Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
You maintenance whole team to repeat a same tasks and consist to pay attentions to your team mates. Everyone has share a same feedback board report is important. By the same time, you need a people who is devoted to change the strategy and understand the change of people’s behaviours are vital important factors. People need feel that they are respect by the team members. Every measure is reaction and actions. Leadership is a simply and boring job.
Hi! First of all – this is a great idea, I feel that it is so right. I have a question though – does this theory work when a person grows from individual contributor to team lead? Because this kind of growth requires changes in that person`s patterns.
Mr Buckingham said that the research shows that 91% of people surveyed said they were on a team yet in other areas the number is 83%. Please straighten me out on this one.
What resonates with me is the concept of feedback in a coaching context. Like others that have posted, I’m looking for application. Here is how I envision it. Supervisors, as coaches, are in regular contact with their teams. They have ample opportunities to meet and ‘examine’ the events and activities of the team. When they conduct the examination, like a coach reviewing a film with a player, they can ask questions about the event, activity, or deliverable. What do you think went well? What would you do differently? The leader shares their insights and then encourages them to do more of what went well. And before you send them off, ask them what they will try during their next opportunity. Then repeat the cycle as frequently as you can.
Thx Ashley and Marcus for sharing your insights. I liked the back and forth dialogue between the two of you and how you would build on each other’s thoughts. You compliment each other well.
Thanks for bringing this up, Dan-
For many years I struggled with accepting ‘feedback is a gift’ because I think primarily I remember getting this gift only when I’ve done something wrong, and no one seems to give me this gift when I did something right. I feel that this truth strengthens an aspect of coaching for good performance by catching our people doing something right and encouraging them to replicate that good work by paying attention to that and making specific comments or having a quick conversation that goes beyond the surface (not just that hollow ‘good job’).
Truth # 5 reminds me of a management principle I learned years ago – leaders manage processes and have relationships with people. I love this conversation is providing a framework for building positive, productive relationships within our teams. Focused attention/ Pausing to interrogate the positive to learn.
From a mathematical angle:
You have a team of people. The team exists for a reason.
The team members, together, exist to fulfill that purpose of the team.
The productivity and the product quality of the team is a function of each individual’s skills and the harmony of team work (who does what, with whom, when and how).
To maximize “production” the leader needs to solve the maximization, of a huge multi variable function, problem.
In my case is: maximize “customer” satisfaction while having fun (as an individual and the whole team).
To reach the maximum “output”, as a leader, I need to:
1) understand what makes each one tick (understand which variables lead to a maximum).
2) Understand what and how makes a team member be at their best. (find the local maximum)
3) Recognize and handshake that local maximum within the team.
4) Repeat to all team members (find the variables that lead to a maximum)
5) when it’s done we have reached the Maximum output of that team.
6) Pay attention and maintain a sustainable maximum. Identifying behavior that led to great individual and team performance. Making sure it is reflected back, recognized and shared
The team maximum may mean that is a minimum of team member. A leader should spot and recognized that. Should be open and honest with the team, team member and find ways to mitigate that.
For example: I’ve found that after a quarterly report, a team member (to repair his energy) desperately needed to investigate a topic of his choice for 1 or 2 days. When we “allowed” him that, he was the one contributing with new ideas and by far his
This really aligns with the mindset change we have been trying to create in our company. We still use the word feedback but it is focused on doing the majority of feedback on reinforcing the behaviors that help them and the company be successful. When presenting this reinforcing feedback we are encouraging leaders to do it in a thoughtful way that helps the employee understand the impact their behavior has through aligning it with criteria, context and consequence. We also tell them the sandwich of reinforcing and redirecting feedback is a no no because the messages get mixed and missed and takes away the power of either. This video gives me some great insight to help change some of our wording to hopefully help those who are not working this way to see the benefit of what you all are saying. Thank you.
I love the distinction you’re making between the lie “people need feedback” and the truth that “people need attention”. Great example of peer feedback tools warping behavior in workplaces today published by ex-facebook employees who are certainly not alone in using this practice with good intention but negative impact. David Rock and his team published research with 200 companies today suggesting that rather than leaders needing being taught how to give people attention/feedback, staff should be taught how to ask for attention/feedback. What do you think is the balance of responsibility in initiating these conversations?
There tends to be a big difference between what I want feedback on and how and what people give feedback. It is a wise man who learns to solicit the feedback that he needs.
I really love the notion of focusing on strengths, what people do best, and Simon Sinek’s notion of Leaders Eat Last – on the flip side, however, what is the right thing to do/approach when someone isn’t performing in their current role or a specific behavior is getting in the way of them being successful?
I have the same question! What approach is recommended when it’s necessary to correct a behaviour or an undesirable habit? Curious to hear if you received a response?
Hello Christy. My question exactly. I am in absolute agreement of the “people want attention” philosophy when you see them doing something well and “interrogating” them about what they did and how. But, what do you do when there’s a gap between what the person should be doing and what they’re actually doing? The answer is you still need to address that gap (the old Standard-Behavior-Impact conversation) AND you can still “interrogate” them to better understand what’s going on with them, what problems/challenges they’re having, and what you can do to help them succeed. I feel that Marcus and Ashley should also address how to provide (in the same vein as good performance) that attention where there are performance gaps.
Is it the case where not all feedback is born equal? The question then becomes what type of feedback is effective (or not)?
While intrigued by the concept, contextually, I’m missing the part where you help someone from shooting themselves in the foot performance wise.
Hi Laurie–thanks for the comment! Of course, stopping someone from shooting themselves in the foot is a good thing. But what that results in is someone who’s not failing, and “not failing” is very different from “being great.” We’re arguing that far too much of our feedback lives in the prevent failure/remediation mode, and that–at least according to the science–none of that helps create excellence. The Adequacy Business is very different from the Excellence Business, and the Excellence Business demands from us a very different approach!
Dear Marcus and Dear Ashley, This one is really very thought provoking. Maybe it is me, but I am finding it difficult to accept that giving feedback can be seen as counter-productive. We have been taught from the childhood that feedback is the breakfast of the champions. Taking sports corollary, all great sportsmen attribute their success to the great coaches and openness to feedback. It can’t be different for corporate. I am afraid, Lie 5 is more to do with the lack of skills of some of the managers to give feedback both negative and positive. So, I believe, we should not throw baby with the bath- water and should keep faith in feedback and just decide who can and cannot give the feedback to people.
I’m intrigued what the ‘truth’ will be for this one. How do we gain insight into our behaviours if not for feedback? Self reflection? Some people are not that self-aware! Some people don’t consider the impact of their behaviour on others. In these cases, surely feedback is one way to develop awareness?
Marcus and Ashley – Lie #5 “the anvil” – brilliant! Taking on the “feedback” universe is a great Lie/Truth, can’t wait to see the truth on this one. Feedback is not only hard to receive, but incredibly hard to give. I am a little confused though on the difference between feedback and guidance. You make it sound like leaders shouldn’t give guidance (maybe I misinterpreted the feedback lie?), but obviously we want to tell people something like “hey, you know this customer account was lost because the last person was a boring presenter? You should work on that.” or “hey, you know the last person that did that task without wearing their protective gear was injured? You need to correct that.” Seems like feedback, in terms of guidance, makes sense.
Ugh…… “feedback,” “feedback is a gift,” geez, didn’t we all graduate the dreaded middle school; thankful we NEVER have to repeat that ever, ever again? Why then do many seem hellbent on bringing middle school back into the professional world, under the guise of feedback? Let’s choose to resist this, when it comes to person to person conversations about performance! Let’s assume you have the right to speak truth in love to your team member, colleague, co-worker…… let’s commit to provide them with an in-the-moment human to human, truthful conversation that is recipient-centric, NOT giver-centric.
I love the way Liz Ryan puts it in a Forbes article from OCT 2015: “…offers weak people the perfect opportunity to take potshots at their colleagues.”
Looking forward to the TRUTH in a few days! Cheers!
I don’t want your feedback…I need your insight.
Ditto on Ron Thieme’s points.
Giving this some thought in the context it was presented, feedback appearing to tell me where I am personally wrong only makes me feel small and underappreciated (I am guilty of doing this). Insight on how I can improve the work I am doing and better leverage my strengths builds me up and shows that my strengths are appreciated (much more fun). I usually know my weaknesses already and I don’t really need you to point them out and thrown them in my face. I need a coach, board member, peer, staff, someone to bounce those crazy ideas against and show me the holes in my logic or break me out of a rut and help me find a new approach.
Ashley, Marcus, and fellow free-thinkers, I am very appreciative of your insight and looking forward to more.
I have found that large amounts of unsolicited feedback (i.e. 360 reviews, open feedback sessions or even coaching sessions) tends to pull people backward to become more like the ordinary than direct them to higher performance or excellence. If the majority of the feedback is based on the idea that you need to be more like me, the result will be to become more like the current state of ordinary than moving toward excellence.
The quality of the feedback matters. Is it being delivered from the wisdom of someone that truly understands excellence or is it being delivered by someone that thinks I should be more like them; assuming that they represent a closer approximation to excellence. As effective leaders we are encouraging people to build on their individual strengths, not become like everyone else.
I think feedback harkens to the nasty sound that comes out of an amplifier. Team leaders and team members need to build a respectful and trusting relationship that allows for open communication. When I can say to my manager “hey this activity weakens me” or “this is the coolest thing I got to do this week and the time seemed to fly by” it helps to hone in on where I am providing the most to the organization. Connecting with someone who you know cares about your growth and development is not about feedback but trust and learning what works best. I believe that if we are all playing to our strengths every day (not all day but every day) the need for feedback is lessened. Team leaders and team members should be discussing each week to know, focus and grow together. Then there is no surprises about what I or they are doing or not doing.
Marcus and Ashley, I’m so appreciative of the work you are doing. Like the poster below, I can’t wait to share this book with our executive team. I absolutely agree that feedback as defined here is rarely effective in creating long-term change/improvement. On the other hand, I know that I value the observations of a personal coach–someone with whom I can discuss difficult matters, and who will offer their unvarnished assessments. Sometimes the sound of true learning is “Ooooh” tinged with a bit of “Ouch!”
I believe there is a lot of value in getting people to begin to evaluate themselves on a regular basis – what went well – where did you get stuck – what would you do differently next time? And then, if they haven’t identified a limiting behavior — “would you like to hear some feedback from me?” Most times they can identify the limiting behavior themselves.
For me feedback is not about measuring someone towards excellence but more to provide someone more insights in what his or her behavior does to you. It’s about sharing your truth about how you see the world and how you feel, without judging someone for their truth. Sharing this with someone else means you are helping that other person to question his/her view of the world and broaden their perspective as well. That’s also a part of someone else’s growth process. Also, just asking someone what you could do better or differently in the future helps you build trust with that person as you value that person’s opinion and from what I learned from the first lie, it’s all about trust. Seems like you narrowed the value of feedback to unsolicitedly giving your truth to someone but it can provide so much more value. I still believe someone is entitled to know how you perceive them in a certain way from out of your personal truth. I’m curious about your truth.
Interesting point about feedback is the other persons reaction. Examples from my own experience “You come across as too emotional” as opposed to the alternative, “I love that you’re really passionate about this”. I agree with the comments below regarding review/feedback on actual work as opposed to someones personality/way of being in the world. We are all unique and there has been a push towards expecting us to be homogeneous at work. Not good for diversity and not good for business.
Feedback…it is a natural phenomenon that we inherently react to and adjust our behaviors according to. But what form does it take? Organisms respond and adjust to feedback in their environment for survival- survival to them, on an evolutionary scale = excellence. What feedback do we respond to in our work environment to achieve excellence? Can’t wait to hear what the Truth about feedback is on the 9th!
I get the point of the lie. In my personal experience, people do not want our advice, even (often) when they ask for it.
On the other hand, you get in a group like Toastmasters where evaluation and feedback are core to people improving their speaking abilities and it’s hard to argue with those results.
I am considering – as you say – what is actually working in winning situations.
Jacqueline, I like you comment. Having been involved with Toastmasters in several venues I have observed that the majority of the benefit comes from the practice. Speakers practicing what engages an audience, evaluators practicing listening skills. I see people grow more through the practice than any particular anvil of feedback. The model works, but as you suggest, the mechanism of that success may not be what it outwardly appears.
One apparent assumption of the word feedback, is that it refers to pointing the weaknesses/development needs in someone, which is also the assumption at work and therefore people don’t like feedback because it will point to what is not working. So I agree that maybe its time to use another word and include reinforcing strengths! I believe that indeed any feedback (good or bad) should be owned by the giver, it is my perspective, which I think many companies are building in their feedback trainings… Loved the sound of knowledge!, thanks for that. On excellence, I do think that a company culture will shape what “excellence looks like”, so you may not be successful at company A but you will be at company B, because they expect different behaviors from people. There is so much more to be said, so I look forward the reveal.
Perhaps the time has come to revisit the word “feedback”. Just as “problems” became “issues”, feedback is about growth and self-awareness. It lets us see how we are perceived by others and what needs to shift in us to bring out the best in others. Feedback questions like those found in exhausting 360 questionnaires do not reveal essential opportunities of growth. The answers usually reveal that a manager had to fill out at least 10 questionnaires in which he/she had to rate his/her direct reports across 200 items. Feedback should be simple, timed, and qualitative based on two simple questions: what do you appreciate about XXX? What advice would you give to XXX in his/her efforts to reach XYZ goal? These insights would be much more impactful. Let’s call is: POSS – positive opportunities to show strengths
One important distinction, people may not want feedback about themselves, but we often need feedback about our work. For example I create training content, so I need feedback from my peers about the quality of the content I create, and feedback from the learner’s about the subjective experience of my content, and it’s effectiveness.
This is totally true. I’d add a cherry on top here, though. Feedback about work should also intentionally include some “in the weeds” commentary about what’s right, or about why something IS working – instead of just focusing on what needs to be fixed. It makes a huge difference to know what good looks and feels like, especially while in the throes of creating that work.
Thanks for another great video and insight.
Firstly, please write the book quicker. I would love to share it with my teams.
Secondly, do you have a favorite method to set the receiver to quickly fall into a perceptive/understanding/listening state?
By using a clear language, creating a coaching environment and preparing well, you will get good results. But I would like to have a code word or something similar to be able to give and receive feedback.
Third question, any tips on how to give feedback up the hierarchy with all the risks that it might include?