Intentional Approaches to Feedback

Rarely is our first draft our best draft. Asking for feedback and insights from others always holds the potential to see what you have authored through a different light. Yet, just asking “what do you think” can bring a quick, unthinking response instead of the thoughtful perspective that is possible.

Whether I am facilitating a strategic planning session or working with organizational leadership on recommendations for the next iteration of a governance structure, I always build into the process the opportunity for key voices to provide feedback. This takes the form of a very specific and straightforward four-step structure:

Affirmations, Modifications, Deletions, Additions (AMDA for those who live in the world of acronyms)

1.????? Affirmations – Before anything else, we always ask what resonates, what speaks to them. This accomplishes three things:

a.????? It ensures they do not start with seeking flaws that may not be there.

b.????? If multiple people are reviewing the piece, it can illuminate where one person resonated and another found disconnect.

c.????? People often feel a strong tie to what they author, so asking for feedback can feel like throwing a precious creation to the wolves. By starting with affirmation, the author(s) become more open to hearing layers of feedback.

2.????? Modifications – Next, we proceed to what edits may be needed.? If the heart of what was written is right-directed, there may just need to be some minor edits in language, grammar, word-choice, etc. In this step, it is also possible to ask about the intent of a piece, especially if what is being reviewed has confusing or unclear sections. This can move a good foundation to great communication.

3.????? Deletions – There are times when some (I know I am guilty of this one at moments) use 100 words where 10 would do. Identifying components that are repetitive or superfluous can be incredibly helpful since, what the author hears in their own mind may make complete sense, but may not be clear on the page. Unless we are trying to hit a required word count, more words are not often better or clearer. The more straightforward the language we create, the easier it is for the reader to understand what we are trying to convey.

4.????? Additions – Finally, and only after the previous steps, are suggestions of additions invited. This is saved for the last step so a reviewer’s biases about the subject material may shift before they insert their own voice. With that said, asking for diverse perspectives to review a draft requires being open to….diverse perspectives. Suggestions for addition can help a piece resonate with different audiences in a more relatable way and provide a more comprehensive clarity than what may be achieved from a single perspective.

If there are multiple people/groups that are reviewing the same piece, I ensure the four steps of feedback are documented, and the original draft they are reviewing remains untouched until ALL feedback has been received from all reviewers. This allows the original authors to consider the many perspectives they have received, identify suggestions which elevate the piece, and then make necessary edits.

Asking for feedback is not a sign of deficit or weakness – it is a recognition that in all parts of life, we are better when we are able to elevate our own thoughts and work in collaboration with the diverse perspectives and people who fill our lives. Yet, asking unto itself is an act of humility – and this approach incorporates a careful consideration of responses that respects the work, the original author, and the editor(s), building trust, strength, and higher output quality.