data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a4d71/a4d71a4fb51ca36a05854ae8cdd88a6b39eb176f" alt=""
Since I've made a conscious effort to give feedback in this way, I've found it to be extremely effective. For one thing, it forces me to replace vague, superficial comments ("Oh prabhu, what a great Bhagavatam class!") with sincere, honest assessments of what I like and don't like. For another, it allows me to look at the negatives in light of the positives, and puts criticizing in a constructive context. And of course, if I can't come up with at least two things to appreciate about the person, it raises a red flag in my mind that I'm not thinking objectively -- and gives me an opportunity to slow down, cool off, and try to heal myself first.
Still, there are limitations. Recently a colleague told me that she has started to grow wary of the sandwich -- that when she hears my words of praise she starts to cringe in preparation of the impending criticism! Her telling me this was a sobering reminder to me that merely "buttering someone up" before and after you "give them the sauce" does not a sandwich make.
Here are some tips on how to make a better feedback sandwich:
- Feedback (positive or negative) should be directed towards a person's performance, not their character or personal. "You're pretty. You're an idiot. You're trustworthy." -- not a feedback sandwich.
- Avoid low-carb sandwiches. The positives are the bread and the negative is the peanut butter and jelly inside (what, you forgot that we're vegetarians?) -- don't just find praises to bookend a pile of complaints. An unbalanced sandwich is obvious.
- Be specific in both praise and criticism. "I really liked when you did XYZ..." "When you said so-and-so, I noticed that..." "I thought your use of such-and-such was..."
- Criticism especially should be constructive, well-timed, and targeted.
- Constructive criticism is clear, objective, and employs "I statements" rather than "You statements." It offers realistic alternatives or suggestions for improvement.
- Well-timed criticism is sensitive to the time, place, and situation. It is offered soon enough after the performance to be relevant, but not so soon after as to touch on something that this still "raw." It is given privately or publicly depending one whichever is more appropriate, and is often preceded by a "heads-up" that feedback is coming.
- Targeted criticism recognizes specific behaviors (not the people acting out the behaviors) and hones in on specific skills or practices that are within the person's control. It avoids using extreme phrases like "always" and "never."
- Praise should not flatter the ego, it should reinforce and encourage desired behavior. The recipient should walk away more educated about what worked, not just "feeling good."
- Use non-verbal communication to package the sandwich. Let your eyes and body language express your feelings. Dramatic pauses can go a long way. A softening of the voice can make that room-for-improvement easier to digest.
- Allow the recipient to respond -- feedback does not need to be a one-way street. If recipients feel the need to defend themselves or explain their actions, allow them to.
- Know when you need not (and maybe even should not) use the sandwich. There are situations where using the sandwich will feel (and be) inauthentic, contrived, or insulting. Use common sense.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c671f/c671f6fd93cdf595162083df5559ce5b4b5a05be" alt=""
1 comment:
Great post prabhu!
Stephen Covey really lays down the smack on this. He singles it out and characterizes it as a manipulative technique when not used by a person who is principle-centered and coming from a place of integrity.
All forms become manipulative techniques if we don't focus first on rectifying ourselves.
Otherwise, yes, it is an effective form. Leadership and management skills become manipulation techniques when a peson lacks personal integrity and committment to leadership through self-transformation.
Post a Comment