The following is a guest post by author and speaker Steven Smith. Voted as one of the top 100 business thought-leaders in the United States, Steve’s work has been adopted by several universities to help students gain a better understanding of how the business world really operates. His ideas and writings have lead him to work with a number of organizations including American Express, Microsoft, Disney, State Farm, and Hard Rock Cafe.
He’s the co-author of the book “egonomics: What Makes Ego Our Greatest Asset (or Most Expensive Liability)” and he’s currently at work on his third book called “Us: Why we matters more than me and how to bridge the gaps between us”. Next Monday, he will be presenting a workshop at G5 Leadership called “Listen Up, Speak Up – How to tackle tough topics”, where he’ll discuss, among other things, the challenges in giving and receiving feedback, which is the subject of his guest piece here on my blog. Steve will also be giving an interpersonal communication workshop on the G5 Leadership website in August called “Pure Confidence”.
Thanks to the team at G5 Leadership, I will be giving away a number of FREE one-year memberships to G5 Leadership so you can attend these upcoming workshops by Steve as well as those given by other leadership speakers. To learn more about this contest I’m holding, check out my special message at the end of Steve’s post.
We’ve all been in the meeting where almost everything is said, except what needs to be spoken most, and everyone is painfully aware of the impact the unspoken words will have.
When the chance to speak up is there, it slips by, untaken, because of emotions like fear, anxiety, frustration, anger and distrust. We stare in the distance, wait for someone else, look away or hope what needs to be said disappears, and our anxiety with it.
Intellectually we’re committed to saying what’s on our mind, but emotionally we get intimidated or distracted long enough that the moment passes, and with it the truth that could help the most.
After the meeting we walk to the water cooler, where we take on the elephant that was in the room, directly. Why is it that the water cooler (real or hypothetical) seems to be the place where people are most honest?
In a word, fear.
But what if teams and companies could create an open, honest, politic-free culture where people say the things that need to be said at the right time, in the right place, where what’s said can change things for the better rather than losing power in an empty room once everyone leaves?
Tough topics and difficult discussions can be easier than we think, and as liberating as we’ve imagined, if we have the courage and diplomacy to say hard things. Equally, each of us need to listen and embrace what is being said when we’re on the receiving end of hard-to-hear truth.
It’s time for some feedback on feedback.
For a conversations of water-cooler honesty that don’t need a water cooler, we need to invite people to talk about what we see in a way that encourages them to listen to tough truths. In return, we need to invite ourselves to listen to them in a way that promotes more talking and less fear.
On the listening side, two questions can expose our fear of feedback: 1. when don’t we want the truth, and 2. why don’t we want it?
The answer to both questions is simple—it’s tied to how we take feedback, especially when we’re a leader.
A major barrier to getting negative feedback (constructive or not) from someone on your team or a close colleague is the belief that dissent is disloyalty. Dissent from your point of view or arguing the opposite side of an idea does not mean someone isn’t a team player or against you. In fact, they may be the strongest team player you have.
Most dissent is not disloyalty. Real disloyalty is keeping quiet when something needs to be said.
When we’re the one’s speaking, we can’t blurt out what’s on our mind and then say to ourselves,
“There. See. I told the truth.” That’s truth spoken, but never heard. You might feel good about your courage, but not much change follows.
Speaking up requires courage, candor and tact.
Most people cringe when they hear, “Can I give you some feedback?” Walls go up. Muscles tighten.
Minds close. We assign bad intentions to good words, and either go on the attack or retreat until the feedback is over. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
When we do business, we’re supposed to be in control (which is an illusion anyway). If someone points out a weakness, “Your strategy won’t work. It doesn’t factor in the downturn in that market right now”, it feels like something we should have seen or been in control of. We believe the feedback calls into question our ability to do our job.
The barrier to water-cooler honesty is not that people are incapable of seeing “the facts” or even expressing them. The barrier is our confusing criticism of our ideas with criticism of our identity.
We must speak up in a way that doesn’t provoke others to be defensive or defy what we say. We have to listen in a way that turns up the volume on feedback, not down.
It’s about what we say, how we say it and our intent. Our motive must be clear to keep the focus on ideas rather than identities.
If we expect to be a strong leaders and confident team players, we need the rare ability to listen to things that are tough to hear, and say things we don’t think will be popular.
Taking any team or company to the next level of their performance depends on their ability to build an atmosphere of water-cooler honesty. It’s not the only thing you need to reach the next level, but you can’t get there without it.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
As I mentioned in the introduction to Steve’s post, in anticipation of Steve’s upcoming workshop presentation “Listen Up Speak Up” I’m running a contest here on my blog to give 10 lucky readers a FREE one-year membership to G5 Leadership (a $129 value). For those unfamiliar with G5 Leadership, it’s a leadership training resource where you can attend leadership training keynotes and workshops directly through your PC.
As a member, you will get access to a number of tools to help you apply the lessons provided through these talks, such as “team assessments to measure progress, 360 profiles to assess where you are, step-by-step fitness plans to get in shape and on-demand access to refresh your memory.”
Some of the speakers they’ve had, and will have, to offer leadership training to members include David Allen (best-selling author of “Getting Things Done”), Bob Sutton (Professor of Management Science and Engineering at Stanford and author of “Good Boss, Bad Boss”) Dr. Marshall Goldsmith, Dave Logan (best-selling author of “Tribal Leadership”) and many more. As a current member and attendee of past workshops and seminars, I can tell you that this is a great resource for anyone whose interested in learning more about leadership and improving their skills and understanding of how to become a better leader.
So if you’d like to have a chance at winning one of these 10 FREE one-year memberships to G5 Leadership, please leave a comment below sharing your thoughts about Steve’s piece and maybe even some questions you’d like him to answer in his talk next week. I’ll be selecting 10 winners at random from those who leave a comment on this piece. Winners will be notified via email with instructions on how to redeem their one-year membership to this great leadership resource.
If you’re interested in improving your communication, teamwork, and/or leadership skills, I strongly encourage you to participate by leaving a comment below. Good luck to everyone and my thanks to the team at G5 Leadership for their help with organizing this contest.
NOTE: Contest is now closed. Thanks to all who participated and congratulations to the winners of the free 1-year membership to G5 Leadership.
I've noticed a trend of bloggers closely monitoring their feedback and immediately deleting any public comment that is even vaguely critical of their article or blog. This goes a long way in discouraging the kind of water-cooler honesty you're talking about, when it comes to public forums and blogs.
Interesting, Greg; I haven't noticed in the blogs I normally read any restriction or removal of comments because people disagree with some of the ideas/points being presented by the blogger. Granted, I don't think anyone has to accept comments where the commentator chooses to criticize/attack the writer instead of addressing the topic and sharing their points for why they disagree. After all, it's easy to be critical of anything, but harder to provide an alternative that would address the ideas you're disagreeing with.
Providing such input will not only allow for a proper evaluation of the ideas being presented, but it will also others to determine if these alternatives are in fact a better choice to the ones being presented.
Thanks for adding your thoughts on this, Greg.
Honest feedback is tough to give, but I completely hear you when you say that it can usually come from your strongest supporter. I've lost friends and business associates because my loyalty and fervor for the project and mission were misconstrued. I wanted us to succeed, and so when my feedback was requested, I was honest and transparent about my passion to fix any forseeable problems. Instead, I was shunted from friendships and companies for being a naysayer.
As time will tell, though, the companies either went nowhere or dissolved altogether, and the relationships broke apart for the very reasons I saw coming. Ah well. =)
Delena
Thanks Delena for sharing your experiences with giving feedback. There's no question that this form of communication can be the hardest kind for us to give – and receive – which is why it's nice to have experts like Steve sharing their insights on how we can all do a better job at giving and receiving.
Two thoughts:
1.) I am amazed when I ask people are you in the mood to receive some feedback how people immediately people tighten up. Ironically when I use that phrase I am ready to provide positive feedback which is rarely done these days. People need positive reinforcement for accomplishing baby steps.
2.) Suggestion: Place the water cooler in the meeting room. Start the meeting by establishing norms – one person at a time, there are no bad ideas, we respect candor, we will have fun, etc. Just a thought.
That's an excellent point, Jim. I know there's a lot being said and written about how one key to making meetings more productive is to state before the meeting and at the very start what's the purpose behind it and what the organizer wishes to accomplish by having those present and participating. Adding points about what kind of behaviour, comments and feedback will be expected will also help in making such meetings beneficial and productive for all participants.
When trying to discuss ways to improve flawed procedures in the past, I have heard feedback that is perceived as “negative” constitutes that you are part of the problem, not the solution. However, I feel that if you can discuss the elements of a problem with a well functioning team, you can then brainstorm about possible solutions. I would be interested in finding out how to present something in a way that does not lead to such comments and allow an atmosphere of collaboration.
Michele, I'd definitely suggest Steve's keynote on the 13th.
Full disclosure- I work closely with Steve…so I am a bit biased, but I believe he's brilliant!
Thanks Michele for adding your thoughts on feedback. I think you're on the right track in recognizing that how we present information or ideas plays a big role in how those on the receiving end might perceive it. Of course, another big piece of the puzzle is the fact that we also can't know from what vantage point others are approaching a given problem or situation. For example, something which I might see as being a major obstacle to our team moving forward might be seen by others to be merely a nuisance. Taking the time to learn how others perceive or understand what you're presenting will go a long way to making sure any feedback you offer is constructive and help, instead of being viewed as negative and counter-productive.
Thank you for this thought-provoking post, Steven and to you Tanveer for hosting it.
I couldn’t agree more that straight talk and the ability to share it, and trust it, is an invaluable tool in any organization.
When I was part of corporate life, what got in the way of straight talk was the fear of being punished in some way. There was always a “hammer” waiting in the wings for those who dared to address the elephant directly. And so, as is so clearly pointed out in this post, people found other venues to vent their more genuine feelings and opinions. Unfortunately, in my experience anyway, conversations around the water cooler quickly become unfocused, full of inaccurate observations, and obscure complaints… and then descend into gossip. I believe it’s because, around the water cooler, there is no structure that allows for inquiry or exploration and nothing to safeguard the conversation from becoming distorted and eventually losing its real value.
Creating an environment where candid talk is valued also includes building a safe system that invites the examination and criticism of ideas, not people. It isn’t enough to bring the water cooler into the room. The rules of engagement must be clear and the leader must demonstrate a willingness to respect them especially at times when his or her thoughts and opinions are being challenged.
While I really like the idea of creating a “politic-free culture”, my feeling is that politics will always be with us and rather than spend time trying to eradicate something that seems to be part of human nature, we should encourage its use in ways that build alliances for the achievement of organizational goals as opposed to individual gratification.
It's my pleasure, Gwyn. And I love the points you bring up. Thanks again for adding some great value and insight to the discussion.
I’ve seen this type of behavior in 2 settings; overly corporate companies (Fortune 100), and entrepreneurial environments where the entrepreneur has a short temper.
Not sure there’s solution for the first; a water cooler in every office wouldn’t have changed the behavior I saw while at Coca-Cola. But the startup office can benefit greatly from Steve’s advice.
I’ve worked for many startups, and in each occasion found that very few people question the entrepreneur’s opinions. That includes the omnipresent inner circle. In most cases this was because of the (uncorporate-like) backlash that was surely to follow. What’s ironic is that– without fail–the entrepreneurs always ended up seeking the opinion of the few people brave enough to question them.
Training is needed for the bosses and employees alike. The bosses need to understand that discussion is not always dissention. And the employees need to believe if they address the elephant in the room, they won’t be crushed by it.
Nice post Steve.
Excellent points, Kathy. And thanks for sharing your experiences on both ends of the working spectrum.
I have been reading "Crucial Conversations" by Kerry Patterson and this posting reinforces those lessons. I highly recommend Crucial Conversations for learning how to create the safety needed for the type of honesty suggested here and for understanding and recognizing our own emotions and what stories are in our minds when we tense up.
Thanks Anne for pointing that out. I like the point you mention about recognizing not only our own emotions but the stories we conjure in our minds to explain the motives behind the feedback we're receiving. Making the effort to recognize how sometimes our responses are not based on what's being said, but on our assumptions of why something is being said, is critical to making ourselves more open and receptive to understanding what others are trying to communicate.
I can relate to this post as I just had my department review my leadership. This is a tough thing to do because you have to be able to take their comments and use them to better yourself. The one thing that they rated me the worst on is addressing an individual about a small issue before it blows up into a huge issue.
I knew I struggled with this. I don't like to hurt peoples' feelings and felt that I could just say something to the group and not point anyone out. Even in private I get nervous pointing out an aspect of a person's job that is not meeting the standards that are set out in our strategic plan.
I have learned from this post and am in the process of looking for an executive coach to help me overcome this as well as many other weaknesses I possess. Thanks for the great post!
Kathleen, thank you for sharing that experience with everyone. I know a lot of people would be too ashamed to say what they were rated "worst" on.
Definitely attend if you can on the 13th. Steve will be going more in-depth about what he wrote about…so there will be many more pointers. I think if you email Tanveer he can get you in!
Thank you, Kathleen, for your candour and honesty in sharing the challenges you face in providing feedback to those in your team. It's this kind of guidance and support I'm hoping to share with my readers by providing them with the opportunity to have a membership to this valuable leadership resource.
My experience is that R&D folks, who are clearly measured by what they deliver and whether or not it solves the problem/delivers the functionality, are more receptive to feedback than people who do not have easily measured success.
People who do not have clear, valid metrics are more likely to have their ego on the line if they do not receive regular feedback because they need to justify their approach in order to feel worthwhile. I think regular feedback, both positive and negative, in addition to metrics would decrease their confusion of dissent with a personal attack and they might reach the point where the pronoun changes from "I" to "we" sooner rather than later with less anxiety.
Hi Karen,
That's an interesting take on offering feedback. Do you think perhaps it's also a result of the fact that those giving and receiving this information view it less as being a question/attack on their abilities/decisions and more directed on the process and what's the desired outcome because of what they're communicating through these metrics?
This is such a timely post for me. Tomorrow we will be providing some feedback to an executive team that notoriously defends, diminishes and discounts any feedback we attempt to provide. It is going to take a tremendous amount of tact without unnecessarily sugar coating the message and a great deal of candor. And potentially some meds followed by a nice bottle of wine once it's all over!
This post has given me some good food for thought and also helped me to keep 2 core values in my business, honesty and challenging the status quo top of mind as we approach the conversation.
I am wondering, what Steve believes is the most effective way to position feedback. Since we know when we say, "can I offer you some feedback?" that people get tense and tend to become defensive. Is there another way to approach it that wouldn't create that reaction? Typically I just go right into the feedback whether positive or constructive and stress that I coming from a place of support with the goal to help the team or individual maximize their potential. I look forward to hearing his thoughts.
Thank you Tanveer for the generous contest and for sharing Steve's post!
Kelly
It's my pleasure, Kelly. As you know, one of the goals I have for my site is provide valuable insights and inspiration to readers to help them improve the way they approach work and how they lead their teams. I'm delighted that I can offer a one-year membership to this leadership resource to my readers to help fulfill that goal. Thanks again for sharing your experience with this; always a delight to have you participating in discussions here on my blog.
"…listen to things that are tough to hear, and say things we don’t think will be popular"
I could not agree with this more. Difficult feedback from others must be considered an open window into how we are perceived. If you slam that window shut as soon as a foul odor wafts in, you might never realize it's being emanated from you yourself. One, in my opinion, can only improve so much without the perceptions of others to use as an external view and to match up against an internal compass.
Thanks!
Thanks Doug; glad you enjoyed this piece.
Thank you Tanveer for the great introduction to Steven Smith's work. I have worked in the corporate world for a long time and constantly see people shy away from giving input and feedback to someone with a higher title than their own. It would be a great opportunity to gain additional insight into setting up positive interactions and feedback sessions – maybe learn some word choices that work in sticky situations.
It's my genuine pleasure, Laura. Any chance I get to create or offer more value to my readers when it comes to understanding the challenges they face in leadership or in navigating today's workplace environment, I am more than happy to bring here to my website to share with my readers. G5 Leadership is one such resource and I'm delighted to be working with this organization to help facilitate others to benefit and enjoy the insights and guidance of the knowledgeable leadership thinkers and writers they will be connecting their members with.
Thanks again Laura for your participation. I hope you'll continue to join in and sharing your thoughts on the ideas presented here on my blog.
Tanveer, thanks for inviting this interesting topic, and for offering Steven Smith’s thoughtful notion of feedback, as well as speaking and feeling heard.
Was especially intrigued with the notion: “Intellectually we’re committed to saying what’s on our mind, but emotionally we get intimidated or distracted long enough that the moment passes, and with it the truth that could help the most. “
We’ve all seen the water cooler conversations, and certainly heard plenty about the elephant in the room, as Smith suggests. But are people really “honest there,” or does gossip lead the exchanges?
From a brain’s perspective it’s no surprise that fear shuts people down, or that they no longer want to engage those who offer feedback, so I was glad to read that.
My question is:
Have we really created a feedback model that holds people and capital and helps organizations move forward from an innovation standpoint?
This topic especially interests me, as we’ve addressed the topic of poorly run meetings, as well as ineffective feedback yet in a book just completed and in draft form.
The book accompanies an invited, MBA Course called “Lead Innovation with the Brain in Mind, “ and looks at both meetings and feedback from different angles – so I am thrilled to see ideas here that show angles from another side. All to say thanks – much here for further reflection.
Here are a few central questions our MBA leaders engage on the topic:
-What does tone have to do with how feedback is received and used?
-Since most people hate meetings, what format would bring winning results?
-Are performance reviews intelligence fair, & do they generate talent we all crave?
Thanks for new angles and discussions to consider on a vital topic – that either holds back a firm or can propel it forward! Pretty sure my MBA students and I would ask a few more questions – but I’ll start with these – and thanks for the chance to weigh in with another 2-bits to a fine exchange.
You're welcome, Ellen; I'm delighted to have Steve sharing his insights on feedback and how we can improve the manner in which we communicate, respond and perceive what others are telling us.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this from the neurological perspective. I'm grateful for the insights you bring to the conversation.
Tanveer: The CEOs I've worked with during the past twenty plus years were not prepared to give or receive honest feedback to/from their direct reports. Simply said, their egos would not allow them to provide or accept such feedback. Despite these shortcomings, each CEO was viewed and respected for their business acumen because of thecompany's success and profitability. I frankly think that having some CEOs relish having a Machiavellian management personality.
That's an interesting point you bring up, Rick. I wonder if in this knowledge-age, where information is no longer resides at the top but is found more among those in the front lines, that feedback will become more necessary as leaders require the greater participation of their employees and the use of their knowledge to address some of the challenges their organization faces.
Appreciate your sharing your experience with this Rick. Thanks for adding your thoughts to the discussion.
I think the problem with honesty is sometimes it's hurtful and just plain anger that is being expressed. If you say something about some one it doesn't hurt them if they don't hear it. But once it becomes public that's a whole different ball game.
Most bosses don't want honesty but loyalty they are not always the same thing sometimes telling your boss honestly is not a great career move and why I work for myself.
Hi Damien,
I agree that there are many leaders out there who are more interested in having people's loyalty than being receptive to hearing the truth of what's really going on around them. Of course, in today's hyper-connected world, such a filtered perception at the top is becoming more and more of a liability.
Thanks for adding your thoughts to the discussion, Damien.
Very timely post… I'm in the process of doing a 360 on my boss and doing performance reviews for my team. Thanks for a great message.
I've noticed a trend of bloggers closely monitoring their feedback and immediately deleting any public comment that is even vaguely critical of their article or blog. This goes a long way in discouraging the kind of water-cooler honesty you're talking about, when it comes to public forums and blogs. You are superb thanks a lot.
Thanks Sara. You're the second reader to comment about this trend in the blogosphere to delete any comment that's critical of their ideas. Personally, I can't say I've seen that, or should I say that I'm aware of it based on what comments I do see. That could be because the bloggers I read have a high level of integrity when it comes to respecting dissenting opinion, if not also understanding that it's the idea, not who they are as a person, that's being challenged or questioned.
I think once you have that understanding, it becomes easier to welcome criticism because such feedback helps you to refine your idea, to see if there aren't gaps that need to be addressed, or how you might be able to present it differently to help others appreciate what you're trying to impart.
In any case, I agree with you, Sara, that it doesn't serve blogs or public forums to restrict comments that are only positive of what's being said or done. Not only will it drive people away, but it will narrow your perception and understanding of the subject you're interested in discussing and sharing your thoughts on.
Thanks again, Sara, for adding your thoughts to this discussion.