It should not be offered lightly. Giving it, without being explicitly asked, is an extreme sport.
Always observed and naturally weighted or judged with lenses other than the protagonist, commenting or observing acts, omissions, outcomes or criteria of any person in your organization is one of the most complex actions that exist in the dynamics of interdependent activities.
If you are too condescending or not precise in what is relevant, you neither add value nor manage to trigger reflections or modify behaviors. In contrast, if you exceed the force of the comment or overuse insensitive criticism, you will achieve both rejection and resentment in the recipient listener or colleague.
How to graduate the ‘feedbackWhat is your responsibility to give in different professional circumstances? Here are three levels of depth for managerial weighting:
1) Manifest appreciation.- It starts from the premise of ‘catching’ people doing things well and knowing how to show appreciation for someone’s role at a certain moment.
If it is not false praise, it tends to reflect that you notice what that individual contributes and makes visible what should be maintained or repeated: “You are good at doing that…”; “You have an impeccable file…”; “What an interesting analysis you just gave us…”. The more precise, assertive and without ‘buts’, the more valuable.
2) Timely feedback.- It produces positive results when the person offering it clarifies one or more facts or sayings precisely, while at the same time offering options for what – based on their experience or perspective – the interlocutor could have done, would do well to change or would benefit from polishing.
It is not a class on this or that topic, nor a critical observation based on personal taste. A productive feedback is a contribution to the effort that the individual is making to take his or her work to the next level or, in situations of greater self-demand, to the maximum possible execution.
3) Performance evaluation.- It assumes you have the authority to do it. It must be detonated at relevant moments and after an orderly weighing of the overall actions of the person in question.
As it is a multi-faceted professional assessment of the person’s actions, it is advisable to organize the conversation with a list of points divided, at least, into two sections: one, where the person is in optimal condition (Americans usually say ‘on point‘); and, another, in which those things that must be improved, corrected or, in some cases, omitted are stated. Which one do you want to review first? It is worth asking.
In its best possible expression, a ‘feedback‘Well thought out and better proportioned is not a scolding. It is an instrument to properly guide the management of the talent that your ecosystem has. And even when certain styles are not liked, it is an explicit manifestation of interest in the development and growth of the person to whom it is provided.
There may be better times than others, or more or less favorable contexts to implement it at the appropriate level for the case and the person. What is a fact is that the ‘feedback‘ is a structurally sensitive conversation that, even between known, respected and well-loved people, occurs in a sea of different possible interpretations.
And if. There are things that are difficult to verbalize correctly. This does not eliminate, however, the imperative need to always keep the language connected to the brain, intellectual honesty aligned with the discipline of method and, above all, serenity nourished by an enormous dose of sensitivity.
