Feedback

How to receive it and what to do with it

It is annual review season and many of us are going to be giving and receiving feedback on our performance over the past year. I’ll start right off by saying that I’m not a fan of annual reviews but like democracy being the worst form of government except all others, annual reviews are better than most other processes and certainly better than not providing feedback. When done properly they are useful in helping people understand what they did well and what they need to improve. My hypothetical alternative would be near-real time feedback that is accumulated and periodically analyzed for trends. More about that at the end of this article.

Giving Feedback

First let’s start off by acknowledging that giving or receiving feedback can be stressful. There has been a lot of research on feedback, especially in the medical community where feedback is essential in training the next generation of healthcare providers. An achievement-based, high stakes, competitive environment such as medical training and even some corporate environments, may induce a performance goal orientation which can lead to avoidance of feedback. When the stakes are high, it is our natural inclination to avoid feedback. However, I would argue that this is most when we need the feedback in order to perform at our peak.

Research suggests that fostering a learning-based mindset increases receptivity to feedback and feedback seeking behavior. Our jobs as leaders is to shift our teams into a learning or growth-oriented mindset, despite the high performance environment, in order for them to be open to receiving feedback. The way to do this is to build trust. Before someone can be open to receiving feedback they have to believe that you are in their corner. Otherwise, it comes across as an attack. And, the way to build trust is to establish an environment of psychological safety.

Research published in the Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management in 2023, suggests that psychological safety precedes trust. When employees feel safe, learning occurs more quickly, peers rely on each other, and team performance improves. In these newsletters, we’ve often discussed the importance of psychological safety, highlighting studies like Google’s Project Aristotle that found this to be the most important factor in team performance. However, this concept of psychological safety is often confused with things like being nice. Amy Edmondson, a Professor of Leadership at Harvard Business School states, “Too many people think that it’s about feeling comfortable all the time and that you can’t say anything that makes someone else uncomfortable or you’re violating psychological safety” I like the Center for Creative Leadership’s definition, “Psychological safety is the belief that you won’t be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes.” This doesn’t mention anything about being uncomfortable and I would argue that as leaders we need to get comfortable having uncomfortable discussions.

Receiving Feedback

The role of the leader giving feedback is important but equally is the role of the individual receiving feedback. As mentioned above, you need to come into these discussions with a growth mindset. This is, of course, easier said than done but I like to remember that most of our co-workers and bosses aren’t out to tear us down or make us feel bad. Most people provide feedback in an honest attempt to help us grow. Once we believe that, being open to receiving feedback is a little easier.

My advice to anyone receiving feedback is that there are only two options: 1) it is correct or 2) it is not correct but for some reason there is a perception of that. Either way, whether correct or a perception, you as the receiver own the problem. Once pointed out to you, there is no excuse not to do something about it.

The first situation is easy, the feedback is correct. You are missing a skill, not demonstrating some specific behavior, not accomplishing a goal, etc. Your response should be to develop a plan, often with the help of your supervisor, to improve. This might involve attending a class to gain a skill or taking a different approach to achieve a goal. Upon receiving this type of “correct” feedback, you should thank the person for pointing this out, acknowledge that you agree with it, and agree on a timeline for developing this plan. That conversation should look something like “Thank you for the feedback. I agree with your assessment. Let me get back to you in a week with some thoughts on how I can improve.”

The second situation is a bit more difficult but nonetheless, it’s your problem to solve. When someone provides you feedback that you don’t think is accurate, you should not argue. Providing evidence or context of your perspective at this point is way too late and comes across as defensive. The time for providing context and perspective was days, weeks, or months ago. At the time of feedback, this is someone’s perspective and regardless of the facts, you own this situation. You did something or failed to do something that gave the reviewer this perception. Now begins the work of fixing it.

The first step is to figure out why this perception exists. Maybe a reviewer provides you with feedback that you need to improve your public speaking skills. If your response is “but I am great at public speaking, I speak at conferences in front of thousands of people all the time,” you are wrong. The proper response is “Thank you for the feedback. I hear you and let me come back to you with a plan in a week.” That week should be spent figuring out why the person has this perception. Did they not know you spoke at conferences? Did they hear you speak one time where you didn’t perform well? There are a myriad of reasons why they might have this perception. Your job is to figure that out and develop a plan to remedy it.

Whether the feedback is correct or someone’s perception, you need to own it!

The Future of Feedback

Now, on to what I’d like to see as an alternative to annual reviews. There are numerous articles and studies on the pitfalls of annual reviews including ones in HBR pointing out problems such as: biases including recency bias and halo effects, administrative burden, and harm to employee morale. Others from the Society for Human Resource Management point out that annual reviews often fail to provide timely feedback, leading to outdated assessments that don't address current performance or development needs.

My desired replacement is a process and system to support and capture near real-time feedback that is periodically analyzed for trends. These trends are used to create development plans that might last a week, a month, or even years. For example, if an employee gives a presentation, someone or multiple “someones” should provide instant feedback, such as: “clearly stated the problem and provided recommendations but needed action items.” If this type of feedback becomes a trend their supervisor can help them develop a plan for developing better action items for their meetings and presentations.

There are tools that provide a mechanism for capturing instant feedback and I’ve used several of these. Where I think they fall down is summarizing the data into useful insights. Where companies fall down using these tools is that we don’t commit to this being the formal review process. Of course, there are a few companies that seem to be doing this type of feedback. Most notably is Netflix, as detailed in No Rules Rules by Reed Hastings and Erin Meyer, where they eliminated annual reviews in favor of ongoing, candid feedback throughout the year. However a company that you probably haven’t heard of is Cargill, a Minneapolis-based food producer and distributor with over 160,000 employees. They transitioned from annual reviews to an "Everyday Performance Management" system, integrating continuous feedback and motivation into daily interactions between employees and managers. This shift improved performance by nearly 40%, with 70% of employees reporting feeling valued and receiving useful feedback from their supervisors.

Conclusion

Annual reviews, while imperfect, remain a cornerstone of many organizations’ performance management processes. Their value depends largely on how both reviewers and recipients approach them. Reviewers must build trust and create an environment of psychological safety, delivering feedback in a way that focuses on growth rather than judgment. For recipients, adopting a growth mindset and owning the feedback, whether it highlights actual issues or perceptions, is essential to turning evaluations into opportunities for improvement and development.

As you prepare to give or receive feedback, remember that the process is not about perfection but progress. Approach it as a dialogue that fosters mutual understanding and shared goals. Whether you are highlighting achievements, identifying areas for growth, or addressing misperceptions, the aim should always be to support each other’s success. Let this review season be an opportunity to not only reflect but also to act, ensuring that feedback becomes a tool for meaningful development and stronger relationships.