It can take champion courage and humility to face the most powerful feedback because it is often the stuff we don’t want to hear. It can be about the parts of us that are the most difficult to admit to, or to change.
Picture this: your team gets asked to do an anonymous 360 review about your performance. You receive critical feedback no-one has told you before. Instead of focusing on growing and learning from it, you try to figure out who gave that feedback and why they could not say it to your face. Were they making it up? What else are they not saying? What context can you give to explain (or excuse) it?
It’s frustrating because you can’t have a follow-up conversation to learn more about the feedback and their point of view. How can a survey that was intended to help you be of any real value?
It’s embarrassing because now you know what your co-workers really think of you. The survey has caused you to become suspicious of them. You can feel judged, despite all the effort you put into your work.
Anonymous feedback can be useful for leaders who want it but don’t really know how to ask for it directly from their team. Or, if they are new to a team and they can see there are things people want to say but they are too afraid to do so, for example, because the team culture is not healthy.
On the flip side, anonymous surveys can also be used like a shield for people to hide behind instead of having honest conversations in which perspectives can be shared and understood. Anonymity can also embolden people to perhaps express themselves more freely, sometimes vexatiously or frivolously. And this argument may justify the recipient of critical feedback to downplay it.
One approach that I think strikes the right balance is for a feedback process to have two steps: (1) anonymous answers to questions and (2) candid group discussions about themes that came out of the results. After the survey results are collated, a team meeting is called to share a high-level overview of the themes and the team discusses them as a group so collective wisdom can be gained. This can also be used as an opportunity to highlight positive feedback.
This process gives co-workers the safety of anonymity and the leader permission to give context and seek more information. Together, the group finds collaborative solutions. It can have a snowball effect of opening up more constructive face-to-face feedback, which is a bedrock of a trusting culture. Having an expectation with your co-workers that if they have a problem with you, they will raise it directly as soon as possible lets you know where you stand with one another and prevent issues from spiralling.
Ideally, in that environment anonymous surveys are no longer needed. However, in reality, there is always likely to be someone who is not comfortable raising an issue directly. To cover all bases, it could be good to make 360 reviews (or something similar) a regular part of professional development so that everyone will not be taken by surprise in receiving feedback. They will be more open to it, even if it is still uncomfortable to hear.
And, of course, there are good and bad ways to deliver feedback. Ye olde sandwich approach can work well: start with a strength, fill them in on a weakness and finish with another strength. Champions with a growth mindset will dine on such an approach, but it may still give them a stomach ache. Go easy on them. Feedback should always be delivered in manageable portions, with a side of something sweet.
Making feedback processes regular and routine is important for risk management at an organisation level as well, because often businesses only become aware of issues once they become serious. This relates to matters like workplace bullying, but also to customer-related problems such as poor service. Organisations should also have whistleblowing policies and processes to cover the Protected Disclosures (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act 2022.
And with the mention of legislation, it is time for me to mic drop and refer you to get specialist advice.
(If you have any feedback for me, you are welcome to send me a polite email.)
— Kate Keddell is a mediator, investigator and director of Balance Consultancy.
