Chap_3_7 debriefing surveys

The Toguna® Leadership Field Guide | 5352 | The Toguna® Leadership Field Guide

Indirect feedback via surveys can be extremely useful dataHardly a month goes by without leaders receiving indirect feedback. Whether it’s the team barometer, a culture survey, the annual employee engagement survey or your very own 360º feedback. It all has the potential to be very useful data, meant to help you navigate in the right direction.

Potential?

Yes. The usefulness depends on two things: the quality of the responses and the quality of your reaction to the feedback.

The first point seems easy to address. Rubbish in, rubbish out.

So, you might find yourself thinking: “Let’s just ask the right questions, encourage people to be honest, done deal. That’s for HR to sort out, clearly. And do shorten these things whilst you’re at it, they take up far too much time!”

by Andrea Schuellerand Martina Weinberger

DEBRIEFING SURVEYS IN AN ENGAGING FASHION

Chapter 3.7 >> Debriefing surveys in an engaging fashion

HOW CAN YOU MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE AN OPEN, HONEST AND CONSTRUCTIVE EXCHANGE WHICH WILL

BE WORTH THE TIME YOU AND YOUR TEAM

INVEST IN IT?

Copyright © 2015 by Andrea Schueller, Toguna Leadership.All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author.


The quality of the responses depends on safety and follow-throughOnly – nothing is ever that simple. It’s a chicken and egg situation. The quality of the ans-wers to any questions you pose will depend on how carefully and respectfully you treated what you heard in the past. In other words, do people feel ‘safe’ to share what they truly feel? Do they feel that it’s worth bothering to share specifics – because something useful will come of it?

Peter, an engineer and senior executive in a global organisation, wants to talk through how he can make the most of a recent Team Barometer. Peter has been with his current organisation for many years and is seen as indispensable. Especially when the going gets tough. The composition of his team has recent-ly changed during a reorganisation which followed

a fundamental change in strategy. He now has eight direct reports, five of whom he’s worked with for a long time. The other three had been reporting to another colleague.

According to Peter the mood in the team is “Okay, but far from ideal”.When asked to elaborate, he explains: “I’d say people are annoyed because they can’t quite see the point of some of the recent changes. But they don’t feel as though it’s useful to voice this.”

Asked, what it would take to initiate that proper debate and how the Team Barometer results might contribute to it, Peter becomes quite pensive and explains after a while: “The trouble is, I can’t really tell them all that much. I’m only informed on a need-to-know basis myself. We’re not the most open organisation and quite hierarchical. My three new team members are cautious. They soldier on, but are clearly annoyed that the area they once represented has now changed beyond recognition. I feel as though they are poised to jump ship as soon as they get a better job offer. That would be a real shame. I need their experience and expertise and if they go, chances are their direct reports would fol-low. Their previous boss has left the organisation under a bit of a cloud. He was properly miffed. I try to get closer to them, but the shutters are down for now.

So, how might the Barometer contribute to a proper debate? I’m not sure. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s great to have feedback on how people feel about me as their boss. I’m just not sure if this survey has truly fulfilled that!

Looking at it, the data is, at best, inconclusive. Some – and with such a small number it’s not difficult to spot who – have taken the opportunity to moan anonymously. I really don’t recognise myself in their comments, but I can relate to how they might see me like this under the current circumstances. Some have ticked the boxes, but not provided any real comments, which I can’t help but find cowardly. Others, presumably my ‘old’ team members, have pretended that everything is okay because they like me and don’t want to dump me in it. They gave me top scores even where I know I don’t deserve them.

I think it’s safe to assume that this isn’t is a real reflection of what’s going on and how they view me. It isn’t the ‘real’ data we’d need for that proper debate you asked me about.

So, what I need you to help me with is this: how can I avoid putting one meaningless exchange on top of another? How can I turn this from a potential farce that’s somehow about me to a starting point for a new ‘us’? How can I engineer an honest, yet construc-tive exchange that will be worth the time we invest in it? I’m old and ugly enough: I can take a real dialogue – face to face. Help me plan it!”

Peter is an old hand at leading people in times of change. He was unusually relaxed about some of the more hurtful personal comments and the bad scores that came with them. He took them with as much of a pinch of salt as the glowing praise.

Having a rock-solid reputation in the organisation he had no reason to worry: “What does this mean for me and my future in the organisation? Will somebody question my ability as a leader”?

How can you get yourself into the right state to digest the feedback?In our experience the following questions are useful in creating a bit of necessary ‘distance’ before analysing the feedback.

1. How do I stop myself making assumptions about who said what, which just creates unhelpful ‘noise’ in my head? Noise that has me concerned about my likability and competence as a leader. Noise that ultimately distracts me from properly engaging with my people about the result.

2. How will I talk about it without my own hurt feelings getting in the way? Without becoming defensive? What will I need to assume about the people who wrote the most cutting comments? Why would a motivated, capable, trustworthy colleague react like this?

3. How will I not only look at the small number of negative, hurtful comments, but see the full picture? How can I, for myself, acknowledge that whilst there may be room for improvement, there is also a solid case for building on what works? How will I read the results to get confirmation of what exactly that is?

4. How will I stop myself from belittling certain comments, which I find petty and out of sync with the strategic challenges we have to face? If there were value in these comments, what would it be? Is there anything we specifically can and need to look at? Are these general grievances, or are they particular issues which are unique to our team, as it is right now, that can be addressed immediately?

5. How will I set myself realistic goals? It will be nigh on impossible to get 5 out of 5 on everything… but that said, it‘s the standard to aspire to, clearly. Or is it?

HELP ME PLAN FOR A CONSTRUCTIVE EXCHANGE!



All of these issues are perfectly understandable and okay. You’re human. Whilst we all intellectually buy into the usefulness of negative feedback, at some level we do hope that others acknowledge and appreciate just what we’re trying to do and how much we invest, especially given the context. Or, at least not criticise us quite so harshly… at least not in writing, for everyone to see…

A three-step approach to debriefing surveys in an engaging fashionAllow us to take you through a tried and tested three-step approach to ensure a constructive discussion right now and even more honest and helpful feedback next time round:

STEP 1: Focused and balanced self-reflection – how can you analyse the data in the most useful way?

STEP 2: Planning – how can you ensure an open, honest and constructive dialogue? This is the step we immediately jumped to with Peter.

STEP 3: The team debrief – what can this look like in terms of a structure?

STEP 1: FOCUSED AND BALANCED SELF-REFLECTION

10 SELF-COACHING QUESTIONS

... as you initially analyse the meaning of the feedback for yourself

1. Strengths: What does the feedback tell me about my strengths?2. Expected: What fits into the regular pattern of positive feedback?3. New: What is new and a pleasant surprise?4. Positive take away: What’s your key take away from the positive comments?5. Development areas: What are the areas in which people feel

I don’t yet make the grade?6. Expected: What fits into the regular pattern of criticisms?7. New: What is new and tough to accept?8. Oops: What do you never want to read again?9. Negative take away: What’s your key take away from the negative comments?10. Insight: How has all of this enhanced your insight into the kind of leader

you are perceived as? How is this different to the leader you want to be?

Okay, that’s you hopefully starting out in a constructive place. Now let’s focus on how you best engage others (and with others!) in a follow-up discussion.

STEP 2: PLANNING FOR AN OPEN, HONEST AND CONSTRUCTIVE DIALOGUE

How can you facilitate a dialogue that is recognised as a vital step towards the creation of an environment that allows everyone to do their best work?To get there, you need to make one fundamental switch – from focusing on what this means about YOU to focusing on what they are telling you about the best conditions for THEM to succeed – because that’s what you ultimately need to create, for and with them.

10 SELF-COACHING QUESTIONS

... as you plan your conversation with the team

1. Who do you need to involve – and how: For certain surveys, it’s most useful to involve more or less people than those who provided input. 360° feedback for example is best followed up individually with your boss and peers. When it comes to debriefing the comments of your team, it’s best to have everybody in the same room.

2. Success in their eyes: If you were them: what three specific things would make this a really useful follow-up for you (e.g. I feel respectfully listened to; concrete, mea-ningful actions are agreed and taken)

3. Success in your eyes: which three indicators will you use to assess if the follow-up has been time well spent?

4. Assets: when you think about your team and how they behave in group discussions: what makes you hopeful that this success can be achieved? How can you build on that?

5. Liabilities: when you think about your team and how they behave in group discussions: what might get in the way of success? How can you mitigate that?

6. Know thyself – and prepare: what are your own hot buttons (e.g. unspecific, badly backed-up examples; people who love to moan but are reluctant to suggest so-lutions; people holding back in the face-to-face follow-up who were happy to let rip on paper). How can you credibly suspend judgement when those buttons are pushed?

7. Clear ground rules: what ground rules do you need to introduce to make it ‘safe’ for everybody to speak their mind? How can you credibly be a role model for them?

8. Your guiding belief: if you remember only one thing as you facilitate the session, what is it? (e.g. curiosity opens up – judgement closes down)

9. Setting the tone: how can your invitation for the follow-up pave the way to success? What does it need to say about the purpose?

10. Getting it right from the start: how do you need to ‘be’ at the start of the meeting to signal what kind of exchange you want? What do you need to do or say?



STEP 3: THE TEAM DEBRIEF – A GENERIC STRUCTURE FOR YOUR FOLLOW-UP

:: Start by thanking people for the feedback they have already provided and frame the purpose of this discussion as jointly determining the best follow-up actions.

:: Provide an executive summary of the key findings without attributable quotes (never put the actual data in front of others, if this has not been expressly agreed in the set-up).

:: Get people to reflect on the following questions (if possible, group them in threes or fours)

– To what degree is this overview a fair description of what you perceive to be going on – on a scale of 1 – 10, with 1 meaning ‘not at all’ and 10 ‘absolutely’

– If your score is less than 8: what would you like to add? – Considering the overall picture: what in particular stands out for you – positively or

negatively? – If you compare what you see with how you believe things would need to be for you

personally to deliver your best performance, what are the 2 – 3 key issues we need to address – and how do you suggest we do this (please note: this includes things that you feel are working well and that you’d like to see more of).

:: Provide enough time to consider and answer the questions in small groups if you meet face to face. If it’s a virtual debrief, encourage individuals to make a couple of notes.

:: As the groups/individuals present their suggested actions to you and each other, beware of judging as you listen; you can add your ideas, but if you are, or even seem to be in any way dismissive of theirs they won’t feel free to express their views and it turns into a pointless exercise.

:: Ask the team as a whole to agree which max. 5 actions will be selected (e.g. by giving each team member three “votes” and select those that get top scores overall).

:: Challenge the team to consider, what might get in the way of these 5 actions being successfully implemented. What can they – individually and collectively – do, to ensu-re that these hurdles are either overcome or don’t emerge in the first place?

:: Agree a future date for all to review the effect that the selected 5 actions had – frame this as a stop-check in a joint learning and development process

TOP TIPS

:: Don’t go through the motions. Your and your team’s time is too precious. Consider what the survey would need to deliver if it were to become instrumental in elevating your own and your team’s performance. And then ask the questions the survey doesn’t/can’t ask, but that really matter. Hearing the answers face-to-face will allow you to probe deeper and understand what is behind certain perceptions.

:: Aim to get away from an open big group discussion as often as you can. Small groups are a tried and tested way of hearing from the less extroverted team members and anybody who might keep their head down for any other reasons.

:: Ensure that you have a long list of ideas (keep it for future reference!) but a very short list of real actions. Make sure that they are the ones that matter. If you sign off a whooping big list, everybody will be disappointed by it not being completely followed through.

:: Above all: trust your people. Nobody expects that all ideas put forward will be adop-ted. What matters is that they are heard, understood and that the criteria for deciding what to do next are transparent and make sense to everybody.

:: Do away with pre-conceived notions of how team events ‘have’ to happen. If you are used to team away days – great. Only: it doesn’t have to be this way. If two separate hours of virtual discussion is all you will get, focus on what people need to say and what you need to hear. Give them guiding questions to think about, which they can answer ‘live’. If you have to split the exchange in two, make the most of it. Focus the first part on analysis and the second on ideas. This allows for reflection and ideas generation in between the sessions ( a great way to get the most ideas out of your introverts, too )


Documents

Chap_3_7 debriefing surveys