We are fast approaching the mid-point of the year which, in many companies, is the point of time when mid-year performance reviews are held. For companies that do not believe in performance reviews, feedbacking conversations between managers and their teams are still encouraged so that employees are aware of how well they are doing in order to learn and improve.
Is feedbacking really useful in encouraging improvement and achievement, or maybe even over-achievement of goals? Not necessarily.
Let's take a step back and look at what feedbacking is. When I give you a feedback, it is a one-way process of sharing what I observed and felt about what you did. Assuming the intention is good, the objective of feedbacking is to help you learn and improve, or even change.
So what's wrong about feedbacks?
Feedback is a judgmental perspective.
The nature of a feedback is an opinion - it’s judgmental and based on one person’s perception. When we observe someone’s performance, no matter how much factual data there is, we selectively take part of the data, assign meaning to it and draw conclusions based on these selective perceptions.
The implication is that, our feedback is in most cases a perspective, not fact. While it could be beneficial for a person to hear a different perspective, in the case of a manager-employee relationship, this could lead to a feeling of being judged or evaluated upon, which is not likely to encourage improvement or change.
The feedback recipient is not aware.
The second issue is related to how we learn. Curtiss and Warren (1973) proposed the famous Four Stages of Competence model which describes how we learn new things and sustain the new behaviors. Learning is a sequential process, and the first step of the process is to be aware of what we don’t know or are not doing good enough, in other words, to become “consciously incompetent”.
The problem of feedbacks is that we often jump directly into the behaviors we observed, without first bringing the recipient’s attention to what is it that one needs to improve. This could lead to confusion which might actually make the situation worse.
The feedback is not connected to the recipient's motivations.
A factor that could be most easily overlooked is the recipient’s motivation. One of the most popular theories about motivation is perhaps Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory. It describes that a person’s motivation is influenced by 3 factors: Valence, Instrumentality, and Expectancy. Particularly related to the topic of performance feedback is Valence, which is how significant a person’s emotional expectation is related to the expected outcome. If a person is not emotionally connected to the expected outcome, motivation significantly decreases.
Before we give feedbacks, how often do we listen to what the recipient wants to achieve in the job, or maybe even in the career? As a manager of a team, are you clear about your team’s career goals, and the connections with what they are doing right now? Without a clear connection between your feedback and the recipient’s career expectations, it would be unlikely for him/her to be motivated in opening up, taking in your feedback and improving.
Here's how to make it work.
Listen first.
In Stephen Covey’s best selling 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, the first habit to achieve public victory and work well with others is to "seek first to understand, then to be understood". To have a meaningful feedbacking conversation, we need to first shut up and listen. Ask questions, seek to understand your team's challenges, achievements, motivations and perspectives.
The social behavior of focusing on your team members increases oxytocin level in their bodies, which induces the feeling of trust, the precursor of any effective social interaction. This would lay down a solid foundation for a constructive conversation.
Focus on what your team aspires.
The Intentional Change Theory suggests that engaging a person’s ideal self or personal vision is an essential driver of sustained, desired change. If we intend to encourage someone to change and improve, we could encourage that person to aspire and focus on the preferred future, which arouses the person’s Positive Emotional Attractor. This was found to activate the Default Mode Network in the brain, activating neural mechanisms that encourage the individual to be motivated, willing to tackle difficulties, and open to new ideas.
This creates a sense of safety that allows the person to face, rather than avoid, difficult issues, like accepting feedbacks.
Seek permission before giving feedback.
Accepting a feedback, especially one that is constructive, Is not an easy process. Asking for permission, or waiting for a signal that shows acceptance of feedback, is helpful in three ways:
First, the process of accepting feedback is likely to trigger a person’s psychological defenses. By asking for permission, it reminds and helps the recipient lower the defenses and pass through the stage of denial more easily.
Second, by lowering the recipient’s psychological defenses, it is less likely to trigger the person’s neural activities that decrease motivation and make it harder for the recipient to approach and embrace change.
Thirdly, when the recipient gives permission, his/her attention is shifted towards the feedback, which enhances neuroplasticity - the ability of the brain to form and reorganise synaptic connections, i.e. form new connections and learn.
All the above tips are about setting the right scene, and approaching feedbacking with a proper mindset. With that part properly done, the conversation would be much more likely to drive improvements in both the recipient’s performance and in the relationship with you as the feedback giver.
Reference
Argyris, C. (1982). The executive mind and double-loop learning. Organizational dynamics, 11(2), 5-22.
Boyatzis, R. E. (2008). Leadership development from a complexity perspective. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60(4), 298.
Boyatzis, R. E., & Jack, A. I. (2018). The neuroscience of coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 70(1), 11.
Buckingham, M., & Goodall, A. (2019). The feedback fallacy. Harvard Business Review, 97(2), 92-101.
Covey, S. R. (1991). The seven habits of highly effective people. Provo, UT: Covey Leadership Center.
Chicago
Curtiss, P. R., & Warren, P. W. (1973). The dynamics of life skills coaching. Prince Albert, Sask.: Training Research and Development Station, Department of Manpower and Immigration.
Kosfeld, M., Heinrichs, M., Zak, P. J., Fischbacher, U., & Fehr, E. (2005). Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature, 435(7042), 673-676.
Vroom, V. (1964). Expectancy theory. Work and motivation.
Comments