Can I give you some feedback?
One of the questions I am regularly asked, often with a sense of desperation, is how to give feedback. Feedback is an age-old challenge that is laid at the feet of managers, who carry out the task with varying degrees of success.
If we have something positive to say to someone, we don’t tend to ask for permission first.
How do you feel when someone says, “Can I give you some feedback?”. The term itself injects a level of threat before the conversation even starts. It’s not that there is anything wrong with the word itself, but it carries so many negative connotations. As a colleague of mine once said, “if we have something positive to say to someone, we don’t tend to ask for permission first”.
How many times have you had a performance conversation where 95% of it has been focussed on what’s gone well but, it’s the 5% of negative assessment that remains with you?
How many times have you had a performance conversation where 95% of it has been focussed on what’s gone well but, it’s the 5% of ‘development opportunity’ that remains with you? That piece of negative assessment can gnaw away, undermining our sense of position and significance and knock our confidence – the exact opposite of what is was hopefully intended to do.
The Idiosyncratic Rater Effect
Ironically the view and assessment we deliver to another often says more about us than it does the other person.
The truth of the matter is that, in general, we are simply no good at giving feedback to others and have set up systems and processes to measure performance that don’t work to achieve growth and learning.
There are several reasons for why we are where we are but one main reason why feedback is so hard is that we come at the conversation from our own subjective view of the world. Ironically the view and assessment we deliver to another often says more about us than it does the other person.
Now that takes a bit to get our heads round but it’s really quote simple - because of our subjectivity human beings are unreliable raters of other humans. Our own sense of what good looks like is coloured by our biases, our uniquely filed experiences and our beliefs.
This phenomenon is called the idiosyncratic rater effect. It shows that more than half of your rating of someone else reflects your characteristics not theirs. Our ‘feedback’ is more distortion than truth. Think about how you would describe a colour. To some a red would be more crimson and to others more pinky. No-one is wrong, it is simply our learnt perception in play. We see the world and others as we are, not as it is or as others are.
Please don’t use the sh!t sandwich method
Now there are many models out there that describe how to give feedback but what most fail to take into account is how the brain reacts, and how we really learn. One of those is the good old sandwich approach. Say something good, say the ‘bad’ bit and then finish with a good bit. This method primes us to expect that what comes after the good stuff will not be so positive and our brain switches to alert, effectively depleting our capacity to learn. Mistakes are part of life and crucial for learning. That’s not to say that we don’t need to mitigate for the risk of potential mistakes, but we also need to understand how to provide developmental input that really works.
Learning requires trust and psychological safety first and foremost. Feedback that triggers our neurological reward circuitry, which increases our capacity for learning and engagement, is possible. My research in the field of human motivation has led me to build a brain-safe model for feedback so that our conversations lead to development, and not to demotivation. It is a simple checklist using an an mnemonic that we all know - and it’s as straightforward as AEIOU.
The AEIOU Framework
A –And
E – Effort
I – Intention
O – Opportunity
U – You
A –And instead of ‘but’. If I said to you, “that presentation was great…”– what word are you expecting to hear next? ‘But’ or ‘However’ most likely. Now what happens to the words that preceded the ‘but’? Our brains home in on the threat, which in this case is the criticism that is anticipated to follow, and delete the positives. So, instead of ‘but’ or ‘however’ use, ‘and’. This will feel awkward at first, but it works. “That presentation was great, and to make it even stronger you could….”
E – Effort. We are rewarded neurologically far more for the effort we put in than for the end result. The behavioural economist Dan Ariely refers to this as the IKEA effect. We tend to value something which we have put more effort into - just like piecing together IKEA furniture. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t celebrate the success, of course we should, but it is critical to notice the effort and hard work that got the individual and/or team there.
I – Intention. People come to work to do a good job. So first think about what their intention was before an error occurred; was it to cause harm, to damage or destroy? There is an impact which needs to be addressed, but first try to understand the intention. Coming from a premise that we are all seeking to do our best helps to regulate our emotions and respond to the facts, rather than our subjective perception.
O – Opportunity. In every genuine error, there is an opportunity to learn, to continually test, learn and improve. Ask for input and opinion on how to do things differently next time and remain solution focused. When we contribute and own our learning, we are more motivated to implement the changes and advice.
U – You. Focus on yourself. How are you feeling? What are you thinking? What is your mood? What messages are you transmitting that will either help or hinder the conversation? Is this the right time to talk? If not, maybe wait for a more suitable moment.
AEIOU can be used to structure a conversation, or the elements can be used on their own to boost motivation and deepen psychological safety, the foundation of growth and development. Try it with your team, and see what happens.
Feel free to email us at enquire@revelesco.com at any point.
Susanne & the Revelesco team.