Oisin | Feedback Traps and How to Overcome Them

1. Clear Intention is Key

Ironically, the first trap leaders fall into providing feedback is not being clear about their intent. Consequently, the first shift I seek to facilitate in leaders is a shift in mindset. Leaders need to be crystal clear regarding their intention when providing feedback. Frequently leaders seem to confuse venting frustration or acknowledging another person with feedback. Often, leaders share a message that is difficult to decipher or use.
Having a coaching mindset here is critical. Whether the feedback is motivational or constructive, the intention ought to be similar – the purpose of feedback is to enable change, growth, development, and shift. The only difference is that in motivational feedback, the shift is related to scaling or leveraging what is working well. In contrast, in constructive feedback, the change lies in reducing a gap of some kind. In simple terms, feedback is about sharing information with another based on observations. In turn, the input enables the others to make good quality decisions regarding how to conduct themselves best.

2. Ensure the Critical Elements are in Place

If the goal of effective feedback is to facilitate growth, change, and enhancement in performance, it stands to reason that certain elements must be in place for feedback to be effective. These elements include high-quality observations, incisive use of language, structured to facilitate real development, and framed in a manner that contributes to the person.

3. The 4:1 Ratio

Relationship experts understand the importance of the 4:1 ratio to creating positive and respectful relationships. The recommendation is that we use a ratio of 4:1 positive to constructive feedback to keep relationships at optimum health. For every one piece of constructive feedback we provide, we should provide four pieces of motivational feedback. The 4:1 ratio is very different from the sandwich method of feedback, which only serves to confuse – (think love the dress don’t like the shoes love the hair). The 4.1 ratio is more about the overall bank balance created through cumulative feedback experiences. When the balance is healthy, receivers will most likely interpret constructive feedback as a contribution versus a slight and an indication that the other person invests in my success. The team member is just as likely to interpret the constructive feedback as an indication that my boss takes enough interest in me to provide feedback. My boss notices what I do. My boss has enough interest in me to take the time to share this feedback with me. My boss invests in my success. However, if feedback messages are mainly constructive, it is understandable that the feedback receiver will inevitably tire from only hearing where they need to improve. On the other hand, leaders who leverage what is working well typically obtain higher performance levels than leaders who do not.

4. Incisive Use of Language

The biggest skill gap I see is the use of loose language and the inability to name behaviors in observational terms. In my workshops, I usually lead a coaching drill called ‘specify the ‘behavior. Here leaders prepare a specific piece of feedback that they seek to share with someone in the next seven days. When I ask leaders to share the behaviors they seek to address, I usually poorly articulated examples. For example, none of the following statements specify behavior: proactive, self-aware, a team player, motivated, and ownership. They are categories of behavior under which sit many different specific behaviors. The leader must be crystal clear about which specific behavior (s) in the category they are focusing upon in this conversation. If leaders simply refer to a category of behavior, they add no value, create confusion, and may even do more harm than good.
It can mean a range of things if a leader refers to a person as being proactive. These might include the person takes on tasks without being asked. They notice what’s missing and point them out. They anticipate needs, provide feedback, or reach out to customers to explore their unspoken needs. As a coach, we do not want to leave it up to the other person to determine to which of the specific behaviors we refer. It is our responsibility to ensure that no ambiguity exists for the receiver. Otherwise, we reduce the likelihood of them utilizing the feedback effectively. If you intend to help a person shift, you must be unambiguous about what precisely the person is going to focus their attention on. Eliminate opinions and subjective views.
1. Poor linkage between the identified behavior and the associated impacts and consequences
2. Insufficient attention to leveraging observed strengths
3. In the case of constructive feedback, not enabling the person to shift from current to desired behaviors.

5. Tight Linkage between Observed Behaviour and Impact

Poor linkage between the behavior observed and the associated impacts has two aspects. The first aspect is insufficiently articulating the implications of the observed strengths, thereby diminishing the link between what the person did and the positive result they achieved. Without this line of sight, the feedback will have minimal impact on future performance. The second aspect is insufficiently articulating the implications and consequences of unhelpful behaviors, thereby inhibiting the person’s motivation to bridge the performance gap.

Examples
Let’s take an example. Fred made an excellent presentation. He analyzed the numbers, interpreted the data, and drew vital insights to share with the client. The point the coach needs to articulate here is why doing those things made such a difference. If the coach does not communicate the why, feedback becomes a compliment at best rather than a developmental growth moment. However, if the coach goes on to describe the impacts, the coaching value will significantly increase.
The coach might say, for example:
“The client appreciated you penetrating beneath the surface of the numbers. Your credibility shot through the roof, and you consolidated trust. This credibility and trust will accelerate the momentum around this high-value proposal. As your Manager, I am proud to have you on this team.”
Leaders may address three or four possible impacts in their feedback messages. Potential impacts may include impact on self, on others, on costs, on productivity, on client satisfaction, on team morale, on credibility. For the feedback to create impact, it must have relevance and resonance for the person receiving it.
With a constructive feedback example, the application is similar. Let’s imagine Fred hadn’t analyzed the numbers or generated key value-adding insights. Here the coach might incorporate the following into their feedback message:
If a client perceives we only have a superficial handle on the numbers, their confidence reduces, and they potentially begin to look for other flaws in our proposal. It opens the opportunity for them to look at other suppliers, and it potentially gives a message that the client is just a number to us. Ultimately it dilutes your credibility. Neither of us wants those unintended consequences do we?

6. Leverage Motivational Feedback

Another trap leaders fall into is not fully leveraging motivational feedback and failing to enable the person to scale a positive behavior. In this case, the leader reduces the impact of the input as a rich developmental experience. With motivational feedback, the opportunity is to help the team member to leverage and scale a strength. The leader explores how the strength might be further scaled to obtain more value. In our example above, the leader would go back to the behavior – analyzing the numbers deeply, extracting the insights, and sharing the relevant ones with the client. He might say, for example:
These skills of analyzing the data and then drawing pertinent insights are critical in helping clients make complex decisions. I would love to see you translate what you did with this client and apply it with other similar clients too. Who comes to mind? The more you can grow these skills, the more confidence you will have in engaging with executives about strategic issues.

7. Bridge the Gap between Current and Desired Performance

Finally, leaders need to be able to help team members to bridge the gap between current and desired behavior. Here a coaching mindset to the feedback would see the leader explore how the person could enhance their analytical skills. Are there particular steps that might be adopted? Is there the opportunity for a quick check-in along the way next time you complete an analysis? Are there certain questions that enable a better generation of insight? Could these be explored next time? Missing this step in the process is like having and hit and run approach to feedback!