- Have any questions?
- 02 9247 6000
- media@commsroom.co
- Have any questions?
- 02 9247 6000
- media@commsroom.co
Menu
Securing constructive feedback is critical in helping you find out which decisions are working and which ones are not. Yet, many organizations fail to effectively engage their stakeholders due to a reluctance towards incorporating and acting upon feedback. This results in communication gaps between executives and their stakeholders.
Organizations need to incorporate constructive feedback from stakeholders to survive pandemic-related disruptions amid today’s turbulent economy. To meet the expectations of their stakeholders, leaders must ensure that they obtain regular feedback from them since these people make decisions that determine the success of the organization.
To address these problems, leaders need to adopt best practices for getting constructive feedback from stakeholders.
Learning to incorporate constructive feedback is vital for building a trusting relationship with stakeholders. It provides you valuable insight into how they view and make decisions.
Alisha, who is the head of membership engagement at a professional manufacturing association, recently shared how communication gaps between the organization’s executives and its key stakeholders had strained their mutual relationship. Realizing the seriousness of the situation, the association requested an in-depth, neutral, third-party investigation into the opinions of its members and the quality of outreach to them.
She realized that to work effectively as head of membership engagement, she needed to learn the best ways to infer the truth about the stakeholders, their opinions, and the quality of the organization’s outreach.
Obtaining accurate feedback is key to stakeholder engagement. It ensures that you have an accurate picture of what’s working and what’s not.
Unfortunately, we often believe that we know our stakeholders well enough to fully understand their requirements and thus fail to seek their input about essential matters.
This dangerous judgment error, termed the “false consensus effect,” causes us to mistakenly believe that others share our beliefs. It is one of many dangerous judgment errors called cognitive biases. These mental blindspots impact decision-making in all areas of life, ranging from business to relationships. Fortunately, recent research has shown effective and pragmatic strategies to defeat these dangerous judgment errors, such as by constraining our choices by focusing on the top available options. In so doing, we can improve our stakeholder engagement.
Members often suggest changes that make executives highly uncomfortable. Therefore some leaders fall for the “status quo bias,” a desire to maintain what they see as the right way of doing things.
We have a natural tendency to avoid accepting information that counters our beliefs. This is another dangerous cognitive bias called the “confirmation bias.”
It is vital for companies to inculcate a new workplace culture fit for the future of work. The culture needs to encourage all organizational leaders to appreciate and obtain constructive feedback. This approach allows decision-makers at a company to utilize such feedback to engage with stakeholders effectively.
The inclination to reject information that opposes our beliefs due to confirmation bias is very dangerous for our modern-day organizations. This behavior stems from our evolutionary history, when it was more important to align our perceptions of reality with our tribe than to determine the truth.
Constructive feedback allows leaders to identify the true perceptions of the stakeholder, rather than what we would want them to be. Thus, leaders must learn about these filters to effectively engage stakeholders. Naturally, getting constructive feedback is a great way to achieve this goal.
Want to gain and share knowledge from other professionals within the industry? Check out our latest Comms Room events here.
There are several ways to obtain constructive feedback from stakeholders. The easiest is “active feedback.” This means asking targeted questions to yield precise answers.
We can also apply social intelligence to get “passive feedback” from stakeholders by analyzing their behavior, words, and actions. “Social intelligence” refers to the strategic capacity to evaluate and influence other people’s emotions and relationships.
Research in cognitive neuroscience shows that it is our emotions, not thoughts, that determine most of our behavior.
Getting Active Feedback From Stakeholders
Alisha decided to arrange a meeting with the stakeholders. The meeting atmosphere was initially tense. However, the mood lifted as members actively asked questions and realized that she was sincere in understanding them.
Eventually, the members started to express their opinions on recent decisions. Alisha was able to address their reservations by offering reasonable explanations for each point.
Getting Passive Feedback From Stakeholders
Depending on your topic, there can be other passive feedback methods.
You should acknowledge feedback and adjust your actions accordingly. Gradually, this feedback will help you understand your stakeholders and improve your engagement with them.
Three months after her consultation, Alisha noticed a significant improvement in stakeholder engagement. By bridging the communication gaps, the C-suite found it much easier to reach amicable compromises on points of contention.
Leaders often fall prey to cognitive biases that prevent them from incorporating feedback from stakeholders. The best way to ensure that you stay on the same page as your stakeholders is to obtain regular, constructive feedback. You can achieve this by proactively applying best practices for seeking active and passive feedback. By doing so, you will be able to bridge communication gaps and improve stakeholder engagement.
This article was originally published on the Psychology Today.
You may also want to read: Communicating with Prospective Clients (commsroom.co)
Gleb, also known as the "Disaster Avoidance Expert," is a cognitive neuroscientist and behavioral economist on a mission to shield people from harmful cognitive biases through his cutting-edge expertise in risk management, social and emotional intelligence, disaster avoidance and decision-making.
