An interesting article. I'm a retired police sergeant, and in that world, many of the "Old Timers," thought just the opposite. I'm performing well if the boss isn't talking to me. The younger generation officers, that was a different story. It appeared that they fed off of feedback. Maybe that was because they grew up being told how great and special they were, and in the real world of work, many leaders or managers don't have the time to give the feedback they would like to, or they weren't trained how to give feedback. An interesting perspective of the word feedback also depends on our generation. I'm at the tail end of the Baby Boomers, so feedback to me means negativity, based upon my experiences. It appears for many of the younger generations, feedback is all about positivity. I guess it comes down to the culture of your organization, on what feedback means, and its expectations.
Feedback still has inherent criticism to it, but it shouldn't be exclusively delivered that way.
All leaders still can get better at delivering feedback, and if it is inherently critical or corrective, why would any of us want to ignore the resistance to the things we have to say?
Curious about your idea that it is a generational thing. It certainly does seem that an older generation of team members would learn from an early age not to seek out input that will always be critical. Behavioral best practices are a relatively young science... but we know that there were leaders to admire back then who would have found their way into great behavior even if it wasn't elevated in research yet.
love having your perspective here, Steve. Please come back often with it.
One follow up question for you as you bring up culture. Was there inherent parts of the law enforcement culture you saw that might also encourage leaders not to offer feedback? Critical or positive?
You pose an interesting question. My experience was probably not much different than in many industries, but I view things through the lens of an oath I swore.
Our oath speaks of having the courage to hold ourselves and others accountable, there is the proverbial but. My experiences as a field supervisor, a student of multiple law enforcement leadership schools for various levels of leadership/management never focused on feedback. The closes my agency came was when we built our own "Leadership Academy," and had a block based off of "The One Minute Manager," by Ken Blanchard. But NONE of the leadership training was ever followed through with any level of consistency beyond a week or two. In the Frontline Leaders Course I developed and teach, we have a four-hour block on the topic, but I know the likelihood it will be followed is extremely low, which comes back to the cultural point.
Feedback by its nature comes across as critical. People generally don't want "corrective," "critical," or even "a redirect," so they will in turn, complain, and the next level bosses don't want to have to deal with the complaints. So, the Frontline Leader providing the feedback gets yelled at and or threaten, and disengages. When the problem persists, then the Frontline Leader is accused of not being able to handle or control their people, then the vicious cycle continues. So much for courage.
I have had the opportunity to communicate with a large number of officers from a not only around our nation, but officers from other countries, and generally, its the same everywhere. Occasionally, there will be an organizational leader who will lead, but they are few and far between.
I have found showing appreciation goes a long way. Gen Zers (and some Millennials) will see if it's genuine or not. If it's not, don't say it. Regarding constructive criticism, I am wary of that one. One needs to read the room (be very good at it too). Very rarely, in the overworked, and fast paced world we live in, have our SMEs not seen (even tried) what problems our managers are bringing up. If, and that's a big if, we're going to bring it up. We'd be wise to ask the SMEs questions, rather than give commands.
Do you believe that younger generations are more tuned in to the authenticity of words and actions than their older colleagues? If so, what is your guess on why that might be?
One probably worth a significant amount of money, especially in this age when companies are competing to gain and control access to information.
The question, while simple is complex.
For example, I study organizations and leadership for my major. The way I am taught to see the world has come from consistent studying and asking hard questions. Ultimately through the implementation of Deming's/Shewhart's PDCA/ PDSA cycles. These young men and women seem to pick up on it naturally.
Perhaps it is a genuinely higher EI than previous generations.
This is purely speculation, at best. From our conversations; they want someone who won't treat them like sh*t and will back them when it counts. We also must be willing to be diligent.
Thanks for your time.
*We'd be wise to factor in their environment. A lot of people coming from hard backgrounds learned how to hustle and read the room, because their survival depended on it..
I apologize for the delayed response, we are running two academies, Full and Part Time, so time is not always my friend.
The culture was more of "it depends." This is what I mean. I could provide encouraging feedback to the people I lead, and they talk about how their boss recognizes their efforts/work, then a different manager or supervisor hears grumblings from the people they are supposed to lead due to the lack of feedback, because, "I shouldn't have to tell them they are doing a good job." Instead of our direct manager or supervisor speaking to the not in contact supervisor, I would get spoken to about how I'm making the others look bad.
Similarly, if a person I led needing a corrective redirect, all they had to do was go to my boss and complain that I was being mean, or rude. Even though, my supervisor had expressed the same concerns when they managed the same person, or worse, the redirection I was given was to be more sensitive and not bother.
So the "it depends" part is, it depends on who is doing what. We called it "OTT." If your were On The Team, you could do about anything. If you weren't, then it depended on who your next boss, or even the next layer boss was.
I have been to quite a few "leadership" schools or courses, both in the United States Marine Corps and in law enforcement. Very little is talked about, let alone covered on this topic. In the leadership course I designed, we have a large block on it, and it only scratches the surface. Its not a sexy topic but a critical skill to get right. As much as I have studied and work at, I still don't get it right all the time.
Hi, I really appreciated this piece. As a current PhD student, it also made me wonder if we have a robust understanding of this dynamic (withholding feedback = perceived as negative feedback). I think there is value in taking leadership intuitions and trying to study them. I'm curious if you have any literature, networks, or connections on this topic that could be used to possibly structure a research effort here?
An interesting article. I'm a retired police sergeant, and in that world, many of the "Old Timers," thought just the opposite. I'm performing well if the boss isn't talking to me. The younger generation officers, that was a different story. It appeared that they fed off of feedback. Maybe that was because they grew up being told how great and special they were, and in the real world of work, many leaders or managers don't have the time to give the feedback they would like to, or they weren't trained how to give feedback. An interesting perspective of the word feedback also depends on our generation. I'm at the tail end of the Baby Boomers, so feedback to me means negativity, based upon my experiences. It appears for many of the younger generations, feedback is all about positivity. I guess it comes down to the culture of your organization, on what feedback means, and its expectations.
Hi Steve.
Feedback still has inherent criticism to it, but it shouldn't be exclusively delivered that way.
All leaders still can get better at delivering feedback, and if it is inherently critical or corrective, why would any of us want to ignore the resistance to the things we have to say?
Curious about your idea that it is a generational thing. It certainly does seem that an older generation of team members would learn from an early age not to seek out input that will always be critical. Behavioral best practices are a relatively young science... but we know that there were leaders to admire back then who would have found their way into great behavior even if it wasn't elevated in research yet.
love having your perspective here, Steve. Please come back often with it.
One follow up question for you as you bring up culture. Was there inherent parts of the law enforcement culture you saw that might also encourage leaders not to offer feedback? Critical or positive?
Good morning,
Thank you for your kind words.
You pose an interesting question. My experience was probably not much different than in many industries, but I view things through the lens of an oath I swore.
Our oath speaks of having the courage to hold ourselves and others accountable, there is the proverbial but. My experiences as a field supervisor, a student of multiple law enforcement leadership schools for various levels of leadership/management never focused on feedback. The closes my agency came was when we built our own "Leadership Academy," and had a block based off of "The One Minute Manager," by Ken Blanchard. But NONE of the leadership training was ever followed through with any level of consistency beyond a week or two. In the Frontline Leaders Course I developed and teach, we have a four-hour block on the topic, but I know the likelihood it will be followed is extremely low, which comes back to the cultural point.
Feedback by its nature comes across as critical. People generally don't want "corrective," "critical," or even "a redirect," so they will in turn, complain, and the next level bosses don't want to have to deal with the complaints. So, the Frontline Leader providing the feedback gets yelled at and or threaten, and disengages. When the problem persists, then the Frontline Leader is accused of not being able to handle or control their people, then the vicious cycle continues. So much for courage.
I have had the opportunity to communicate with a large number of officers from a not only around our nation, but officers from other countries, and generally, its the same everywhere. Occasionally, there will be an organizational leader who will lead, but they are few and far between.
Thank yo for your time.
Be safe.
Steve
Good morning,
I have found showing appreciation goes a long way. Gen Zers (and some Millennials) will see if it's genuine or not. If it's not, don't say it. Regarding constructive criticism, I am wary of that one. One needs to read the room (be very good at it too). Very rarely, in the overworked, and fast paced world we live in, have our SMEs not seen (even tried) what problems our managers are bringing up. If, and that's a big if, we're going to bring it up. We'd be wise to ask the SMEs questions, rather than give commands.
Thank you for your time.
Morning Joe.
Do you believe that younger generations are more tuned in to the authenticity of words and actions than their older colleagues? If so, what is your guess on why that might be?
That's a great question.
One probably worth a significant amount of money, especially in this age when companies are competing to gain and control access to information.
The question, while simple is complex.
For example, I study organizations and leadership for my major. The way I am taught to see the world has come from consistent studying and asking hard questions. Ultimately through the implementation of Deming's/Shewhart's PDCA/ PDSA cycles. These young men and women seem to pick up on it naturally.
Perhaps it is a genuinely higher EI than previous generations.
This is purely speculation, at best. From our conversations; they want someone who won't treat them like sh*t and will back them when it counts. We also must be willing to be diligent.
Thanks for your time.
*We'd be wise to factor in their environment. A lot of people coming from hard backgrounds learned how to hustle and read the room, because their survival depended on it..
I apologize for the delayed response, we are running two academies, Full and Part Time, so time is not always my friend.
The culture was more of "it depends." This is what I mean. I could provide encouraging feedback to the people I lead, and they talk about how their boss recognizes their efforts/work, then a different manager or supervisor hears grumblings from the people they are supposed to lead due to the lack of feedback, because, "I shouldn't have to tell them they are doing a good job." Instead of our direct manager or supervisor speaking to the not in contact supervisor, I would get spoken to about how I'm making the others look bad.
Similarly, if a person I led needing a corrective redirect, all they had to do was go to my boss and complain that I was being mean, or rude. Even though, my supervisor had expressed the same concerns when they managed the same person, or worse, the redirection I was given was to be more sensitive and not bother.
So the "it depends" part is, it depends on who is doing what. We called it "OTT." If your were On The Team, you could do about anything. If you weren't, then it depended on who your next boss, or even the next layer boss was.
I have been to quite a few "leadership" schools or courses, both in the United States Marine Corps and in law enforcement. Very little is talked about, let alone covered on this topic. In the leadership course I designed, we have a large block on it, and it only scratches the surface. Its not a sexy topic but a critical skill to get right. As much as I have studied and work at, I still don't get it right all the time.
Hi, I really appreciated this piece. As a current PhD student, it also made me wonder if we have a robust understanding of this dynamic (withholding feedback = perceived as negative feedback). I think there is value in taking leadership intuitions and trying to study them. I'm curious if you have any literature, networks, or connections on this topic that could be used to possibly structure a research effort here?