assholes is unproductive whether it goes into a sealed file or to the company mailing list.
For example, say, "I'm tired of filling out TPS reports and I felt underpaid." No can argue with your emotions, and it's not like your aversion to unnecessary paperwork or need for a decent salary will get out and kill your career. If enough employees leave for precisely these reasons, that may eventually cause change.
| If enough employees leave for precisely these reasons, that may eventually cause change.
What i'm saying is that it usually doesn't. Usually the feedback that you give is already known. The good companies would have changed it before the company left. Especially if it's a huge known problem.
Probably true at most places, but good companies can definitely drift into bad habits without being aware of it. Sometimes all it takes is a few managers recognizing the problem.
For example, say, "I'm tired of filling out TPS reports and I felt underpaid."
That's a good angle to take. And the choice of words and tone here is key -- it's not a rant, and it doesn't finger-point. It puts the emphasis on you, not them -- and it basically says "look, I'm disappointed and I'm suffering", thereby engendering empathy.
But if in fact they listen carefully, it also expresses criticism which can be quite damning. I like language that works like that.
That's different than using the exit interview as the opportunity to let out all your frustrations and to "get back" at the company.