photo by elevate printing
John Maeda’s recent post on the Harvard Business blogs discusses the value of being critiqued. Two things stood out to me. First, how the concept of feedback (aka crits) is entrenched in the supposedly emotionally-based art world and yet the supposedly emotionless, fact-based business world does everything possible to avoid annual reviews. Second, was the fact that the business world has no idea how to constructively give feedback. (The latter likely follows from the former, of course.)
So…a few thoughts on how to start turning that ship.
Feedback often fails to motivate because we unintentionally make the conversation human. Seriously. We make evaluative judgments about the other individual rather than framing the conversation around their goals. Though the content of the conversation is about the individual and their actions you want to be able to disassociate the individual from the process as much as possible. You also need to make it apparent that you’re working to the same end point without placating or making unproductive comments in order to ’soften the blow.’
It’s far easier to be critiqued by others when you know they have your interests in mind. This is the subtle difference between being a coach and being a manager.
Know what motivates (why one works). Know each individual’s goals (where they want to be). And know how to talk to them in a way that gets heard (what springs them to action).
Not knowing these will likely lead to a brilliant failure. It may not be immediately apparent, but the individual will likely shut down in the short-term and need time to bounce back. That process can be long and if not properly managed, irreparable. If you don’t already know the answers to the above a good starting point for giving feedback would be to start the conversation with the first two questions. If you know the answers, start by reiterating them.
Giving feedback is incredibly hard. Nobody wants to be the bearer of bad news. Yet, most people want to be able to take some credit for helping others succeed. Mentally shift how you think about this activity and it will get a little easier. And your team should become more productive.
Criticism is easy. Any knucklehead can do it.
Real genius is in seeing why something will work rather than the 100 reasons why it won’t.
photo by daftgirly
As the team leader you need solutions from your team. You need them to unabashedly throw out half-baked ideas because it’s only from those nascent thoughts that real change comes. Allowing criticism to creep into your work environment creates a competitive scenario where people are first looking to score points by killing the ideas of others rather than coming up with solutions of their own.
Instead focus on collaboration. People shouldn’t be made to feel stupid because there were a couple flaws in their idea. Focus on what works in the idea and follow those breadcrumbs.
It all begins with you. The team will follow your lead. With that, a few thoughts:
This is something I struggle with all the time in my internal voice. I’m my own greatest critic, but I’m changing. What else do you have? Any other ideas?
We’re all guilty of kissing ass at some point. We laugh at a boss’ joke that isn’t funny. We concede that an idea might work despite it’s obvious (to us) flaws. But what is that ingratiating behavior costing us?
Not much as it turns out. Despite the article being titled Workers “Sucking Up” Bad For Business: Experts the only evidence given shows what a boon it is to workers:
Forget for a moment, what that does to a business. What does that say about you and I that we are so easily fooled? We think we’re smart enough to evaluate people based on merit, but obviously we’re susceptible to a little ass kissing. This means in all of our evaluative efforts where our subjectivity comes into play (hiring, annual reviews, promotions and firing) we can’t be trusted.
photo by mallix
We need more rigorous and objective measures in terms of who to hire and who to promote. While it’s impossible and foolhardy to do away with human measure in these areas we too often think we’re God’s gift to intuition and therefore aren’t willing to allow another objective data source to interfere with our decision-making process.
So back to why this is bad for business. Sure, group think is a problem. Yep, it fails to reward good ideas.
But it’s also a vicious circle. When we promote the suck ups it’s because we don’t have the self-confidence to firmly stand behind our own decisions. Likewise, the people sucking up will be the ones who can’t get ahead on the quality of their own thoughts. This creates an organizational weak-mindedness that dumbs down innovation and work quality. And in a knowledge-based company that trades on its ideas that’s a deathblow. Inertia will carry you along for a while, but the friction of the marketplace and the internal competition to see who can suck up best will grind you to a halt soon enough.
For all the leaders out there, don’t succumb to the sycophants. If for no other reason than it points to your own obvious flaws and weaknesses. Have a little self respect and self confidence. You’re better than that.
The idea of ‘coaching the player, not the score’ has come across my radar twice in the last few days. It’s been what I’ve been trying to elucidate for the last 20,000 words. Leave it to John Wooden to figure it out in six.
The first, was John Wooden’s talk at TED. It’s well worth the 18-minute investment if you’re busy procrastinating. His overarching point is that successful coaches focus on the individual and get the best out of each of them instead of comparing them or trying to shape them to others. When you focus on getting the best out of each player then the score of the game takes care of itself.
The second was an interview with Jimmy Rollins during baseball’s opening game on Sunday night. Rollins speaking about his manager (paraphrased as I don’t have the direct quote handy), “Coach recognizes that this team is made up of 25 individuals and that each of us has a different way of going about things. He has rules, but he let’s us do our thing within the construct of the team in order to accomplish our larger goals.” High praise considering Charlie Manuel, the Phillies manager, benched Rollins for failing to run hard to first base on a pop fly a few months prior.
photo by yogma
This isn’t to say you just let everyone do as they please. Instruction and coaching is still at the heart of what each of these men do. They want their players to get better, but they recognize that getting better will happen in different ways for each player. Each player has a different ceiling and each wants to get something different out of the experience.
Just because we share common job titles doesn’t mean we share common skills or goals. As counterintuitive as it may seem, when you acknowledge individual differences and tailor your message accordingly you will ultimately be more likely to get them to try doing things differently.
Take the time to learn your players so you can push the right buttons in order to get them to take their game to the next level.
photo by sassyart
When have you ever come out of a performance evaluation more energetic and ready to kick some serious ass for your company? Doesn’t matter if it is glowing, that one negative (because there always has to be something) will sit with you and fester.
This has been on my mind for a while. It is, after all, a multi-month process that is only this month coming to a head for many companies. After running across an old post from Bob Sutton, the head of Stanford’s d.school, where he wondered about the usefulness of performance evaluations it was time to chime in.
Performance evaluations, as most are implemented, could not be more detrimental to our organizations. Period.
Showing incredible restraint, I’ll limit my rationale to ten reasons. They,
Not just useless, but counter-productive.
Try holding a weekly review instead. Set aside 15-minutes at the end of the week for some two-way communication and focus on the individual’s own goals and their effectiveness within the team. I’d suggest knowing and reviewing goals on both sides weekly and then answering questions that will help make your relationship more productive and keep the employee engaged.
Some starters:
That said, if you lack sincerity, don’t come prepared to these meetings or are just looking out for number one then these will still be worthless.
Being a coach (translation: manager in today’s archaic vernacular) means prioritizing your employees and helping them reach their goals in the context of the company’s. It’s not easy. You’re serving two masters. But there aren’t too many people who can do it well so it’s a huge opportunity for us to differentiate ourselves and our companies.
Some performance evaluations may work for what they were designed to do. Regardless, I’d still suggest they be done weekly instead of annually.
Copyright ©2008-2009 RoundPegg Inc.