Ever feel like you’re having the same feedback conversation over and over again? Despite best intentions on both sides, there are times when giving feedback to an employee doesn’t work. Often, something is causing the interaction to loop without making progress.
I once managed an engineer and had the same monthly conversation about promotion and opportunities for improvement. In those conversations, the engineer would sound like they understood me. They felt excited to change, and this time we’d deepened our shared understanding! Then next month, we were back at the start, having the same conversation over again. We were stuck in managerial groundhog’s day.
Situations like this are often hard to break out of. The temptation is to keep trying to communicate the idea you want to convey – you might try some different ways of articulating the concept. This can work, but less often than one might suspect. The loop isn’t usually due to a lack of understanding. It’s usually due to a breakdown in the feedback-to-behavior-change process.
What I have found to be most successful here is to break into what I call “meta feedback.” This is feedback about how the process of giving the person feedback is going. I like to call it the Nielsen Technique – after the famous fourth-wall breaker Leslie Nielsen. I like this term because you are breaking the frame of the dialogue. You invite the other person to examine the conversation itself, not only react to it.
Ultimately, if the issue is that someone lacks the strategies or motivation to address the feedback you’re giving them more feedback will fail. You must address the underlying causes.
Let’s look at some examples of what this looks like:
Example 1:
Me: Similar to what I mentioned last week, I’m not seeing the level of documentation that we need from the work you’ve been finishing. It really helps the team avoid rework when we have good documentation.
Team member: Right, right. I totally get that. You’re absolutely right. I will make sure this next project is better. [They nod vigorously and appear to agree.]
Normally this would be a fine response. But if they’ve said this before and then didn’t change, it’s time to try the Nielsen Technique.
Me: Glad to hear that. Before we move on though, I want to point out that you said something similar last month, but this latest project had similar lack of documentation. I really appreciate the enthusiasm, but I want to make sure my feedback is heard and acted on this time. What can we do differently this time that will mean we get a different outcome?
Team member: Ah… yeah, that is a good question. I’m not sure exactly.
Me: Great, let’s spend some time brainstorming together on this then. I want to make sure I’m helping you develop good practices around how to receive and act on feedback, so you’re set up for success. What are some ways you can think of to help ensure that you’re successful here?
Here I am helping them realize that the issue is with their response to the feedback. I’m doing my best to make sure they understand that I’m trying to help them and the team. But I’m also making it clear that I see a gap in their current skills or habits.
Example 2:
Me: I noticed in that last meeting that it seemed like you lost your audience when you dove deeply into the details around the architecture.
Team member: That’s ridiculous. I can’t believe they don’t understand the basics of how our system fits together! [They cross their arms and look annoyed.]
If this kind of rejection of feedback is something this person has shown before, this would be a good time to look at their pattern of receiving feedback.
Me: I can definitely understand why that is frustrating. Let’s stop for a moment and look at this conversation though. I’m bringing this up as a point of feedback for you, as I want to see you be successful in communicating with the team. Unfortunately, when you lose your audience like that, it’s hard to get them on board with your ideas. So when I bring you a point of feedback and you put blame on others, it makes it hard for us to have a conversation that helps you improve your presentation. Do you see how that happened just now?
Team member: It’s not my fault they’re so far behind. [Again, arms crossed]
Note that they are still rejecting my feedback. This is a good time to switch to meta-feedback.
Me: That may well be the case, but let’s stay focused on our interaction here for a moment, since we only really have an ability to change our own behaviors and they’re not in the room here (Here, I’m refocusing on the conversation we’re having in the moment, as that is the one that is breaking down. Note, I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with their perspective that other people may be at fault, but merely point out that we can’t do anything about them at the moment, but we can control our own skills and approaches.). Would you be open to considering how you can get to better outcomes together? (Here, I’m inviting the person to own their mobilize their own will to engage — more on this in another post)
Team member: Hmmm…. yeah, I guess that could have gone better…
In both examples, we’ve transitioned from giving feedback about a skill or situation to discussing the receiving and acting on feedback. The trigger to switch into meta feedback was seeing a pattern of feedback rejection that allowed persistent performance gaps. By shifting to meta feedback, we now have an actionable topic to work on together. This turns an otherwise frustrating conversation into one with a chance for success.
This technique is easy in theory, but can be difficult in practice. Often, you may not realize in the moment that this resistance pattern is occurring. The good news is that you don’t have to be perfect for this to be useful. If you’re like me and you frequently realize you missed a good opportunity only after the fact, don’t worry! You can always bring it up at your next opportunity. With practice, you will get better at recognizing when to deploy the Nielsen Technique. As you improve, you’ll get to enjoy success in conversations where you would otherwise have been stuck. Give it a try!