According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, being brutally critical with colleagues is actually an act of kindness – and more productive than being polite. The piece profiled companies adopting this much-touted communication style that, of course, isn’t without a buzzword: “front-stabbing.”
But leaders should think twice before jumping on this potentially dangerous bandwagon. Using thoughtful language, it is possible to confront performance and demand excellence without alienating and demoralizing others.
Brutal Candor
In the companies cited, the focus is on being direct with criticism. Candid confrontation is the new trend. One advertising company practices “direct, sometimes painful critique of ideas or behavior.” This kind of confrontation is “more big-hearted and caring” than going behind someone’s back.
This may suggest that participants in this new corporate culture see going behind someone’s back, and being brutally confrontational as the only options. I’d like to suggest that there are many options between those two extremes.
Let’s explore the cost of niceness, and options beyond being too nice or front-stabbing.
Cost of Niceness
To be sure, there are costs of niceness:
- Poor performance, disappointed customers, missed targets
- Damaged relationships
- Missed learning opportunities and opportunities for improvement
Poor Performance
In a team, tolerating poor performance costs in two ways: it affects other team members if the commitment is still met and the others have to pitch in, or it costs the company and the customer if a commitment is not met. Unaddressed poor performance at the cost of quality has a high cost.
Sometimes, in a family or medical crisis, team members pitch in out of compassion. That’s different than tolerating a consistently negligent team member or poor performer.
Damage Relationships
Niceness can damage relationships if it:
- Becomes resentment – if someone has let you down and you don’t address it, it can damage your ongoing relationship. Here’s the litmus test: do you want to tell others about your disappointment.
- Is avoidance. Sometimes (but not always) you can avoid working with a poor performer. That limits the range of topics or assignments that you think can be handled. You could be missing out on having a more active contributor if the problem was addressed and not avoided.
- Damages trust. If people have let you down and they don’t have a chance to correct the problem, your relationships can suffer.
- Means withholding an opinion or complaint that comes at the cost of clarifying perceptions about legitimately different data. (“That was due Monday? No, I heard it was due Thursday.”)
- Creates missed opportunities of clearing the air (“You thought I was being demeaning. I didn’t mean it that way. I was actually identifying with your mistake because I did the same thing recently. I am truly sorry.”)
Missed Opportunity
Another cost of niceness is the missed opportunity for learning, such as:
- If people have done something wrong and never find out, they miss the chance to learn from it.
- If they are perceived as brusque when they thought they were being focused, they don’t know they have to make better connections.
- If they are perceived as aloof when they are just reflective, their reputation will precede them because they’re never given the feedback and the chance to clarify the reason for their quietness.
Alternatives to Front-Stabbing
Front-stabbing sounds mighty personal. As soon as people get personal, listeners tune out. And they are justified in tuning out. Front-stabbing will not come across as caring. In fact one person was quoted as saying it “cut me to the bone.” Front-stabbing does not seem to include recommendations for improving. It does not create conditions for learning.
There are other ways to clearly – and politely – get your point across. In my recent blog on performance reviews, I outline the following steps for giving feedback for managers. Peers can use much the same approach:
- Reflect
- Describe the facts
- Describe the problematic impact
- Describe the alternative actions desired
- Describe the beneficial impact
Manager’s Job
In general I would argue that feedback about performance should come from the manager. The manager sets the goals and expectations. It is the manager’s job to ensure accountability. If the manager doesn’t hold them accountable, we know the data: the good performers eventually quit.
At a senior management team level, I do think peers should hold each other accountable to team goals, agreements and outcomes. Not instead of the Company President holding each one accountable, but in addition.
Peer Feedback
Peer feedback is tricky, especially when managers aren’t doing their part in holding people accountable for performance. In my opinion, issues beyond performance, such as personal relationship issues, should be handled directly between peers. If Jason is bothered by Sally’s interruptions, Jason should be direct and tell Sally to save up her questions or comments. The same 5 steps can be followed:
- Reflect: I am thinking Sally should stop interrupting me. I am feeling really irritated. If I didn’t have to be polite I would say, “cut it out.”
- Describe: Sally, this is the fourth time you have interrupted me this morning. (Wait for recognition – are you exaggerating because you’re annoyed or is it factual?)
- Impact: Every time you do that I lose my place and have to start over.
- Alternative: I want you to save up your questions until the end of the day, and send bullet points in an email, then come see me at 4:00pm.
- Impact: That would enable me to finish my work, and give you my undivided attention to help you.
If Jason counted on Sally to do her part in a customer presentation and she didn’t, the same 5 steps could be used.
- Reflect: I am thinking Sally agreed to do that part of the presentation. I am feeling implicated in the poor quality presentation. If I didn’t have to be polite I would say, “I’m never co-presenting with you again.”
- Describe: Sally, we agreed that you would prepare the historical numbers. You did not prepare what you agreed to prepare.
- Impact: The customer was disappointed, and I personally was embarrassed to be part of a poor quality presentation that was missing key data. Not only that, we’ll be lucky if they follow up with us because without your data, we didn’t make as strong a case about why they should work with us.
- Alternative: You need to do your part and keep your commitments, or talk to our manager to get reassigned, so someone who is available can do the work within the schedule.
- Impact: If you do your part we’ll be more successful as a company, and I would consider teaming up with you.