Why I hate feedback: Anchoring effective feedback within organizations Tijs Besieuxa,b aLeuven University, Dekenstraat 2 — Box 3725, 3000 Leuven,… [620705]

EXECUTIVE DIGEST
Why I hate feedback: Anchoring effective
feedback within organizations
Tijs Besieuxa,b
aLeuven University, Dekenstraat 2 — Box 3725, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
bIÉSEG School of Management, Paris
1. The paradox of feedback
Steven stares aimlessly at his laptop screen. His
heart pounds and his hands tremble. “What to do
now? ” Steven asks himself in silence. He feels like a
complete failure. It is about 9 p.m. and he is the
only person left in the offices of his highly respected
law firm. His day has suddenly turned into a night-
mare. Ten minutes later , Steven reads the report
one final time before packing his things and hurrying
outside. Once inside the subway, he bursts intotears. The next day, Steven returns to the office
at 8 a.m. Bracing himself, he forces a big smile. He
is determined to continue his journey up the corpo-
rate ladder. Business as usual.
What happened? Tw o years ago, Steven was made
a partner at the London headquarters of Finlaw, a
boutique firm specializing in legal advice for online
retail banks. As partner, Steven leads a team of
15 top-notch lawyers. Last month, the HR depart-
ment sent out a survey to Steven ’s 15 team mem-
bers, asking them to assess Steven on a number of
topics, including leadership, legal expertise, and
research skills (see Figure 1). The goal was for
Steven to receive valuable feedback so he could
grow in his role.Business Horizons (2017) 60, 435—439
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
www.elsevier.com/locate/bushor
KEYWORDS
Human resource
management;
Feedback ecosystem;
HRM;Organizational
development;
Leadership feedbackAbstract More than ever , business practitioners perceive feedback as a vital tool
for increasing sustainable business competitiveness; however , research on feedback
shows mixed results in terms of its effectiveness. Three problems underlie the
paradox of feedback. First, the word ‘feedback ’ lacks definition. Both scholars
and practitioners have different understandings of what feedback means. This lack
of clarity hampers successful implementation of feedback as a corporate reflex.
Second, feedback can be destructive. In fact, toxic feedback might disengage
employees from their jobs. Third, giving and receiving feedback is more difficult
than we sometimes like to think. The mantra “our organization has an open feedback
culture ” does not alone suffice to support effective feedback behavior. This Execu-
tive Digest addresses these issues and introduces the feedback ecosystem: a four-
step process (receive, reflect, plan, act) bridging theory and practice to anchor
effective feedback within organizations. In addition, evidence-based advice is
offered on how to implement each step of the feedback ecosystem.
# 2017 Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All
rights reserved.
E-mail address: [anonimizat]
0007-6813/$ — see front matter # 2017 Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2017.03.001

Yesterday, around 8 p.m., Steven received the
report, along with a message from HR. It stated:
“Please find your feedback results attached. They
provide key insights for you to develop. We expect
you to take action on critical scores. Do not hesitate
to contact us if you have further questions. ” The
report came to Steven as a complete surprise.
Although he received high scores in expertise and
research skills, the only survey result that stuck
with him was that he had failed as a leader; the
positive feedback in the report was already out of
mind.
How has this feedback been of any help? Steven
now feels uncertain. “You truly are a horrible boss, ”
his inner voice whispers repeatedly. He reacts de-
fensively when a team member challenges the cho-
sen path for a project. He is afraid to contact HR
with questions about the survey. Steven feels like he
is misunderstood. Sound familiar?
2. The problem with feedback
I identify at least three problems regarding feed-
back. First, the term ‘feedback ’ is one of the
business world ’s most omnipresent words, yet it
may also be one of the hollowest. Second, feedback
gone wrong can be destructive. Third, feedback is
not as simple as we sometimes like to believe. In
fact, providing effective feedback is very difficult.
Let’s face these three issues.
2.1. The word seems hollow
The business sector is obsessed with the notion of
feedback, believing that it can and will do won-
ders. In the hunt for feedback, we try to gather as
much as possible, like squirrels hoarding acorns in
September. The problem is that feedback is con-
ceptualized in a variety of ways. I once had a client
who, on a Monday, asked me for feedback on a
team meeting. Great. Except the meeting had notyet taken place; it was scheduled for Friday the
following week. What did the word ‘feedback ’
mean to my client? I wondered if we were on the
same page.
What do we actually mean by feedback? Several
definitions exist, but two elements appear consistent
(Gabelica, Van den Bossche, Segers, & Gijselaers,
2012 ; Larson, 1989 ):
1. Feedback is about the transfer of information to
an individual or team; and
2. It reflects behavior, processes, or performance.
Based on this, two types of feedback can be
identi fied: process feedback and performance
feedback –—that is, the ‘how ’ (process) and the
‘what ’ (performance) of things. The information
provided can be positive or negative. Steven re-
ceived a flurry of feedback on how he does things
(i.e., process feedback). That is a starting point,
but by no means should it be the final chapter.
2.2. Feedback can be destructive
Bad feedback can be destructive. Generalized,
vague, and highly negative feedback is considered
toxic. Toxic feedback is difficult to reflect upon. It
does not contribute to the development of the team
or the individual. In fact, it might do the opposite;
people react defensively and conflict may arise.
Even worse, people can feel disengaged (Bakker
& Leiter , 2010 ). Toxic feedback derails employee
engagement rather than provide fuel for growth.
Steven received feedback through a survey. Often-
times, such results lack speci ficity and they tend to
be a generalization of attitudes and behaviors over
a long time period rather than regarding a speci fic
project. In such situations, concepts remain at the
surface. And, too often, we forget the powerful
effects of positive feedback on employee engage-
ment (Yukl, 2012 ).
When we ask for feedback, we create expecta-
tions regarding our future actions. If we do not then
take action on the received feedback, we diminish
trust by signaling a lack of commitment to and
willingness to act for our employees and our clients.
Little is worse than asking a client for feedback
without having the resolve to take action. When
someone is kind enough to provide feedback, he/
she expects to be informed about the actions it has
triggered.
Think twice before you give or ask for feedback.
Steven ’s team might now have high expectations
regarding how he will develop as a leader , and his HR
department likely looks forward to Steven ’sFigure 1. Survey results for Steven
12345678910
Leadersh
ip Ex pertis e Researc hSurvey results: Steve n436 EXECUTIVE DIGEST

concrete actions on critical scores. However , Steven
does not feel capable of properly reflecting, plan-
ning, and acting. At this point, feedback creates
more damage than opportunity for development.
2.3. Feedback is difficult
Despite the fact that feedback is difficult to gener-
ate, deliver , and hear in return, many organizations
expect their employees to give feedback continu-
ously. Giving and receiving effective feedback is
quite hard (Steelman & Rutkowski, 2004 ). Some
consider it an art; I would agree. As a corporate
advisor , I often join client meetings as an observer.
Afterward, I ask team members how they felt about
the meeting. Sometimes, they complain about a
lack of clear goals and/or few opportunities to voice
their own opinions. I ask how they raise such con-
cerns with the team leader; as you might guess,
they often don’t.
Why do we refrain from giving feedback? Often-
times, it is because we do not want to hurt people or
for them to be disappointed or mad. We certainly
don’t want them to criticize us in return. The
difficulty of providing and hearing feedback should
never be underestimated. These issues related to
feedback hamper its effective potential.
3. The feedback ecosystem
How can the aforementioned feedback challenges
be transformed into opportunities for growth? To
anchor effective feedback within organizations, I
developed the feedback ecosystem (see Figure 2),
a simple tool that facilitates a journey of continu-
ous development for feedback recipients . . . like
Steven.
3.1. Step 1: Receive
We receive feedback whether or not we ask for it,
and appreciating the same can be difficult. The
implicit assumption made by individuals who re-
ceive feedback is that accepting criticism renders
them vulnerable. From that perspective, feedback
can be a scary thing. However , when feedback is
appreciated as a development opportunity, the
gates are opened to growth and performance (Stone
& Heen, 2015 ).
Giving feedback is not always straightforward
and may be made easier by following three simple
guidelines. First, convey your message from the ‘I’
perspective. Second, provide clear and objective
facts. Third, express your emotional evaluation ofthe situation. “You’re no good to this organization
because you are always late” sounds a lot different
than “I’ve noticed that you’ve been late twice
during the last five meetings. I’m concerned about
you and feel like you’re no longer committed to the
team. ” The way we provide feedback determines its
potential effectiveness (Aguinis, Gottfredson, &
Joo, 2011 ).
Do you want to dig deeper? Research by de
Villiers (2013) uncovered seven principles for highly
effective feedback. According to the scholar , feed-
back should be (1) situational, (2) manageable, (3)
speci fic, (4) meaningful, (5) timely, (6) relevant,
and (7) reliable.
3.2. Step 2: Reflect
Feedback is useless unless it is followed up by
individual self-re flection. Team leaders, executive
committee members, and HR strategists often refer
to this part of the ecosystem as the ‘pause button. ’
Carving out recurring, dedicated time (e.g., every
Friday morning for 1 hour) explicitly for reflection is
good practice. Just as we need sleep to stay healthy,
we also need reflection to grow (Edmondson, 2014 ).
The role of the HR department can be crucial
here. In our example, Steven is hesitant to contact
HR. If an HR representative plans a meeting with
Steven, this facilitates his ability to reflect. HR
should be proactive with employees, especially
those like Steven who may be reluctant to initiate
contact.
3.3. Step 3: Plan
The next step entails designing an action plan. This
might be a team or an individual effort. Above all,
the plan should be SMART: speci fic, measurable,
actionable, realistic, and timely. Do not aim to
change the entire world at once; craft a plan that
is challenging, yet doable. As elaborate and fine as
they might be, grand designs that stand no chance
of implementation in the real world are nothing but
worthless wastes of time.EXECUTIVE DIGEST 437

Referring back again to our example, after a
reflection meeting with HR, Steven can draft an
action plan. He can then prioritize, together with
HR or with his team if he feels comfortable. The
SMART plan will empower Steven to communicate
clearly with his team on the actions based on the
survey feedback.
3.4. Step 4: Act
All that remains is gathering the courage to act.
Having an action buddy can aid in this process.
Discuss your plan with someone you trust and then
ask him/her to observe as you try out the new
behavior. Make sure to celebrate successes –—
especially the small ones, which are too often
forgotten. Before you know it, the feedback eco-
system starts all over again. Continuous develop-
ment is now anchored.
4. Feedback: A summary
Effective feedback is powerful. The strength of
feedback lies in how it can guide behavior toward
more efficient goal achievement (Gagné & Deci,
2005 ). It is also vital in helping employees to feel
engaged, which promises value for organizations;
indeed, Deloitte ’s 2015 Human Capital survey ranks
engagement as a top priority (Schatsky & Schwartz,
2015 ). Further, feedback stimulates continuousdevelopment. Individuals become better adapted
to the environment ’s complexity and fast-paced
change because they continuously seek and provide
high-impact information, thus creating oxygen for
growth (Ashford, Blatt, & VandeWalle, 2003 ). As a
result, feedback assists along the pathway to strat-
egy execution.
5. Loving feedback: Your next step
Think about the last time you received feedback.
Now, observe the feedback ecosystem and make an
assessment. How did the feedback go through the
ecosystem? If it got stuck somewhere, explore why
and how. Then, ask yourself a simple question: What
will I do tomorrow to unlock the potential of feed-
back? I’ll bet Steven knows.
References
Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Joo, H. (2011). Delivering
effective performance feedback: The strengths-based ap-
proach. Business Horizons, 55(2), 105—111.
Ashford, S. J., Blatt, R., & VandeWalle, D. (2003). Reflections on
the looking glass: A review of research on feedback-seeking
behavior in organizations. Journal of Management, 29(6),
773—799.
Bakker , A., & Leiter , M. (2010). Work engagement: A handbook of
essential theory and research . New York: Psychology Press.
de Villiers, R. (2013). 7 principles of highly effective managerial
feedback: Theory and practice in managerial development
practices. The International Journal of Management Educa-
tion, 11(2), 66—74.
Edmondson, A. C. (2014). Teaming: How organizations learn,
innovate, and compete in the knowledge economy . San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer.
Gabelica, C., Van den Bossche, P. , Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W.
(2012). Feedback, a powerful lever in teams: A review.
Education Research Review, 7(2), 123—144.
Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and
work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4),
331—362.
Larson, J. R. (1989). The dynamic interplay between employees ’
feedback-seeking strategies and supervisors ’ delivery of per-
formance feedback. Academy of Management Review, 14(3),
408—422.
Schatsky, D., & Schwartz, J. (2015). Global human capital
trends 2015: Leading in the new world of work . AvailableFigure 2. Feedback ecosystem
Receive
Act Reflect
Plan
Acknowledgment
I would like to thank Hans Driesen for the
intellectually stimulating dialogue that led
to the design of the feedback ecosystem and
subsequently the current article.438 EXECUTIVE DIGEST

at http://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/at/
Documents/human-capital/hc-trends-2015.pdf
Steelman, L. A., & Rutkowski, K. A. (2004). Moderators of
employee reactions to negative feedback. Journal of Mana-
gerial Psychology, 19(1), 6—18.Stone, D., & Heen, S. (2015). Thanks for the feedback: The
science and art of receiving feedback well. London: Penguin
Books.
Yukl, G. (2012). Leadership in organizations . Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.EXECUTIVE DIGEST 439