Continuous improvement is better than delayed perfection.
—Mark Twain
Feedback is one of the most powerful tools for facilitating improvement, both within an organization and in our lives as a whole. Defined as “the transmission of evaluative or corrective information about an action, event, or process to the original or controlling source,”1 feedback evaluates the outcome of our actions or behavior, telling us whether what we did was “good” or “bad,” “successful,” or “unsuccessful.” To appreciate just how powerful and widespread a tool it is, imagine for an instance, life without feedback: Consider speaking to a friend, family member, or colleague who is cold as ice, who shows no reaction whatsoever. We have probably all encountered such a person before, and found interacting with them difficult on many levels. Now imagine if everybody you encountered were like this. Combine this with the lack of in-built feedback mechanisms in tools and systems that we use every day. Entering a wrong password, or filling out a form incorrectly prompts the system we use to do nothing. Zilch, no error message, no popup dialogs. Pressing the unlock button on our car keys invokes no noise or no blinking lights to indicate that the car was successfully unlocked. When giving a presentation at work, everybody just stares blankly ahead without giving any indication of whether or not they are listening.
Feedback is such an ingrained part of our lives, that we probably have never considered the above scenario before. Instead, many people tend to associate the term itself with the dry forms and HR processions that managers go through every 6 months or so. Rarely do we appreciate how feedback allows us to lead richer lives. But feedback can also be a dangerous tool if used incorrectly. Again, let’s perform a little thought experiment to illustrate this: instead of imagining a world without feedback, envisage one in which feedback is given at complete random. Entering a password randomly results in an error dialog informing you that the password is incorrect, even when it isn’t. Your car sometimes beeps, sometimes doesn’t when unlocking it. Your friends randomly laugh at you as you confess a personal, serious issue you are having. How would such a world make you feel? How would you be able to navigate, and grow within it?
Applying the above thought experiments to the context of this book, we see why feedback is such a crucial, yet also dangerous, element to success, and why in Chapter 1, we said that mastering it is one of the essential nine pillars for successful leadership. In this chapter, we are going to discuss how to use this great resource properly, avoiding common pitfalls.
Characteristics of Good Feedback
Now that we toyed with the idea of what living in a world without feedback, or with improper feedback, would feel like, we have gained at least some appreciation of the importance of feedback itself.
Before we can move on to discussing how best to give as well as ask for feedback, we should first understand the characteristics of good and bad feedback. In essence, good feedback is (i) specific, (ii) relevant, (iii) given in public only when positive, (iv) participative, and (v) well-thought through and well-planned. Feedback that does not check the aforementioned five boxes is usually dangerous and destructive, and should be avoided.
Let’s talk about the five characteristics of good feedback in detail.
Specific
When giving feedback, ensure you have specific instances of the observed behavior to mention, generic comments that can’t be linked to particular events are counter-productive and might be easily dismissed with some examples where said behavior didn’t happen. For instance, “In our last planning session you were not very participative, we were hoping to hear your thoughts” is preferred over “You are too quiet in the meetings.”
Being specific is also important when suggesting what needs to be improved. While it is easy to criticize someone’s actions, an important part of the feedback is showing a different way to act. Having an action plan with concrete steps on eliminating or mitigating the undesired behavior can be of great help.
Relevant
Feedback should always be relevant to the given task, topic, or operating environment at hand. When you attempt to authenticate with incorrect credentials, the application processing the login provides you with the feedback that the login attempt was unsuccessful. It does not present you with an irrelevant error message from 3 days ago. Similarly, any feedback you give to coworkers should be relevant to their job performance. Sure, it sometimes is tempting to provide general guidance, life or career advice to others, but when unsolicited, such feedback is poorly spent: It is likely to make you look like a know-it-all, and does not help others perform their jobs more effectively. Instead, limit feedback to what is relevant. Explain the real impact of the behavior and how relevant that consequence is. Keep in mind that oftentimes the person incurring a certain behavior does not have a clear idea of the impact associated with it. “Due to your nonparticipation in the last planning session we didn’t allocate time to setup the infrastructure that we assumed was completed, this will delay the deadline in a week impacting other projects” instead of “Your nonparticipation will impact the deadline and cause a delay.”
Private or Public
This is certainly the most straightforward rule: Praise in public, criticize in private. When you criticize in public the person being criticized will automatically assume a defensive position making it almost impossible for the message, no matter how correct and relevant it is, to be understood and internalized. Not only that but the person feels that her image is also being attacked which might escalate into unnecessary conflict.
Participative
Don’t make the feedback a monologue that reinforces a top-down relationship. Instead, stimulate the participation of the other person by asking whether they agree with your assessments or not, what would they do differently if they had the chance, and what made them choose that particular action. Unlike when using software, feedback is a two-way street. Especially negative feedback should be open to discussion: the world is a complex place, and sometimes actions and words are misunderstood. Furthermore, with people we only ever see the tip of the iceberg: There is a depth to us all, and many motivations and justifications invisible to the observer.
Regular
Providing feedback should be part of the company’s culture as one important way to stimulate continuous improvement. As part of a process, it should happen regularly. At the same time, we don’t need to always wait for the periodic meeting in order to give feedback, as long as the main requirements listed above are respected.
There are different tools for making feedback regular, like 1-on-1 meetings, annual reviews, etc. If it happens too often, like weekly or biweekly, those meetings might not have enough content to be discussed, converting them into time sinks. On the other hand, if you provide feedback just once per year you are not creating the continuous improvement that is expected from it. A good rule of thumb is that if, as part of their annual or bi-annual review, the person is surprised about the feedback they receive, then their manager has not been doing their job. Of course, it is up to the individual leaders to decide the cadency of the feedback. Sometimes this cadency can vary from team to team, from person to person. Don’t worry if it takes some experimentation to get it right. Just remember to make feedback constant. As Adam Grant eloquently put it: “Good managers don’t wait for formal meetings to help you grow. They make it a daily priority. The sooner you get feedback, the sooner you can break bad habits and learn better ones.”
Planned
In order to satisfy the aforementioned requirements, planning is required. You need to gather evidence to support your claims, anticipate some potential responses from the person that is receiving the feedback and put yourself in the other person’s shoes. How would you react if you were the one receiving such feedback? What exactly are you solving for, and does the gathered feedback help create the desired solution or outcome?
It is also a good idea to check your motives when planning to give feedback. Are you giving the feedback in order to make yourself feel better or to check a box in your career growth list? Or are you trying to actively solve a problem or help/motivate others to grow? If you answered yes to the former, then it is best to refrain from giving feedback. Remember: the purpose of feedback is to generate improvement by changing a particular behavior. It is not supposed to be a tool to vent, harshly criticize, or gratuitously offend the other person.
Characteristics of Bad Feedback
We define “bad” feedback as feedback that is damaging. Damaging to the goal at hand, damaging to the interpersonal relationships across your team, and/or damaging to the company as a whole. Of course, just as was the case with the “bad engineer” checklist some chapters ago, bad feedback isn’t just the inverse of good feedback. That is, when inverting the characteristics of good feedback discussed in the previous sections, we don’t automatically get damaging feedback. For example, feedback that is irregular doesn’t necessarily affect the relationship between the giver and receiver of the feedback. Similarly, unplanned feedback might not damage the operating environment—it might simply be useless. Void of meaning. At the same time, bad feedback isn’t any less damaging because it is planned (and hence shares a characteristic of good feedback).
Instead, bad feedback fails to solve the problem at hand, is not actionable, and harms the relationship between the giver and receiver.
Personal – That is, it is not objective feedback, and is given for personal reasons, mainly to boost the giver’s image. Oftentimes, personal feedback is coupled with the inverse of a characteristic of good feedback: it is negative feedback that is given in public.
Offensive on some level. It may not be due to language or format, but it hurts, offends, or puts the receiver down in some shape or form.
Unproductive in that it does not help the receiver, is sufficiently general to not be actionable, and does not solve any problem at hand
Negative in nature. Positive feedback is rarely damaging. Feedback that is negative however can demotivate people and destroy relationships if not relevant, actionable, or framed in a productive manner.
Remember: good feedback is used to help the other person grow, while bad feedback is used to satisfy a need for whoever gives it, being inherently unhelpful to the receiver.
How to Ask for Feedback
Not all companies have a culture of providing regular, planned feedback. However, that shouldn’t stop you from directly asking for it when you think it could be of benefit to you. Effective leaders should always use feedback as a tool to make sure that they are not blindsided.
The first step when asking for feedback is to identify people that have enough information about your work to craft useful feedback. Ideally your direct boss/manager, some of your peers, or even clients. Once identified, make sure that you trust the person: If you believe they are not willing to help you it is preferable to search for someone else. Next, prepare a small set of questions to ask. The emphasis here is on “small”: providing feedback when you request it, should not be very time consuming to others, so don’t occupy their day with a 10-page questionnaire. Everybody is busy, and, by answering your questions, the responder is taking time out of their day to do you a favor. When creating your questions, create a mix of both single/multiple choice questions and open-ended questions that you’d like them to respond to. Last but not least, remember that all questions should be about your work. Nobody cares about your hairstyle.
Lastly, if asking in person (as opposed to async), ensure that you give some time for the person to really reflect about your work. You should also be prepared to ask follow-up questions once you receive the feedback, focus on suggestions that might be too generic or not actionable. Try to really drill down on what action could lead to the result which that person would expect.
How would you rate <insert name> overall job performance over the past 6 months? Present this question with a fixed scale, for example of 1-5.
List 3 positive aspects of <insert name>’s work. What did <insert name> do particularly well?
List 3 negative aspects of <insert name>’s work. What could <insert name> have done better? What concrete steps could <insert name> do to perform better?
Acting on Feedback
Receiving feedback is the easy part. The hard part is acting on it. That is, becoming a better person/colleague/worker. There is only so much advice that we can give: ultimately, it is up to you to take on board what other people have to say, and work on yourself. What exactly “working on yourself” involves, largely is up to the individual. There is no size to fit all. However, based on our experience, people that drastically improve their behavior and performance over time, all share five distinct characteristics. We will touch briefly on each in the following sections, but in summary, high performers (i) have strong emotional self-control, (ii) are planners, and (iii) know how to validate their behavior, (iv) respond to feedback in a timeline manner, (v) are self-aware. Furthermore, strong performers act both on positive and negative feedback. A natural tendency of many people is to relax after they do something well, and only focus on improving their weak points. However, being good at something means actively maintaining skills, and consistently holding yourself to high standards. As such, strong performers use positive feedback as a form of positive reinforcement: praise drives and motivates them to continue excelling at what they are doing well.
Don’t Take It Personally
Dismissing or minimizing a criticism is a very natural reaction when we are on the receiving end of it; however, in a professional context, we need to be more cautious. First, it is important to understand that a given feedback is meant to help us improve, and second, that the target of the feedback is not ourselves or our image (things we’ll fight fiercely to defend) but instead a very specific action or behavior that needs correction. Therefore, the first step toward improvement involves emotional self-control: don’t take constructive criticism personally.
Have a Plan
If the person that provided you the feedback read this book they probably gave you some actionable suggestions on how to improve, if not it is up to you to come up with a plan to adjust the specific behavior. Don’t be afraid to reach out to the person giving the feedback for help.
Validate the New Behavior
With a plan in hand it is time to execute. There are situations where it is preferable to validate the plan itself first, in cases where the stakes are higher, otherwise you can just try the new approach and ask the person that gave you the feedback if that looks adequate now.
Respond in a Timeline Manner
Responding to negative feedback in a timely manner, and showing that you are committed to improving is crucial for maintaining trust and preserving your image. This does not mean that you are expected to resolve your weaknesses all at once. Instead, it means making and showing progress. Colleagues that are not committed to acting on feedback will cause resentment and distrust. Furthermore, they will eventually lose their sources for feedback (and hence a valuable source for improvement) as those that provide them with feedback are unlikely to continue “wasting” their time providing it if they see that the receiver is unwilling to accept and respond to it.
Self-Awareness
Self-aware people have a clearer understanding of themselves, know what they what and where they stand, this allows them to respond better to negative feedback as they have an easier time identifying the root cause of the undesired behavior. At the same time it is easier for them to incorporate changes that they believe are aligned with their long-term objectives
Words of Caution
Now that we know what good and bad feedback looks like, how to ask, and how to react to it, it is time for some brief words of caution: if a lot of feedback is available to you, pick your battles carefully. All of our actions and choices incur a cost, and if you stop and act on everything, you risk creating a lot of change. That is, you are at risk of kicking up dust which can irritate others or make it difficult for others to accomplish their work. If acting on a feedback item would result in big changes, determine what the general consensus is first: Are you hearing this feedback from only one individual? Or is this feedback common? Does everybody/the majority believe that the given change should be implemented?
Effective 1:1s
Unable to express themselves openly or clearly
Unable to ask for help, raise concerns, or (to a healthy extent) vent
Unable to establish a personal relationship
…then something is wrong and the 1:1 meeting is unproductive.
Keep notes of achievements, blockers, frustrations, and suggestions
Complete any outstanding action items
Come prepared to answer the common and important question (such as what needs to be done (by either party) to attain a promotion)
Making the receiver of the feedback feel attacked (in the case of negative feedback), or overwhelmed in the case of general feedback
Diluting the conversation, resulting in a general discussion rather than one that produces distinct action items
Remember: one-on-one meetings are two-way streets. On the one hand, they allow the manager to evaluate and help the team member. On the other hand, they create a close personal relationship, allowing the team member to provide feedback, and hence helping both parties keep a pulse on things.
Effective Listening
Listening actively rather than passively by taking notes, and maintaining focus.
Asking follow-up questions and engaging in the conversation. If the person doing the talking feels that they are speaking against a silent wall, they will eventually stop giving information.
Caring about the topic at hand. As a leader, part of your job tasks involve dealing with people. Just like with any other task, you can only do the task of listening well if you care about it.
Starting every conversation on the premise that the other person knows something that you do not know. Everybody has something to teach you. Always remain conscious of the fact that we sometimes naturally view conversations as competitions, and counteract this tendency when you see it surfacing. Remember: you are here to listen, not to compete. Or as the stoic Epictetus once put it: “We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.”
Be curious and genuine.
Reflecting on what is being said. Avoid jumping to a new topic immediately and remember that communication is often more about what is not being said than what is being said.
Repeating or paraphrasing what the speaker said. This gives the speaker a break to reflect, and gives them the necessary pause to think of additional things to say on the topic. It also promotes “active listening” on behalf of the listener, improving your memory of the conversation, and allowing the listener to gather their own thoughts and reflect on what is being said.
Using the power of silence when appropriate. That is: ask a question, then let the other person speak. Then remain silent—don’t immediately jump to a conclusion and start blabbering. Remaining silent will cause the other person to continue talking.
Relaxing. As with any task, we perform worse at it if stressed.
The Power of Labels
[Labeling] theory assumes that although deviant behavior can initially stem from various causes and conditions, once individuals have been labeled or defined as deviants, they often face new problems that stem from the reactions of self and others to negative stereotypes (stigma) that are attached to the deviant label (Becker, 1963; Lemert, 1967). These problems in turn can increase the likelihood of deviant and criminal behavior becoming stable and chronic. In the words of Lemert (1967), deviant behavior can become “means of defense, attack, or adaptation” (p. 17) to the problems created by deviant labeling. Thus, being labeled or defined by others as a criminal offender may trigger processes that tend to reinforce or stabilize involvement in crime and deviance, net of the behavioral pattern and the social and psychological conditions that existed prior to labeling.
Although labeling theory is primarily viewed through the lens of criminology, there is an argument to be made that it also holds true in the modern workplace. If we consistently label a good employee as an underperformer, chances are that they will eventually underperform—be it due to lack of motivation or because they give up hope of ever casting off this label in the current workplace—turning our opinion of them into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Many times the “labels” we apply to our colleagues are automatic and not something we actively think about: a wrong answer shows that one is not technically competent or inattentive; joining a call late means that one is careless and irresponsible and so on.
What we can learn from labeling theory in these situations is that we should be cautious in making judgments too soon—and to realize when we are making them. How we feel about others affects how we interact with them, which in turn affects our relationship with them and possibly their work performance as a whole.
- 1.
Framing critical feedback in a positive light, as well as considering the other’s strengths when judging their weaknesses
- 2.
Recognizing other people’s work via shout-outs in public chat rooms or meetings or thanking people in person
- 3.
Actively encouraging people during 1:1 sessions
- 4.
Never publicly blaming or shaming someone
- 5.
Keeping performance reviews positive, framing criticism as forms of helping the other person advance their career, and using strong criticism only when a concrete problem needs to be resolved
Conclusion
Feedback is an incredibly powerful tool, and as any powerful tool, when used incorrectly the damage it creates can be significant. The purpose of this chapter was to serve as a manual for correctly applying this tool. In short, we learned that, in order for us to be able to unleash the power of feedback, it needs to be (i) relevant, (ii) specific, (iii) regular, (iv) planned, and (v) participative. The giver of feedback also needs to be empathic enough to be able to distinguish when the feedback should be given in public or private. Negative feedback given in private as part of one-to-one meetings should be limited: The giver should focus on no more than two topics at hand, lest the receiver feels attacked or leaves the meeting demotivated. Both participants of feedback meetings should come prepared: action items should have been completed and questions prepared ahead of time. Questions raised with the objective of receiving feedback should be short and concise, with at least one open-ended component. Most importantly however, they should only ever be asked to persons that the receiver trusts. Last but not least, the receiver should always act on feedback in a timeline manner (failing to do so risks drying up your sources of feedback and will likely generate resentment and distrust), which in turn requires you to not take the feedback personally. Keep in mind that dismissing or minimizing a criticism is a very natural reaction when we are on the receiving end of it; however, it is important to understand that the giver of the feedback is trying to help us improve (they are not questioning ourselves or attacking our image). After all, that is what feedback is all about.