The Fix: Avoiding feedback mind traps

It's not easy to truly evaluate someone's performance, especially in this age of hyperconnected and decentralized work. How can you accurately measure work when it's happening under multiple roofs instead of one? Who gets credit for the product or prototype that emerges from cross-functional collaboration? And let's face it: with so many companies modifying their performance management practices (and even dropping them altogether), assigning ratings to work has become a head-scratching experience.

But what if the biggest barrier to giving a meaningful measure of work...is the person giving the rating?

Freeing yourself from feedback mind traps.

Whenever we talk about someone's performance and potential, we inadvertently stumble into feedback mind traps. These are the subtle and subversive beliefs we carry with us anytime we make judgements of others. Needless to say, there are multiple biases that can affect our perception and presentation of a given situation. But in my work and experience, I've found three mind traps to be especially persistent — and problematic:

• The recency trap: Better known as recency effect, this describes the tendency to give weight and priority to what's happening right now. With recency, we look only at one part of an employee's story (the most recent chapter) to the exclusion of the larger narrative. While the bias may arise from our inability to recall distant moments or memories, its effect can be particularly damaging to anyone who may be sagging through a rough patch or struggled on the most recent project.
• The spillover trap: On the opposite end is spillover, the unfair and usually unfounded assumption that past experiences impact current behaviors. This backwards-facing trap locks us into a pessimistic view of others, discounts the possibility of change, and takes a fixed view of who people are, not who they are right now.?
• The halo trap: Like its angelic name suggests, halo effect is the tendency judge others more favorably based on the positive impressions we hold of them — leading to preferential treatment, better opportunities, and higher approval of the work they do.?

When discussing performance, we can't avoid these mind traps altogether — that's simply unrealistic — but we can ensure that our feedback is more accurate and actionable by becoming more aware of our cognitive bias and making sure it doesn't ensnare us for too long. These practices can help:

Adopt a learning mindset.

Instead of presuming to know everything about another person, ask questions to broaden your understanding. (We explored ways to turn feedback into a conversation in a previous edition.) When we act like "learn it alls " instead of "know it alls," the combination of humility and curiosity can bring new insights and stronger relationships.?The act of perspective taking and inquiry can free us, even if only momentarily, from the preconceived views and versions we hold of others.

Acknowledge your gaps.

Being open with others about your cognitive biases can disarm and defuse a potentially heated conversation. It also telegraphs to others that you're aware of your own limitations. This can close the 'perspective gap ' that may cause us to underestimate the effects of something we haven't experienced ourselves.

You might begin by recounting the experience that's running in your head -- I recall the time when you did the exact opposite of this, and I see that you've taken a new tact. What prompted the change? Taking others inside your thinking can serve as a powerful trust builder that shifts the tone and trajectory of feedback and evaluation.

Widen the loop.?

If you can’t trust your assessment of others, ask others to assess themselves. Every few weeks, or at the end of a project, invite your team?to write their own evaluations. Some of my clients find this simple matrix helpful:

It encourages both retrospective and prospective thinking. Employees find the exercise refreshing, since it gives them opportunities to reflect on what's working and what's not. And managers are often surprised by the insights and information that's generated in the process, providing a broader context for evaluation.

In a perfect world, we'd always give honest, actionable feedback when discussing work issues. While we can't solve the intricacies of human nature, we can gain a clearer picture of performance by looking beyond our limiting beliefs and avoiding the mind traps that hold us back. If we can do that, we might just see someone's performance in an entirely new way.

Research round-up:

• Teams with humble leaders outperform their counterparts
• Want to avoid a biased judgement? Eat a good meal
• More on the 'perspective gap'

* * *

Dr. Joe Hirsch is the managing director of Semaca Partners, a?TEDx ?and?international keynote speaker , and the author of "The Feedback Fix ." His work and research has been featured in Harvard Business Review, Forbes, CNBC, The Wall Street Journal, Inc. and other major outlets. He also hosts the popular podcast,?I Wish They Knew .

Stay connected:?YouTube ?|?Twitter ?|?Speaking