The sandwich is dead, long live the sandwich.

From the most junior person in your organisation to the most senior, we all give and receive feedback daily. Formalised feedback is often an important part of our professional and personal lives. Done right it delivers great benefits, done poorly it can be responsible for a lot of damage.

I hope you enjoy this article. If you do, please share it and link it on.

“Whatever words we utter should be chosen with care for people will hear them and be influenced by them for good or ill.”

– Buddha

At its best well delivered feedback can help us flourish or on the flip side poorly considered feedback can serve to diminish and can in extreme cases be destructive. Feedback happens often and is most healthy and productive when given 'in the moment' as well as regular more formal occasions .

From our earliest moments of adapting our behaviours to achieve our wants through to our more evolved complex decision making skills, we as humans have an incredible ability to learn and adapt for best outcome.

The key mechanism for this learning is feedback, be it the haptic feedback you receive as your finger vibrates when you press the screen on your phone or the smell of burning toast that wafted to me this Sunday morning.

Almost everyone on this planet is receiving feedback of one kind or another in every second of their existence. Our amazing brains are processing the information we receive and acting upon it so quickly that we often take it for granted. Think for just a second on all the ways we receive feedback and give feedback in our modern world.

Ok your second is up, what have you come up with?

Lets just skim the surface on what may have burst from your mind. Facebook shares, Instagram likes, tweets. Even the comments, likes and shares you hopefully placed on this article (sorry couldn't resist). The choices and methods of feedback we have at our disposal in this moment of history are staggering.

While I am sure we can all conjure up a long list of the obvious lets not forget that one of our earliest learning experiences is how to share feedback on our moods with others through our facial expressions.

So why then does something we do so frequently and easily demand time and effort in getting it right? Shouldn't we be natural experts at giving feedback?

The answer to that question is a fairly simple one. The skills required in relation to feedback are drawn upon dependant to our experience and comfort with the relevant situation. The less experienced and less comfortable you are with the specific situation, typically the harder delivering feedback is.

Giving feedback well in a professional setting is an art and one that is often done poorly, mainly due to the little time given to its development as a skill.

Feedback really is a soft skill with a hard edge. The more practiced and experienced you are at delivering feedback the higher the probability that the feedback you give will have a beneficial effect.

Brutal honesty v. gentle authenticity

Think about the majority of talent show hopefuls that were told by their family and friends they were fantastic singers only to have their beliefs crash against the shore of objective brutally honest feedback.

In the talent show example the feedback may have been given in a way that gratifies the givers ego or at its worst seeks to entertain viewers in its brutality. Where possible gentle authenticity is always best. And getting that balance right can be a difficult trick in itself.

Honesty is a critical part of providing good feedback because good feedback should be useful in determining a course of action or change that is beneficial to the receivers performance and ambition. Feedback shouldn't crush, it should build.

In a professional setting gentle authenticity in simple terms is delivering feedback that is honest about the change you require while providing support on how to achieve it.

Gentle authenticity does not require over positivity, where the core reason for the feedback is diluted by positive messaging to the point the original reason for the feedback is lost. It requires a clean message delivered in a way that shows the receiver you are supportive in meeting their requirement for change.

Remember, giving feedback is at its best when every intention of it is to lift the receivers performance. In short, feedback should be about the receiver, not about you.

The person giving feedback should remove any lust for their own result. This can be difficult in business life as you may often have to give feedback that has been motivated by a cascading of intent.

Cascading of intent.

'Monica the department head is out of the office on an important client visit. She calls in during a break in the meeting to speak to the Marketing department to arrange some documents to be sent urgently to her.

Upon calling she is greeted by Steve who did not answer the call with the professional greeting all employees are expected to adopt.

Monica returns to the office and asks to speak to Angela, Steve's team leader.

Monica explains her unhappiness at Steve's performance and asks Angela to feedback to Steve immediately that his current performance is not to standard and that they expect it to improve immediately'.

A cascade of intent is beginning.

Angela may find it more difficult to deliver the feedback objectively as she has a motivated stake in Steve getting it right. After all, Angela wants to serve well and wants to ensure she is doing her best to comply with Monica's wishes.

Angela may be fearful that a repeat of Steve's performance may lead Monica to move her focus to Angela.

How will this go down do you think? Can you think of any times that this fictional example reflects your own working life and experiences?

The intent is important when giving feedback. Question yours before you begin, exercise some emotional intelligence, try to remove your own motivations and bias, then focus on this simple question:

'If I give the feedback the way I intend to give it, will it change the receiver's performance for the better? '

Make sure you have clarity on the outcome you want to achieve. This outcome should translate to a change in performance that provides beneficial results for the receiver and be in tandem with the change required. The clarity around why it is beneficial for both parties should be mutually agreed.

There is a spectrum to the methods and timings of operational feedback. I have tried to simplify it by boiling it down into 3 stages/methods. I hope the suggestions given add clarity on how each can be used:

1. Pull

This style is predominantly a coaching style. When the feedback is conducted the person attempting to give the feedback works with the receiver to explore the stated situation. This method attempts to create a collaboration where the receiver is engaged and drives the effort to arrive at ways to improve performance.

This approach is often used in coaching and mentoring situations where on the road to the main topic discussions around factors relating to wider performance can be found. To use the Johari window as a reference point; we have a better chance at increasing disclosure and moving hidden elements into the known areas.

Typically this approach would be used when performance has been good and usually focuses on ways that can be explored with the receiver to enhance performance further.

While similar to coaching in some ways it should be noted that it is not. Always remember the desired end result should always come clearly back to the trigger for the feedback. In other words, don't get lost on the journey when giving feedback.

2. Pull/Push

This method is similar to Pull in many ways. The key fundamental change here is that you are likely to be leading the receiver to acknowledge the trigger for the feedback session so ultimately the receiver becomes aware of the need for change and takes ownership of the requirements for change. This hopefully leads to improvement in their performance.

A question that may appear after the individuals revelation in this method;

'Describe what you will do differently if the same situation occurs again'.

This should lead to a statement of improvement from the receiver. The statement of improvement is often positioned as a SMART goal which enables tracking of the desired improvement. This statement of improvement by the receiver is a pivotal moment in any feedback.

In Pull we typically work with the receiver to find ways of enhancing performance. In Pull/Push we are ensuring the receiver acknowledges, understands and can communicate how they will own the required change.

3. Tell Directive.

This method is typically used when giving formalised feedback when there is a performance crisis. I have described this when coaching and mentoring others in how to deliver feedback as 'the sandwich without the bread'. Those of you familiar with the classic sandwich approach will understand I hope.

The person receiving feedback in a tell directive fashion would hopefully have received feedback relating to the trigger for a formal tell directive feedback intervention. Other methods should be exhausted so the receiver has time to adapt their approach before reaching this stage.

Before engaging Tell Directive you should assess what resources the receiver may need to support the required change. This support should be comparable and appropriate to the support given or available to the rest of the workforce.

Tell directive is a last resort, a tool designed to leave nothing to chance in respect to the receivers understanding to the requirements for change and the ramifications if change is not achieved. It is often the last step before more serious measures such as performance management are implemented.

If the receiver acknowledges poor performance or not, the outcome of the feedback in Tell Directive is the same. A statement of immediate change is given to the receiver. Once again this is usually a SMART goal.

Here is a simple visual representation of the spectrum and its interpersonal dynamics:

Now we have 3 methods of giving feedback, how can we get it right?

Don't make it about you.

Why are you giving feedback? If you are giving feedback that does not help or support an individual to improve performance then you need to question why you are giving that feedback in the first place.

People will never be a clone of you. Don't give feedback or have expectations that requires them to try. It should always be about the receiver in thought and deed.

Your not doing this to win, are you?

Make sure you do not enter an attack/defend mentality where you are arguing points, justifying your standpoint etc. The moment a feedback session becomes competitive any beneficial outcome is in jeopardy.

Stick to the outcome, decide the appropriate method and be clear on the desired improvement.

It's for them.

Your not there to sell the feedback. The feedback should be delivered in a way that encourages the receiver to own it. Without their ownership, responsibility and accountability there will be little motivation or desire to change.

Don't be afraid and don't be cold.

You may at times have to give feedback that requires sensitivity and empathy. These situations often strike fear into the heart of the less experienced. Typically they require feedback to be given on personal matters. Some classic examples:

Suzanne's team have complained that she has poor body odour and they find it hard to work with her.

Adrian has been very vocal in the office over the break up of his relationship. His team have spoken up as they are finding it hard to focus on their work.

In cases like these you must address the situation and give feedback appropriately. Look at the spectrum of methods and guidance given in this document. Hopefully you will adopt the correct method and deliver feedback that is true to the desired outcome and appropriate to the situation.

----------------

If you, or your business needs support or you wish to discuss any of the points raised please get in touch.

Good luck, Mark Casey