Let’s be honest, when someone asks you if they can give feedback, in your head you’re saying ‘Errr… Nope!’. Are we bad at giving feedback, or are we bad at receiving it?
I first started thinking about this when I was giving my first briefing to a really high performing team in the Armed Forces. These guys were at the top of their game, always got the tough missions and always got the job done. And here I was, standing in front of them telling them about the next 24 hours. That is, until someone in the second row stopped me in my tracks. ‘Hey Gaz, that’s not going to work’. What? Who are you? We’ve planned this, how is it not going to work? I was really taken back. I was being humiliated in front of everybody, the new guy gets it wrong. My professional credibility was on the line. I wanted to argue, to defend my position, to defend myself. But as I looked back at the slide behind me, I realised something: he was right. I spent round three years with this team and the one overriding golden thread of what made these guys high performers was this: Honest Feedback, Fast. What this team realised was there is nothing kind or anything to be gained by keeping quiet about someone’s weaknesses. It was a safe space for feedback, there was nothing malicious or obnoxious about it, there was a culture of reflection, and always of improvement.
From a reflection of my own behaviour when someone gives us feedback, there seems to be three phases:
- F@ck You!
- I’m really rubbish.
- Ok, how can I do better?
I know this to be true, but I regularly go through one for a bit, and then totally get stuck on the second one. Is there a way to go straight to number three? After all, however it is delivered the aim of feedback is to improve your performance. I often now refer to it as feed forward, not feedback. Feedback implies its in the past and there’s you can or are willing to do to change it. Feed forward implies you are ready to change, to improve in order to make it better.
When we feel optimistic about feedback I guess we imagine a kind of good therapy session. Gentle but with little nuggets we can take away and use. Of course, that’s not how it always goes, especially in work or business. People don’t necessarily calibrate their words to our feelings. We feel bruised that we are not meeting expectations, even at the most minor of issues. The problem is we constantly over estimate our abilities, especially when unskilled in a particular area. This phenomenon is known as the Dunning-Kruger effect after the authors of an academic study in 1999. So we all have blind spots. The problem is when we have received feedback in the past, its usually been what’s called ‘ego involving feedback’. The boss that chewed you out in front of everyone. The teacher that explained to you in front of the whole class why you got the equation wrong. The spouse that didn’t filter their response when you left the milk out. This prompts the receiver to believe they cannot change, that failure is intrinsic to who they are. It is more to do with the emotional state of the giver than the receiver.
Whether or not we act on feedback is ultimately our choice. It largely depends on the kind of relationship we have with the person providing the feedback. Which is why managers need to be really careful about when and how feedback is delivered. Some feedback will be bad. Focus on the 5-10% that will help you develop and fix that. Then once you move past the f@ck you and I’m really rubbish stage you can have a rational conversation about it. A great book to read on this subject is Radical Candor by Kim Scott so go and check that out if you haven’t already. But I’m curious, let me know how you respond to feedback, what’s the best and worst you have ever received?
