This post is actually related to feedback AND coaching. My organization is very big on approaching "coaching" through the balanced feedback model. Here's what it looks like:
1. Ask the direct what they thought they did well.
2. YOU say what you thought they did well.
3. Ask what they think they could do better/differently next time to be more effective.
4. YOU say what you think they could do better/differently next time.
EXAMPLE:
- Assume a direct (we'll call him Steve) is being coached around calling to schedule appointments with clients for potential additional sales opportunities, and they have just completed their 1/2 session of making those calls. Balanced feedback would go like this...
[b]"Steve, you just finished your call block, tell me what you feel you did well with the calls you just made?" Steve responds...
"Good job Steve. I agree with you. I also though you did 'X' very well. Keep up the good work. What do you think you could do differently next time to be more effective?" Steve responds...
"I agree, that is something we could probably work on. I also think that doing 'X' next time would help you be more effective and efficient."[/b]
Any thoughts on how this compares, or fits into, the MT feedback/coaching models?
MT feedback model vs. Balanced feedback model
Maestro-
The point of feedback is to change behavior. The best feedback method is the one that is most effective at producing the desired behavior change.
The method you describe focuses on behavior and it balances affirming and adjusting feedback, so I expect it will have some beneficial effect. The reason I (and many others on this board) are wildly enthusiastic about the MT feedback model is because it is very effective.
A few thoughts on the model you described:
[list]1. There is no behavior-consequence link to show how the behavior affected results.
2. There is no opportunity for the receiver to come up with a solution to feedback you offer.
3. What if you do not agree with the direct's observations of their own behaviors? Will you disagree?
4. What do you do when you want to offer adjusting or affirming feedback on a specific behavior. Do you have to come up with a balancing item?[/list:u]
There are many feedback and coaching models. What is so attractive about the MT model is that it has been developed through long experience, it is simple to remember and it works.
Regards,
Lou
MT feedback model vs. Balanced feedback model
I think Lou covered most of it.
Two things concern me about it - 1) the model appears very formal and artificial. It reminds me of the forced listening mode. 2) I don't like the pull/push method. There is a higher chance of an argument coming out of this if you disagree and both feel strongly about it. Ultimately, it is your opinion that counts most (positional power), but this model seems to treat you a bit as equals. You're not. There's no reason to pretend.
Brian
MT feedback model vs. Balanced feedback model
My problem with this is that it assumes there is a 1:1 relationship between what went well and what did not. There is no possibility for just telling someone did something well.
Like the sandwich technique, it also leaves the person waiting for the other shoe to drop every time they hear something good.
MT feedback model vs. Balanced feedback model
How frequently is the "balanced feedback" model delivered? It seems pretty bulky for frequent delivery (i.e. several times a day). With practice, the MT feedback model is like "breathing". It just happens.
CC
MT feedback model vs. Balanced feedback model
Good takeaways. Thank you-- that is why I asked.
In answer to ccleveland's question, the balanced feedback model is encouraged in my organization to be used during a situation in which you are coaching an employee around a specific behaviour.
So perhaps, we agreed in our morning meeting that "Steve" was going to ask each of his callers that morning if they had heard about the new widgit we were offering on special. Upon observation, I notice that Steve has just completed 3 phone calls without asking. I would then approach Steve, commenting that I noticed the behaviour. I would then follow the comment with the balanced feedback model.
I am actually a fan of both feedback models, MT and the balanced feedback, depending on the setting. I would note that at times, it seems that the MT model seems to come across a little abrupt at first, until the employees become used to you using it. In addition, asking the employee what they would do differently each time takes getting used to as well.
Don't get me wrong though, once again, I see tremendous value in both methods-- including MT. I simply was curious to hear what others thought about the differences in the two.
MT feedback model vs. Balanced feedback model
I use both feedback models depending on the situation. I agree with the other posts on this thread about the effectiveness of the MT Feedback model - It is like breathing and it can be delivered quickly.
The main reason that I like the Balanced Feedback model is that it encourages self-analysis. The more often it is used, the more often the direct report will list everything they did correctly and incorrectly. This leaves the person delivering the feedback simply agreeing with the direct, which is a great place to be. Sometimes I find myself disagreeing with my DR's comments about what she or he did well and what they should do differently, which is not a big deal and part of the process.
The drawbacks of the Balanced Feedback model are that it is NOT like breathing and the process of delivering it is SLOW.
Bob