Chapter 16
Seeking and Using Feedback from Individuals and Groups

For most experienced trainers, all feedback is welcomed because it enables the trainer to make a session truly interactive and focus on the needs and interests of the audience. For those only just entering the role of trainer there is often a fear of being asked a difficult question or receiving a critical response to a statement made. The likelihood of both of these eventualities arising is multiplied with the number of different nationalities present in the audience. Different nationalities bring with them a range of cultural perspectives that are going to lead to a variety of questions and a range of perceptions much greater than in a homogeneous, single-nationality group. This chapter will examine the opportunities given to the trainer, along with some advice on how to make the most of these opportunities.

Should the trainer be an expert?

Our advice to trainers would be never to perceive yourself as an expert in the subject of the training event, because then you will avoid giving the impression to the audience that you have all the answers. It is of course important to have knowledge of your subject as this enhances your ability to help others to learn. This is not the same as giving the impression that you are the expert. It enables you to turn a question from one member of the audience into a point of discussion for the whole group. Indeed there are situations when it is essential that the trainer opens up a subject raised by one participant for discussion by the group. An example would be when a participant quotes a writer who has recently taken a different point of view from the one that you are developing at the time. If you had positioned yourself as expert the participants would be expecting you to defend your point of view. As you have merely positioned yourself as a knowledgeable facilitator you are in a very good position to open up the issue for debate. Invariably a balanced discussion will follow with all points of view being given due consideration.

This does not mean that you should open up every issue for discussion. Indeed, in some cultures like Turkey for example, this will be seen as a weakness. Often participants from these high power distance cultures (see Chapter 2) will test speakers early on. Their view is that if the speaker cannot demonstrate that they know a lot more than the participants, then they will not earn respect and have no right to instruct them. However, once this is established, more interactive ways of answering questions become acceptable.

Participants are interested in anecdotes from the trainer where they are used to illustrate a point. This is different from boring your audience with long and detailed descriptions of your experience in the subject. Anecdotes should be short and pithy, with a very clear relevance to the point under discussion. These vignettes can be from the trainer's own experience or an account of an experience that has previously been shared with the trainer. Naturally these stories must be culturally sensitive. US speakers, for example, drawing sporting analogies from baseball or American football risk, not only losing part of their audience, but also of alienating them. Should a trainer wish to use an anecdote which has something specific to say about one country, they should only do so if it is certain that the participants are familiar with the content.

Naturally, if the trainer shares anecdotes with the audience, participants should be encouraged to share their experiences with the group. A good example of how fruitful this can be is when experiences are shared on issues such as leadership styles, coaching experiences and customer interactions: indeed, any area of human interaction is ripe with opportunities for generating interesting anecdotes. The trainer need only relate the stories to the model or principles that are under discussion at the time. Even where the anecdote appears initially to contradict the model it can be useful. In the process of discussion at least one participant will make an attempt to relate it to the model or will come forward with an alternative experience that does relate to the model. All this open discussion is possible and fruitful so long as the trainer has not positioned himself as the expert.

Feedback from breakout groups

In Chapter 14 we looked at some of the principles of creating and managing breakout groups. Receiving their feedback at the end of a group exercise is a very important part of the process and is instrumental in setting the tone of an event.

The first principle is that the trainer needs to look for elements in the feedback that can be praised enthusiastically. This is particularly important with international groups of managers. First it needs to be recognized that giving feedback in a second or third language, on a subject that is also quite unfamiliar and to an unfamiliar audience is in itself a major challenge for many people. Only by making positive comments on what has been delivered will the trainer encourage other participants to come forward as spokespersons from their breakout groups.

The second principle is that if some of the feedback can or should be challenged, it is generally much better that other participants do this rather than the trainer. It is very easy to do this by opening up the feedback points for questions or discussion for the members of other breakout groups. Where the trainer feels a point requires particular discussion it is always possible to ask the audience how they feel about this. It gives people the opportunity to challenge, qualify or simply debate a point that the trainer may feel to be doubtful or suspect in some way.

However, many Middle and Far Eastern cultures do not encourage overt criticism of colleagues in a direct manner as it gives rise to 'loss of face'. Such questions as '...and how could team B's analysis be made even more complete?' are sometimes met with stony silence, not because of lack of knowledge but because the participants do not wish to offend. This raises a particularly difficult problem for the trainer. On the one hand the participants expect the trainer to be critical but on the other hand it must be done in such a manner that there is no loss of face.

A number of approaches can work. At the end of the feedback from all the groups, the trainer can pick up the key learning points from the participants and then add to them without being critical of any one individual or group. Another riskier approach is to use humour to soften the criticism. Alternatively a separate, private conversation can be held with the individual or group where direct feedback is given.

One golden rule on receiving feedback from several groups on the same exercise is to allow each group to give all their feedback before opening up the points made for discussion.

Often the best way of avoiding the possibility of upstaging breakout groups is to ask them to give feedback on different aspects of the exercise. This avoids any repetition and resulting boredom by the rest of the group at hearing the same thing being repeated several times.

Dealing with and asking questions

Questions from individual participants are to be welcomed and, if handled effectively, will almost always enhance the understanding of the group on the topic being discussed. It is really important that the trainer repeats the question asked and then answers it for the benefit of the whole group. Repeating the question serves two purposes. First, it is a check that the question has been properly understood. Second, it ensures that the whole group has the benefit of hearing the question clearly before either the trainer or members of the group come up with possible responses to it. This is really important bearing in mind the language issue we have discussed. Participants from Brazil, for example, will have considerable difficulty understanding a question asked in English by a Kenyan or a Russian with their own particular accents. It is extremely frustrating to be a member of a group where the questions are difficult to hear and responses are made without understanding the question in full.

There can be occasions when the questions are detailed and will not serve a purpose in enhancing the understanding of the group on the main topic under discussion. In these instances the trainer has some choices:

• give a short response and then ask if the group wish to debate the question in more detail;
• ask the audience if it is going to be useful to discuss the question in detail in the group session;
• offer to deal with the answer in detail outside of the group session.

In most instances it is good practice to involve the group in deciding whether the issues raised by the question are considered to be of general interest and should be discussed in the group session.

It would probably be unwise for a trainer to confront the participant who issued a challenge. The challenger will almost always gain the support of the group if that happens. It is also an example of when a trainer needs to be flexible in how learning is achieved. If a group makes it clear that the current activity needs to change, the trainer needs to have the resources to offer another option. In the case above, it was essential that the other option maintained the focus on the subject under discussion. As William James the psychologist is quoted: 'Intelligence is having fixed objectives but being capable of flexibility in how they are achieved.'

There are two very good reasons for asking questions of the group early in a training event or when the trainer switches from one topic to another. First is the need to assess the knowledge level of the group so that the topic is presented to take account of the level of knowledge of the majority of participants. It is likely that the trainer will have attempted to establish this at the point where training needs were being identified, but it is good practice to check it out in a 'live session' to ensure that the training material is being introduced in the most appropriate way. The second reason is to check participants' understanding of the material the trainer is delivering before getting into too much depth. This is particularly important with diverse groups, as it is critically important to check understanding of the language being used by the trainer.

Another use of questioning to assess how well learning is taking place is to review each day's learning either at the end of the day or, perhaps even better, at the beginning of the subsequent day. This can be done using well-structured questions to test knowledge. Quite often a few prompts are necessary, amongst even the best motivated of groups, to remind participants what was being discussed on the previous day! An alternative is to give a slideshow presentation (accompanied by music to give additional atmosphere if desired) of all the slides shown on the previous day and to ask each participant, working in groups, to come up with a different learning point.

Another way of checking on progress is to ask participants during the breaks how they felt about the previous session. As well as getting an immediate reaction on how it was received, participants will often raise any issues about understanding, which they might not raise when the group is in formal session. This is particularly useful with international groups where individual participants may be hesitant about admitting to a lack of understanding in the formal session. A variant of this is to put up a flip chart at the end of the first day, located near to the exit of the room. The chart is divided into two columns; one headed 'What are we doing right and should continue?' and the other 'What should we do differently tomorrow?' Participants are asked to think about the training they have experienced on the first day and to write down any points on Post-it® notes - one point per Post-it® - and stick them in the appropriate column on the flip chart on their way out. The trainer can then review the points, grouping similar ones together (see Figure 16.1). The next morning the trainer can then give feedback to the whole group using the flip chart as a visual aid on how the course will proceed in response to their comments.

Figure 16.1 Participant feedback flip chart

Summary

Difficult questions and aggressive statements can often be managed effectively by opening them up to the whole group for comment and finding a solution through discussion. However, in some high power distance cultures this can be a way of participants testing speakers early on in the programme and a strong response may be called for. Where participants take an expert stance, the trainer needs to demonstrate knowledge but not enter into a competition on level of expertise. Trainers can manage discussions on detailed points from expert participants more effectively if the trainer is positioned as knowledgeable rather than as the expert.

In responding to questions the trainer must first repeat the question asked slowly and carefully to make sure everyone understands it.

Use of anecdotes and stories is to be encouraged, but they must be culturally sensitive and understandable by the participants. It is also productive to allow participants to relate their own anecdotes where they illustrate a relevant point that can subsequently be discussed by the whole group.

Trainers need to look for the positive aspects of feedback from breakout groups and invite participants to add other comments, some of which can be challenging or critical. With some cultures, face saving is very important, while at the same time criticism is expected if something has been done wrong. If the trainer avoids giving such criticism altogether then participants will feel dissatisfied and learn less.

When receiving feedback from breakout groups it is important to allow the spokesperson of each group to present the group's ideas before the trainer adds any additional viewpoints. Questions from the trainer are essential to check understanding and to assess the knowledge level of participants.

Action plan

Consider the key points in the Action plan in seeking and using feedback from participants. Reflecting on recent international courses that you have run, identify against each item what you could do differently in future to improve interaction with the audience.