3 Workshop 3 – Giving and Receiving Feedback
Jack Miranda; Yasamin Jahani Kia; and John Donald
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
Giving and receiving feedback is an integral part of both team and self-improvement. Through this workshop, we will be learning about how to be a better leader by giving proper, extensive feedback, and how to react to such feedback ourselves. Following up on the idea of engineering as a leadership profession, this workshop will take place in Domains 1 and 2 of the leadership domain.
Some of this workshop has been adapted from the book “Thank you for the Feedback”, by Douglas Stone and Sheila Heen. If you wish to engage further with this type of content, this book is a great place to start.
This workshop will be split into two main parts:
- Effective Feedback and how to interact with it.
- Giving Extensive feedback
FEEDBACK
TRIGGERS
Triggers are a type of barrier that can block us from receiving effective feedback. They typically stem from our core beliefs and personal values, and when experiencing a trigger, we usually feel confused, enraged, or even defeated. These triggers can cause us to dismiss any form of advice, even good advice, so understanding them can be crucial in effectively engaging with feedback. These triggers come in three main forms.
TRUTH TRIGGERS
These types of Triggers occur when you believe the feedback you are receiving is incorrect. When receiving advice you think is fundamentally flawed, you are likely to immediately dismiss it, but there many often still be some truth to them, or some sort of misunderstanding. “Labels” tend to be the cause of these types of triggers, as they are words or phrases that contain vague meanings. This results in a disconnect between the intentions of the giver and receiver of feedback, muddling the true meaning of the advice.
Example
- “I don’t like how that outfit looks on you”
The term “looks on you” is very vague in this statement. The receiver may take this as a personal attack, understanding this as being accused of not having good taste, or not being suitable to wear such clothing. In reality, the giver of the feedback could just mean that they don’t think you’re dressed suitably for the occasion, or be pointing out an actual wardrobe malfunction.
A good way to rectify these possible misunderstandings is to ask for clarification. Simply asking some followup questions, such as “What do you mean by this”, or “What would you like me to do to prevent this in the future” may help you to get to the true meaning of the phrase. Once the meaning is clear, you can then decide on whether the advice is beneficial or not, rather than dismissing it entirely.
RELATIONSHIP TRIGGERS
As opposed to having issue with the feedback itself, relationship triggers tend to stem from how the receiver views the giver of feedback. If the receiver views the source of the advice as untrustworthy, not-credible, or having ulterior motives, they are very likely to not accept any form of advice from them. Sources of this conflict can be:
- You + Me – Perhaps the giver and receiver of the feedback simply dislike each other due to personal reasons. This makes them less likely to trust each other and their feedback.
- Roles – In an organization, roles can naturally create friction between individuals. Perhaps a boss seemingly over-delegates tasks to his workers, or different team divisions have dissimilar goals.
- Other Players – The situation or the environment can also inherently generate conflicts. Perhaps these are more subtle, but still gradually add to conflicts, such as language barriers, time zone differences, or lack of in-person interactions.
Example
- Two coworkers, A and B, initially decide to split a task equally. As B got assigned more work, they failed to complete a few tasks during the week. Coworker A then took over the task without communicating to coworker B.
In the end, the two coworkers can come out of this experience with very different views. Coworker B may have felt that coworker A was being uncommunicative, and taking the reins without prior discussion or consent. On the other hand, coworker A may have felt that coworker B wasn’t pulling enough weight in the project, leading to an increase in A’s responsibilities.
To remedy this type of trigger, communication is often key. Both parties must admit to their shortcomings, and work together towards a solution. Even if this doesn’t immediately solve the task at hand, by acknowledging that both parties are trying to help, giving and receiving feedback will be a lot smoother.
IDENTITY TRIGGERS
In some cases, you might reject feedback that conflicts with your personal beliefs on a topic. You may not even think the advice is necessarily wrong or unhelpful, but the feedback itself might seem to go against your own values and systems. These personal views may cause you to react strongly to a given topic, leading to more roadblocks. Some aspects of your personality that might affect your reactions are:
- Baseline – Your natural disposition towards positive and negative feedback. More optimistic individuals might react better to positive feedback, while people who tend more towards pessimism might find it easier to implement negative feedback.
- Swing – Your reaction to a given topic that doesn’t align with your personal views may be relatively severe or quite tame. Someone who reacts strongly to small issues would have a larger swing, while someone who may not have much of a reaction to many things has a small swing.
- Sustain and Recovery – People often have different adjustment periods when receiving feedback. If receiving some negative feedback, someone might be upset about it for hours before trying to change anything, while others may not even need a few minutes before implementing it.
ACTIVITY 1: RECEIVING FEEDBACK
The worksheet found in the link below contains several scenarios of various types of conflicts between individuals. With a group of friends, go through each scenario and disect its components. Try to identify the types of triggers found in each scenario, and propose possible solutions to remedy the situation using your knowledge of triggers.
Link to worksheet:
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- There are three types of triggers: Truth, Relationship, Identity.
- Approaching feedback can be easy from an outside perspective, but requires some careful thinking and introspection to apply effectively to yourself.
- Understanding triggers and other roadblocks to receiving feedback can help us to sort through helpful and unhelpful feedback.
GIVING EXTENSIVE FEEDBACK
Generally, feedback can be broken down into two forms: Brief and Extensive feedback. Brief feedback is much shorter and tends to occur more frequently, while Extensive feedback is much more detailed, requiring more followthrough, and is thus less often expressed.
Extensive feedback can be a great tool to convey specific information about behaviors, offering advice or an evaluation of them. This form of feedback focuses on multiple takeaways that the receiver can apply directly to their work, and this type of feedback can be given through many methods.
GENERAL FEEDBACK CONSIDERATIONS
Regardless of the framework being used to give feedback, it is important to keep a few key things in mind.
- Be specific: Avoid general comments that may be of limited use. Giving examples of situations is a great way to be thorough.
- Be respectful and Kind: If the situation is approached without regard for the feelings of the receiver, they may get defensive and be less likely to hear you out. Try to include positive statements along with criticism, always being mindful of tone and expressions.
- Be realistic: Focus on things that can actually be changed or improved, as these are the things that the receiver can actually execute. Avoid the terms “always” or “never”, as they can often set unrealistic standards.
- Be timely: Feedback is best given soon after it is required. Providing feedback too late may result in a loss of relevance, or even an inability to rectify the situation. Arranging to speak with a teammate or coworker soon after the feedback is relevant can give them an opportunity to change quickly, avoiding further mishaps in the future.
TYPES OF FEEDBACK MODELS
As previously mentioned, there are many different ways in which feedback can be given. In the upcoming section, 3 different feedback models will be discussed.
- The Sandwich Model
- The Pendleton Model
- The Ask-Tell-Ask Model
Each of these models have their own strengths and weaknesses, and are highly effective in their respective scenarios for giving extensive feedback. Some allow for a more direct approach to feedback, while others incorporate a more conversational approach. Each model can be very effective when paired with the right giver and receiver of feedback.
SANDWICH MODEL
This is often the easiest and most common form of giving some sort of extensive feedback. The main feature of the sandwich model is having one negative piece of feedback sandwiched between two positive pieces of feedback, reinforcing positive behaviour while softening the impact of any criticism.
Example
“Your presentation was great, I can see that you were very well prepared, and you were very well-spoken. You might have spoken a bit fast towards the end, but I know you can overcome this with some more practice. Keep up the good work in the future!”
This model has the advantage of being able to give both positive and negative feedback at the same time, while having the option of being very brief. This can often increase the receptiveness to the feedback, as there’s more than just one negative point to dwell on. On the other hand, it can encourage passive listening, and is a relatively uninvolved method of giving feedback. This can result in the receiver only focusing on the positive feedback while dismissing the negative feedback, and encourages a unilateral form of communication. Thus, this format may not be suitable for those who prefer open communication.
PENDLETON MODEL
The Pendleton model is a framework for structuring effective, meaningful conversations. This model can be used to break down barriers preventing feedback by encouraging self-reflection and proactive problem-solving. Its main feature is asking the receiver to reflect on their positive and negative impacts, with the giver weighing in with their own observations. After this discussion, the giver of the feedback prompts the receiver by asking what they think they could have done to improve, while giving suggestions on implementation.
Example
Yasi: “So Jack, when you were developing this workshop, what do you think went well, and what do you think went poorly?”
Jack: “I enjoyed preparing the content for this workshop, but I feel that the presentation itself could be more interactive and engaging”
Yasi: “The content you created was indeed very insightful. I do, however, agree that your presentation could have been structured more effectively to increase participation. Perhaps you can try a different approach with the next presentation, using some team members to gauge improvements”
Jack: “I can certainly try. I’ll be sure to trial run some changes with the team before the next presentation, so hopefully we can get some more engagement”
As this model generates conversation, it is much more engaging than frameworks like the Sandwich Model. The resulting meaningful conversation has the receiver do some self-reflection before receiving their feedback, ensuring that everyone is on the same page. This discussion also allows the receiver to set their own agenda for improvement, giving them a path forward for growth without too much pressure. The one drawback of this model is that the receiver needs to actually care about improving, and must have genuine insights about their performance. If the receiver doesn’t wish to engage, there won’t be much to discuss in terms of both good and bad performance metrics, and how to improve.
ASK-TELL-ASK
This method is similar to the Pendleton Model in that it helps to generate conversation. This method centers around asking the receiver to assess their own performance, followed by telling them your own observations. You can then ask them about their understanding of the situation and their plans for improvement.
Example
Ask: “How did you think your presentation went”
Tell: “I also noticed that audience engagement was a bit low”
Ask: “How do you plan to improve this for the next presentation?”
This method affords both the giver and receiver the opportunity to contribute to the conversation equally. This framework is also more learner-centric than the Pendleton Model, as the receiver develops a plan of action of their own accord. Once again, the major drawbacks of methods that rely on receiver engagement need a willing receiver, requiring some forethought from both the giver and receiver of feedback. Due to this, this method might require a bit of planning ahead and preparation before engaging in discussion.
ACTIVITY 2: GIVING FEEDBACK
For this activity, you will need a friend, or a group of friends. The worksheet found at the link below contains a few hypothetical situations about an individual. Take turns being the one in the story, and give feedback to each other using the three frameworks for giving feedback above. Feel free to critique each other’s methods of delivering feedback, keeping in mind the general considerations of giving feedback. Remember, good feedback is always actionable.
Link to worksheet:
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- There are many ways to provide effective and actionable feedback.
- Each framework has its own pros and cons, and can spark conversations in different ways.
- Through utilizing these frameworks as often as possible, you can learn which approach works best for you in any given situation.
WORKSHOP SUMMARY
RESOURCES
Click here to access the workshop worksheets.
CONGRATULATIONS! YOU HAVE REACHED THE END OF THIS WORKSHOP!