Field Notes

A surprising thing sometimes happens after a team member receives direct and candid negative feedback about their performance. 

Even though the leader believes they have been straightforward and unfiltered in their criticism, the team member does not receive the message as negative. 

In fact, on some occasions, they actually hear the feedback as relatively positive, or at least nothing to be concerned with. 

How can this be?

In some instances, leaders are not as direct or candid as they think they are. The problem, then, would lie squarely with the leader’s ability to construct a message that accurately reflects the unfavorable view they hold. 

But in many other instances, the fault sits with the team member who “hears” an entirely different message than the one designed to emphasize a negative evaluation. 

This misinterpretation usually isn’t a strategic or deceptive way of rejecting negative feedback. What happens is that the team member’s expectations get in the way. 

Consider the extreme example of a team member who believes they have underperformed, that they will receive the lowest rating, and will likely be shown the door. 

The leader also holds a harsh view of their performance but views the performance as an aberration and not reflective of the value or quality of work this team member typically produces. 

Yet, they want to make a strong point about the need to improve, so they say to the team member, “This is not your best work. In fact, this is poor work by any standard and I’m disappointed in you.” 

Remember, the team member expects to hear that they may receive the lowest evaluation and might be asked to leave the team as a result. 

So, when they hear “lousy” and “disappointed,” their reaction is one of relief and joy. They agree with the assessment, walk out of the meeting, and quickly high-five one of their colleagues. 

In their view, this was a positive message relative to what they expected to hear and how they judged their own weak performance. 

Of course, this is an exaggerated example to make an important point. Expectations have a tremendous influence on how people hear the positivity or negativity of evaluations and feedback. 

In most cases, those who positively interpret direct feedback that is highly critical do so because they expect to receive a message that is much more specific, actionable, and negative. 

The solution to this dilemma is NOT to make negative feedback as harsh as possible, but instead to explore what people expect before offering the evaluation. 

Before offering feedback, the leader asks the team member about what went well, what they could improve upon, and how they would judge their own performance. This puts their expectations squarely on the table. 

Better yet, a leader who explores expectations before giving their feedback instantly learns the gap between how they see things differently than the team member. 

Now they can adjust their message to fit the expectations rather than sow misinterpretation. So easy, and yet so clever.