What are the most common mistakes when giving feedback to a group?

It is vital to start with the overall goal of the group. This way you can hang all feedback, positive and constructive, against their objectives. Thats the WHY of the feedback. Feedback without an anchor like this is useless. Its like saying you were good. Good against what benchmark?

One common mistake I have seen is the misplacement of feedback, addressing individual actions within the group context. Distinguish between individual and group behaviours. When providing feedback to a group, ensure that the feedback is directed towards the collective rather than singling out individuals. Highlight specific collective actions or behaviours that contributed to positive outcomes or areas that need improvement. The focus should be on fostering a collaborative spirit, encouraging shared responsibility, and acknowledging the collective efforts that shape the group's success or challenges. If the feedback is relevant to a specific person, discuss it with them directly rather than in a group setting.

While giving feedback, it is extremely important to define the following : 1. Why- why is it important to share this feedback? 2. What- is the objective? 3. When- will the feedback be given? Deciding the right timing is key. 4. How- think about how will you deliver this feedback. in-person/video call if its a remote team 5. Prepare- Have you collected supporting evidence? Have you thought about how will you ensure that the feedback is specific and not clouded with judgement? 6.

Common mistakes in group feedback include being unclear, ignoring individual contributions, ignoring positive feedback, and providing only criticism without recognition. Other errors include using ambiguous language, delaying feedback, making it personal, and failing to consider cultural sensitivity. It is critical to be specific, balance positive and constructive feedback, consider individual contributions, and foster an open communication environment that values diverse perspectives in order to improve effectiveness.

Define feedback and the intent very clearly and then plan the verbiage. Here I'd recommend a left hand column (thought process) versus a right hand column (verbalization) exercise, prior to speaking with the group. The closer the left is to the right, the better you are able to articulate your thought process. Feedback must be given on time and the mode of communication would depend on the group dynamics, size, location etc. It is also important to guage the outcomes of your feedback, preferably with tools that allow for measurement. Group profiling also helps understand the strengths and improvement areas. The leader should be seen as participative and supportive, with a clear sense of accountabilities, responsibility and concrete actions.

Timely and specific feedback is important for improvement. It's like adjusting the path of the leadership journey and small corrections make a significant impact. Being specific is important. I find that it not only acknowledges the effort but also guides the team in the right direction. It transforms a generic pat on the back into a roadmap for success. In my leadership journey, I've seen the magic happen when feedback is a dialogue, not a monologue. It creates an environment where everyone is on the same page, moving towards common goals.

Providing feedback to a group can be challenging, and inevitable common mistakes can hinder the effectiveness of the feedback process. One of the most prevalent mistakes to avoid is vagueness. Offering vague feedback that lacks specificity can be confusing and unhelpful. It's essential to provide concrete examples and details to help the group understand what aspects of their performance need improvement or reinforcement.

Point to particular actions and identify their impact, or their role in a certain causal chain. For instance, X led to Y and therefore it is useful/not useful. Or X led to Y which led to Z, and therefore it is useful/not useful. This way, people are better able to see the big picture and can review that on their own.

It's important to give feedback soon after an event to reinforce positives and guide corrections. Being specific, as the article suggests, transforms feedback from a generic compliment to a meaningful, actionable insight. To build on this, it's helpful to adopt a "more of this, less of this" approach. This method not only clarifies what worked well but also gently points out areas for improvement, without sounding overly critical. For instance, saying "Your presentation had excellent research – more of this next time! Let's work on reducing the length for a sharper impact – less of that" provides clear guidance in a balanced and constructive manner. This approach encourages growth while maintaining positivity and engagement.

Even positive feedback that is not specific can easily backfire. The audience may end up copying the least of the favorable behaviors instead of the very best you were trying to highlight. There may be ten things your team member did exceptionally well, but if you don't mention them, someone will invariably take away and copy the one thing that was not quite outstanding.

Putting the spotlight on someone whilst purposely/accidentally shaming them can cause incredible and often indelible harm. Be thoughtful about what impact your feedback will cause, and make it about a behaviour rather than a person. Offer support and advice on what can be done differently to nudge a person in that direction, and use their capabilities to scaffold that change.

I would rather frame the balancing of "positive" and "negative" feedback to - Give realistic and honest feedback. If the group is not contributing to the expected outcomes, then it is important to set the correct expectations and be realistic about it. Don't frame a problem as a "negative". One should rather frame it as an event that happened to the group as a whole and depending on the situation one can highlight the WHY, then be realistic about the situation at hand and then focus on the solution. Framing into positive and negative will have a consequence of the individuals in the group chasing the "positive" and not wanting to risk a bad idea or try something new because the outcome might have a "negative" focus.

Positive feedback should be actionable to everyone. If it's not actionable, it's emotional support. "Jane - you present your profit and loss numbers down to the decimal points, showing the group you care about every dollar the company is investing." "Jane - great job on the presentation."

Another common mistake is focusing solely on either positive or negative aspects. Strive for balance by acknowledging strengths and achievements while addressing areas for improvement. This balanced approach helps maintain motivation and fosters a constructive feedback environment.

There is always a balance with feedback. Highlighting only what went wrong can demotivate the group. Balance criticism with positive feedback to encourage growth.

One of the best pieces of advice I got as a team leader was to think of the group I managed as a "system" -- not to de-humanize it, but to allow the team and myself to discuss what was working/not working in the system, vs with specific individuals. That took some of the emotion out of the conversation and helped us identify the changes that would improve the functionality of the system. It was also a good reminder that our individual contributions were only as strong as the health of the system itself.

Do not forget to remember that you are a part of the group as well; including yourself and your actions as part of the feedback cycle cements to your team that you are one of them, models to them how to receive and respond to feedback, and establishes your accountability.

Feedback should be tailored to the dynamics and needs of the group. Avoid using a one-size-fits-all approach. Consider the group's culture, communication style, and individual preferences when delivering feedback. Adapting your approach enhances receptivity and engagement.

When the goals and expectations are clearly defined and the review is systemized and expected, feedback can come from the team. They see what's working, and what's not, and can go down in the weeds to figure see and copy the actions and systems that work well.

Critiquing the person rather than their behavior is a common error. When giving feedback, concentrate on specific actions or outcomes, not personal attributes. This approach depersonalizes feedback, making it more constructive and less likely to evoke a defensive response.

We often miss out on the follow-up step post-feedback session. Taking the time to revisit previously discussed feedback in followed sessions brings huge value. It demonstrates a commitment to action by presenting the action points generated from previous feedback sessions. This proactive approach not only builds trust but also showcases a genuine willingness to openly accept and diligently work on feedback. It's not just about giving feedback; it's about actively implementing it to grow and improve.

Things that are key in following up: 1. What has happened so far? 2. What have you progressed on? What was your experience doing that. 3. What needs work still? How can we make it easier? 4. When should we check in again? 5. What milestones should we have met by then?

Failing to follow up or provide support after giving feedback can hinder progress. Ensure there is a plan in place for ongoing support and development. Check in with the group to monitor progress, offer additional guidance, and reinforce positive changes based on the feedback provided.

I prefer to use a "Public" praise and "Private" guidance approach. Public praise can boost morale and motivation by recognizing and celebrating accomplishments, fostering a culture of appreciation and visibility for good work. On the other hand, offering guidance for improvement in private respects individual dignity, allowing for reflection and learning without the pressure of public scrutiny. This method ensures that feedback is constructive, fostering an environment where performance improvement and professional growth are the central focus. By balancing public acknowledgement with private counsel, you create a dynamic that not only accelerates individual development but also strengthens team cohesion and effectiveness.

Feedback is a tool, not a weapon. The classic blunder is airing criticism like a broadcast. To avoid this, here are 3 tips that I strongly recommend 1. Personalise your feedback; direct it to individuals, not the room. 2. Be specific about what needs to change and why. 3. Balance the negatives with positives to foster motivation, not defensiveness. And at last after you've spoken, listen. Feedback is a two-way street. It's not a monologue; it's a dialogue that, done right, can turn good groups into great ones.

Feedback is a tool to enhance performance & learnings. Best way is to do both publicly & individually based on the circumstances. Never delay a conversation as this wouldn’t help. If the team needs to enhance their performance, this should be a collective responsibility and addressed publicly. If you have to provide a constructive criticism to a team member, do this in private. This way the person receiving the feedback on a 1:1 won't feel intimidated. Be empathetic, when you engage your team member to discuss a plan to improve their performance. Create a quantifiable plan and then follow up with your team. This way the team will improve much quicker, as they will have a target to reach. Do regular check ins to monitor progress.

Not doing your own assessment before giving any kind of feedback is a big mistake. Sometimes you can be triggered by a behaviour and not even realise it. I think this is an important step that is often overlooked in feedback protocols: pay attention to your emotions and thoughts before anything else. You might want to "unfilter" all your data in your "mental Excel".

Giving feedback to a 'group,' the critical piece here is 'group.' Create a safe place, don't be personal - be objective and specific, stick to the core issue, while sharing feedback - and showcase the benefit of change with examples and stories.