One of the questions I am regularly asked – often with a sense of desperation – is how to give feedback. It is an age-old challenge, laid at the feet of managers, who carry out the task
with varying degrees of success. How do you feel when someone says: ‘Can I give you some feedback?’ How many times have you had a performance conversation where 95 per cent of it has been focused on what’s gone well, but it’s the 5 per cent of ‘development opportunity’ that remains with you?

There are many models out there that describe how to give feedback, but what most fail to take into account is how the brain reacts and how we really learn. Mistakes are part of life. If we didn’t make mistakes we would never learn or adapt. That’s not to say that we don’t need to mitigate the risk of potential mistakes – of course we do – but we also need to understand how to provide developmental input that really works.

Feedback that triggers our neurological reward circuitry, which increases our capacity for learning and engagement, is possible. It is my research in this field that has led me to build,
and now teach, a brain-friendly model for feedback, which I’d like to share with you. It is a simple checklist using an acronym that we all know, which aims to ensure conversations lead to
development not demotivation – and it’s as simple as AEIOU.

A – And
If I said to you: ‘That presentation was great…’ – what word are you expecting to hear next? ‘But’ or ‘however’? Now what happens to the words that preceded the ‘but’? Our brains hone in on
the threat, which in this case is the criticism that is anticipated to follow, negating the positives. So instead of ‘but’ or ‘however’, use ‘and’. This will feel awkward at first but it works. ‘That presentation was great, and to make it even stronger you could…’

E – Effort
We are rewarded neurologically far more for the effort we put in than the end result. Behavioural economist Dan Ariely refers to it as the ‘Ikea effect’. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t celebrate the success – of course we should – but we should notice the effort and hard work that got the individual and/or team to that end result.

I – Intention
People come to work to do a good job. So first think what their intention was before an error occurred. Was it to cause harm, to damage or to destroy? There is an impact that needs to be
addressed, but first understand the intention.

O – Opportunity
In every genuine error, there is an opportunity to learn. The aviation industry has embedded this into how it operates with systems set up to encourage pilots to log their errors so improvements and learning can happen continuously.

U – You
How are you feeling? What are you thinking? What is your mood? What messages are you transmitting that will either help or hinder the conversation? Is this the right time to talk?

Positive development and growth of those in your team happens when our brains can engage and that happens only when we feel safe to do so. Applying AEIOU is a tool to help do this.

Development is not an annual event held only in the appraisal meeting – it needs to happen every day and in the moment if it is to make the best connections for learning.

In my daughter’s school is a large poster reminding the children every day about the values and behaviour expected of them. It reads:

Always think of others and be kind
Look after each other
Understand and accept differences
Respect success
Be honest
Take responsibility for your own actions
Believe in yourself
I have worked in several schools recently supporting teachers to enhance their resilience and I have seen similar list of words placed in full view for both students and teachers. The words are not simply used for effect they are truly embedded and lived everyday by the pupils and teachers alike and as a parent I see their positive impact. It got me thinking of our workplaces and the varied list of values also pinned strategically for employees to ignore, and how we can learn a lot from what schools are doing.

The DRIVERS of trust and motivation (see table below) are all impacted by how we interact with each other. We damage another’s relative position when we are uncivil, gossip or micromanage.
We often exclude many individuals when decisions are needed relying instead on our superior leadership expertise. We deliver targets and budgets that over-stretch and overburden, and we try to control the physical presence of our teams through flexible working rules. These, often unintended, behaviours all serve to undermine and damage trust leading to demotivation, distress and reduced performance. The impact is significant both to our wellbeing and to the bottom line. And this is by no means and exhaustive list.

Let’s look at incivility as an example. Christine Porath and Christine Pearson’s work[1] has shown that the number one reason people say they are uncivil to others at work is because they are
themselves overwhelmed and under stress. This sets up a vicious cycle as the incivility spreads, flowing from the top down. Their research has shown that across organisations over two-thirds
of people say that they withhold effort after they experience incivility and 80% loose work time worrying about the uncivil interaction. Think about the last time someone was sarcastic, rude or dismissive towards you. Even if what they said or did was small the impact may have stayed with you for hours, even days as you go over the incident again and again. As Maya Angelou said ‘I’ve learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel’

But, it’s not just experiencing incivility directly, the impact on performance extends to those witnessing it. Again Porath and Pearson’s research shows that witnesses to rudeness were over 50% less effective on word problems and 28% less creative on brain storming problems. They even created these effects in experiments by simply priming individuals before tasks with impolite trigger words such as, impolitely, bother, interrupt etc. After being primed participants who received these trigger words reduced their selective attentional capacity by up to five times when compared to participants who had not received the trigger words. Those primed participants also reduced their ability to process information, make decisions and problem solve. Think about this in relation to concentration and focus at work. What if this effect happened with a nurse administering drugs to a patient because she had been subjected to incivility from the doctor five minutes before? No joke – in a study of 4,500 doctors and nurses, 71% of them tied uncivil behaviour to medical errors that they knew of! As Porath tells us ‘Incivility robs cognitive resources, hijacking performance and creativity. Even if you want to perform at your best, you can’t’.

So who do you want to be at work? How should and can you and your colleagues take responsibility for how you interact with each other every day? Every interaction has a legacy and we can each be accountable for our words and actions so they support the DRIVERS of trust not undermine them.

The DRIVERS of trust and intrinsic motivation

• DDirectionA clear sense of purpose and meaning.
• RRelative positionMy sense of significance, identity, and position within my group. That my contribution is understood and valued by others.
• IInclusionMy perception of belonging.
• VVoice and ChoiceMy sense that I my view will be heard and that I have choice, autonomy and control over my decisions that affect my life.
• EEquityMy perception being treated fairly and of fairness and equity within my group.
• RReliabilityMy sense of certainty and security in my surroundings, others and my life
• SStretchMy opportunities for growth, learning and achievement through effort.