In an earlier blog post I talked about the difference between implicit and explicit feedback. Implicit feedback is what you convey with your body language when you deliver a tough critique, for example, but soften it with a smile. Explicit feedback is that tough critique – it’s what you say.
Explicit feedback relies on implicit feedback much more than most people realize. So, when we’re asked what we thought of that presentation, that meeting, or that town-hall session, we almost always offer a mix of explicit and implicit feedback. The mix allows us to soften the harsh messages and toughen the soft ones. We may only say, “It was fine,” but our body language—the implicit feedback—conveys that we really thought the session was a disaster. Or the reverse. We can deliver some tough words but soften their impact with a touch or a smile that says, “It really wasn’t that bad.” And there are, of course, a whole host of meanings possible in between.
That’s how it works in the real world. In the virtual world, that comfortable mix of explicit and implicit feedback is impossible and things immediately start to go wrong. The manager who is used to offering minimal explicit feedback because she conveys a strong connection to her team nonverbally may find herself struggling in the virtual world, where she suddenly has to articulate everything that she previously could leave unsaid. If she fails to do so, then she risks leaving her team confused about her intentions and their performance.
Take out the implicit feedback on which the explicit messages depend, and you get confusion and alienation.
Let’s further explore the difficulties inherent in feedback in the virtual world. We’ve identified the basic problem: explicit feedback relies on implicit feedback to provide the emotional connections that make human relationships matter, that help people function effectively through the daily ups and downs of organizational life, and that help them endure.
Explicit feedback, in short, lacks the unconscious context of human emotional exchange. All too often online, feedback becomes trolling and rapidly descends into hate on all sides. Why is that? Why does this honorable form of human commentary from one person to another rarely work online?
Fundamentally, what has changed is the nature of trust. And as trust changes, so do the relationships, precisely because of how we are hardwired to form connections with people. Trust in the virtual world is much more fragile, though perhaps easier to establish initially. But the big difference comes when something threatens the trust.
And feedback depends on trust. In face-to-face relationships where there is trust, one party may do something to screw up, causing friction, anger, and even a bit of mistrust to creep in. But if the connection is strong enough, the feedback begins. The issue will get thrashed out, the perpetrator will apologize, and trust will be restored. Indeed, once restored, the trust may be stronger than ever.
How different it is in the virtual world! Once trust is threatened, it’s instantly broken, and it’s nearly impossible to reestablish it. People simply move on. Since trust was more fragile in the first place, it shatters with very little provocation.
Thus, virtual feedback has some obvious flaws. First of all, there’s much less of it because virtual feedback is simply harder to give than face-to-face feedback. Second, virtual feedback is less robust and more likely to cause irreparable harm. And third, the resultant weaker feedback has much less meaning.
There’s less spontaneous virtual feedback because trust is more fragile. Why should I enter into the first half of a feedback loop if my trust in you is not very deep and liable to be eventually broken inadvertently even if it isn’t broken deliberately?
The perils of the virtual world are many, and problems with feedback are at the heart of them.
(This post is adapted from my forthcoming book, Can You Hear Me?, due out from Harvard in October. You can pre-order it below.)
Hello Nick, well interesting this your approach of dividing feedback into two aspects as well as you assert that virtual contact whatever it is never equals face-to-face!
Following a virtual course (which by the way, I write) is never the same as studing in a classroom live, in color and moving, living the mood of the environment.
It’s like watching football on TV and being in the stands cheering and making inelegant comments about the second mother of the referee; because he has two. One is at home, and the other he leads to the game!
This has permeated in our unconscious since the time of the caves, where our heroic ancestor should have a very weak verbal vocabulary (grunts?) And communicate basically with his body language (quite incisively, certanly!).
But I believe that starting from face-to-face, feedback will always have the parts implicits and explicits.
One could say that the deficiency in the level of explicit feedback is a weakness of the boss, because of his lack of knowledge of the power of well-used body language.
Thus, application in the proper dose, whether of one or the other, is what characterizes a true leader.
The existence of both aspects of feedback is not criticized. They will always exist.
The unpreparation is criticized, when dosing each one in the respective conditions of the moment. Whose negative aspect exist in only little level in a resilient leader.
Obviously the Internet has come to stay and it is up to everyone to minimize the noise in the implicit feedback by giving more attention to this form of communication
A big hug from your assiduous read
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Olá Nick, bem interessante essa sua abordagem de dividir o feedback em dois aspectos, assim como você afirmar que o contato virtual seja qual for ele nunca é igual ao cara-a-cara!
Seguir um curso virtual (que aliás eu escrevo) nunca é a mesma coisa como a gente estar numa sala de aula ao vivo, a cores e em movimento, viver o clima do ambiente. É como a gente ver futebol pela TV e estar nas arquibancadas torcendo e fazendo comentários maldosos sobre a segunda mãe do árbitro; pois ele tem duas. Uma está em casa, e a outra ele leva para o jogo!
Isso está impregnado no nosso inconsciente desde o tempo das cavernas, onde o nosso heroico ancestral deveria ter um fraquíssimo vocabulário verbal (grunhidos?) e se comunicar basicamente com sua linguagem corporal (de forma bem incisiva!)
Mas acredito que partindo do cara-a-cara, o feedback sempre terá as partes implícitas e explicitas. Poder-se-ia dizer que a deficiência no nível de feedback explicito é uma fraqueza da chefia, pelo seu desconhecimento do poder da linguagem corporal bem utilizada. Assim, aplicação na dose adequada quer seja de uma ou de outra é que vem caracterizar um verdadeiro líder.
Não se critica a existência dos dois aspectos do feedback. Eles sempre existirão. Critica-se o despreparo ao dosar cada um nas respectivas condições do momento. Aspecto negativo que um líder resiliente pouco deve possuir.
Obviamente a Internet veio para ficar e cabe a todos minimizar os ruídos no feedback implícito dando mais atenção a esse forma de comunicação
Um grande abraço do seu assíduo leitor
http://www.elazierbarbosa.com.br
Elazier — thank you so much for your wonderful comment and musings on the ins and outs of implicit and explicit feedback. Indeed, we need to learn new skills to be able to cope effectively in the new world, combined as it is from the old face-to-face world and the new virtual.