Put Down the (feedback) Shotgun
Have you ever been in a meeting where the entire team is receiving corrective feedback on something you didn't even realize was an issue?
You may have been catching strays from being on the receiving end of a shotgun feedback approach.
In this method, a leader gives feedback to an entire group based on the actions of one or two individuals.
There are a number of reasons leaders may do this, but none of them are very compelling. Best case scenario, they are trying to provide some course correction so that others don't make the same mistake. Worst case scenario, they are avoiding a difficult conversation with one individual by vaguely dispersing the message to an entire group. This is why it's called the shotgun method. You are pointing feedback in a general direction and hoping it reaches your actual target.
Not only is the method less effective, it's often detrimental.
When you use this approach, strong performers will feel unfairly criticized. They'll wonder why they are getting feedback on something they already know. People with perfectionist tendencies may internalize the feedback even if it wasn't meant for them, which can create separate issues.
The not so funny part is that often times, the actual intended party won't be self-aware enough to think you're addressing them. They'll either assume it's someone else or that everyone else has been doing the same thing they've been doing.
If you've been a reader for a while, the observation, impact, action model won't be new. Below is a breakdown of why it is a much more effective alternative to the shotgun method.
Address the individual
Constructive feedback should be provided to the individual and in a private setting. This is a discussion about one individual's actions and/or behaviors. We don't need or even want an audience here. Ultimately, each person is only responsible for their own behaviors which is why addressing the actions of one person in a group setting is just not effective. It only serves to embarrass the intended individuals while also not respecting the time or contributions of the other people in the room.
Specific behavior
Meeting with the individual allows you to dial-in on their specific behaviors. This is what makes feedback effective. It also removes any guess works because you are not addressing "the team's" behavior, you are addressing that person's behavior directly with them.
When you give constructive feedback to an entire team, the feedback is going to be more generic in nature in order to remain relevant to a broader audience. This dilutes the message and creates confusion. Here is an example of the difference…
Group feedback sounds like: "We need better follow-through on the actions items from our meetings. There are times where I have to chase down some of these deliverables because they're not done by the agreed-upon deadline. "
Individual feedback sounds like: "Your design proposals for client XYZ were not submitted by last Friday as we had discussed and I had to follow-up with you in order to get a status update. When you don't communicate delays prior to the deadline, it creates uncertainty and capacity constraints for your downstream colleagues who are depending on those deliverables to complete their own work. What steps could you take to ensure you are communicating more proactively in the future? "
See how the ability to discuss specifics adds so much clarity to the situation? This is what we want effective feedback to sound like.
They own course correction
The action portion of the observation, impact, action model invites the individual receiving the feedback to determine how they are going to course correct going forward. Again, this becomes hard to do in a group setting which is why this step is completely skipped in the shotgun method. This results in simply telling a group of people what's not working rather than encouraging the individual to find a better way they can approach the situation in the future.
Never say never
There are never any absolutes in leadership. That means there are times where group "feedback" may be warranted. I use the term feedback lightly here because the group discussion is going to be a much more generic form of feedback. It's really more of a briefing that should still be paired with the individual discussions I covered above.
Perhaps a mistake was made due to unclear expectations. It's fine to have a team discussion to clarify expectations so that others don't repeat the same mistake. But you still need to have an actual feedback discussion with the individual who made the original error.
Team performance is another example. If a majority of the team underperformed on a project, it's fine to be transparent about that in a group setting…but you would still need to have specific conversations with each individual who was responsible for contributing to the underperformance. This happens all the time in competitive sports. The team might be addressed after a disappointing loss but positional coaches are going to work with the individuals to course correct specific behaviors.
This Week's Action Items:
Replace the shotgun method of feedback with individual discussions.
Use the "observation, impact, action" model to help make the feedback as specific and engaging as possible.
Leverage group communications where it's necessary, but make sure you are still having individual feedback discussions when you do so.
