What have we done in the professional world that makes many people wary of feedback? How can we make performance feedback more acceptable and effective? Let’s explore.
So, what is feedback? Can we agree it’s communication about how people perform, how they act? That communication comes in various forms (with examples):
- Verbal (a conversation or award presentation)
- Written (a note or performance review)
- Printed (a comparative sales report)
- Video (a recording of a class you instructed or of your golf swing)
- Audio (review of a recorded customer service call or of your singing)
We generally accept there are two types of feedback: “reinforcing” and “constructive” or whatever terms you prefer. (You get the point.) The former encourages people to repeat their behaviors and results. The latter intends to improve performance and outcomes.
And is it fair to say the amount of constructive feedback we receive far outweighs the reinforcing type? Let’s call it as it comes across to the recipient: criticism. “Why are people so critical? Can’t they see what I’m doing correctly? I just wish they could positively recognize my work at least once.” Sound familiar? No one likes to be criticized, but sometimes its absolutely necessary, particularly in cases of safety.
Think about the feedback you receive and how you see it. From whom do you get it? Do those folks have the credibility, the authority, your respect, and your permission to tell you how you’re performing? Does it feel like they’re judging you, or does their intent appear to be an effort to help you grow? In other words, effective feedback starts with the recipient’s perspective.
On the other hand, how we deliver feedback is certainly important, too. Consider these elements in giving productive performance feedback:
- “What’s my baseline?” In other words, what expectation or standard have you set for this person? Do they truly know what you expect? Effective communication about performance compares what the person did versus the established standard, the expectation, of what they should have done.
- “What behavior (the action you saw or heard) did I observe?” Feedback shouldn’t be about something as vague as someone’s attitude; it’s about how people perform. We can assess their performance only through observation of behavior and/or results? Oh, you didn’t actually see or hear what they did? You simply heard about it from someone else? Oops, your credibility just took a big hit. You can’t give legitimate feedback about behavior in this case.
- “How should I deliver the message?” What we observed is in the past. What we want is in the future. So, focus your message on the future. “This is what you did… Keep it up!” “Here’s what I saw/heard…The next time you have a similar situation, please do this…” When we say, “You should have…”, it’s very close to “I told you so.” That statement more often raises negative emotions rather than conveying useful information.
Feedback that is behaviorally specific, compared to a performance standard, and delivered quickly after the action or event occurs is most valuable. Otherwise, imprecise, unrelated, and delayed observation becomes empty and a waste of everyone’s time. We can do better than that.