• 3
  • comments
Post Image

Maybe you’ve been in a situation like this: you attend a  meeting where a person is briefing 55 charts for a 20 minute presentation, most people in the audience are either reading their Blackberries or doodling, and when the guy finally stops talking, no one says a word.  Until, that is, each retreats to the security of their offices.  What a waste of time!  That guy has no communication skills–how’d he become a manager?

On the other hand, imagine hearing a terrific talk that motivates you to plan a new product or collaborate with a team you hadn’t worked with before.    Usually such speakers don’t get much more feedback than the previous one, other than a round of vague congratulations.  Such feedback won’t provide much assistance to someone trying to deliver a repeat performance.

This means the majority are forced to stumble across productive or winning ideas and strategies.  Many assume its the boss’ job to offer feedback anyway, further justifying silence.  Yet one of the most common complaints (and reasons for leaving a company) is the lack of feedback and development opportunities.

Seth Godin would likely tell you that’s a result of your lizard brain, the one who certainly doesn’t want feedback itself and definitely doesn’t want to take a risk by having a public opinion.  Your mother might have told you, “If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all.”   It turns out you can follow your mother’s advice and do the right thing at the  same time.  Good feedback needn’t be unkind.

Dawn Lennon recently wrote a nice post about feedback as career currency, offering practical advice on how to handle the give and take.  Scott Belsky, in his book Making Ideas Happen: Overcoming the Obstacles Between Vision and Reality, describes a system used at Hewlett-Packard, where team members send emails to colleagues after big events using the headings START, STOP, and CONTINUE.

In fact, there are many articles and tips for putting a feedback system into place.  The key to making such systems work is to plan for authenticity.  Wikipedia defines the word as “the truthfulness of origins, attributions, commitments, sincerity, devotion, and intentions.”

That means the feedback you provide is not just honest, but intended to help.  It springs from sincerity.  It demonstrates your willingness to make someone better, not just at that moment, but afterwards too.  It’s a co-pilot comment, not one from a backseat driver. If you’re not invested in the outcome, it’s probably not authentic. If you can hold yourself to that standard for every meeting you attend, you’ll discover authenticity (and productive teams) are contagious.

  • Liked this post? Click here to subscribe to
  • Everyday Bright Logo
  • Add Comment
  • A Chance to
  • Speak Your Mind

3 Responses to Planning For Authenticity

  1. Nothing is greater than a theme reinforced. You’ve done that here so beautifully, and I am delighted that my post became a seed for yours!

    I love your comment about feedback being a “copilot comment not one from a backseat driver, ” because we should all be invested in the outcome our our messages. When you’re the co-pilot, feedback is truly give-and-take since you both have access to the throttle!

    I do a fair amount of public speaking, so your comment about presenter feedback really resonated. Silence is consent. So if we don’t tell speakers how they come across, they’ll just keep doing what they’ve always done…and more audiences will pay the price or reap the benefit.

    It’s great to be part of your conversation, Jen. Thanks again for your kind words and for sharing my blog post. I really appreciated it.

    ~Dawn

    • On
    • May 27, 2010 at 1:06 am
    • sadya
    • Said...

    Dr. Jen
    1) sometimes the good ideas that come as result of listening to a great presentation don’t come immediately . some of them take time , so maybe thats another way we cud measure how good or bad a presentation has been … feedback received instantly + feedback received later on
    2) if i had to choose b/w no comment & a harsh comment i’d choose the latter . it forced someone to think about what was being presented to them.
    3) the tricky part is however identifying the fine line b/w feedback & criticism , its amazing how few ppl recognize this. also sometimes the presenter needs to leave her/his ego at the door..

    • Sadya,
      These are terrific points. I especially like your idea of providing both immediately and after you’ve had a chance to think about it. I’m often able to be much more specific when I give my brain time to mull a presentation over (and the speaker is also more receptive, b/c the anxiety levels have come back down to normal).

      Also true about the fine line between feedback and criticism. That’s why I was saying if you aren’t interested in the outcome (and making that outcome a reality), it’s probably more criticism than feedback. And you’re right–criticism is based in one’s own ego. Another good reason to wait a bit before providing feedback, once you’ve stopped comparing yourself to the speaker.

      Thanks for your thoughtful comments!