Kategorie: Communication

Two sides of feedback

Feedback is the result of the comparison between the target and actual state by a second person.

If the assessment of the state between actual and target is the same in the eyes of the second person, then the feedback is positive. The feedback recipient receives recognition and appreciation. The difference is that recognition refers to performance and appreciation refers to personality.

If the target and actual state do not match on the part of the feedback giver, the feedback receiver is criticized. We can learn from both. From the positive perceived feedback, we learn to conform.

From the negative perceived feedback, the criticism, we can learn where a second person sees improvements for us. Studies have shown that negative feedback, criticism, can lead to improved performance (Kluger & DeNisi 1996).

With any feedback, it is important to understand that the source of the feedback is the second person and their own construct.

If the feedback is given with good intentions and no hidden agenda, it is a fantastic resource for the feedback receiver to learn from.

However, feedback can also be part of:

  • Instrumentalization in the form of manipulation techniques, such as false compliments or in the worst case with the intention of humiliation.
  • Projection of one’s own behaviour, this happens unconsciously, the feedback giver’s own behaviour is transferred to the feedback receiver.

Examine the mindset with which feedback is given and consider whether you can learn from it or whether it is done in an instrumentalized way. 

In this way, the feedback receiver has the chance to learn twice:

  1. About the self: How others, especially the feedback givers, observe and evaluate feedback receiver own behaviour.
  2. About the feedback giver: With the feedback, the construct of the feedback giver will be uncovered.

For further information read this article Valence of feedback (positive vs. negative feedback)

Methodology „H-O-E-R“ to turn exception into daily behaviour

„H-O-E-R“ is an acronym and stands for deep listening a method of coaching, which is also helpful for systemic leaders or for self coaching. If you use it for self-coaching, replace employee through yourself.

H stands for hearing out to the exception (s)

O stands for make it more open / expand it. Ask the employee what is the positive exception to the challenge or problem. Ask the employee when and how the exception appear or what happened during or before the exception and which role the employee had.

E is empowerment and strengthen the employee stronger the success and own power. The main part of the leader is to observe and recognize. When the positive exception to the challenges happened, and give the employee natural compliments when the leader observes that the obstacles could be overcome.

R is to go back and reflect, through questioning the employee, what changed in a more positive way through the exception. The question is: „What else?“

This methodology is origin from Peter De Jong and Insoo Kim Berg from the book „Interviewing for solution“.

What is the reason of gullibility?

We all know that rumours and allegations are often long-lasting. False insinuations spread via spoken words or facial expressions and gestures persist in the organization for a long time, even if the facts and data refute them. Researchers discovered social and cognitive factors that explain the persistence of rumours and allegations.

These are here summarized:

Cognitive factors

1. Intuition („gut feeling“) through:

  • Little analysis
  • Less analytical thinking

2. Cognitive inaccuracy due to:

  • References to sources are neglected or forgotten
  • Own knowledge is not applied
  • Counter-evidence is neglected  

3. Illusory truth:

  • Familiarity of information
  • Fluency
  • Cohesion with own experience

Social factors

1. Credibility of groups through:

  • Hierarchies (elites)
  • Degree of attraction / attractiveness
  • Own social affiliation

2. World views through

  • personal views
  • Affiliation to a party

3. Emotions

  • One’s own emotional state
  • Information itself is presented emotionally

The whole study can be found under this link: Eckert et al.

The power of words, especially in a virtual conversation

In a virtual conversation, body language and facial expressions are limited. Especially since the cameras record us two-dimensionally, which does not correspond to our learned patterns. Evolutionarily, we have learned to read non-verbal signals on a three-dimensional person in order to build psychological safety and gain trust.

That’s why it’s important to focus on verbal (our words) and para-verbal communication (social sounds, e.g. „hmm“) in a virtual conversation.

Words evoke emotions and through these physical reactions.

Words that trigger emotions also lead to a physical reaction, just as facial expressions or sounds can. Words that are read or heard and associated with smiling, for example, lead to smiling in the perceiver.

Mirror neurons / resonance leads to the fact that emotions of observed persons are also physically comprehended. In cognitive tasks, physical change does not occur.

Some physical sensations coupled with individual emotional experiences are stored as somatic markers.

Somatic markers are emotional memory stores of experiences combined with body signals. These body signals emit evaluation signals, such as „positive, aim for“ and „negative, avoid“. Somatic markers express themselves with physical sensations and/or feelings. Immediately, when a signal reaches the person, these markers emerge, which are necessary to decipher

The somatic markers are activated through two pathways:

1. body loop: when the emotion is activated, the appropriate bodily state arises directly.

2. as-if-body loop: as-if-body loop, when memories, thoughts or ideas are evoked. These lead to the appropriate physical emotion arising (conversely, it is a physical anchor).

3. Words can trigger both loops. Accordingly, words influence behavior patterns/actions as well as emotions.

Since neuroception an co-regulation, which are biological process to reduce stress signals through the influence on autonomous nervous system (Polyvagal Theory from Stephen W. Porges), are only possible to a limited extent in a virtual conversation, the choice of words in a virtual environment is crucial, since words can trigger emotions. If words are increasingly chosen that evoke positive emotions, co-regulation can take place via this route.

„The Berlin Affective Word List Reloaded“ (BAWL-R) provides an overview of words that show emotional valence, imaginability, and emotional arousal. To learn more about the power of words, you find the BAWL-R under this link, https://osf.io/hx6r8/