Power and Lane Blurring in Feedback
Cameron Conaway
Prof @ University of San Francisco | On social media hiatus to focus on deep work and mindfulness practice | Contact: cameronconaway.com
Considered the largest work to have survived the Roman empire, Pliny the Elder’s The Natural History contains a story in Book 35 that contains feedback lessons for us all.
A Greek painter named Appelles of Kos would display his paintings publicly while hiding behind them so he could hear honest feedback from viewers. As the story goes, one of those viewers was an expert shoemaker who commented about how the footwear of a person in the painting had the wrong number of straps.
Appelles adopted that feedback and, the following day, displayed the painting again, this time with the recommended number of straps.
The shoemaker viewed the new painting and was thrilled that his feedback was incorporated. But he didn’t stop there. He commented on how the legs were wrong and could have been better. At this point, Appelles came out from behind the painting and told the shoemaker to keep his feedback about the shoes, his area of expertise.
This is the origin story of ne supra crepidam, a Latin expression that means “not beyond the shoe.” The story reminds me of so many feedback lessons, including the importance of:
Appelles found a way to seek feedback, but he had enough confidence to not accept feedback from anybody on anything. For many, low confidence and harsh self-judgment can mean adopting feedback on areas of expertise from non-experts who don't know what they're talking about.
Appelles processed the feedback by recognizing the shoemaker's feedback was coming from a place of expertise. From there, he incorporated the feedback into the painting -- improving it as a result. But, as the shoemaker began to give feedback "beyond the shoe," Appelles began to draw the line.
Similar to the lack of confidence and harsh self-judgment mentioned in #1, I've met many folks who struggle to give constructive feedback even on areas where they are true experts (or, at least, the expert in the room). This does a disservice to their experience and to the project that could have been improved as a result.
Ne Supra Crepidam & Feedback Communication
Workplace feedback communication can offer a helpful lens through which to see various power dynamics. This especially comes into focus when I see organizations split up feedback training, with people managers only learning how to give feedback and early-in-career individual contributors only learning how to receive it.
In essence, organizations tend to assume everyone knows how to and will:
This assumption means that if it even exists, employee feedback training doesn’t address either with any depth. As countless studies highlight, many feedback givers are so undertrained or stressed that they don’t give it, and many receivers are leaving their companies because they aren’t getting the feedback they want and need.
And those up the hierarchical power ladder often assume the role of feedback giver on various topics, including, like the shoemaker, on areas outside their domains.
While feedback givers need not always “stay within their lane” when giving feedback, they should be aware of when their confidence in one domain may be causing overconfidence in another (see last week's Dunning-Kruger Effect post).
So, how can you embrace your inner Appelles and get the feedback you need? Similarly, when receiving feedback, how do you know when to draw the line?