“Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger.â€
 Franklin B. Jones
As some of my readers know, my wife and I raise guide dog puppies for the blind and now have Enzo who is 4 months old.
At nine months of age, all guide dog puppies go in for their a formal evaluation. It really is feedback to the volunteer puppy raisers about how we are doing–a form of 360 feedback.
Feedback can be really helpful to improve our performance or it can be damaging. One of the most cited research studies on performance feedback is based on meta-analysis by Kluger and DeNisi who reviewed over 600 studies (607 effect sizes, 23,633 observations) on performance feedback ((Kluger, A. & DeNisi (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, meta-analysis and preliminary feedback theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-285)). They found that although there was a significant effect for feedback interventions (d=.41), one third of all studies showed performance declines.
Indeed, if performance feedback was a drug many of us could be easily sued for malpractice. Some new research has emerged which helps clarify ways to make feedback received more positively and constructively.
1. Ask the Right People for Feedback and Ask for the Right Type of Feedback
A new study by In-Sue Oh and colleagues suggests that feedback about interpersonal sensitivity, empathy and agreeableness might not be very useful for leaders ((Oh, I., & Berry, C. M. (2009). The five-factor model of personality and managerial performance: Validity gains through the use of 360 degree performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1498-1513)). Their research suggests that this “five factor” concept of “agreeableness might not always be a desirable trait for managers except in “getting along environments” (non-profits, community based organizations) so feedback on other task related behaviors might be more important. Second, their study suggests that peer, and not directs reports, is more accurate in predicting actual performance. It appears that raters have unique perspectives and each are utilizing different lenses to observe and evaluate behavior.
2. Be More Prescriptive In Interpreting Feedback for Others
A interesting study by Robert Hooijberg and colleagues looking at what makes coaching effective surveyed 232 managers from diverse organizations ((Hooijberg, R. & Lane, N. (2009). Using multisource feedback coaching effectively in executive education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8, 483-493)). One of their key questions asked, “What did your coach do that you found effective?”
From the view of the client or participants, three major categories determined feedback success: 1) Interpreting results (34.8%), 2) Inspiring action (27.5%) and 3) Professionalism (23.3%). The majority of clients thought the best coaches were those who analyzed strengths and weaknesses, helped assimilate feedback and make concrete developmental recommendations.
This study really seems to contradict much of the coaching literature and suggests that participants using 360 feedback expect and want their coach to take a more active role in interpreting their results and making developmental recommendations. This finding IS consistent with the concept of “feedforward” by Marshall Goldsmith who suggests letting us know what we can be doing more, less or differently in the future to become better and more successful.
We are looking forward to our own feedback report in a few months to highlight what we are doing well and what things we need to do more, less or differently to help Enzo become a guide dog for the blind. Â I will keep you posted on what we find out….Be well….