TRANSKRİPT 🔗
WEBVTT
00:00:04.799 --> 00:00:08.480
Welcome to this episode of the Chief Psychology Officer with Dr.
00:00:08.640 --> 00:00:17.199
Amanda Potter, Chartered Occupational Psychologist and CEO of BTalent, and myself, Caitlin Cooper, business psychologist and principal consultant.
00:00:17.440 --> 00:00:19.280
Today we're talking about feedback.
00:00:19.440 --> 00:00:20.719
And I know what you're thinking.
00:00:20.879 --> 00:00:22.480
Another episode on feedback.
00:00:22.640 --> 00:00:29.359
Every leadership podcast does feedback, but bear with us, we're not doing tips, frameworks, or telling you how to phrase things.
00:00:29.600 --> 00:00:31.440
Today we're asking a different question.
00:00:31.679 --> 00:00:35.520
Why does feedback still fail, even when people know how to do it?
00:00:35.679 --> 00:00:46.240
And the answer, which Amanda's going to take us through, is more psychological, more neurological, and frankly, or hopefully, more interesting than some of what you may have heard on the topic before.
00:00:46.479 --> 00:00:58.880
So if you've ever held back feedback because you felt it was risky to say it, or you've sat in a debrief where someone's fixated on one line while ignoring everything else that was maybe positive, then this one's for you.
00:00:59.039 --> 00:01:03.039
But before we jump in, make sure you hit subscribe so you never miss an episode.
00:01:03.119 --> 00:01:06.239
And if you want to keep the conversation going, connect with us on LinkedIn.
00:01:06.400 --> 00:01:08.640
Just search for Caitlin Cooper or Dr.
00:01:08.719 --> 00:01:09.680
Amanda Potter.
00:01:09.760 --> 00:01:13.599
Plus, feel free to check out the CPO.co.uk for more resources.
00:01:13.840 --> 00:01:15.040
Hi Amanda, how are you?
00:01:15.280 --> 00:01:15.760
Pretty good.
00:01:15.840 --> 00:01:16.719
How are you, Caitlin?
00:01:17.040 --> 00:01:18.560
I'm good too, thank you.
00:01:18.799 --> 00:01:24.959
Why don't we start with something that, well, can be maybe frustrating for some people when we talk about feedback.
00:01:25.200 --> 00:01:33.599
Many organizations we come across are heavily investing in feedback, investing in training programs, models, frameworks, new ways of phrasing difficult conversations.
00:01:33.840 --> 00:01:39.200
But yeah, from what we see and hear, it often still feels like an awkward conversation.
00:01:39.439 --> 00:01:50.640
And I think people still hold back or say something softened that might not resemble what they actually think, or on the other hand, they give personal and very direct feedback that they've never yet said in person.
00:01:50.719 --> 00:01:53.439
Maybe they've not practiced it and it doesn't quite land well.
00:01:53.760 --> 00:01:55.280
Are we solving the wrong problem?
00:01:55.599 --> 00:02:08.080
Isn't that interesting, the point you've just made, that when there's discomfort, people either hold back and sugarcoat the feedback or take it to a level where it doesn't have any really any impact.
00:02:08.159 --> 00:02:15.360
So they don't really understand that they're even be receiving feedback, or they're brutal and direct and they say the things that they've never said before.
00:02:15.439 --> 00:02:18.479
Isn't that interesting that that's what happens when we're feeling uncomfortable?
00:02:18.639 --> 00:02:18.879
Yeah.
00:02:19.039 --> 00:02:19.759
People panic.
00:02:20.000 --> 00:02:24.879
Yeah, and particularly when there's a limited skill and understanding how to deal with the situation.
00:02:25.039 --> 00:02:31.039
And that's the point, I think, that when we focus on skill, we're only dealing with part of the problem.
00:02:31.199 --> 00:02:33.599
But it's not necessarily the most important part.
00:02:34.000 --> 00:02:43.360
Because most organizations that we work with and we come across that invite us in to help them solve the feedback challenge are really thinking about communication.
00:02:43.439 --> 00:02:44.879
They're thinking about the skill element.
00:02:45.039 --> 00:02:49.759
How can you improve feedback with better phrasing, better techniques, a clearer structure?
00:02:49.919 --> 00:02:55.039
We use Cupid, for example, don't we question behavior impact do differently as a model of giving feedback?
00:02:55.120 --> 00:02:55.840
And it's great.
00:02:56.000 --> 00:02:58.240
It does, you know, it works with practice.
00:02:58.400 --> 00:03:00.159
And all of those things matter.
00:03:00.400 --> 00:03:08.240
We shouldn't dismiss them because they do make a difference, but they don't get to the root problem of why people avoid feedback.
00:03:08.400 --> 00:03:10.719
They're downstream of something much more fundamental.
00:03:10.960 --> 00:03:12.000
So, what is that then?
00:03:12.080 --> 00:03:13.120
What is that root?
00:03:13.439 --> 00:03:21.199
So, the root problem really, or the most fundamental problem, is feedback at its core is really psychological and social experience.
00:03:21.360 --> 00:03:25.840
It's very emotional for the person who's giving the feedback and for the person who's receiving it.
00:03:26.080 --> 00:03:45.199
So, before any model or framework, or Cubid, which is ours, which we've used and many companies use, before that model has a chance to even work, our brains have made a decision to avoid whether that situation is safe or unsafe, and therefore we are preparing ourselves for an emotional experience.
00:03:45.439 --> 00:04:04.719
So this is where Amy Edmondson's research and our research on psychological safety is so important because the work on psych safety shows that people will speak up and engage honestly and give real feedback and not in that brutal or sugar-coated way, and they'll raise real concerns only when they believe the interpersonal risk is low enough to justify the conversation.
00:04:05.039 --> 00:04:16.240
So then I guess if people, you know, even organizations like ourselves are running sessions and looking at the skills and all the things that we've already been
Load full transcript
talking about, what is the other question we should be asking?
00:04:16.560 --> 00:04:22.399
I think the question we shouldn't be asking is do our people know how to give feedback?
00:04:22.639 --> 00:04:28.000
And the question we should be asking is, do our people feel safe enough to give feedback?
00:04:28.240 --> 00:04:31.360
So I think it's actually both questions rather than one or the other.
00:04:31.519 --> 00:04:34.079
Do they know how to and do they feel safe to?
00:04:34.240 --> 00:04:36.399
Because they require quite different interventions.
00:04:36.720 --> 00:04:44.240
So then if someone doesn't feel safe but then still gives feedback, well, as you said, I don't know, it it can land not so well.
00:04:44.399 --> 00:04:47.600
I imagine that's where it can go probably the most wrong.
00:04:47.839 --> 00:04:49.519
How do you see that happening?
00:04:49.839 --> 00:04:56.959
Yeah, I've seen it a few times actually, and I actually can experience it in myself even when I'm uncomfortable and I've seen it in others.
00:04:57.120 --> 00:04:58.720
We can sometimes jump in.
00:04:58.959 --> 00:05:02.079
We know my resilience risks are impulsive, impatient.
00:05:02.319 --> 00:05:06.160
Most people who listen to this pod regularly know those are my resilience risks.
00:05:06.319 --> 00:05:12.560
So that will mean that in those situations, I might be quite blunt, for example, or I might be very direct.
00:05:12.720 --> 00:05:15.040
That might be my risk under pressure.
00:05:15.279 --> 00:05:21.439
For someone else, it might be that they're very submissive or they're very apologetic, or it's probably more me, other end of this.
00:05:22.319 --> 00:05:23.279
It's interesting, isn't it?
00:05:23.439 --> 00:05:23.839
Yeah, yeah.
00:05:24.000 --> 00:05:26.399
And another one might be that they dismiss it.
00:05:26.560 --> 00:05:29.439
I didn't come up with this feedback, I don't necessarily agree with it.
00:05:29.600 --> 00:05:31.920
So they take away the accountability for it.
00:05:32.000 --> 00:05:32.160
Yeah.
00:05:32.319 --> 00:05:33.680
Or another one could be aggressive.
00:05:33.759 --> 00:05:34.800
You know, just get on with it.
00:05:34.879 --> 00:05:35.600
You know, just do it.
00:05:35.680 --> 00:05:36.879
I can't believe you're not doing this.
00:05:37.040 --> 00:05:41.040
So there's a lot of ways in which you could deal with feedback which are unhelpful.
00:05:41.279 --> 00:05:41.680
Yeah.
00:05:42.000 --> 00:05:44.079
We mentioned interpersonal risk.
00:05:44.240 --> 00:05:45.839
What does that actually mean in practice?
00:05:46.000 --> 00:05:47.040
What are people afraid of?
00:05:47.279 --> 00:05:49.920
So interpersonal risk is really the fundamental of psych safety.
00:05:50.000 --> 00:05:59.759
And Amy Edmondson, when she talks about the naming of psych safety, she's very clear that fundamentally all of psych safety is all about facing into interpersonal risk.
00:05:59.920 --> 00:06:12.399
But actually, the David Rock Scarf model
is quite helpful here because it has a neuroscience basis, which we know, and it maps really practically to how people experience risk and fear.
00:06:12.560 --> 00:06:21.519
And Scarf stands for, those of you who haven't heard of it before, it stands for status, certainty, autonomy, relatedness, and fairness.
00:06:21.680 --> 00:06:25.519
And feedback can threaten each of these simultaneously.
00:06:25.680 --> 00:06:28.959
But I could give you an example of a few just to bring it to life if you like.
00:06:29.199 --> 00:06:29.759
Okay for it.
00:06:30.319 --> 00:06:32.000
So, for example, status.
00:06:32.240 --> 00:06:38.319
Imagine, Caitlin, you had to give me some feedback and you were worried about it.
00:06:38.480 --> 00:06:44.000
You might be thinking, well, what will that feedback say about me and my status in the organization?
00:06:44.160 --> 00:06:45.360
How will Amanda perceive me?
00:06:45.439 --> 00:06:48.480
If I have to give Amanda feedback, how will she perceive me as a result of this?
00:06:49.040 --> 00:06:51.439
Will she still see me as competent and credible?
00:06:51.600 --> 00:06:54.319
Will she question me as a result of this feedback?
00:06:54.480 --> 00:07:00.319
Because this is about giving, you know, worrying about how giving that feedback, how it will make you be seen.
00:07:00.560 --> 00:07:07.360
It's just an interesting one in itself there, because I think it can be looked at, obviously, we're talking about it in a negative way because it's triggering us to feel uncomfortable.
00:07:07.519 --> 00:07:13.759
So it's me thinking, if I deliver this badly, you're gonna think less of me and not so competent.
00:07:13.920 --> 00:07:18.720
On the other hand, though, if we're talking about the positives from that, is it could go the other way.
00:07:18.800 --> 00:07:21.360
And you think, you know what, I really respect her for doing that.
00:07:21.439 --> 00:07:22.720
You know, that's got courage.
00:07:22.959 --> 00:07:24.560
For being courageous, for being brave.
00:07:24.720 --> 00:07:26.000
Yes, totally agree.
00:07:26.160 --> 00:07:27.759
We often go to the negative, don't we?
00:07:27.839 --> 00:07:28.480
But you're all right.
00:07:28.560 --> 00:07:34.399
If you handle it well, if you've got the skill as well as the environment, then of course it's the perfect cocktail.
00:07:34.639 --> 00:07:40.399
Your first instinct is probably gonna be, oh, I don't want to do it because I don't want to look silly or whatever.
00:07:40.560 --> 00:07:45.519
But then you have to be able to say, but if it goes well, this is potentially gonna be the outcome.
00:07:45.600 --> 00:07:47.360
So let's try and aim for that.
00:07:47.600 --> 00:07:48.879
Yeah, think positively.
00:07:49.199 --> 00:07:50.639
Another one might be certainty.
00:07:50.800 --> 00:07:59.600
So if you are giving me that feedback and it goes well or not so well, what does that mean for your future, for your role in the organization, and so on?
00:07:59.759 --> 00:08:01.759
Will it change how you're being treated?
00:08:01.920 --> 00:08:06.240
And then relatedness, will it change our connection, either positively or negatively?
00:08:06.480 --> 00:08:15.360
So the David Rock scarf model really works actually for thinking about the implications of how we feel about giving feedback and receiving feedback.
00:08:15.519 --> 00:08:19.759
And I think what I quite like about the model as well is that you know it's gonna be different for everyone.
00:08:19.920 --> 00:08:22.079
Some people might experience a few of those.
00:08:22.319 --> 00:08:24.560
What I might experience might be different to you, Amanda.
00:08:24.639 --> 00:08:28.160
So for me, I think relatedness is probably the one which holds me back.
00:08:28.240 --> 00:08:32.080
Because I'll tend to worry, is this person gonna hate me after I give them this piece of feedback?
00:08:32.320 --> 00:08:37.120
But then again, it's just thinking, well, actually, no, I'm I have good intent here, I'm actually doing it to help them.
00:08:37.440 --> 00:08:41.360
So try and like get rid of that negative internal dialogue.
00:08:41.519 --> 00:08:44.720
But for you, Amanda, which one if you to choose?
00:08:45.039 --> 00:08:46.960
Yeah, I think fairness is a big one.
00:08:47.039 --> 00:09:02.559
Actually, I didn't talk about fairness, but making sure that I do it in a way that I treat people fairly and that because of my impatience impulsiveness, I don't just jump in with feedback that's about me or how I'm feeling, but to make sure that I'm truly being fair and considering the other person.
00:09:02.639 --> 00:09:04.639
That's probably my one that I need to make sure.
00:09:04.879 --> 00:09:07.679
But I think that's like two really good examples of how they're very different.
00:09:07.759 --> 00:09:12.080
And so if you imagine you're in an organization, you know, you're gonna be working with lots of different people.
00:09:12.320 --> 00:09:18.639
That's why a model like this is so useful because it can start that reflection for everyone to think about.
00:09:19.039 --> 00:09:31.360
So um it's less about a rational evaluation of content and more an internal what we call threat calculation, if we want to say it like that, that's already happened before the feedback has even been shared or properly heard.
00:09:31.440 --> 00:09:32.159
Is that what we're saying?
00:09:32.240 --> 00:09:33.279
Is kind of going on.
00:09:33.600 --> 00:09:34.080
Totally.
00:09:34.240 --> 00:09:41.919
What's even more crucial is that the calculation of threat is often unconscious and it happens fast and it happens before the conversation.
00:09:42.159 --> 00:09:55.600
It either moves us towards very quickly and very rapidly, because I want to get rid of it, I want to get rid of that cognitive dissonance, the discomfort, or we move away and we avoid and we're therefore submissive and overly kind and overly sugarcoating.
00:09:55.759 --> 00:09:58.080
So, in other words, we don't even know
we're doing it sometimes.
00:09:58.240 --> 00:10:02.960
We just note we recognize the discomfort and we want to do something about it.
00:10:03.200 --> 00:10:04.399
Would you say that's a fight or flight?
00:10:04.480 --> 00:10:06.480
Your fight or flight is kind of activating in that situation.
00:10:07.200 --> 00:10:07.679
Absolutely.
00:10:07.840 --> 00:10:21.279
So, for example, if I'm giving feedback, by the time I'm consciously engaging with the words, my nervous system has already made a judgment about whether it's safe or not, which is then what causes me to say it really abruptly or be like, you know what, I'm gonna retreat here.
00:10:21.600 --> 00:10:22.080
Absolutely.
00:10:22.159 --> 00:10:30.240
And so that's why training people on strategies and feedback models is less helpful if you do it alone without considering the environment.
00:10:30.480 --> 00:10:33.840
You can know exactly how to frame a piece of feedback and still not give it.
00:10:34.000 --> 00:10:38.879
So I might know exactly how to give feedback using Cubid, question, behaviour, impact, do differently.
00:10:39.039 --> 00:10:42.720
Yet I might think, no chance, that's a real risky one.
00:10:42.799 --> 00:10:46.399
Or it might be about the way we think that person's going to respond in that situation.
00:10:46.559 --> 00:10:47.840
That's another big one often.
00:10:48.320 --> 00:10:49.759
Do you have any good examples of that?
00:10:50.080 --> 00:11:07.200
So if there's a particularly touchy person in the team or colleague about a particular topic, and you know you've got to give them feedback, you've given them feedback about it multiple times, and they've already responded negatively to it, you've already got evidence or examples of them responding negatively to it, you know what you're facing.
00:11:07.279 --> 00:11:09.440
So that your brain is already preparing you.
00:11:09.600 --> 00:11:22.080
And if you think about neuroplasticity and facing into stress, what happens with neuroplasticity is that every time we face into that stress, we learn and we create the neural pathways for doing something similar the next time.
00:11:22.399 --> 00:11:28.559
So if we're not successful, what happens is we learn that and we therefore learn that we want to avoid it.
00:11:28.639 --> 00:11:36.159
If we are successful in giving feedback and have helped and it has been a positive outcome, then what happens is we again, you know, we learn from it and we move towards it.
00:11:36.320 --> 00:11:38.720
Uh, do you know what an example might be body odor?
00:11:38.879 --> 00:11:40.000
That's kind of a tricky one.
00:11:40.480 --> 00:11:49.039
I do remember very early in my career had being asked to give someone feedback in my team when I worked for a big organization before Zircon to give someone feedback on body odor.
00:11:49.120 --> 00:12:01.519
That's a tricky such a tricky one because it's in some ways it feels unrelated to performance in a way, but ultimately, you know, it can
be what's the word, distracting for some people, which can inhibit performance.
00:12:01.759 --> 00:12:03.120
And it's an emotional point as well.
00:12:03.279 --> 00:12:03.600
Yeah.
00:12:03.840 --> 00:12:09.519
People both working with that individual and also for that person who was receiving that feedback who may not be aware.
00:12:09.759 --> 00:12:11.039
So did you have to do it then?
00:12:11.279 --> 00:12:13.200
I did, and I didn't do it very well.
00:12:13.519 --> 00:12:14.000
Honestly.
00:12:14.159 --> 00:12:17.120
No, I did it in my impatient, abrupt way.
00:12:17.360 --> 00:12:19.679
So, you know, how would I do it now?
00:12:19.919 --> 00:12:23.840
I'd use Cubid, but I'd make sure that the environment was right for that person beforehand.
00:12:24.159 --> 00:12:28.480
Oh well, we learn from these things, and I'm sure there's loads of people who have been in that same situation.
00:12:28.559 --> 00:12:33.360
So I think that's an interesting segue because I think we've been predominantly talking about giving feedback.
00:12:33.519 --> 00:12:43.279
I think a lot of the time people talk about being on the receiving end, but you know, I think both obviously are just as important to kind of be in that right, I guess, mindset.
00:12:43.360 --> 00:12:50.879
But what's interesting to me is that the threat response when we think about receiving feedback can also kick in before the feedback even arrives.
00:12:51.120 --> 00:12:58.559
So it's not just about receiving a difficult comment if you're on the receiving end, it can happen at the anticipation stage of receiving.
00:12:58.720 --> 00:13:00.080
But that's the same with the giving feedback.
00:13:00.159 --> 00:13:02.240
I know it's getting a bit confusing here going back and forth.
00:13:02.399 --> 00:13:17.519
But to give an example, I remember Christian telling me a story or about his experience about doing a 360 debrief with a HR director, someone who championed 360 feedback across the organization for years, but had never actually done her own 360.
00:13:17.759 --> 00:13:23.840
So every time the opportunity came up for that person to do it, something in her, I think, just resisted.
00:13:23.919 --> 00:13:29.679
And she'd find a way to maybe avoid doing it, which as you can imagine, is quite ironic in that situation.
00:13:29.919 --> 00:13:31.440
So what's going on there?
00:13:31.759 --> 00:13:35.600
That's a perfect textbook example of anticipatory threat.
00:13:35.679 --> 00:13:38.480
And it's much more common than we probably realize.
00:13:38.639 --> 00:13:52.399
So before the feedback even arrives, so as soon as we know that there's the potential of a 360 feedback process or any type of feedback, the brain is already running a simulation trying to predict what might be in that 360.
00:13:52.480 --> 00:13:58.320
And it tends to go towards negative or the uncertain possibilities more than the positive ones.
00:13:58.480 --> 00:14:01.120
So it's true negativity bias doing its job.
00:14:01.360 --> 00:14:04.879
The HR director might be thinking, what if there's something I don't know?
00:14:05.039 --> 00:14:06.480
What if I've got some blind spots?
00:14:06.639 --> 00:14:07.840
What if I'm not a great leader?
00:14:08.000 --> 00:14:09.519
What if my team don't like me?
00:14:09.679 --> 00:14:16.480
And so critically, she's looking at all of the negative things that could potentially happen, and she has no control over that information.
00:14:16.720 --> 00:14:19.279
You know, she can't shape it and frame it, she can't control it.
00:14:19.600 --> 00:14:25.120
So that uncertainty and lack of control is probably one of the most uncomfortable states we can be in.
00:14:25.279 --> 00:14:26.320
And the brain doesn't like it.
00:14:26.399 --> 00:14:28.960
The brain likes predictability and certainty and control.
00:14:29.279 --> 00:14:32.879
So the avoidance isn't irrational, the avoidance is rational.
00:14:33.200 --> 00:14:37.200
Actually, it's an efficient short-term solution to get away from that pain.
00:14:37.360 --> 00:14:39.759
You're overthinking it, if anything, because you're thinking about the outcome.
00:14:40.159 --> 00:14:40.399
Absolutely.
00:14:40.480 --> 00:14:42.320
So you're just like, well, that's a no for me.
00:14:42.399 --> 00:14:42.639
Thanks.
00:14:42.720 --> 00:14:43.120
I'm out.
00:14:43.279 --> 00:14:44.639
Yeah, I've definitely been there.
00:14:44.799 --> 00:14:49.120
And what's interesting actually in that story was apparently the feedback was overwhelmingly positive.
00:14:49.279 --> 00:14:54.240
And so that person learned a lot about their strengths and they weren't actually giving themselves enough credit.
00:14:54.399 --> 00:15:01.279
So perhaps as someone who's more on the uh self-critical side of things, you know, we make things feel like they're going to be a lot worse than they actually are.
00:15:01.519 --> 00:15:02.720
Do you know what's really interesting?
00:15:02.799 --> 00:15:07.519
Because on reflection, we've we run development programs for senior execs around the world.
00:15:07.679 --> 00:15:11.120
And the CEO is usually the leader of that team.
00:15:11.360 --> 00:15:14.320
And often we'll say to that CEO, do you want to be part of it?
00:15:14.480 --> 00:15:16.240
And most of the time they'll say no.
00:15:16.399 --> 00:15:20.240
But every now and then we'll have a CEO who says, Yes, I'd like to be part of it, and I'll lead.
00:15:20.320 --> 00:15:22.320
So they role model and they go first.
00:15:22.480 --> 00:15:23.519
But it's rare, isn't it?
00:15:23.679 --> 00:15:28.080
I would say probably 30% of the time the CEO is actually part of the process.
00:15:28.399 --> 00:15:31.279
Self-nominated part of the process rather than private equity.
00:15:31.360 --> 00:15:33.679
Could you assess everyone and include the CEO in it?
00:15:33.919 --> 00:15:36.480
I guess as an imposter syndrome, maybe playing in there.
00:15:36.639 --> 00:15:39.440
Or maybe on the opposite end, it's that
they actually just don't think they need it.
00:15:39.519 --> 00:15:42.559
They need Yeah, I'm actually a perfect version of myself.
00:15:42.639 --> 00:15:43.360
Thank you very much.
00:15:44.720 --> 00:15:52.639
Um I guess the important thing is that it's not a weakness to avoid giving and receiving feedback necessarily.
00:15:52.720 --> 00:15:56.000
It's very normal to experience that psychological threat.
00:15:56.159 --> 00:16:05.360
But the problem is that I guess organizations treat it as a capability gap or a commitment gap rather than it being about psychological safety or a psychological safety gap.
00:16:05.600 --> 00:16:06.399
I totally agree.
00:16:06.720 --> 00:16:16.879
Well, I guess that brings us back then to your earlier point that the solution might not just be more training, it's about creating the conditions where it doesn't feel so risky.
00:16:17.039 --> 00:16:17.759
Is that correct?
00:16:18.000 --> 00:16:18.960
Yeah, exactly.
00:16:19.200 --> 00:16:24.000
It's not just about skills and learning, it's about leadership and environment.
00:16:24.159 --> 00:16:30.080
So a better point would be to think about the psychological safety and the climate of the organization.
00:16:30.320 --> 00:16:32.080
Is it ready for feedback?
00:16:33.120 --> 00:16:39.840
So if we talk about when we give feedback, it lands, but that it lands badly.
00:16:40.000 --> 00:16:46.320
I have an example where I've worked with a um successful senior lawyer a few months ago who went through a 360.
00:16:46.480 --> 00:16:54.080
The majority of the feedback was balanced and constructive, but there was one line in the report that described that person as too emotional in certain situations.
00:16:54.240 --> 00:17:07.359
And that one line completely, well, it derailed the conversation because there was pages of positive data that was in that report, but kept on coming back to that one single comment again and again, and everything else barely registered.
00:17:07.519 --> 00:17:09.039
I've definitely been there.
00:17:09.359 --> 00:17:12.240
Did you find that conversation really tricky as a result, Caitlin?
00:17:12.480 --> 00:17:14.559
Because you kept going back to that emotional point.
00:17:14.799 --> 00:17:15.759
Yeah, I guess there is.
00:17:15.839 --> 00:17:23.519
You have to kind of manage that emotional point, but also bring it back to, you know, it's one data point, you know, let's look at the themes and there's a way that you manage that situation.
00:17:23.599 --> 00:17:27.440
But yeah, of course it is, because you want the conversation to end up being valuable for them.
00:17:27.519 --> 00:17:34.880
And if they're just honing in on that one thing that might not be a true representative piece of data, it's an interesting, yes, definitely an interesting one.
00:17:35.039 --> 00:17:37.279
But what would you say is going on psychologically?
00:17:37.599 --> 00:17:46.640
So it's a really important point because there's a clear distinction between behavioral feedback, which describes what you did or what the person had done or what you've seen.
00:17:46.880 --> 00:17:52.319
Because you can change that where it versus identity-based feedback, and that's about judgment.
00:17:52.480 --> 00:17:56.160
You know, that too emotional in certain situations, we don't actually have evidence.
00:17:56.319 --> 00:17:57.839
There's no behaviour.
00:17:58.000 --> 00:18:00.079
We don't know what the emotion looks like.
00:18:00.160 --> 00:18:03.440
It's very subjective, and in certain situations, it's not specific.
00:18:03.599 --> 00:18:06.960
So too emotional is really dangerous because it's so ambiguous.
00:18:07.039 --> 00:18:10.640
And the feedback crosses a line from behaviour into identity.
00:18:10.960 --> 00:18:14.319
It would trigger a sense of, you know, who am I?
00:18:14.559 --> 00:18:15.359
Do I fit?
00:18:15.599 --> 00:18:16.480
Am I acceptable?
00:18:16.640 --> 00:18:17.359
Do I belong?
00:18:17.599 --> 00:18:24.640
It makes me think about the research that Christian shared with me, which was the Naomi Eisenberger research on social pain.
00:18:24.960 --> 00:18:35.599
So it's not research I normally look at, but he was talking about her research about social rejection, about being criticized, excluded, diminished in some way, and how it activates the system.
00:18:36.079 --> 00:18:38.400
And it has the same impact as physical pain.
00:18:38.720 --> 00:18:44.400
I really get that because one of my key triggers or things I don't like is loneliness.
00:18:44.480 --> 00:18:47.599
I mean, I was an only child until my brother joined me when I was 24.
00:18:48.240 --> 00:18:52.480
So I don't like being alone and I don't like being isolated or being left out.
00:18:52.559 --> 00:18:54.640
So that absolutely I really get.
00:18:54.960 --> 00:19:02.880
So when feedback feels like a personal judgment, it activates that social pain of being criticized or excluded or diminished in some way.
00:19:03.119 --> 00:19:09.759
And the response is for people to withdraw, often to be defensive to withdraw in order to avoid the pain.
00:19:10.000 --> 00:19:10.240
Yeah.
00:19:10.400 --> 00:19:13.599
I imagine your amygdala is on high alert in that situation.
00:19:13.839 --> 00:19:22.319
The word that I'm going to use here, because it's fresh in my mind from my friend who's going through a different situation outside of work, and she used the word a character assassination.
00:19:22.559 --> 00:19:25.279
So I wonder if people feel it's like a character assassination.
00:19:25.440 --> 00:19:28.160
And then that sends them to spiralling into thinking that.
00:19:28.240 --> 00:19:30.799
And um, yeah, I guess it's not productive.
00:19:31.039 --> 00:19:34.079
That friend sounds like she needs your support or he needs your support.
00:19:34.319 --> 00:19:37.039
Yes, yes, and there we're we're working through it.
00:19:37.359 --> 00:19:41.200
But yeah, I guess you can't process the rest of the feedback clearly, which I
think is the main point.
00:19:41.519 --> 00:19:48.240
Exactly, because if you think when we're under threat, which is what we're talking about, our cognitive flexibility diminishes.
00:19:48.400 --> 00:19:55.119
So we can't hold on to multiple pieces of information, we can't weigh them up, we can't think rationally about implications.
00:19:55.279 --> 00:19:57.359
Our thinking is very much compromised.
00:19:57.599 --> 00:20:00.559
So we can't be logical when we're feeling threatened.
00:20:00.880 --> 00:20:12.960
I guess it's all that stuff that we usually talk about with the neuroscience where all the blood and oxygen is being sent round your body, fight or flight, that it's not being sent to your brain to be able to rationalise this character assassination.
00:20:13.119 --> 00:20:15.440
But I guess it's a pattern that we see constantly.
00:20:15.519 --> 00:20:16.480
I mean, I see it constantly.
00:20:16.559 --> 00:20:28.640
It's the one negative comment effect, not just in a 360 report, but even if you were in a, I don't know, a performance review and someone was that said four really great things, the one bad thing is the thing you're gonna walk away remembering.
00:20:28.799 --> 00:20:35.200
So similarly in a 360 report, you can have up to 40 people comment, you know, if you've got a lot of people that have responded.
00:20:35.359 --> 00:20:40.319
But if there's that one that's just doesn't quite sit or feel right, then that guess what?
00:20:40.400 --> 00:20:41.680
That's the one that they want to talk about.
00:20:41.920 --> 00:20:45.039
Yeah, and that's the negativity bias that we all have.
00:20:45.200 --> 00:20:50.559
You know, we're evolutionary wired for identifying and avoiding threat.
00:20:50.799 --> 00:20:56.480
We know that when we're feeling threatened, we get tunnel vision and our focus narrows.
00:20:56.799 --> 00:21:01.599
And we focus intensely on what feels threatening or risky.
00:21:01.839 --> 00:21:09.440
So not only do we focus on the negative things, we hone in on those negative things and we focus on them acutely.
00:21:10.000 --> 00:21:25.200
It's not, for example, with your legal client, it's not that she was being dramatic or ignoring the positive feedback, it's just that the brain was flagging that stimulus as a risk and telling them just to identify it and remove it and focus on it and sort it.
00:21:25.440 --> 00:21:26.799
It's a protective mechanism.
00:21:27.039 --> 00:21:27.519
Yeah.
00:21:29.920 --> 00:21:34.400
Do you know if people in your organization feel safe to speak up about their concerns and ideas?
00:21:34.640 --> 00:21:38.079
We often talk about the importance of psychological safety on this podcast.
00:21:38.240 --> 00:21:43.119
But did you know we offer a diagnostic tool to help measure the climate of psychological safety within your team?
00:21:43.359 --> 00:21:47.039
When your people feel empowered to speak up, Annovation has the chance to thrive.
00:21:47.200 --> 00:21:52.720
Visit the CPO.co.uk to learn more about the B Talent Suite or get in touch with me on LinkedIn.
00:21:52.799 --> 00:21:55.759
That's Angela Malik, M A L I K.
00:21:56.160 --> 00:21:58.799
Open the door to the Art of the Possible today.
00:22:01.920 --> 00:22:12.240
So, I guess to answer your question from earlier, if you think about when you're giving feedback and particularly in a 360 feedback process, one thing that can really help is to deliberately slow things down at the start.
00:22:12.319 --> 00:22:17.599
So rather than going straight into the data, asking, you know, were there any pleasant surprises in the report?
00:22:17.680 --> 00:22:18.640
Why don't we start there?
00:22:18.880 --> 00:22:26.319
And sometimes people often uh look slightly thrown by that question because they hadn't really given themselves the permission to notice the positive thing.
00:22:26.400 --> 00:22:29.039
So that's quite a nice way to start the conversation.
00:22:29.279 --> 00:22:35.839
Yeah, I really like that actually, because if we go straight into the challenging content, you're activating the threat before you've got the safety.
00:22:35.920 --> 00:22:36.720
And that's the point.
00:22:36.799 --> 00:22:38.400
You need to get to that safe ground.
00:22:38.559 --> 00:22:42.720
I know there's permission to swear, but we always used to talk about the sandwich.
00:22:42.880 --> 00:22:43.119
Yeah.
00:22:43.440 --> 00:22:47.200
And people talk about it as being a really bad thing that we shouldn't do that.
00:22:47.279 --> 00:22:52.799
But if you think about psychological safety, we do need to create the safe ground before we go into the negative feedback.
00:22:52.960 --> 00:22:58.160
We need to create the opportunity to think expansively and not to be narrow in our thinking.
00:22:58.480 --> 00:23:08.960
Another way we do it is we make sure that the individual doesn't have their report too long before we get into the conversation to help understand it, because otherwise they they overly focus and ruminate, don't they?
00:23:09.200 --> 00:23:13.599
Yeah, I find that's always a really helpful practice that we implemented.
00:23:13.920 --> 00:23:18.480
So if we're giving or receiving feedback, it changes the behavior.
00:23:18.640 --> 00:23:20.640
So that threat changes that behaviour.
00:23:20.799 --> 00:23:22.720
Do you have any good examples of that?
00:23:23.119 --> 00:23:29.200
I think my best examples are when leaders believe that they're really open to feedback.
00:23:29.440 --> 00:23:32.319
And I think I'm probably one of these people, by the way.
00:23:32.480 --> 00:23:41.440
You know, I want to be open to feedback, but in the moment of receiving challenging or critical feedback, what happens is I can maybe be a bit more closed in my body language.
00:23:41.519 --> 00:23:48.799
And so I'll be sending micro signals to you to say, actually, I'm not that interested in the feedback because I'm kind of in protection mode, if that makes sense.
00:23:48.880 -->
00:23:49.200
Yeah.
00:23:49.440 --> 00:24:03.759
So it might just be, you know, I might look away or I might look down, or my shoulders might rise, or I may no longer have my head on the side, my lips may go down, you know, I may no longer be smiling, I might be frowning, or I might clasp my hands under the desk.
00:24:03.839 --> 00:24:07.519
You know, there's lots of signs that I'm not comfortable, or I might be fidgeting.
00:24:07.680 --> 00:24:11.279
There's so many signs that actually that I'm feeling unsafe.
00:24:11.440 --> 00:24:15.039
I want to close my ears to this, I'm I'm feeling discomfort.
00:24:15.359 --> 00:24:23.119
So when our behavior and our words don't match, those micro signals are very clearly read by the other person.
00:24:23.359 --> 00:24:25.599
They don't kind of connect, they don't calibrate.
00:24:25.839 --> 00:24:29.039
Imagine I was giving you that feedback and I noticed those signs in you.
00:24:29.119 --> 00:24:33.839
I might hold back from actually giving you the true feedback because you think, oh God, she doesn't really want to hear this.
00:24:34.079 --> 00:24:54.160
Well, Manda, for the record, I don't think I've noticed you do that, but let's say I was giving you feedback and you started doing that, it would then make me feel as though maybe next time I might not say anything or I might sugarcoat it more because obviously it wasn't like a pleasant experience to watch you feel that uncomfortable.
00:24:54.319 --> 00:24:55.920
I guess that probably happens quite a lot.
00:24:56.160 --> 00:24:56.880
It does, yeah.
00:24:56.960 --> 00:25:03.519
Because if you think also that those visual signals are almost more impactful, I might say, Thank you, Caitlin, that was helpful.
00:25:03.599 --> 00:25:08.720
But all of my body language, my face, my demeanour might be screaming at you, that was awful.
00:25:08.799 --> 00:25:09.839
I'm really upset.
00:25:10.000 --> 00:25:28.079
We talked about an example of you giving feedback to one of our team recently, and that while she was saying, Yes, I'm open to the feedback, you said to me that her non-verbals were desperately uncomfortable, desperately unhappy with receiving feedback because she wasn't used to receiving feedback of that kind.
00:25:28.400 --> 00:25:32.960
What somebody says and what you see can really have a very different impact.
00:25:33.279 --> 00:25:36.000
It goes back to the music, words, dance model.
00:25:36.240 --> 00:25:38.559
Yeah, which is proven, disproven, proven, disproven.
00:25:38.720 --> 00:25:39.279
Yeah, exactly.
00:25:39.519 --> 00:25:40.240
Exactly that.
00:25:40.400 --> 00:25:50.000
And if you think about Brene Brown as well and her work on vulnerability, she argues that vulnerability isn't a weakness, but it's actually one of the most important and demanding leadership behaviours.
00:25:50.160 --> 00:26:01.920
And so for me in this scenario to sit with the discomfort of receiving feedback is actually the most important thing, rather than for me to defend or explain or redirect the conversation to actually just sit with your feedback.
00:26:02.079 --> 00:26:04.559
That's the most important thing I could do as a leader.
00:26:04.720 --> 00:26:08.079
But it's probably one of the hardest things I have to do as a leader.
00:26:08.400 --> 00:26:14.400
I guess it's where trust comes in as well, because I was just reflecting on my own experience of giving feedback and receiving feedback.
00:26:14.480 --> 00:26:26.960
And being a manager, I think there definitely is in most situations a teething period, maybe where the first time you might have to give feedback to someone new, there probably is going to be those signals.
00:26:27.039 --> 00:26:29.599
But then it's about right, okay, I'm aware of it.
00:26:29.759 --> 00:26:35.599
How do I now have this open conversation and create that safety and create that trust?
00:26:35.680 --> 00:26:42.799
So then the next time they know that throughout our relationship, there is going to be feedback along the way because that is how you're going to grow.
00:26:42.960 --> 00:26:44.640
And it's never with bad intent.
00:26:44.799 --> 00:26:48.400
So yeah, it's just about, I guess, building that with people.
00:26:48.720 --> 00:26:49.039
Too.
00:26:49.359 --> 00:26:54.720
And if we go back to psychological safety, we know the foundation is all around that clarity.
00:26:54.799 --> 00:26:58.960
So people knowing what they're supposed to be doing, it's about connection and it's about trust.
00:26:59.119 --> 00:27:09.279
But also, we always try to take time to connect with people and have non-work conversations and encourage people to ask questions and show interest and to listen.
00:27:09.440 --> 00:27:14.319
So it's some really simple techniques actually to start a process before giving feedback.
00:27:14.480 --> 00:27:18.880
Don't just jump straight in with the, oh, by the way, you were rubbish at this or whatever.
00:27:19.119 --> 00:27:19.359
Yeah.
00:27:19.519 --> 00:27:21.519
As you said, it's creating those right conditions.
00:27:21.680 --> 00:27:29.920
So if we zoom out from the individual level, because I think there are structural and cultural dynamics at play that make all of this harder.
00:27:30.160 --> 00:27:35.279
Why do organizations consistently fail to build the feedback cultures they say they want?
00:27:35.440 --> 00:27:37.279
What's your perspective on that?
00:27:37.519 --> 00:27:40.000
Well, I think it comes down to low psych safety again.
00:27:40.079 --> 00:27:48.799
If you think about some of the scales on our questionnaire, it's organizations that have got a high need to please and are super polite where harmony is valued over honesty.
00:27:49.039 --> 00:28:00.559
Another one is when there's a super relentless culture where there's high performance pressure, high stakes environments, and people want to appear competent in control, so they don't want to be seen as weak in any way.
00:28:00.720 --> 00:28:04.559
It could be down
to a hierarchy, so power dynamics are really important.
00:28:04.720 --> 00:28:22.720
So there's a deference to leadership, and so speaking up carries risk, and it could be around lack of clarity, so it could be inconsistency, and so feedback is welcomed in some parts, but not in others, and also it's not really clear about what the real purpose is within a team or an organization.
00:28:23.039 --> 00:28:27.920
The thing is, I think that all of this happens in organizations, they generally want better feedback cultures.
00:28:28.160 --> 00:28:33.599
I think they're not trying to create avoidance, they've just built environments that inadvertently produce it.
00:28:33.839 --> 00:28:34.480
It's true.
00:28:34.640 --> 00:28:41.359
So it's the structural and cultural or climate signals that overpower the values and the behaviours.
00:28:41.599 --> 00:28:45.519
So it's the way people operate that overpowers the values.
00:28:45.599 --> 00:28:56.160
So they can say, you know, we value conversation, we value communication, we value people bringing their best versions of themselves to work, yet they may not actually operate in that way.
00:28:56.240 --> 00:29:00.240
So it's the way actually leaders operate that has such an impact on the environment.
00:29:00.559 --> 00:29:06.960
Which I guess kind of reinforces the importance of being a good role model in this space and being courageous.
00:29:07.200 --> 00:29:12.960
Another thing that brings to mind is that feedback's not always about the content, so it's not always about what it is.
00:29:13.119 --> 00:29:15.759
What's also happening in the background is the relationship.
00:29:15.839 --> 00:29:22.559
So there are often times where power dynamics might be at play, or maybe there's another, you know, ulterior motive.
00:29:22.880 --> 00:29:28.559
And that's why feedback can land really differently depending on who gives it and what their intention is.
00:29:28.720 --> 00:29:48.799
So if it's someone from someone you trust who their intention is purely for you to help you learn, to help you grow, to help you understand, then you will know that if the intention is for them because they're frustrated or annoyed, or for the organization because they have to give it even though they don't want to, it's going to feel very apparent.
00:29:49.039 --> 00:29:51.519
So the intention is really key.
00:29:51.759 --> 00:30:01.440
It also got me thinking about when we need objectivity in feedback via rating scales and standardized questions and competency models.
00:30:01.599 --> 00:30:05.920
We also need to remember that at the end of the day is the two people having a conversation.
00:30:06.160 --> 00:30:16.880
Yeah, and I don't think it's wrong to have all the things you just mentioned, you know, the robust rating scales and competencies and indicators and everything, but they're ultimately just a starting point for gathering data.
00:30:17.039 --> 00:30:23.279
Once you've gathered the data, it's the conversation that's the most important and of key value.
00:30:23.440 --> 00:30:31.599
So giving people the skills to have the conversation and to create the environment, which is fundamentally what we're talking about here, is the most important thing.
00:30:31.839 --> 00:30:55.599
I guess it's um if you think about a 360, if you're an external person giving 360, there might be not as much hesitation because you're just literally going through that report with an individual and there might be some negative feedback in there, which yes, you're going to have to manage, but that's a very different experience to if you're a manager and you have some ad hoc feedback you need to give someone, but I think still useful in both scenarios.
00:30:55.839 --> 00:31:01.920
So if all of this is true, feedback is fundamentally a threat response problem, not just a skill problem.
00:31:02.160 --> 00:31:03.200
What actually works?
00:31:03.359 --> 00:31:07.839
What moves people from avoidance to genuine engagement with feedback?
00:31:08.160 --> 00:31:14.799
So it doesn't matter what models you have or what programs you have or what training you do if you don't have the right environment.
00:31:14.960 --> 00:31:21.200
So if people do not feel safe to speak up, then they're not going to give feedback openly and robustly.
00:31:21.359 --> 00:31:26.160
So the first investment is in psychological safety to encourage honest and open feedback.
00:31:26.480 --> 00:31:27.440
Create trust as well.
00:31:27.680 --> 00:31:28.000
Exactly.
00:31:28.160 --> 00:31:30.400
The second one is to reduce social threat triggers.
00:31:30.480 --> 00:31:33.279
So you think about ROC's scarf domains.
00:31:33.440 --> 00:31:37.440
It means that understanding what those threats are and overcoming them.
00:31:37.519 --> 00:31:42.079
And then it's helping people to regulate their emotions, so it's all the resilience stuff as well.
00:31:42.240 --> 00:31:55.119
So helping them understand how they feel and to combat those emotions before they go into those situations so they can create that neuroplasticity and learn so that when they next have a feedback, they're in a better, stronger position.
00:31:55.359 --> 00:31:57.279
It's like creating that growth mindset as well.
00:31:57.440 --> 00:32:06.400
And actually, it made me think of a really useful thing that you can do in a debrief or any feedback, say, this might bring up some feelings, that's really normal.
00:32:06.640 --> 00:32:08.720
It doesn't mean anything is wrong, for instance.
00:32:08.880 --> 00:32:11.599
This is going to be useful for your progression going forward.
00:32:11.759 --> 00:32:16.799
And I guess people are often trying to process the data and manage the emotional response to that data at the same time.
00:32:16.880 --> 00:32:22.079
So it's useful to have like a word or a phrase that you might go in with to just set the tone.
00:32:22.400 --> 00:32:23.599
I think that's great actually.
00:32:23.759 --> 00:32:46.079
So giving
permission for people to experience the emotions and acknowledge them can actually reduce the negative impact of those emotions because it's okay, particularly for men, because men and women feel differently about expressing emotions, particularly can be helpful for men because men are more wary in sharing their emotions than women just because of our society.
00:32:46.559 --> 00:32:57.200
So, a potential question then, Amanda, that I think might be useful for our listeners to get your thoughts on is how should organizations approach embedding an effective feedback culture?
00:32:57.519 --> 00:32:58.559
There's a few things.
00:32:58.720 --> 00:33:02.079
One, it's about normalizing feedback as a continual habit.
00:33:02.319 --> 00:33:04.319
So everybody realizes this anyway.
00:33:04.400 --> 00:33:07.599
It shouldn't be a PMP performance management 360 thing.
00:33:07.680 --> 00:33:12.960
It just happens all the time in small doses, and therefore it's much less emotionally loaded.
00:33:13.200 --> 00:33:19.839
The other thing, of course, is about creating the environment so people feel safe and giving people the skills to actually give feedback.
00:33:20.000 --> 00:33:21.200
They're fundamental.
00:33:21.440 --> 00:33:28.640
We need to just make sure that everybody understands the importance of feedback and who's benefiting from it.
00:33:28.799 --> 00:33:35.599
You may benefit from it, Caitlin, from giving me feedback in the long term, but fundamentally I'm the person who's going to benefit the most.
00:33:35.759 --> 00:33:42.000
So understanding that we're not doing it necessarily for ourselves in the short term, but will have a positive impact on us in the long term.
00:33:42.240 --> 00:33:43.680
So win-winning in that sense.
00:33:43.920 --> 00:33:50.319
A reflection I had, I think that comes through in all of this, is the challenge of making the dynamics visible.
00:33:50.559 --> 00:34:01.359
So what I mean by that is the threat responses, the relational dynamics, the micro signals we're talking about, all those things that are often happening below the surface and they're not part of the formal conversation.
00:34:01.519 --> 00:34:12.880
So I suppose this is where we talk about structured tools like 360s or psychological safety diagnostics and psychometrics, they can be valuable as a way of potentially surfacing what's otherwise invisible.
00:34:13.199 --> 00:34:14.239
Yeah, they can be.
00:34:14.400 --> 00:34:17.360
I think we're talking about blind spots ultimately, aren't we?
00:34:17.599 --> 00:34:20.800
So tools are fantastic for identifying blind spots.
00:34:20.960 --> 00:34:33.199
The point of using those products and using tools is not to just to create benchmarks and to understand how populations are performing against standards, it's to give people insight.
00:34:33.280 --> 00:34:35.679
And that insight is a real starting point.
00:34:35.920 --> 00:34:41.199
What we often see from using those tools is there's some elements that
are highly visible to the individual.
00:34:41.280 --> 00:34:51.280
If you think about the jihari window, but there's some elements that are really kind of unclear or were not visible to the individual, and that's where those conversations, those discovery areas, they're so so helpful.
00:34:51.519 --> 00:35:05.360
So, Amanda, I actually wanted to wrap up and ask you if you have any stories or you could share an example of a bit of feedback that really stuck with you or that was dealt with in a constructive way, everything that we've been talking about.
00:35:05.760 --> 00:35:06.559
How interesting.
00:35:06.719 --> 00:35:09.119
What's jumping into my head and not the good ones?
00:35:09.440 --> 00:35:14.559
Immediately I'm thinking about pieces of feedback that I've received that weren't handled well.
00:35:14.719 --> 00:35:16.719
They're the ones that have really stuck with me.
00:35:16.880 --> 00:35:23.920
It's quite hard to think of an example where feedback has been delivered well and has had a positive impact.
00:35:24.239 --> 00:35:27.760
I think one is around my use of language.
00:35:28.079 --> 00:35:36.000
Because I'm quite enthusiastic and positive, I can use words like amazing quite a lot.
00:35:36.159 --> 00:35:38.159
So I can get overly excited about things.
00:35:38.320 --> 00:35:39.119
It's amazing.
00:35:39.360 --> 00:35:45.760
So I have had feedback that I can appear overly positive and overly enthusiastic.
00:35:46.000 --> 00:35:50.320
So that was one that was quite helpful because I don't want to come in looking too happy clappy.
00:35:50.400 --> 00:35:52.639
I, you know, I need to be realistic about what we can achieve.
00:35:52.880 --> 00:35:54.639
But did you feel like they delivered it well?
00:35:54.880 --> 00:35:57.199
Yeah, because it was also about me being on stage as well.
00:35:57.280 --> 00:36:01.679
And so I'm quite sensitive about when I've been on stage, whether it was okay or not.
00:36:01.920 --> 00:36:07.440
So trying to make sure that I'm not using filler words or repetitive words on stage is really important to me.
00:36:07.760 --> 00:36:10.320
You've definitely come to me afterwards and said, How was that?
00:36:10.480 --> 00:36:13.599
Which I think again is good because that's you're asking for the feedback.
00:36:13.679 --> 00:36:17.280
And that's what I was thinking earlier when we were talking about those signals.
00:36:17.360 --> 00:36:21.039
I was thinking, when she's done that, how does she look when she's asked me?
00:36:21.119 --> 00:36:24.880
And that's, I mean, I feel like you've been quite open to it, not too fidgety.
00:36:25.199 --> 00:36:28.480
Not too fidgety, looking away, avoiding your eye contact.
00:36:28.800 --> 00:36:30.719
Another one, I know I've had feedback.
00:36:30.800 --> 00:36:32.880
I was just thinking about a r another really tough one.
00:36:33.119 --> 00:36:39.119
A tough one is I know that I've had feedback from the team around project management because it's not my strength.
00:36:39.199 --> 00:36:49.920
Because I'm a big picture thinker and because I'm more visionary and an ideas person, whilst I am a complete finisher, if you think about the old Belbin team type, I'm not the planner.
00:36:50.159 --> 00:36:54.000
So I need people around me who are very robust in their planning.
00:36:54.159 --> 00:37:01.679
And so I have had feedback about that where I may be less clear on the steps, for example, or tracking projects against steps.
00:37:01.840 --> 00:37:05.119
And so now I have people around me who do that for me, which is fantastic.
00:37:05.360 --> 00:37:09.920
Well, that's why we have teams, and we have a team of FIFA, so we can all play to our strengths.
00:37:10.079 --> 00:37:11.599
I still don't like feedback though.
00:37:11.760 --> 00:37:17.360
And so for me, I know we've just done this whole pod, I'm not the most comfortable person receiving feedback.
00:37:17.519 --> 00:37:20.639
I've always had a fear of response, so I totally get it.
00:37:20.800 --> 00:37:23.519
And in the past, I haven't been as comfortable giving feedback.
00:37:23.599 --> 00:37:29.039
I'm much more comfortable giving feedback now because I really see the difference the feedback has made for people.
00:37:29.119 --> 00:37:31.199
So I'm much, much more comfortable giving it.
00:37:31.440 --> 00:37:37.360
I was just thinking myself there about receiving feedback and how, yeah, I'm the same as you.
00:37:37.440 --> 00:37:40.800
It's not something I think I'm really looking forward to hearing this.
00:37:40.960 --> 00:37:43.599
But I do think it does depend on the person sometimes.
00:37:43.760 --> 00:37:56.880
If it was someone that I feel like I've got a very strong relationship with, then I know that if they're giving me a bit of feedback, it's purely I know through and through it's for me, then I'm more likely to approach them and just say, was there anything I could have done better?
00:37:57.360 --> 00:37:58.880
That's probably what I go in with.
00:37:59.280 --> 00:38:04.400
Whereas if it was someone new, that hurts my soul sometimes to have to ask.
00:38:04.559 --> 00:38:08.719
But that goes back to our point around creating that relationship and creating that safety.
00:38:08.880 --> 00:38:13.119
But ultimately the reality is you're going to be potentially receiving feedback from someone that you might not know very well.
00:38:13.199 --> 00:38:19.199
And you have to be prepared on the receiving end as well as to be ready to give feedback to someone you also don't know very well.
00:38:19.360 --> 00:38:22.000
So it's it's good to be prepared for all scenarios.
00:38:22.239 --> 00:38:23.519
Well, thank you, Amanda.
00:38:23.679 --> 00:38:24.880
That time flew by.
00:38:25.039 --> 00:38:28.320
I think it's because it's one of these topics that I'm always talking about.
00:38:28.480 --> 00:38:48.239
But I wanted to end with a simple version, I guess, of a key takeaway around if someone is listening to this and they're in an organization where feedback is hard, where people hold back from giving the feedback, or where the honest conversations are not quite happening, what's the one thing you'd want them to take from this episode?
00:38:48.559 --> 00:38:54.159
So the key message is that when feedback feels difficult, it's not usually about capability.
00:38:54.239 --> 00:38:57.519
It's much more about vulnerability and how people feel.
00:38:57.760 --> 00:39:06.719
So if that's the case, look at the environment and ask yourself have we got the right conditions for people to be honest and to take interpersonal risk?
00:39:06.880 --> 00:39:10.400
And what do we need to change for them to feel like it's less of a risk?
00:39:10.559 --> 00:39:12.960
So the science is really clear on this.
00:39:13.119 --> 00:39:24.800
You need consistent leadership behaviours, you need to build trust, people need to feel like they belong, they need to feel like people are genuine in their desire to help one another.
00:39:25.039 --> 00:39:39.760
So to accept the discomfort and to face into those tricky times of giving and receiving feedback and to learn from it, we need to recognize that everybody's doing it for the right intention, for the right purpose.
00:39:40.000 --> 00:39:44.000
And I'm gonna finish with taking a page out of your book and say, amazing.
00:39:46.079 --> 00:39:49.760
Um, but no, thank you, Amanda, and thank you to everyone who's listening.
00:39:50.000 --> 00:39:53.679
If this has been useful, do feel free to share it or leave a review.
00:39:53.840 --> 00:39:59.039
Give us feedback in the spirit of giving feedback, both constructive and positive.
00:39:59.199 --> 00:40:00.320
We won't bite back.
00:40:00.400 --> 00:40:05.360
But it does make a genuine difference to how many people we can reach and share our learnings around.
00:40:05.519 --> 00:40:07.920
So we'll be back soon with another episode.
00:40:08.159 --> 00:40:09.679
Until then, take care.
00:40:09.760 --> 00:40:10.800
Thanks, Amanda.
00:40:10.960 --> 00:40:14.239
Thank you, Caitlin, and thank you, Christian, for the prep on this pod.
00:40:14.320 --> 00:40:15.440
And thank you, everyone, for listening.
00:40:15.599 --> 00:40:18.079
Hope you have a wonderful and successful day.