There is no failure, only feedback.
—Robert Allen
The Six-Legged Sales Call
I often get the chance to work with sales managers in the field as they travel with their sales team. It is part of my consulting expertise, and my clients find it a good way to assess talent and help sales managers become better at developing their people.
On one such assignment, I was working with a sales manager and one of his reps in the biopharma industry. The salesperson was relatively new, and the sales manager was cotraveling as they often do in many industries to reduce the ramp-up time for new sales hires.
I had been asked to work with this sales manager because he was struggling with his people. His 360 feedback reviews indicated that his people did not feel he provided clear direction and developmental coaching. My standard method for determining the source of the issue is to sit with the manager and his or her salesperson while the manager conducts a pre-call discussion as I observe and take notes. Then I travel with both to the customer meeting (I am introduced as a consultant who is helping the company to improve their sales and leadership skills). After the customer meeting, I listen to the sales manager provide feedback and coaching the salesperson. This gives me a pretty good idea of how a manager can quickly increase his or her effectiveness and communication with the sales team. Most of the time, this works well and a manager’s ratings improve significantly.
While the pre-call discussion went reasonably well, the customer meeting did not. It became quickly clear to me that this salesperson had a long way to go to become proficient at selling the company’s product. Almost immediately, she lost control of the meeting as the customer diverged from the main discussion going off on a tangent about past customer service issues and the competition. Add to that the fact that several objections came up that were left unanswered. I was surprised that the sales manager let things go along these lines without jumping in to salvage the meeting and at least making some progress. As it was not my role, all I could do was watch.
I was very interested in how the post-meeting debrief was going to go after such a train-wreck of a meeting. We met in the cafeteria to debrief, which went like this.
The manager asked, “How did you think that meeting went?”
The salesperson responded, “Horrible, just horrible. I don’t know why this keeps happening even when I prepare for these meetings. Things just seem to get offtrack and I end up accomplishing nothing.”
To my surprise, the manager tried to make her feel better, “Don’t be so hard on yourself. It wasn’t as bad as you say it was. There was some good that came out of it.”
“Really, like what?” she asked noticeably sarcastic.
“Well, I think you learned a valuable lesson in there. You learned that sometimes things don’t go the way you want them to.”
“Yes, but I don’t feel I accomplished anything. What do I have to do to get better?” She asked frustrated.
“Just keep plugging away and keep doing what you are doing. Eventually it will start working for you.”
“But what should I do differently?” What should I work on? How can I get better at my job?”
“Don’t worry, don’t worry. You’re doing fine. Just keep up the good work and don’t stop trying. You’ll get it eventually. Don’t be so hard on yourself.”
I couldn’t hold my tongue any longer; from this dialogue, I knew immediately what the problem was and wanted to send a strong message.
“Do you mind if I give some feedback to your rep?” I asked.
The manager turned to me with a kind of stunned look but gave me the okay.
I turned to the salesperson and looking her straight in the eye said, “You’re right. That customer meeting was a train-wreck, wasn’t it?”
A bit shocked but paying rapt attention, she responded, “Yes it was.” And tears welled up in her eyes.
But I didn’t back off. “And you’re emotional not because you’re sad, but because you’re frustrated. Aren’t you?”
“Yes,” she replied, her eyes swelling even more.
“You’re frustrated because you know that you are struggling but you don’t know how to get any better. Is that right?”
“Yes,” she said again, but this time with a dawning awareness.
And I said, “Well, that’s a good place to start then. Let me explain why that meeting went so poorly and give you a couple skills that will help you avoid that happening in the future. Is that okay with you?”
“Yes,” she said, her face brightening significantly.
Cheerleading Is Not Managing
Why is it that managers think that being a cheerleader is the same as being a manager? While managing, especially sales managing, does have some rah-rah aspect to it, cheerleading is not a skill. It is an attempt to motivate people through your own excitement. I remember sitting through motivational sessions when I was a middle manager in corporate America and thinking, “How does this help me do my job? Does this time I’ve taken out of my day help me make my objectives? Does this guy in front of the room understand the challenges of my job, or does he think that all anyone needs to be effective is to walk over some hot coals or zip from one tree to another while being encouraged to scream at the top of my lungs to release my inner demons?
Give me a break. And don’t even start on trust falls . . .
Managing people takes all sorts of challenging skills like empathetic listening, detailed observation, and a keen understanding of human needs and desires. Sitting in a sweat-lodge with some pseudo-guru using amateur psychology to try and make you a better manager is, and I’m sorry to say this, stupid and a poor use of a manager’s time and company money.
Feedback Rule #1: Be Honest and Constructive
If you treat people like adults, they often act like adults. When you treat them like children . . .
Adults can handle honest and sincere input on their performance especially if given by a manager that knows what he or she is doing. Soft-pedaling difficult feedback does not do justice to the employee. I am often asked by my clients to coach struggling employees and managers who are in jeopardy of losing their jobs or being blocked from promotion due to rather simple and easily corrected behaviors. Almost always, when I tell them that there is a problem, they are taken aback by the seriousness of the issue. Managers give mixed messages when they couch their communication in niceties and soft language to avoid making an employee uncomfortable. And that may be one indicator of a problem, the fact that the employee is too comfortable with the status quo. So perhaps you want to make them a bit uncomfortable. At least if it is a serious issue.
I have a bunch of friends that get together once a month for a dinner and movie, usually at my place. It is a regular thing with a regular crowd. But one of my friends, Tricia, has an annoying tendency to start a conversation often at the most suspenseful part in a movie. As I said, it is annoying but one of the things you put up with as a friend. One month I realized that Tricia was no longer invited to our movie night and inquired why. My friends said that they wanted to watch a movie without being interrupted for once, and so neglected to invite Tricia.
To me, this didn’t seem fair. I invited Tricia despite my friend’s advice telling them that I would handle it and make things good. As we watched the movie, as if on cue, Tricia asked if anyone was following the local elections. I interrupted her, “Hey Tricia. Do you mind if we talk about that after the movie is over?” “No problem,” she replied and continued to watch in silence. Then again after about a half hour, she spoke up, “Did anyone see the Seahawks game this weekend? Great game, wasn’t it?”
“Tricia,” I said. “Can we please discuss the game after the movie?”
“Sure,” she said looking a bit hurt.
After the movie, I had a chance to sit with Tricia and explain myself. I told her that when she talks through a movie, people have a problem concentrating and that it is a small but irritating behavior. In the end, she thanked me for bringing it up and letting her know about the issue. And she’s fine now.
Which brings me to my point, which is that honest feedback can be incredibly helpful to people as long as you keep it constructive.
The best feedback, whether positive or negative (corrective), is always best when it is honest and constructive. Arm yourself with specifics before engaging with the employee and check your sources.
Like Tricia, one of the things Charles needs to do his job and meet his responsibilities is a clear understanding of the things he is doing well and the things he is not. So I asked him, “How often did your previous manager sit down with you and discuss your performance?”
“Well, that always happened once a year; at performance review time.”
“Did you have any type of ongoing developmental plan?”
“What’s that?”
“You know, a list of things that you do well and that you need to work on?”
“Never got anything like that from him. Only really met when he had a problem with me, when something was wrong.”
“Do you know all the issues that he regarded as troublesome with you?’
“Well, he always seemed to scream about being late. But that’s about it.”
“Okay, Charles. I’m going to level with you. He had quite a few notes regarding your performance and I’d like to take them one by one and see if we can’t get a handle on this and turn things around. Are you okay with that?”
“Um, okay. Not too sure but I’ll give it a shot.”
Pick Your Battles
Before you sit down with an employee, choose the specific behavior or behaviors you want to reinforce and limit your feedback to those specific behaviors. Managers tend to try and give as much feedback as possible when they have the attention of the employee. This can be overwhelming. A manager will be most effective by concentrating on one or two behaviors at a time. So, pick your battles. As a manager, you may want to communicate multiple areas of improvement, but remember that it is difficult for people to try and improve performance or behavior in too many areas. Stay with the 80/20 rule. Also, decide what you are going to say and how you are going to say it. As an example, let’s say you recently sat through a presentation by one of your employees who did an excellent job of presenting an organized outline that was easy to follow. You will want to prepare to encourage the behavior of providing the outline.
Another aspect of encouragement is that it shows that you are paying attention. When it comes to Charles, I focused first on areas he did well to build his confidence and reinforce that my role is to help him begin to self-manage and motivate. That sends a positive message. At first, he was reluctant to see the value in our discussions and was suspicious of my motives. And I realized that it would take time to overcome some of his experiences with previous managers.
Feedback Rule #2: Get to the Point
For years I read and listened to a bunch of management consultants proselytizeon the best ways to give and receive feedback. And while I learned some good techniques, there were many that contradicted each other and some that just seemed stupid.
One idea I got from a management guru was to always start with a question when discussing performance. Actually, I had a boss who must have read that book because he used this particular technique regularly. He would stroll into my office, close the door, take a seat, and ask, “Hey Steve. How do you think you are doing in your job?” So first, by closing the door he set a tone that he had something to say he didn’t want others to hear. Then by beginning with a question, he put it on me to figure out what he was getting at.
This always, always pissed me off. Why? Because I felt like, and often was, being set up. It was obvious that he came in with his own agenda. But because he had read this book, he thought that by getting me to open up and share my own shortcomings he was being a “compassionate” boss. It seemed like he was treating me like a child. If you have something to say, just say it. I’m a big boy. I can take it. And if I disagree with you, I will tell you. Sheesh.
Another stupid idea is what is called the “feedback sandwich.” This is the technique in which your start with something good that the employee does, a skill or an approach or something. Then you follow it with the real reason you started the discussion, the behavior or performance you want the employee to change. And then you leave the employee with another area in which he or she is performing well. A feedback sandwich. Get it? Sometimes referred to as the “sh**” sandwich, for good reasons.
The only problem with this is that people are not dumb. They know you have an agenda and that the “sugar coating” is just sugar coating, an outside coating that hides the real reason for your interaction. One of the most important qualities that you want in your relationship with your people is credibility. And this type of feedback does not contribute to your credibility; it may detract from it.
So here is the deal. You only need to ensure that your feedback has two elements. All the feedback and coaching you provide to people need to be honest and constructive. That’s it. Treat people like adults and they are more likely to act like ones. Treat them like children and you will encourage immature behavior.
In the initial meeting, Charles and I clarified and mutually agreed on a set of clearly defined expectations. The next step in helping Charles solve his performance problem was to provide him regular, frequent feedback on his progress. So we set up a weekly meeting to review progress and deliverables.
When asked how he received feedback from his previous manager, Charles said he received input mostly when he screwed up. His manager would point out what he was doing wrong and tell Charles how to fix the problem. He called it “constructive criticism.”
Sometimes his manager would get frustrated and complain that Charles wasn’t motivated. Charles insisted he was motivated but had his own way of doing things. Occasionally, when Charles did a good job, his manager would stop by his office telling him to “Keep up the good work!” which didn’t help much.
Feedback Rule #3: It’s Supposed to Be a Dialogue, Not a Monologue
Some managers like the sound of their own voice too much. They think that the definition of listening is waiting to talk. All feedback and coaching (and I use the terms interchangeably) should be an interactive and engaged dialogue with a give and take of ideas and opinions. Some managers tend to talk over their people while others don’t give enough of their own input.
Introverted managers can have the same problems as overly-extroverted managers but for different reasons. A more reserved and introspective boss might seem disengaged and preoccupied when in fact they may be very engaged and paying close attention. People who work for these types of managers often feel like they are not being heard. Quick tip: if you are one of these types of managers, simply stating you own opinion can help. The phrase “Give me a minute to think about that” or “I’m not sure I agree with that” is a beginning in the right direction.
On the other side, overly extroverted managers could do well to stop themselves and ask questions, especially when they have a strong opinion. Asking an extroverted manager his or her opinion is like bait to a bass; sometimes they can’t help themselves. And as a manager, you don’t always want your people to know how you feel about every subject; at times, it is best to be hard to read. And if you always give your people the answer, they don’t have to figure things out for themselves.
Try this as a practice; the next time one of your people ask you for your opinion, use the phrase “I have an opinion, but I’d like to hear yours first.” You might learn something.
Engagement is about back-and-forth dialogue and challenge response. If you find yourself talking too much, then be quiet. And if you find yourself listening too much, state your opinion out loud.
Using questions, getting comfortable with silence, getting uncomfortable with silence, and listening to hear and not just validate your own opinion are keys to building an engaged environment in which people begin to feel comfortable self-managing and making decisions.
Reinforcing Feedback
The term “feedback” is in and of itself a neutral term. In the engineering world, a feedback loop is used to auto-calibrate and improve or extend performance. In that world at least, feedback is helpful whether it provides desired or undesired performance metrics. But in the corporate world, “feedback” often has a negative connotation, and for good reason. Many managers are less than adept at providing honest and constructive feedback to their people.
What comes to mind when you hear the words “Can I see you in my office?” Or “First, let me tell you that I think you’re doing a great job . . .” See? Most people never want to hear these words because they know how the discussion is going to go.
So, let’s start with the positive side of the feedback equation: discussion and dialogue to reinforce or extend good or above-average performance. While this often gets little attention, especially due to the results-driven nature of the corporate world, it is extremely important as a management tool. Catching people doing things right is a great way to build confidence and create self-managing behavior.
But I am often challenged with the question “Why should I praise people for just doing their job?” It is a legitimate point until you know the difference between praise and encouragement.
Be Specific and Behavioral
There is a big difference between praise and encouragement.
Managers who want to facilitate learning use encouragement to help people manage their own behavior. They realize employees are fallible and focus on the process of improvement, not accomplishment. When managers encourage, they concentrate on the process and progress toward the result. Managers facilitate achievement by identifying the end goal and managing the progress toward the result. Encouragement is part of a process-based management approach.
Encouragement shows employees that managers have respect and confidence in their ability to manage their own behavior. It recognizes effort and incremental improvement. Encouragement considers a person’s imperfection and struggle to improve. And it is not dependent on achieving an result, only on effort. It can be applied in process.
Encouragement focuses on behavior and avoids value judgments. The process of using encouragement is participatory and requires managers pay attention and realize that the more they try to control, the more they might negatively impact a person’s motivation.
Encouragement is a tool to help people manage their own progress. It helps managers to separate the individual from the act. Managers who use this type of feedback see employees as works-in-progress and respect the individual as having inherent self-worth independent of his or her behaviors. Encouragement focuses on people’s improvement and their assets and strengths. Praise focuses on past performance.
The word “encouragement” comes from the Latin root “coure,” meaning heart. The act of using encouragement is meant to help people have the heart or “courage” to make decisions for themselves, to self-manage. Managers who rely solely on praise usually see their people as sets of isolated behaviors engaged in achieving results for the manager or company. Good managers see their people as works-in-progress struggling to get better all the time. It is the manager’s responsibility to help with this struggle.
There are situations where praise is appropriate. Praise can be a genuine expression of accomplishment and gratitude. Praise is best used to recognize significant progress or to celebrate large successes. The effective use of praise is based upon the underlying motivations of the manager and employee. If the manager’s motivation is to control no matter how praise is delivered, the employee will feel controlled. If the employee is motivated by a need to “please” the manager, then she or he might become dependent on praise and use it in a subtle way to try and control the manager.
Discouragement?
Is discouragement the opposite of encouragement? While encouragement is an active process, discouragement can be the passive result of the process of encouragement. By encouraging certain positive behaviors, a person discourages negative ones. The difference might best be understood by determining the intended purpose of the feedback. If a person wants to reinforce a certain productive behavior, he or she will encourage that behavior. If a person wants to correct a negative behavior, he or she does so by encouraging the desired alternative positive behavior.
People who try to discourage behavior may be using the term to take the edge off “constructive criticism.” Encouragement can be broken down into two different sets of steps depending on the manager’s objectives in the encouragement process. There are two forms of feedback: one to reinforce positive behavior and another to correct negative behavior.
Charles’s previous manager primarily used the praise approach to try and motivate Charles. Words like “great job” and “keep up the good work” are praise-words. They occur after the fact and refer to past behavior. They are specific only to the desired result.
And managers who pay primary attention to the bottom line and end results are usually good at praise. Praise to an employee who is not feeling good about his or her performance can further demotivate the employee. Overuse of praise demotivates because it feels as though the manager is not paying attention to the actual performance, only to outcomes. Employees who perceive their manager as authoritarian will see this type of feedback as a thinly veiled attempt to control. Praise is a tool that is part of an extrinsic motivation system based upon rewards and punishments.
The alternative to relying solely on praise is to use encouragement. Encouragement is process-based feedback. Using encouragement takes more time and thought, but the result is much more impactful on behavior. Managers who attempt to control behavior use praise. Encouragement helps people learn how to manage their own behavior. Using encouragement in place of praise or criticism facilitates the process of learning to make better decisions.
Elements of good, encouraging feedback include pointing out specific improvement areas or skills that are important to the job and help a person improve, not just achieve. So a manager has to pay attention to areas of needed improvement and think about how to reinforce those in a dialogue that is authentic and, well, encouraging.
Example of Praise: |
“Great presentation, keep up the good work!” |
Example of Encouragement: |
“Great presentation. I especially thought you did a good job of handling all the questions and keeping everyone focused.” |
Example of Praise: |
“You’re doing really great! |
Example of Encouragement: |
“You are doing a really great job! Your attention to detail and keeping me in the loop are good skills. If I can help with anything let me know.” |
Using encouragement forces a manager to be more specific, more behavioral, and very much more helpful.
It isn’t that the phrase “Great presentation!” or “You’re doing great!” is bad; just incomplete. So, the next time you find yourself praising an employee, simply remember to finish the sentence.
Start Collaborative, but Be Ready to Become Directive
In my experience, one of the reasons managers avoid giving feedback is that some employees are very good at tying them in knots whenever they try to talk about performance. These are referred to as “rat holes,” and an employee who is good at “rat holing” makes it difficult to send a clear message. You know the deal, you want to talk about an important issue, and before you know it, you have been dragged into a discussion on the failures of the corporate compensation program to satisfy this one employee’s desires. A good indicator to a manager of whether he or she has a rat-hole problem is if he or she enters a discussion with an employee and the manager is the one who comes out with a “to-do” list.
All performance discussions should start off collaboratively. After all, it is a good practice to expect things to go well and have the employee accept responsibility for the issue or behavioral problem. But that is not always the case, especially with an employee who is adept at the skill of “rat holing.” A key point to remember is that this irritating behavior is not about problem solving or improving situations. It is about power, and more specifically about the power the company has over employee expectations.
But regardless of the power issues, you might be asking yourself why I am bringing this up at this point, especially when discussing positive or reinforcing feedback and coaching. Well, some employees just always seem to have an axe to grind. And the person they want to grind their axe against is you, their manager. So while starting off with a cooperative approach is a good idea, realizing when the conversation begins to deteriorate is another key manager skill.
Here’s an example of how things can get off track. Let’s use the scenario that one of your people just completed a project that necessitated the input of multiple departments. Let’s also say that this employee, we’ll call her Chris, did a great job.
“Hey Chris. I saw you finished that project on time and with some great results.”
“Yeah, well, no thanks to you or other departments. I had to do all the work myself without help from anyone!”
Now at this point, you might be thinking that an appropriate “collegial” response might be something like “Sorry to hear that Chris. Is there something I could have done to help you with that?” But if you know this person has a history of making conversations crazy, that is just inviting more drama.
A better response might be, “Sorry to hear that you had some challenges pulling it off. Well, all I wanted to say was that I think you did a great job of making sure everyone’s input was recognized and integrated into the project. Thanks for that.”
I call it the validate–redirect skill. You want to validate the employee’s concern but redirect the conversation back to the issue at hand. Validating is recognizing the feelings of the person as legitimate; after all, we are all entitled to our opinions, even if they are based on false assumptions. But to keep the conversation productive, the manager has to control the direction of the dialogue. Your job is to be efficient, so it is important to pay attention to the direction the discussion is going, and take control to keep it on track.
When to Escalate?
I use the word “escalation” in this situation as a term for becoming increasingly directive in your conversation. As a manager, you should pick up on verbal and nonverbal signals as to whether the employee is taking responsibility for the issue at hand. And if there isn’t any change in behavior, then perhaps another conversation is needed. If in the first coaching meeting, the employee seemed to accept responsibility and agreed to change the behavior but didn’t, then it is time to escalate the discussion to a more direct and honest conversation. Remember, your goal is to have these conversations as seldom as possible. So, if you are not getting through to your employee, you have to become increasingly directive.
This is when the phrase “Can I see you in my office?” becomes appropriate. Or if the behavior continues after multiple conversations, think about the message you are sending. Once again, if you desire to avoid making the employee uncomfortable, you might want to revisit that; you might want to make this person realize that the comfort zone he or she has established is not in his or her best interest.
When I want to get on a person’s radar about a specific multiple offense or just something egregious, I use phrases like “We need to talk” or “Something came up that we need to address immediately.”
But keep in mind that your intention is not to punish, even if you may want to. Your intention is to help this person avoid the negative consequences of the behavior. Your intention is to help them, not punish them. So, making sure you are both on the same page as the discussion ends is crucial to this person’s success.
A manager’s job is to listen to his or her employees, but in this type of situation, no amount of listening is going to solve this problem. Remember where your control as a manager starts and ends. You cannot make someone like this happy, but you can reinforce and perhaps make a small positive impact on his or her performance.
One of the most important characteristic in an employee–supervisor relationship is trust. And while it is important, it is not always necessary. In fact, with some people, it’s not even possible. New and young managers make the mistake of thinking that they must empathize with the person to prevent the discussion from getting heated or someone gets his or her feelings hurt. There are two sides to the trust equation. The first thing to do is to honestly ask yourself if you are trustworthy and whether you follow through and keep your promises. And if you are pretty sure that you have been fair, even-handed, and clear with an employee (especially over time), then trust should develop.
But the other side of the equation is the employee. Is this person capable of trusting a manager? It is important to realize that there will always be people who have authority issues, that regardless of how trustworthy and honest you are, they will not trust you because you are their boss. That doesn’t mean you can’t work with them, even for a lengthy period. But realizing that can save you a lot of time and energy trying to meet the trust expectations of an employee when they are unattainable.
So, from time to time, you may have to cut-off employees. Young and inexperienced managers tend to go down rat-holes until they learn how unproductive those discussions ultimately end up.
The wrong way to deal with this type of person is for the manager to avoid engaging at all costs. This doesn’t work either. Why?
Frame the Discussion
Because many people, like Charles, naturally become defensive when their manager approaches, it is important to set the tone of the interaction before encouraging. Using the example above, a manager might set the tone by stating, “I thought the presentation went really well.” This sets the tone in a positive way and sends the initial message that this interaction will be positive and people will be more open to encouragement when a positive tone is set. Praise has a place in encouragement, and like I said, all you need do as a manager is finish the thought.
You want to communicate from the start, that this interaction is going to be positive and that you are happy with the performance or behavior. This isn’t the same as “couching” or softening the message because the message is positive. Most people won’t argue with you when you are encouraging positive performance.
Get Specific
To increase the retention of the positive behavior, emphasize the key skill or skills by specifically pointing out not only the positive behavior but also the impact that behavior has on the issue at hand. Instead of saying, “You did a good job of providing an outline,” a manager makes the interaction that much more impactful by adding, “You did a particularly good job of organizing and presenting an ordered outline. I think this helped people follow you better and increased the effectiveness of your presentation.”
This second statement is more specific and shows the manager is paying attention to process and the results. A manager may want to end this encouragement with a question such as “What do you think?”
But it is critical not to let the employee turn the interaction into a discussion about what he or she could do to improve. Mixing the positive message with needs for improvement will lessen the impact of the encouragement. If possible, it is better to separate encouragement from criticism except for Type A personalities. People with a driven style may feel as though the conversation has been left unfinished and strange without something to improve upon. But be careful; some employees might take the interaction as mostly negative if you add anything corrective as well. So, read the situation and the person and make a judgment call.
End on the Positive
Realize that mixing negative and positive feedback invalidates the positive and lessens the impact of the negative. If a manager’s intention is to correct negative behavior, he or she can include some positives after the problem-solving step, but spike the main message of the behavior to correct. If a manager wants to reinforce positive behavior, including any negative behavior will often overshadow and wipe out the desired reinforcement.
I like to close the conversation with a positive and specific message that encourages the person to continue to self-assess and manage his or her own development. One of my favorite statements is something like, “You know, when I see you taking things like this on, it gives me a lot of confidence in your abilities.”
I surmise from his file that this is what most likely happened with Charles. There was very little documentation about either formal or informal discussions between the two of them. And after working with Charles, I realized that he can be difficult. But when I became direct, honest, and constructive, he would eventually back off and listen. But this took time and much self-reflection to figure out the shortcomings I bring to interactions as well.
Even trying to provide encouragement and reinforcement to an employee like this can be a challenge. The notes in Charles’s personnel file indicated that Charles was unmotivated and unresponsive to either praise or criticism. To correct the situation, Charles was given a goal to attend two seminars: one to improve interpersonal skills and one to improve time management. Once again, while the seminars may be a good idea developmentally, I said to myself that his manager was averse to confronting and dealing with challenging people. Charles’s overall opinion was that the main purpose of his manager’s feedback was to get him to fall in line. He complained that his manager spent more time correcting him after the mistake than trying to help him understand how to prevent it.
Charles and his manager were frustrated because the feedback used in their interactions was primarily results based: praise for a job well done and criticism for one done poorly. Both praise and criticism are forms of results-based feedback.
Constructive Feedback
Criticism is another attempt to control behavior through a system of rewards and punishments. Constructive feedback, however, is important and timely input into a professional’s performance and behavior. I hear the term “constructive criticism” all the time, and mostly it is well intentioned. But if a manager’s objective is to create a safe environment for his or her team, it is important to take into consideration a couple of important points.
Praise in Public, Correct in Private
This seems like a no-brainer, but for some reason I hear all the time about managers chewing out employees in front of others. Public shaming does motivate people; it motivates people to avoid their manager. There is no good reason for a manager to criticize another person in front of his or her peers. It’s a stupid way to correct and reduces the credibility more of the manager than of the offender. Regardless of what you may have heard, dressing someone down in front of others is not a good management strategy. It will always be seen as controlling because it is.
Get to the Point
When I ask people how they would like to receive corrective feedback, they almost always say, “Get to the point but be gentle!” Dragging out the discussion or using questions to get the employee to open up can be perceived as duplicitous and controlling. Being straightforward, especially when correcting, sends a clear message.
It is possible to be both cooperative and assertive with an employee. Some managers think these two qualities are mutually exclusive. Even if you need to deliver an especially strong message, you don’t need to be a jerk. And getting to the point is not the same as being a jerk. Quite a few people who worked for me felt I had a hidden agenda whenever I had a discussion with them regarding problematic behavior or performance, until they “got it.” “It” being that I always, always had their best interests in mind. One way I communicated my intentions was by being straightforward and avoiding “fluff” when engaging with them on challenges. My most used line was “Got a minute?” And while at first, this made people a bit uncomfortable, they all eventually got used to “the drill,” as I called it.
Send a Clear Message
If an issue is important enough to warrant a corrective discussion, then it is important enough to want to avoid further discussions. I am often asked how many times a manager should have to address an issue with an employee before documenting the issue or even issuing a verbal or written warning. When I dig into these individual situations, it becomes clear very quickly that in previous performance discussions, the employee did not leave with a clear sense of how important it was to change the behavior.
The more important the issue, the less you want to revisit it. And the key to achieving that end is making sure the employee knows how important it is to change. Mixed messages and “couching” your message with softer words does not help in achieving the desired results.
And the best way to ensure buy-in to altering behavior is if the employee understands that it is in their best interest to do so. So, part of a manager’s job is to persuade and convince the person that the current behavior/performance issue does not contribute to their success in this company or as a person.
As a manager, whether you like it or not, you have authority. The two things you get when you are put in charge of a group are authority and responsibility. I would argue that you get more responsibility than authority, but that discussion could take longer than this book has pages for.
But in business, a manager makes an evaluation of a behavior and provides the employee with feedback. The evaluation is done extrinsically or outside of the employee, and he or she is the recipient of the praise or criticism. This type of feedback is “done” to the employee.
Because this type of feedback is “done” by a manager to an employee, it makes that manager responsible for the behavior and the manager has to “manage” it. It produces compliance, but rarely commitment. Praise and criticism are attempts to motivate through external evaluation and social control. They reinforce the employees’ belief that success is dependent upon their manager’s evaluation, not their own. In a management environment that depends mostly on praise and criticism, employees usually perform well if their manager keeps up the praise. They often become demotivated in the process of receiving criticism. These approaches build management-dependent behavior, like Alex at the beach.
Managers who rely on praise and criticism may believe they are managing the progress of the individual, when in fact they are trying to manage results. This type of feedback is easy to do because managers need only pay attention to the result, not the process. Therefore, it takes less time and energy. What managers eventually get from using this type of feedback are employees that are dependent on their manager to determine their success. Using praise and criticism can develop more dependency. Once again, this is reinforced by the “just do it” management culture.
You Can Treat One Employee Differently from Another
Well, here is another management guideline you may not be aware of but it is true. As a manager, you can treat one employee different from another . . . you can. When I say this to managers, I often get raised eyebrows. That response, I think, is mostly due to being told and taught that everyone must be treated the exact same way, especially in the corporate environment. Repeatedly Human Resources has warned about the dangers of sexism, racism, ageism, or whatever other population qualification that is not only unfair but exposes the company to legal liability.
But here is something I rarely hear any HR department explain.
A manager can treat his or her employee differently due to a performance issue under one circumstance; That this employee knows he or she is being treated differently because of a performance issue. If a manager begins to treat an employee differently without explaining the reason, it is normal for a person to begin to think that he or she is being treated differently because of . . . insert your protected group here.
So if you begin to avoid having any conversations with someone like Charles, and he notices this, he may begin to think that you are treating him differently because in this case, perhaps he is a member of a sometimes disenfranchised group. Once you let a person know that he or she is struggling with an issue, you can then begin monitoring his or her performance in this area. You can meet more often with him or her than you do with your other people. But you must let them know!
Constructive Feedback Process
The process for having an effective and productive corrective discussion starts off faster, but more time is required at the back end with the addition of a problem-solving step. And there is a preparation step that is crucial.
Choose
A person can only focus on improving one or two challenges at any one time. Using the same presentation example, let’s say a manager had previously clarified the expectation that all presentations must start with an overview of the purpose and agenda for the benefit of the attendees. This manager just finished sitting in on an employee’s presentation in which no agenda and purpose were covered. Prior to setting the tone, the manager must choose whether to reinforce something the employee did well or correct the negative behavior. Once the manager has decided to correct the negative behavior, he or she must choose how to set the tone, emphasize, and problem solve. The preparation step when correcting negative behavior is more critical than when encouraging positive behavior.
Set Tone
Most people want bad news quickly without beating around the bush. This manager might start out by saying, “Something concerned me about the presentation.” This helps prepare the employee for the next point. If your intention is to truly address inappropriate behavior or lack of performance, then letting the employee know this upfront is a fair and reasonable approach.
Emphasize
At this point the manager must be firm and matter-of-fact. The specific behavior and its impact must be delivered with as little personal judgment as possible. If you as a manager have checked your sources (if you were not there to directly observe the situation), then being honest, constructive, and to the point will serve you well.
“The presentation started out without a purpose and agenda. This limited the presentation effectiveness.”
Problem Solve
At this point the manager should avoid excuses. If the expectation was realistic (which in this situation it surely is), measurable, and agreed upon, then the manager can validate without accepting. For example, if the employee says he or she was too busy, the manager might reply, “1 know we are all very busy, but we all agreed to start our presentations this way.” Then proceed to a problem-solving step by saying, “How can you (or we) prevent this from happening in future presentations?”
It is imperative that the manager is careful to keep himself or herself out of the equation. Instead of saying, “I don’t like the presentation starting that way,” the manager will be clearer by saying, “The expectation we agreed upon was . . . .” The more collaboratively a manager sets standards, the easier it is to keep himself or herself out of the way.
Remember to Pick Your Battles
Before you sit down with an employee, choose the specific behavior or behaviors you want to reinforce and limit your feedback to those specific behaviors. Managers tend to try and give as much feedback as possible when they have the attention of the employee. This can be overwhelming. A manager will be most effective by concentrating on one or two behaviors at a time. So, pick your battles. As a manager, you may want to communicate multiple areas of improvement, but remember that it is difficult for people to try and improve performance or behavior in too many areas. Stay with the 80/20 rule. Also, decide what you are going to say and how you are going to say it. As an example, let’s say you recently sat through a presentation by one of your employees who did an excellent job of presenting an organized outline that was easy to follow. You will want to prepare to encourage the behavior of providing the outline.
When it comes to Charles, I focused first on areas he did well to build his confidence and reinforce that my role is to help him begin to self-manage and motivate. Another aspect of encouragement is that it shows that you are paying attention. That in itself sends a positive message. At first, he was reluctant to see the value in our discussions and was suspicious of my motives. But I realized that it would take time to overcome some of his experiences with previous managers.
Below are additional examples of autocratic feedback and encouragement using Charles’s performance challenges.
Situation
Charles completes a lengthy report within a specific time frame and meets all standards.
Praise
Great job, Charles. Keep up the good work.
Encouragement to Reinforce Positive Behavior
Thanks for getting the report done on time, Charles. That really helps our organization’s reputation with the departments we depend on.
Situation
Charles doesn’t get the job in on time but meets the standards.
Hey, Charles, nice job on the report. Next time make sure you get it to me on time.
Encouragement with Constructive Feedback
Charles, the report you submitted looks great. We will get even more leverage with other departments if we can deliver these sorts of things in the time frame we agree to. Thanks for your efforts on this.
Feedback Is a Developmental Discussion; Not an Accountability Discussion
Feedback and accountability are related but not the same thing. In fact, it is imperative to keep these two very important discussions separate and distinct. Feedback is coaching and engagement to help an employee understand how important it is to change behavior or increase productivity; it is about encouraging an employee to either continue to extend positive performance or to discourage unproductive behaviors. Accountability is about consequences and the last step in the facilitative leadership process. Accountability is using results or lack thereof as a last resort to change behavior.
So if your intention is to provide feedback, then you need to stick with feedback.
But without a clear distinction of when a manager has moved from feedback to accountability it is difficult to tell. So here is the rule I use to distinguish between the two; you have moved to accountability when you reveal the potential consequences of continued misbehavior or performance.
The best example for understanding this is that of a parent correcting a child’s behavior. It is always best to do it without threats (not that presenting an employee with a potential consequence is a threat, but more on that in the next chapter). As a parent, once you threaten time-out (consequence), you have essentially moved to accountability. That is, of course, unless you make idle threats to your kids all the time. In which case, I’m sure you have your parenting challenges as well.
The line between feedback and accountability is using the threat of discipline or punishment as a tool to get people to fall in line. That is, because once you communicate a consequence, you must follow through. For that reason, it is crucial to your credibility that you keep that card in your pocket until you have no other choice but to use it. By focusing on clear expectations and regular honest and constructive feedback it is possible to avoid accountability discussions altogether.
This is not easy, especially when you are frustrated and angry with a person’s behavior or performance. Letting the behavior get to you and lashing out is a normal human response to continued mistakes, but it does not help you as a leader. You should control your emotions, stay objective, and focus on the individual and his or her progress.
Feedback and the Facilitative Leader
Feedback can be delivered in two ways. Praise and criticism have a place, but are seen by employees as attempts to control. Encouragement focuses on the process of meeting expectations and achieving goals. Employees see an encouragement approach as one of collaboration and mutual respect.
Facilitative leaders recognize and encourage progress and improvement. They don’t see people as sets of behaviors. Rather they see them as works-in-progress. A manager who focuses exclusively on the result is not managing; he or she is avoiding the hard work of engaging and working with his or her people. A hallmark of an autocratic-behaviorist approach is an overreliance on praise and criticism to manage behavior. Employees see this as controlling and demanding obedience.
If managers see that their primary job is to hold people accountable for reaching objectives, they will see people either as achieving or as not achieving. The facilitative leader’s job is to help people become more responsible. He or she does so through building trust and confidence by helping employees see the incremental improvements in their abilities. Managers that neglect to give frequent feedback or rely solely on giving praise and criticism are not managing, and they may be interfering with their people’s progress.
To use encouragement properly, managers must pay attention to people’s behaviors and progress as well as the bottom line. Using this approach helps managers to build their employees’ confidence. The goal of a manager is to develop employees’ self-management skills and to help people become responsible decision makers.
Managers owe and are owed frequent feedback. Those who rely on praise and criticism are not managing people; they are trying to manage results. It is unfair when managers withhold feedback but expect good performance.
Charles’s second problem stems from his manager’s attempt to “motivate” him to achieve results. I worked closely with Charles, providing him regular and honest input into his decisions and judgment calls. We set up a weekly meeting to review deliverables and discuss his progress in the areas he struggled. Slowly, ever so slowly, we established a good working relationship. The key to this was Charles understanding my intentions. I was sincerely focused on salvaging Charles’s standings in the company and his career. And my intentions were communicated much more effectively by my actions than by my words. I began giving him the benefit of the doubt and soon changed our weekly meetings to bimonthly.
He started showing up on time to meetings, which I noticed; I showed appreciation for his attempts to be more punctual. He also began asking me for help on some of the projects he fell behind on and, more importantly, began to trust me enough to relate when he felt as though he might miss a deadline; he often communicated it earlier than necessary, but that was a minor irritation.
I was beginning to think that Charles might make it after all.