“I’ve got some feedback for you.” I’ve seen people respond to this statement with fear and apprehension, visibly tense body language, sighing… I’ve also seen people respond with excitement: their ears perk up, you’ve got their interest, and they’re eager to hear what you’re about to say.
Most of the courses I’ve taken recently have involved peer feedback between participants as we practiced our new skills. It’s amazing how much you can read about a participants’ workplace culture when you see how he/she reacts when we get to the feedback part of the day.
I decided I want to get a better understanding of what makes for good feedback. Every “how to give feedback” course/article I’ve come across gives some sort of simple formula (e.g. talk about the event, not the person, describe the situation, be specific), but little background theory on why feedback is so important, why so many people have bad associations with the word, and what actually ends up being effective.
Model 1:
The first feedback model I encountered in the workplace was behaviourist: positively reinforce behaviours you want to see repeated; ignore behaviours you don’t want to see repeated (hypothesis: ignoring the behaviour will extinguish it). Good parts of model: experientially, I agree that behaviour must be positively reinforced in order for it to be repeated and valued. Too many managers (and employees) make the mistake of ignoring positive behaviour, reasoning that if it’s not broke, it doesn’t need attention. They don’t realize that if an employee (or manager) isn’t getting feedback on what works and what’s valued, then the employee (or manager) doesn’t have the information they need to build on, and continue exhibiting, their strengths. Weak parts of model: ignoring negative behaviours doesn’t always extinguish them. How does corrective feedback fit into the behaviourist model?
Model 2:
The Sandwich model, possibly the model that I think has the most holes in it. The theory is that you start with a positive comment, so the feedback recipient feels good. This supposedly makes the recipient more receptive to the sandwich “filling” – the negative/constructive/corrective feedback. Finally, finish with another positive comment, so that you go out on a good note. Good part of model: well, at least we’ve got some incorporation of positive feedback here. Bad part of model: feedback recipients hear the opener and think “Oh no, what’s coming next…” and then they’re so busy thinking about the negative feedback in the middle that they don’t even hear the positive comment that comes at the end. Also, I think this model encourages the feedback giver to come up with positive feedback insincerely. Example stream-of-thought of the feedback giver: “I need to tell this person he’s doing x wrong. Oh, but the sandwich model! I need to first think of something I can compliment him on, and something nice to say at the end too.” Positive feedback is meaningless and insincere when it’s only being given as a way to package the negative feedback.
Sample guidelines for supportive feedback
The mediation course I took offered these guidelines for supportive feedback:
1. Look for the positives and mention them.
2. Make observations about what didn’t go well, and make suggestions for an alternative approach.
3. Describe what happened, don’t judge it.
4. Be specific.
5. Direct your suggestions for change towards behaviour the person can control.
6. End on a positive note.
Other ideas?
All of the above are sample recipes for feedback, but none are satisfactory explanations of what or why particular methodologies work; nor do they give a theoretical framework for feedback. In search of something less recipe-based and more theory-based, I’m reading Tell Me How I’m Doing (huge emphasis on supportive feedback as more important than corrective feedback) and Perfect Phrases for Building Strong Teams (I’m trying to hold off judgment until I’ve read the whole thing, but I suspect I won’t be using platitudes such as “Team feedback is a source of support and growth, not criticism” anytime soon).
More posts as (if) I turn up some better models or better ways of thinking about feedback.
