Mostrar mensagens com a etiqueta feedback. Mostrar todas as mensagens
Mostrar mensagens com a etiqueta feedback. Mostrar todas as mensagens

quarta-feira, dezembro 22, 2021

Ainda acerca do feedback

Há dias escrevi "Acerca do feedback". Ontem, encontrei um texto que vai na mesma linha, "Science Says Smelling Cinnamon Can Make You Much More Creative and Innovative (But Not for the Reason You Might Think)":

"Sometimes a compliment can be like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Praise an employee for deftly handling a customer dispute -- even though it's the first time that employee has managed to handle a difficult conversation well -- and he or she will start to expect to handle similar situations well in the future.

...

Yep. When we believe there are reasons we will be more creative -- which also lowers our natural tendency to downgrade and therefore inhibit our level of creativity -- then we're much more likely to be creative.

Cinnamon is irrelevant. Expectation is everything. Belief is everything.

In yourself, and in other people.

Want your employees to be more creative? Use your own "cinnamon." Find ways to help them feel more creative. Use praise and recognition and validation to help them expect to be more creative.

But don't stop there. If you want to build a high performing team, praise achievement. Offer constructive feedback after missteps or failures."

 

quinta-feira, dezembro 16, 2021

Acerca do feedback

Um artigo de 2019, "The Feedback Fallacy" que só ontem descobri. Vale a pena ler, porque põe em causa aquilo em que acreditamos. No mínimo põe-nos a pensar:

"Feedback is about telling people what we think of their performance and how they should do it better—whether they’re giving an effective presentation, leading a team, or creating a strategy. And on that, the research is clear: Telling people what we think of their performance doesn’t help them thrive and excel, and telling people how we think they should improve actually hinders learning.
...
Learning is less a function of adding something that isn’t there than it is of recognizing, reinforcing, and refining what already is. There are two reasons for this.

The first is that, neurologically, we grow more in our areas of greater ability (our strengths are our development areas). The brain continues to develop throughout life, but each person’s does so differently.
...
Second, getting attention to our strengths from others catalyzes learning, whereas attention to our weaknesses smothers it
...
In the brains of the students asked about what they needed to correct, the sympathetic nervous system lit up. This is the “fight or flight” system, which mutes the other parts of the brain and allows us to focus only on the information most necessary to survive. Your brain responds to critical feedback as a threat and narrows its activity. The strong negative emotion produced by criticism “inhibits access to existing neural circuits and invokes cognitive, emotional, and perceptual impairment,”
...
In the students who focused on their dreams and how they might achieve them, the sympathetic nervous system was not activated. What lit up instead was the parasympathetic nervous system, sometimes referred to as the “rest and digest” system.
...
What findings such as these show us is, first, that learning happens when we see how we might do something better by adding some new nuance or expansion to our own understanding. Learning rests on our grasp of what we’re doing well, not on what we’re doing poorly, and certainly not on someone else’s sense of what we’re doing poorly. And second, that we learn most when someone else pays attention to what’s working within us and asks us to cultivate it intelligently
...
Since excellence is idiosyncratic and cannot be learned by studying failure, we can never help another person succeed by holding her performance up against a prefabricated model of excellence, giving her feedback on where she misses the model, and telling her to plug the gaps. That approach will only ever get her to adequate performance."