Jonathan Bowyer, Author | View from Here

How to bring “Radical Candor” to 360 degree feedback

Jonathan Bowyer — Fri, 15 Mar 2019 12:35:40 +0000

This week I’ve listened to the first few chapters of Kim Scott’s book Radical Candor. (It doesn’t look like there is an English spelling version!). The basic premise of the book is that managers need to “challenge directly and care personally” when giving feedback to their colleagues. I love the idea – partly because it resonates with other models like Nevitt Sanford’s challenge-support matrix and the “unfiltered debate” in Patrick Lencioni’s Five Dysfunctions of a Team. And partly because it fits with my personal values.

The challenge I have – as a provider of a bespoke 360 degree feedback service – is how to get radical candour in feedback that is written into an online survey? How do we get respondents to be honest, direct and challenging at the same time as being kind and constructive (kind, clear, specific and sincere as Kim Scott puts it)?

The people at radicalcandor.com suggest that feedback should be in person and immediate – and if that is not possible, then video conference, and then phone, is preferable to email or text message. But immediacy trumps in-person they say. So that sounds like another argument against 360s. Radical Candor requires strong, trusting relationships and helps to maintain them – and that might point to at least one solution to my challenge.

Here’s where my thinking has got to so far:

It might help to think of the 360-degree feedback survey as a review of the relationships; a moment to summarise all the immediate feedback that has been given over a longer period of time; and a time to reflect on how we conduct our working relationships (the process, as opposed to the content, of working together)

Choose respondents carefully. I often say that one of the first benefits of the 360-degree feedback process is the conversation between recipient and their manager about who should be on the respondent list. If you have been building trusting relationships with your colleagues, can you also trust them to be honest, challenging and kind in their feedback? If not, then what do you need to change?

Don’t use 360 feedback too soon: If you have not built the relationship, don’t ask them for feedback in this way. Practice face-to-face feedback first. Encourage respondents to give andreceive feedback and to reflect on what would help them. Do unto others…

Design the questions well: Do the questions encourage respondents to be kind, clear, specific and sincere? Ask for examples to back up scores; ask for suggestions for improvement; ask for offers of assistance or more detail

Encourage recipients to develop the skills and attitudes of receiving feedback well. Make sure they are coached to process their feedback – to squeeze the juice from the kind and the unkind, the clear and not so clear comments or trends in the scores

360 degree feedback never was a replacement for ongoing candid management conversations but now and again, often at moments of transition in our careers (promotion, organisational change, personal growth) gathering the considered reflections about how I do my job from a balanced compliment of colleagues, can provide a rich seam of insight and material for reflection.

The post How to bring “Radical Candor” to 360 degree feedback appeared first on View From Here.

360 Degree Feedback – Anonymous or Attributed?

Jonathan Bowyer — Wed, 01 Aug 2018 13:07:46 +0000

I recently had the pleasure of presenting on a webinar about 360 degree feedback for the International Youth Work Trainers Guild. (You can find the recording at https://iywtgroup.wordpress.com/2018/07/05/3rd-webinar-on-assessment-practices-in-the-training-field/). One of the topics we covered was anonymity and attribution: Should respondents to a 360 feedback survey, remain anonymous? Should they have the choice to put their names by their comments, or should organisations insist that all responses by attributed (ie carry the name of the respondent).

On a practical level, attributing scores is probably harder than attributing comments. In our surveys, we usually show graphs from scored questions with the self-assessment and manager scores attributed and all others merged and therefore anonymous. For the text answers, we have the capacity to ask respondents to choose, at the end, if they want to put their name to their comments. The problem arises that if some respondents say yes and a decreasing number say no, then the anonymity of the ‘no’s starts to be eroded. We know that feedback recipients find it difficult to avoid guessing who wrote what, and so with fewer anonymous responses, the process of elimination becomes easier.

This is actually a culture question. Anonymity is offered in order to get people to say, score and write what they really think and feel, without fear of retribution. We want people to be honest and that is not very likely if you think your colleague (in particular a more senior one) will challenge you about it, or worse, punish you for it. All that sounds like a culture of fear; a culture of avoidance. Surely instead, we want to cultivate cultures of transparency, authenticity and learning?

If those who respond and provide feedback in 360 surveys, are identified, then ideally that will mean that the recipient can, yes, challenge if necessary, but more importantly, learn, put things right and build stronger relationships. It takes courage from the respondent and the recipient, to engage in this kind of feedback conversation. And in an ideal world, 360 degree feedback would not be needed, maybe, because everyone – including senior managers and leaders – would already be having robust feedback conversations day to day and month to month.

The purpose of feedback is to raise awareness and to encourage change and growth. A healthy feedback culture therefore, will promote open and honest conversation, questioning and challenging, reflecting out loud and learning from mistakes. It won’t appear overnight. The courage – and the skills – to give and receive feedback well – need to be developed; to be grown and won. Its seems to me that organisations that want to change their feedback culture need to take it in steps. Maybe attribution to a particular group comes first, then, when everyone is more comfortable with that, we can start giving individual names. Maybe it needs to be role-modelled from the top? Are all the senior people happy to attribute their responses and can they demonstrate how to respond well to uncomfortable opinions and truths?

In the webinar, we also talked about the importance of how 360 degree feedback reports are processed or debriefed. It’s perhaps here that much of the important work of encouraging ownership of our responses can be done. Supporting recipients to take a mature, constructive view; developing the wisdom to know what to overlook and how to have mature and constructive, rather than defensive, conversations, to get the most from the feedback.

The post 360 Degree Feedback – Anonymous or Attributed? appeared first on View From Here.

Purpose Ladder – for when you can’t start with why?

Jonathan Bowyer — Thu, 29 Mar 2018 10:43:50 +0000

Our coaching and facilitation page includes a simple model I often use in one-to-one and group sessions. I sometimes think of it as a ladder, with the broad purpose and mission at the top and the practical actions and behaviours at the bottom. To move up the ladder, we keep asking the question why? and to move down it, we keep asking the question how? Simon Sinek introduced us all to the concept of “start with why” – which is a really helpful concept. But the reality for many is that we often don’t get the choice about where we start. We have to jump on the bus whilst it’s driving down the road. The organisation already has a life; the strategy is already in place; the behaviours are already established. But reviewing them, by moving up and down the ladder (multiple times if neccessary) can help to bring clarity about why we do things and why we do them in a particular way. When training coaches, I often discourage the use of the question why? Because it can be received as an interrogation or an accusation; but if we can ask it with the right tone it can lead to some useful exploration and decision-making about objectives and overall purpose. Why is that course of action the best one? Because we want to achive x. And why do you want to achive X? In order to satisfy objective Y. And why do you want to acheive objective Y? Because it contributes to our overall purpose. And asking how (once the why is clear) can help individuals and groups to connect their activities, actions and behaviours to their objectives and purpose. We know what the purpose and objectives are, so how will you acheive them? By running this project or introducing that development. And how will you do that? By doing these tasks. And how will you ensure these tasks are done well and sustainably? By adpoting these behaviours with my colleagues, suppliers and customers. Have a look at the model and let me know what you think.

The post Purpose Ladder – for when you can’t start with why? appeared first on View From Here.

5 QUESTIONS TO HELP YOU DEFINE YOUR LEADERSHIP BRAND

Jonathan Bowyer — Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:47:52 +0000

If you ask someone to describe a person with a compelling leadership brand, they will often struggle initially to explain exactly why that person is so effective.

Source: the7gracesofmarketing.com

The post 5 QUESTIONS TO HELP YOU DEFINE YOUR LEADERSHIP BRAND appeared first on View From Here.

HOW DOES YOUR BUSINESS SCORE IN ETHICAL MARKETING? | THE 7 GRACES OF MARKETING – ETHICAL MARKETING FOR SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURS

Jonathan Bowyer — Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:47:26 +0000

It’s great to talk about ethical marketing, but how well are we putting it into practice? Take the 7 Graces Ethical Marketing Self-Assessment Quiz and find out. (How consciously does your company work towards a triple bottom line?

Source: the7gracesofmarketing.com

The post HOW DOES YOUR BUSINESS SCORE IN ETHICAL MARKETING? | THE 7 GRACES OF MARKETING – ETHICAL MARKETING FOR SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURS appeared first on View From Here.

CREATING PARTNERSHIPS FOR SUSTAINABILITY | MCKINSEY & COMPANY

Jonathan Bowyer — Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:47:00 +0000

Companies are increasingly expected to join with other organizations—both public and private—to address social and environmental problems. Here are seven ways to make such alliances successful.
A McKinsey & Company article.

Source: www.mckinsey.com

The post CREATING PARTNERSHIPS FOR SUSTAINABILITY | MCKINSEY & COMPANY appeared first on View From Here.