A feedback is a process in which job-related messages are verified and the achievement of objectives evaluated. There are two commonly used approaches to obtaining a feedback. One approach is sending an entire message and the assumption that the information has been communicated with common understanding. The second approach is delivering the entire message and then asking the listeners whether they have a question (Lussier & Achua, 2010). This paper explores these two commonly used approaches in getting feedback and why these approaches are not always effective.
According to Lussier and Achua (2010), the use of these approaches are ineffective because people are not likely to ask questions, hence there is no feedback that follows. There are four reasons suggested as to why people have a tendency of not asking questions. First, in such settings where no one else asks a question, the receivers of the message fail to ask any questions for fear of being perceived as less attentive or ignorant as to understand the message put across.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Secondly, it is also probable that the receivers are themselves ignorant hence may not be knowledgeable enough to assess the fullness of the message subject to its interpretation. In this circumstance, the message recipients are not sure of what to ask because they feel the message delivered is right thus, no questioning. A general lack of understanding of the usefulness of the feedback information is also dominant in ignorant recipients. The receiver’s ignorance can be attributed to poor language proficiency and literacy levels.
Thirdly, it is a common phenomenon that receivers often become reluctant to highlight the manager’s ignorance. Lussier and Achua (2010) argue that most employees fail to ask questions for fear that they will portray the manager negatively in the way he or she prepared and conveyed the message. People feel it is not right to give negative remarks or criticism about high-status people in authority while other participants decline to participate for purposes of protecting self-image and reputation.
Lastly, message recipients are constrained by cultural barriers such as respect for those in authority. Thus, in order to please such quarters, the receiver would answer affirmatively when questioned by the managers about the message reception. Additionally, on issues about certain programs where feedback is mandatory and not voluntary, many participants give biased feedback for fear of offending their liked persons or fear of hostility, distrust, dismissal or any other form of victimization (Lussier & Achua, 2010). Also, the emergence of cultural issues such as gender roles and cultural disparities affect the process of obtaining feedback in a multi-cultural setting.
The error is further propagated through the assumption that managers make that the absence of questions is an implication that communication was successful and both parties understand the message well. Ideally, there is a great misunderstanding in such circumstances and it turns out clear when the task is accomplished differently or in a wrong way prompting a fresh repeat of the task. Eventually, there is a waste of time and effort as well as misuse of resources.
Mutual understanding of the message is what yields effective communication thus leading to getting meaningful feedback on messages. In order to achieve meaningful feedback, managers or message senders must be open to feedback through willful responsiveness, patience, and clarity in elaborating issues. Also, attention must be paid to nonverbal communication such as body language, facial expressions and observational listening (Lussier & Achua, 2010). Furthermore, a mastery of the art of asking questions on the information one has given must be adopted to ascertain the recipient understands hence effective communication. Finally, it is important to use paraphrasing as an indicator for effective communication in a way that seeks to check on the sender’s ability in the delivery of the message as opposed to that of the employee’s mastery. The paraphrasing should portray positive attitude towards both the sender and the message.
References
Lussier, R. N., & Achua, C. F. (2010). Leadership: Theory, application, & skill development . Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.
