"How'm I Doin'?": More Feedback, Relationships, and Success

Feedback on Feedback

Let's get something out in the open: I don't like the word feedback. It's a buzzword. Once a word falls into that category it loses its power and effectiveness. It becomes a cliche. Like buzzword.

I've got some suggestions today for finding out how you are doing with people in relation to your mutual goals. The latent professor in me feels the need to first provide some context for the whole feedback thing.

 The Whole Feedback Thing

The feedback thing started with the Space program back in the 1940's (that would be Outer Space, not MySpace . The rocket scientists needed a way to know "how they were doing" when it came to directing the flight path of a rocket. So they set up homing devices to send signals back to earth regularly. That way, they would know whether to make a direction-correction or whether they--and the rocket--were performing as they should. (Maybe that's how the idea of simply talking with other people about 'how things are going' turned  into rocket science:-)

You and I probably don't want to take the rocket science approach with our boss, colleagues, and friends. Regardless of your title or position in the grand food-chain-of-life, you are accountable to someone for your performance. So here are a few practical tips to find out how it's going:

1. Performance improves with frequency of feedback.

Ken Blanchard evangelized that in the early '80s. It's every bit as relevant today as it was then. The more information people get, the more opportunities they have to use it to improve.

2. When you ask "how am I doing?", you create an expectation that you will try to improve.

 Make sure you are ready to commit to your part of the bargain before asking the question.

3. Allow the other people some time to think about how they'll answer your request.

Giving  down-to-earth, honest feedback can feel like risky business. If some of your performance is really on the negative side, they need to ponder:

• "How do I say this?"

• "Will it wreck the relationship?"

• "Do I want to risk that?"

Which leads to number four:

4. Your best relationships are with people who say "no" to you. 

This isn't about someone refusing to give you feedback. It's about the paradoxical dynamic that surrounds difficult news.

It takes a high level of trust to say "no" to someone. As a result, we learn to develop trust with people who say "no" as often as they say "yes." Why? Because we know they aren't telling us what we want to hear. Therefore, we can trust them. Check it out. Who do you trust the most? Who trusts you the most?

If you hear honest comments about less-than-acceptable performance, realize that you are sitting in front of someone who cares enough to make the emotional investment needed to give you that information. It may be a real gift.

5. At the end of the conversation, say "Thank You" and describe what you plan to do--or think about--as a result of their willingness to talk.

6. Check back and see how you are doing after you've had some time to work on the specific item. (That's how the rocket scientists got to be rocket scientists).

What tips do you want to add?

photo attribution: www.af.mil/.../photos

Comments

[Jo]

Perhaps find out how they are doing and make suggestions of how you can change your own contribution to support their goals?

[Steve Roesler]

Jo,

Often the best suggestions are the simplest. Yours falls into that lot.

The higher up one goes in an organization, the lonelier in can become. Someone asking your suggested question would be a bright spot for most managers.

[Tom Haskins]

Steve: I have the same issues with the buzzword 'feedback". One workaround I favor is to speak of seeking "mirror reflections". Then we are seeing ourselves with the help of someone who can mirror how they see us. The metaphor also allows for choosing our mirrors wisely by their frames. There's a danger in asking "how am I doing?" of getting framed as loser, shot down as an enemy, misperceived as lacking or targeted by the other's projections. Then we learning more about them than ourselves. We can sense that they don't see us and cannot separate our accomplishments, responses, effects on others, etc. -- from their limbic hijackings, unresolved tolerance issues or their hot buttons getting pushed. We need a common frame of reference for the reflections to be useful to us. When the frame on the mirror seems right, the reflection we see is worth considering as deeply as you suggest here. Nice insights!

[Steve Roesler]

That's a thoughtful way to go about it, Tom. A mirror reflection automatically puts me into an accurately descriptive vs. evaluative mode.

The "How Am I Doing?" thing was a catch-phrase for Mayor Koch and really served him well. He genuinely wanted to know, was willing to listen once he asked the question, and his personal demeanor invited responses of all kinds.

Thanks for the new framework...

[Tom Haskins]

In political contexts, asking for feedback maybe a request for "free polling data" that could indicate chances for reelection or filling empty seats on the board/council/legislature with compatible candidates. All those issues I proposed filtering out get thrown into the mix of public opinion. The popularity of political candidates/office holders includes tons of finger pointing, blaming, or demonizing projections as well as idolizing, hero worshiping and other halo effects. The same "paying attention to skewed impressions" applies to the success of brands in the financial and consumer marketplaces. All that is very different from getting insightful, personal feedback on teamwork, leadership, communication and personal efficacy issues where other's projections can steer us in the wrong direction.

[Steve Roesler]

Yep, Tom, the data is certainly used for broader purposes in the instances you mentioned.

The fascinating thing with Ed was that he listened and acted on what he heard. As a result, he was elected 3 times. So one has to wonder: "Did he in fact grow as a result of the answers and do so in ways that served his constituents?"

BTW: Apparently Ed was spotted by Jackie Cameron in Scotland this morning. Sounds like he's still doin' ok:-)

Thanks, Tom.

[Joan Schramm]

Steve --

I think the most important of a fine list is #4.

Everyone needs someone who can say "no" to them -- someone who will tell them the unvarnished truth -- someone who will tell them when they're wrong.

It's a sign of a very poor leader when no one in the group feels able to point out when the emperor has no clothes.

Joan

[Steve Roesler]

Joan,

I just came across an article that I have now managed to nuke (argh) that talks about your comment. Turns out that the research cited revealed that group decisions are exponentially better if someone says "no" even if the reason for saying it is incorrect. That sounds strange but the issue is the dynamic, not the content. Once someone puts a second stake in the ground, the discussion goes deeper.

Gotta go back through the history and find that puppy.

Thanks!