Easy Ways To Provide Constructive Criticism To Team Members When Mistakes Happen.

Hi, Scott here. In this tutorial, we're going to be looking at feedback. Feedback is so important to your own boss, to stakeholders, to your peers, to you, and also to the people that you're trusted, paid, and expected to manage to do great things for the organisation. The point we're going to be exploring here is imbalance. What I term cheerleading feedback, where what you do or tend to do as a default is acknowledge the good, acknowledge the brilliant, appreciate the fantastic, and that is all very good. It's all very important. It has its place. But when that's the default setting and the awkward conversations about what hasn't gone well, what was promised that wasn't delivered, and also what cost to the organization when they don't happen, it's an imbalance. So what we're going to be looking at is what are the consequences of what I term cheerleading feedback. For individuals, for team members, and also for the organisation. Then we're going to look at a couple of solutions as well. Please do consider your own and just bear in mind how you prefer to feedback. Many people in leadership and management positions, even though they're in a position of authority, they prefer to feedback on the wonderful things, demonstrate this empathy and appreciation and connected unity with the team. Fantastic. It's important to acknowledge the great things. It reinforces the unity in the team. It reinforces awareness of what goes well and how it went well and how they're going to receive feedback when things in future go well. Let's not just forget though, putting the seatbelt on for the organization and the team and the individuals concerned by acknowledging early when things haven't gone well and they deserve to be discussed. So what we are looking at first is abdication of accountability. If someone doesn't receive clarity at the outset in terms of identifying and establishing and indeed agreeing what is required, why it's required, what is excellent in terms of an outcome, what is acceptable in terms of an outcome, what is not acceptable in terms of an outcome. By a certain timescale, whatever it may be. If they don't have this clarity at the outset and really nod their head to say they understand and actually do understand, there is a potential that they may just go away and drift. They may go away and not be interested in what task or project you've given them, and they just drift. They'll look for any distraction, diversion, or delay to get on with what you're trusting and expecting them to do. And indeed, believing that they're actually doing. So clarity is really important at the outset. Abdication of responsibility also can be on you not clarifying what's expected, not clarifying what support's available, not clarify why the timescale is the timescale, not establishing upfront where the catch-ups, uh, times are going to be. So you can catch up and clarify where you're at, refine and improve and optimise the approach, address after identifying any potential or actual obstacles that could stop the delivery of this outcome. So just be aware, failure like success is rarely achieved alone. It's a team effort. If someone isn't performing to the required standard or not communicating to a clarified standard and expectation, take a step. You own it as well as they do. So just be aware, if I'm working for you and I don't deliver and you never tell me that I'm not delivering, I might start living down to that low expectation because there isn't a clear expectation in terms of what's required of me, why it's required of me, and how I'm empowered to own what's expected of me. The next one is lost learning opportunities. If you don't tell a colleague And this can be up the line, not just down the line or to peers. If you don't tell that person, or on occasions that group of people, what has gone wrong, they lose the opportunity to learn from it. Now, there are learning organisations out there that will proudly say on their website, we learn from our own mistakes. Hmm. But if the same mistake continues to occur, that's not learning from mistakes. That's just ambivalence. So what mistakes can be learned from? Indeed, what mistakes as you begin on a project, begin to delegate a task, and we can explore delegation in this programme too, what potential issues, obstacles, setbacks can be anticipated before they actually arrive and risk mitigated or indeed removed completely? Learn from mistakes, but don't make the same mistake twice. And it's not just for you as a leader to clarify expectations, empower people to make decisions, and support them in progressing. It's up to that individual as well to own that accountability. The next one is false sense of competence. If you don't tell me that I'm doing something below standard, below par, are not acceptable because there are many reasons which can include it will destroy the harmony in the team, or I might get so upset that I might look for another role elsewhere. There's so many potential justifications for not communicating the hard information, the hard word, the hard message that I may then believe that everything's good, everything's good in the garden, and not understand how I can change something to refine or improve or optimise it, or change something because it's not about refining and improving, it's about pulling my socks up, being accountable and delivering value for the organisation that I'm trusted and paid and expected to do. So just bear in mind, if you look at professional boxing, it still happens these days where Someone is hyped that they're the next big thing, they're the next great thing, and then someone bops them on the nose and they're out for the count. Okay, it happens. What we don't want in the organisation is someone to be out for the count, but we do want them to be at least competent at a certain task, but, or indeed acquiring that competence to complete that certain task, achieve that certain outcome. Within a certain timescale. So this ownership is so very important. False sense of entitlement. If again, if you mention to someone, this is great, that was fantastic, leave a thank you note, this is brilliant, great end to the week, great start to the week. It may be that when you do come to provide feedback on what hasn't worked, what their responsibility was for it working, and also how they abdicated responsibility for not telling you that it wasn't working early. It may be, well, I don't, I don't welcome this kind of feedback. I want the good stuff. I want the things that reinforce my sense of identity. Now, if that person is low on the emotional intelligence competency of self-awareness and the reality testing as well, being objective, they may think, well, that doesn't count for me. I know I'm good. Feedback, everybody is due feedback. Not everybody welcomes feedback, especially when it looks like it muddies the water. So just in terms of entitlement, everybody is entitled to candid, objective, value-focused feedback. And this is the thing about balance again. The next one is stagnation and frustration. If you have a Friday meeting every week and it's all happy clappy cheerleading, this has gone great, that's gone well, Jane, thanks for coming early, staying late. Bob, thanks for pulling that out of the bag and finishing that on time. There is a potential that, yeah, this is, this is really good, and I've been mentioned, or we've been collectively mentioned. Great, nothing's wrong. It doesn't have to be something is wrong. It can be something is not as good as it could be, or not as refined as it deserves to be, or It could also be the stagnation of, we're all doing well, so what's the problem? Separating the team members from the team as a whole is really important because one person not performing to a required standard, missing deadlines that have been committed to, and someone else can't start their piece of the project, that interdependence until this other person's finished can cause frustration. It can cause the it's not going to go well anyway, so why should I? Or she or he or indeed they never get feedback, the hard word, when they miss a deadline, when they don't show up to meetings, when they turn up late, whatever it may be. Why should I try? It can really impact you, your high performers, you're really engaged, motivated, willing and able performers when they see that candid feedback isn't being received by them, but also by others too. It can also damage your credibility. It's really important also to mention that there's a financial cost to a missed deadline, to a commitment that was made that wasn't kept, to the late delivery of something or non-delivery of something. But mentioning this just when there's an issue isn't the best time to do it. It's mentioning it when you're delegating, when you're clarifying, when you are communicating at the outset of a project, even in the early planning stage. The financial benefit to the organisation, to the team, is this if it's done right first time, on time, this time. The financial risk is if this is delayed and it impacts that, the financial cost is £10,000 if you can measure it. But taking feedback away from just you and the other person or other people to you are communicating on behalf of your organisation and you're speaking on behalf of a legal entity. What you don't want to do is ram it at people that you've let the business or organisation down. That's blame. Don't do that. What it is important to do is say what the business requires, what the organisation requires is this. That's why this, this, and this are in place. This is what I'm supporting you and empowering you to do. What support would you like from me? It's really important that the budget is achieved or the project is delivered within budget by that timescale because also if it's not delivered, it impacts trust with stakeholders, with customers, whoever that may be. Speak on behalf of the organisation rather than just we. We is a We is a word that reflects unity and companionship and teamwork, but it's also potentially dangerous and a disabler rather than enabler when it's, we're all in this together. Sometimes that can really damage accountability and personal ownership. The next one is if you don't speak up, it may reinforce poor performance. We've briefly touched on this anyway, but if there are people that deserve to be addressed, an issue explored, and solutions identified. If you don't speak up, you're just reinforcing unwittingly, unintentionally perhaps, reinforcing that what they are doing is acceptable. What they are doing will not be challenged or questioned or indeed changed. Poor performance rarely achieved alone. If someone is performing below standard, or in your terms, badly, in an unacceptable way, what's your role in enabling that to happen? Because if you didn't have a role in it, it wouldn't happen, would it? Tough one. That's a tough talk from me, but it, it can happen because someone doesn't know what they're doing. And that's why it's important for them to own speaking with you. It can happen because someone isn't interested. That's why it's important to you to have prudent oversight, to nip things in the bud early. Resentment from others. When the— one of the quickest ways to really damage engagement, involvement, and commitment from team members is to not address something with someone that deserves addressing. When other people see, uh, a laissez-faire, ambivalent approach from leaders and managers, not having the communication that deserves to happen. They notice it. All eyes are on the boss. But we teach people how to treat us. Some people deserve a little bit of reeducation so they can win for the business or organization alongside everyone else and with you as well. The solutions now. This is 13 minutes in, but here are some solutions. Come up with your own as well. Some real solutions. Be specific about the issue. You can mention the person's name. So, Scott, you committed to achieving this timescale at the meeting last Wednesday and you haven't achieved it. Alongside that, Scott, it's a risk for the business because you didn't tell me that you weren't going to achieve it. That is specific, isn't it? Scott— Scott's an easy target. Scott, This is the third time this week you've turned up to the office 15 minutes to 20 minutes late. That's not acceptable. Is there something that I deserve to understand that you want to share? That's a specific issue. If you are frustrated with someone that hasn't delivered on numerous occasions, deal with one at a time, but really be specific. Focus on ownership. This is, you win together, you lose together. How can you win together? For the business, for the organisation. Scott, it's your responsibility to communicate in a timely manner when you anticipate a risk. You've chosen not to, and this is the second occasion on this project where you haven't communicated quickly when you've anticipated or encountered an issue. That's not acceptable, Scott. You have put the project at risk, and there's also cost for the organisation too in terms of trust with the customer. These are just examples, but promote ownership. You've got to teach the children to learn to walk on their own two feet. You're always there with them, you're alongside them, but help them own their responsibilities. Avoid the BS sandwich. This is, well, they do these things really well, so I'll mention that, Those, they've done this thing that isn't acceptable, and I've got to mention that, but I'll finish on a good one. No, it's disingenuous. It really, uh, diminishes the value of the communication you're about to make about a situation that deserves to be mentioned. So there's understanding, so there's clarity, so there's an invitation to provide a solution, produce a solution. Just as those two earlier examples, be specific, be precise, and make it about them owning it in a very collaborative, kind, empathic way. You can still be assertive and empathic at the same time and speak on behalf of the organisation. So just avoid the "good, bad, but we're good now." It's, it's not good. Clarify why you are feeding back. This is Again, you are communicating on behalf of the organisation, not just from your perspective to another human being. You are both employees of the organisation. For example, Scott, it's important that I mention this to you and invite your solutions because I'd be doing you and the organisation a disservice by not drawing it to your attention. Scott Watson, it's important that when you make a commitment, you actually keep it, or if you believe you can't keep it at some point, you speak quickly and tell me quickly so that alternative solutions, alternative timescales, alternative resources can be put in place. Please, will you do that? If you don't have a why, there's no meaning. Scott Watson, your performance on this project, this aspect and that aspect, are below the required standard. That the business requires. I welcome your ideas on solutions on how to at least achieve the minimum requirement, if not deliver more value. Scott Watson, the decision you made was outside of your boundary, and you were clear on that, but you made it anyway. That isn't acceptable because I'm ultimately accountable for you. Make sense? Really straightforward. Come up with your own. Oh, sorry. We've done that one. And situation, behaviour, impact. The examples I've just shared with you, a situation, what is a specific situation? What was their behaviour or decision or choice? And what was the impact? Impact on the organisation ultimately, but it can be impact on trust. It can be impact on finances if there's a financial cost. But do remember, if you do want to use this for acknowledging the brilliant things, be specific with those situations where you're speaking with— come on, we'll say Scott again. Scott, thank you for coming in early and staying late on Monday to address and resolve the issue for customer Mrs. Johnson. Because you've done that, trust has been restored and she's accepted the organisation's apology and she's remaining a customer. That is situation, behaviour, impact. Don't go all fluffy, don't go walkabout, get to the point, make it situation-based, make it behaviour or decision-focused, and then what's the impact? Think of 3 situations where you can use these in the coming weeks. And again, reset as well as set clear expectations. Set clear expectations at the outset. Ensure that the expectations are achievable, that they are interesting and relevant. Don't set crazy expectations because you're so optimistic that nothing can go wrong. But this is the expectation of, do tell me what you require from me. If there's one or two pieces of information or certain support you'd appreciate or welcome from me, do tell me and we'll organize it. Also, when there's been an issue, resetting expectations. Scott, this and this is not acceptable. Please tell me what your solutions are on addressing those. We produce a solution that we both agree to and say, okay, from today then, Scott, that is What's acceptable? Do we agree? Resetting expectations and refocusing, uh, effort, energy, and the human aspects as well can be so very important. So these are things that you can do to stop cheerleading, but balance cheerleading with the really important aspect of, you know, you can be their biggest supporter, you can be their biggest enabler, you can also on occasions be their biggest disabler if you don't have these expectations, this trust, this clarity, this collaboration, these catch-ups in place. So have a think about your next meeting in terms of providing feedback, not just for the collective group but also for individuals within the group as well.