You're faced with conflicting feedback from clients and data analysis. How do you make sense of it all?

When faced with conflicting feedback, it's crucial to acknowledge discrepancy without assuming one side is right or wrong, avoid jumping to conclusions or making hasty decisions, recognize that data provides insights, but may not capture complexity of human experiences & perceptions, seek to understand the underlying reasons for the conflicting feedback, synthesize the information to form a comprehensive understanding, make an informed decision or recommendation that takes into account the nuances of the situation. Remember, conflicting feedback is an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of the issue & find a more effective solution by embracing the complexity & seeking clarity, you can make more informed decisions that drive success

Acknowledge that there is a conflict between client feedback and data analysis. This is the first step in addressing and resolving the issue. Discuss the conflicting feedback with your clients. Make sure they are aware of the discrepancy and involve them in the resolution process. Ask the clients for more detailed feedback to understand their concerns or perspectives better.

Begin by openly acknowledging the gap between client feedback and the findings from data analysis. This shows transparency and a willingness to address the issue collaboratively. Example: "We've noticed a discrepancy between the feedback we've received from you and the data analysis results from our recent project review. We understand this can be concerning and want to address it promptly."

Verifica los comentarios con datos cuantitativos como el uso del producto, tasas de éxito, tiempos de respuesta, etc. Esto ayuda a validar o refutar los comentarios. Análisis de Sentimiento: utilizar herramientas de análisis de sentimiento para comprender mejor el tono emocional de los comentarios y detectar patrones positivos y negativos.

Review Client Feedback: Carefully review all client feedback, categorizing and prioritizing concerns based on frequency and impact. Example: "Let's take a closer look at the specific areas where your feedback indicates issues. We want to ensure we understand every aspect of your experience." Examine Data: Reassess the data analysis for accuracy, checking for errors or biases that might have affected the results. Example: "We will reexamine the data to ensure there are no inaccuracies or overlooked factors that might explain the differences.

Conduct a thorough reanalysis of the data to ensure accuracy and completeness. Look for any potential errors or overlooked details. Look for patterns or trends in the data that might explain the conflicting feedback. Sometimes, data can reveal underlying issues that were not immediately apparent. Compare the current data with past data or industry benchmarks to gain additional insights.

A consultant who's bad at active listening, is like a chef who's bad at cooking. Conflict in insights in certain contexts usually comes from different perception of the same information. In such cases, collaborative approaches like "Whole System in The Room" could help include everyone's takes on the analysis process. It is recommended not to fall in traps of peer pressure and tokenized group dynamics.

Evaluate both the client’s feedback and the data analysis objectively, considering all potential biases and perspectives. Determine which issues are most critical to address based on their impact on the project’s goals and objectives. Create a plan to address the conflicting feedback. This may involve adjusting strategies, further investigation, or compromise solutions.

It’s very common for stakeholders to have varying perspectives. It’s important everyone feels heard and valued. What worked for me in this situation on a project is meeting with each stakeholder separately to get their in depth perspective. Then, I hosted a synthesis session where we discussed the findings before the final read out. I worked with stakeholders to ensure their reflections were captured and turned the mic to them to speak in the read outs. This led to a balanced perspective the sponsor and team appreciated.