Humanly Possible, Inc.

Giving feedback is one of the primary ways that managers develop the skills of their people, and receiving feedback is valued by managers as the primary way they can grow and measure their own achievement. Yet giving and receiving feedback are two of the most fraught (and avoided) activities of management. Furthermore, research suggests feedback is commonly ineffective at improving performance.

Social psychological research suggests that differences in how actors and observers interpret the underlying causes of success and failure can be a major contributor to the difficulty managers have in giving and receiving constructive feedback. This study explores how attributional differences affect the dynamics of feedback in the workplace.

We surveyed 402 middle managers on 3 continents, randomly assigned to one of 4 conditions in which they were asked to describe a recent work-related incident about which they either gave positive feedback, gave negative feedback, received positive feedback, or received negative feedback. Participants described the situation that elicited the feedback and then rated the accuracy of the feedback (0% to 100%), and their qualifications (or the giver’s qualifications) to give the feedback (0 = unqualified to 10 = completely qualified). Finally, they assigned percentages, summing to 100%, to 4 causes of the incident: % due to ability possessed (“lacked”, for the negative conditions), % due to effort, % due to the nature of the task, % due to good (bad) luck. (Analyses exclude data from 20 managers who described incidents that were not work-related.)

In sum, although we observed some differences between attributions of givers and receivers of feedback when the feedback was positive, the major differences occurred when feedback was negative. The reasons givers and receivers of negative feedback have such different perspectives may be both cognitive and motivational.

· Cognitive: Givers of feedback have an external view of the receiver’s behavior that the receiver lacks. Receivers have an experience of their situation that the giver lacks.

· Motivational: Givers’ attributions may be biased by their need to predict and control future outcomes. Receivers’ attributions may be biased by their need to protect their view of themselves as competent and protect their opinion of their likelihood of succeeding in the future.

Understanding the cognitive and motivational underpinnings of these effects can aid in designing feedback that is more effective and less aversive for both givers and receivers. Following the recommendations below can assist managers to (a) give performance feedback in a way that is accepted and actionable and maintains the relationship, and (b) receive feedback in a way that allows them to learn, to improve their future performance, and to earn respect.

Recommendations for Constructive Feedback:

· Recognize the other person’s perspective as valid.

When giving negative feedback, the manager can focus questions on the external situation or task. When receiving negative feedback, the manager can acknowledge his/her own contribution to the problem.

· Remember the goal is to improve future performance.

Fact and opinion sharing can focus on how to avoid bad outcomes and generate good ones, without a common interpretation of exactly what went wrong and whose fault it was.

· Take a mutual problem-solving approach.

Managers can assume that all parties are willing and competent to figure out and implement ways of doing better. Co-create a solution for moving forward and making improvements.