Feedback 1:1's - Build trust with people around you

Feedback is the #1 aspect of learning we all yearn for in the workplace. Yet it's the one thing that's probably hardest to master and we see examples everyday where folks don't achieve their full potential in a particular role or worse, leave, due to lack of adequate, supportive and actionable feedback.

We see too many instances where people don't get ongoing feedback on their strengths and areas of learning, and they end up feeling like they're not making progress, or they get the all-too-common piece of feedback "you're doing great! keep doing what you're doing" - I'm sure we've all heard that at some point!

The primary reasons I've observed why feedback isn't as ongoing, actionable or supportive is due to these 2 factors - #1 Lack of trust between the giver and the receiver, and #2 aversion of conflict between the giver and receiver (fear of having to justify, fear of being misinterpreted, or just not wanting to approach people with a spirit of learning - self or peer).

We also know that low quality feedback isn't very useful, positive feedback is often undervalued and constructive feedback not delivered well can cause more harm than good.

I wanted to share a quick update around a tool to add to your repository for helping build trust with people around you - whether they're peers, direct reports, managers/leaders or someone else.

This is something I've used at many different roles across companies, and currently piloting within my organization at Google too - and so far feedback on the feedback process has been good! so sharing out to the network. It works especially well when you're trying to build trust with people like in a new team or in a new working relationship.

What is a feedback 1:1? How do I do one?

A feedback 1:1 is a 1:1 conversation that’s focused on feedback. Basically, it’s a feedback exchange between the 2 people having the discussion, and uses the below “ground rules”. 

Each person in the 1:1 talks about 3 strengths/positive aspects of the other person and 3 areas of learning for the other person

• So essentially, if you and I are having a 1:1, I’d tell you 3 strengths and 3 areas of learning for what I’ve observed/perceived, and you would do the same about me
• It can be anything you can think of – a pattern of behavior, a one-off incident, a technical issue, a personality thing…consider using the SBI (Situation, Behavior, Impact) pattern while providing feedback to make it concrete; also leverage the past situations to describe how the individual might keep doing or do differently in future (since nobody can change the past!)
• You should try really *really* hard to think of 3 each – no excuses
• This is not to be used for the review or performance or promotion process – this is primarily just for self-improvement for the people participating in the discussion and fostering an open/transparent relationship between people
• No justifications provided or heard :-) Just hear the other person out. When the person giving feedback is talking, the other person has to listen, even if the feedback is not valid or you think it’s not correct. Perceptions are important to manage too, so it’s important to analyze how people perceive you and why. You might want to write it down if you want to aggregate it, but try to stay away from justifying yourself, since it takes away from the spirit of giving and receiving feedback

Spoiler Alert: The first time you do this - it'd be very awkward especially if you're not used to giving or receiving feedback directly to people. Also, given the "no justifications" rule, it ends abruptly. My suggestion would be to exchange the feedback, express your gratitude to each other (say your thanks) and end the discussion (or have other topics to chat about)

You'll probably want to have a follow-up discussion on the feedback once both parties have had a chance to internalize the feedback, had time to think about realities vs perceptions, and get out of the knee-jerk human reaction of defensiveness.

Why do we think this is useful?

A few reasons why:

• It builds trust between the giver and the receiver - you get used to receiving both positive and constructive feedback, so the trust model starts to evolve rapidly between the 2 individuals. Over time this creates that psychologically safe environment we all yearn for, to be able to drive self and peer development.
• Given that humans are in general poor at reliably rating human behavior especially of others - this tweaks the intent and models it to truly build trust (not rating for review, but providing feedback for development directly to the individual), makes it at a cadence, and makes it discrete.
• The way this is framed - you will receive specific, actionable feedback due to the discreteness of the +3 and -3 format.
• Feedback is in-person and not via a tool - so no confusion of purpose ("how will people interpret/read this", "who will read this") or no fear of "this goes in a tool, will this be used for different purposes than purely for development"
• Feedback is exchanged directly - no manager, no interpretation in the middle. Directly from the giver to the receiver and vice versa

OK Great! I got some useful feedback, but why do it a cadence?

When you receive feedback, and you don't justify the feedback, but take the time to reflect on it, think and come up with a plan of action to try and address some of it (reality as well as perception) - then the next thing you need is a validation of whether your approach has helped with the feedback or not. This is where the cadence comes in.

The cadence helps identify patterns over time - your strengths would likely remain consistent and grow over time. Your areas of growth would likely change over time if you're indeed addressing them over time as well.

Additionally, doing it with peers, managers and an appropriate sampling helps you mitigate people biases, and help fight perceptions vs reality. If you received feedback from 6 people, and 4 of them called out a similar area of growth, it likely is a strong signal that you'd benefit from trying to work on it!

Why so much feedback (structure, cadence, format) on feedback?

It really is just a forcing function - the intent is once you've done it a few times with an individual, and have formed that trust model between the 2 individuals, you don't necessarily need the forcing function of having a feedback 1-1. If the trust has developed, this starts to happen organically anyway (as it happens). Meaning if someone has feedback for you, they'll come tell you (positive or constructive)

In Closing

If you're struggling with building trust with your team, or are new to a team/working relationship, or tired with hearing "keep doing what you're doing" and want to explore a simple/interesting way of gathering concrete feedback, give it a try! Feel free to post back on how it went!