|
FEEDBACK
Is
‘Detrimental’ Feedback Worth Your Time?
Today,
with increased demands for high-performing teams and a reduced tolerance
for one another, it is important that feedback is given more efficiently
and effectively
At work or at home, one thing we cannot escape from is feedback. Either we
are giving it to others (often, when they don’t want it) or we are hearing
it from others (often, when we don’t want it)! Anyone will give a list of
what should and should not be done when giving feedback since we get it in
different forms and flavours since our childhood. Today, with increased
demands for highperforming teams and a reduced tolerance for one another,
feedback needs to be efficiently given so the other person acts or thinks
differently and the way we want them to. It is this universality of
feedback that makes it so much easier to rely on anecdotes rather than
research-based evidence to give and receive feedback in a productive way.
But two recent studies — one by Avraham N Kluger and Angelo DeNisi, and the
other by James W Smither, Manuel London and Richard R Reilly — have made
some astonishing discoveries.
Here’re the Key Findings:
1.Feedback is detrimental to performance in a third of the cases,
because it is not executed effectively. So it is not enough to pride in
giving feedback, how we do it becomes more important.
2.Feedback can lead to change of behaviour when it is based on
previously set goals and standards, and the feedback looks at the gaps
between them and performance. Many of us can relate to how we have hated
getting feedback only during appraisal time. So does this mean you need to
give feedback every day? Surely not. By extrapolation, it may help for each
of us to ask others around us how often do we need to exchange feedback. It
could be on a time basis or on a milestone basis. Either way, the very
spirit of inclusion will improve trust and, therefore, the likelihood of
the feedback being accepted and acted on.
3.Attention of the receiver is limited and what s/he pays attention
to is what will influence their change of behaviour. This means when a
person is receiving feedback, it may save a lot of time and energy in
focusing on the behaviour more than hypothesising the intent behind it.
4.Leaders who direct the attention of the receiver to ideals rather
than to contractual transactions seem to be more effective.
5.Improvement is more likely to occur when – a. The change is
seen as necessary by both the giver and the receiver b. The
behaviours that need change are explicitly listed and agreed upon c. The
change is seen as feasible d. The reactions to the feedback are
positive e. The new goals are set to regulate the behaviour, and
actions lead to measurable (objective and subjective) improvement f. Attention
is also paid to skill improvement, where needed, to execute the feedback
Kluger, A. N. & A. DeNisi. (2004). Feedback interventions: Towards
the understanding of a double-edged sword, Reprinted in T. F. Oltmanns and
R. E. Emery, Eds., Current Directions in Abnormal Psychology, Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Education. James W Smither, J W, London, M &Reilly
Richard R, (2005), “Does Performance Improve Following Multisource
Feedback? A Theoretical Model”, Personnel Psychology; Spring 2005; 58, 1; Pp
33 – 66.
EXPERT
VIEW Pradeep Chakravarthy ET 121117
|
No comments:
Post a Comment