Leaders need feedback: Here's how to get it (2023)

When you become a top executive,You have undoubtedly honed a set of skills and talents that allow you to be effective in your job. To help you get to this point, you probably had coaches and mentors who closely monitored your progress, encouraged you to develop your talents, and, when necessary, confronted you with criticism that you may not want to hear but needed to hear in order to continue your journey. upward path.

At this stage in your career, chances are most (if not all) of your peers are subordinates. While he may be "supervised" by a board of directors or a high-level boss, his superiors may not keep a close eye on his daily behavior. Instead, they now form their opinions of you based on your presentations in relatively formal settings or secondhand reports from your subordinates.

As a result, many executives find that as they get more senior, they receive less training and are more confused about their performance and development needs. They may also become increasingly insulated from constructive criticism: Subordinates do not want to offend the boss and may believe that constructive suggestions are neither welcome nor wise. Many senior executives also unknowingly send out a “vibe” that while they claim to encourage constructive criticism, they don't really want to hear it. At this stage in their careers, they may not have focused enough on developing mutually trusted reporting relationships that would make getting feedback and advice much easier.

Too often, when these executives finally receive feedback in their year-end reviews (often as part of a 360-degree feedback program), they are surprised to face specific criticism about their leadership style, communication approach and interpersonal skills. . Worse yet, they may also hear general concerns about your strategy, key tactical decisions, and operational priorities for the business. These leaders may even learn, often too late, that various criticisms and concerns have been widely discussed among their subordinates for a long period of time without their realizing it.

I have certainly experienced and observed this phenomenon over the last 25 years in my own executive career and also in working with various executives since I came to Harvard Business School. I have seen the tendency of top executives to become more insulated from constructive criticism and strategic advice, sometimes without their full awareness. As a result, in recent years, I have worked extensively with my own direct reports and have advised many other top executives to develop specific approaches to getting the critical feedback they need.

The purpose of this article is to distill these approaches into specific, practical advice. In doing so, I hope to make you more aware of your tendency to isolate yourself and suggest approaches to getting better feedback, particularly from subordinates, that will help you materially improve your performance. I'll also talk about other steps you can take to get significantly better strategic advice regarding your business or nonprofit. By taking these steps, you should be able to take more ownership of the feedback process and improve your ability to develop your organization, your skills and your career.

Cultivate a network of junior coaches

One of the first questions I ask top executives is, "Who is your coach?" Many respond with a list of mentors who are outside the company or perhaps on the board of directors. These are "mentors" (versus coaches) because they do not directly observe the executive. Unfortunately, their advice is only as good as the narrative provided, and often doesn't fit the mentor's blind spots or lack of professional familiarity with the executive.

My follow-up question: "Who watches your behavior on a regular basis and will tell you things you don't want to hear?" - often meets silence.

This was the case of the CEO of a medium-sized pharmaceutical company. He complained of having difficulty reaching consensus among his senior leadership team on several key strategic decisions. This included which early stage drug compounds to develop and whether to develop them through joint ventures or on our own. These decisions were extremely important due to the substantial capital required to develop and obtain FDA approval for a new drug. The CEO believed that these issues required a high level of consensus, since they affected all departments of the company. He thought highly of his senior leadership team, but he was getting very frustrated. He asked if there might be a problem with his leadership style or, alternatively, if he should consider replacing one or more of his senior executives. Some of his close friends and outside advisers have suggested that a senior team revamp could help the situation.

I asked him if he sought guidance from his subordinates. He replied: “Of course not; they are the subordinates; it would be weird for me to ask them for training. I'm the coach! When I asked him what was wrong with seeking coaching from subordinates, he thought long and hard and explained that during his career, he had rarely seen his bosses and senior executive role models become vulnerable enough to seek feedback from their peers. directly subordinates. He was also not sure how he would do this and believed that he would make his (and himself) subordinates uncomfortable and possibly upset the boss/subordinate hierarchy.

Despite his reluctance, I urged him to go out and individually “interview” at least five of his direct reports. You only need to ask one question: “What advice would you give me to help me improve my efficiency? Please give me one or two specific and practical suggestions. I would appreciate your advice." Though hesitant, he agreed to give it a try.

These conversations were awkward at first. The first responses indicated that it was “fine” or even “very good”. He took time, insisting, and waiting for a few awkward silences to convince his subordinates that he was sincere, that he really wanted feedback, and that he was serious about his action. During this initial round of conversations, the CEO received some surprising, shocking, but very useful advice. He learned that:

• He was seen as someone who rarely asked his subordinates questions. Some of his direct reports admitted that they assumed he didn't care what they thought.

• He was widely seen as a poor listener. When subordinates came to talk to him, it was usually him who did the talking.

• He was seen as very “sheltered”, without revealing much about what he believed to be the main issues facing the business and what concerned him. People commented that they weren't sure how to read it and "didn't know where he came from." He noticed that his subordinates often misinterpreted his actions.

• Ultimately, their leadership meetings were procedural and debriefing meetings rather than problem framing and discussion sessions. As a result, their top leaders rarely had a chance to brainstorm and discuss issues among themselves (unless they started meetings of their own accord). This made it difficult for the group to agree on which drugs to develop or decide how best to develop them.

While the CEO was seen as a brilliant strategist and creative thinker, he was not yet seen as an effective manager and leader. Much of this came as a surprise to the executive, who said he had never heard such comments from any of his mentors or bosses.

He immediately began acting in a series of reviews. In particular, she was able to communicate with each of her direct reports on a regular basis for specific advice (and encouraged them to do the same with his direct reports). She also hosted monthly leadership team dinners where the group of top executives could openly discuss and debate important issues.

After three months, the CEO was able to break the group's deadlock on several key issues, including agreement on two new drug targets and specific approaches to developing each drug. During that time, the CEO led several sessions in which group members grappled with these difficult questions and, more importantly, came to better understand each other, as well as the CEO's vision for the business. Through debate and open discussion, team members developed a greater respect for the challenges each faced in their individual areas of responsibility. As a result, they began to operate as a more cohesive unit.

Throughout these steps, the CEO also diligently focused on strengthening his own “soft” relationship-building skills, including self-disclosure, questioning, and listening. For a long time he had believed that a strong leader needed to be a bit cautious and a strong defender. He realized that now was the time to review that vision and recognize that an exceptional leader is willing to reveal information about his values, background, and thoughts, as well as ask good questions and be a good listener. While advocacy did take place, the CEO noted that his team responded much more constructively when he explained his own uncertainties and concerns, asked well-formulated discussion questions, and actively listened to the discussion. He learned that these "soft" approaches were essential to getting better feedback and becoming a better manager.

He put these skills to use at his senior team dinners, where he played the role of facilitator: framing two or three issues, forcing himself to sit quietly and actively listen, asking follow-up questions as appropriate, and generally making sure that team members expressed their candid views. This took a lot of practice, but the CEO turned out to be a very effective group discussion leader.

In one-on-one meetings, he made an effort to ask more questions, listen more (talk less), and reveal more about what was keeping him up at night. For example, he revealed his growing concern about the high cost and uncertainty of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approval process. By raising questions about how the company could avoid "going all in" on individual drug development, the CEO helped his team better understand why he was promoting the joint venture concept and ultimately achieved a consensus on the need of said approach. of the company's new drug development projects.

Above all, this CEO learned that asking for advice and coaching was a sign of strength, not weakness. Using these techniques, he now discovered that he could rely more on his subordinates for advice and as an early warning system for his own performance. Furthermore, as he and his senior managers began to understand and trust each other, many shared their own professional aspirations and concerns with him. In fact, he had the impact of stabilizing his senior leadership group, helping the CEO retain team members, and improving overall morale. As a result of all these efforts, he now reported feeling much less alone and isolated. While he regretted not taking this approach sooner, he was optimistic that he was now on the right track.

Drive feedback even further: the 'blank sheet of paper' exercise

As CEOs and other senior leaders strengthen their junior coaching networks and build better relationships with subordinates, a broader culture of coaching and learning can take root in an organization. Employees at various levels are more motivated to give upward feedback when they perceive it to have a direct and positive influence on both the senior leader's behavior and the company's actions.

Building on this progress, CEOs can take additional steps to gain insight on key strategic issues. This is essential in an ever-changing world where industries and customers evolve and businesses can easily fall out of alignment. In many cases, external changes may be difficult for senior management to recognize, and otherwise employees speaking at the "point of attack" may not feel sufficiently informed or empowered to express their views. . In addition, existing strategic planning and business review processes may not emerge and address these issues in a sufficiently timely and effective manner.

Consider the experience of the CEO of an industrial products company who was concerned about the potential erosion of his company's competitive position. This CEO was highly respected in his company and in his industry and had done an excellent job of developing strong, upward coaching relationships with his subordinates.

The company was built around a group of high value-added products and a series of subsequent innovations, and has built very strong customer relationships for many years. However, the CEO was increasingly concerned that major competitors had taken specific steps that would strengthen their value propositions for their customers. He was also concerned about the commodification of some of the company's legacy products from him. He believed drastic changes might be needed to address these threats, but he was concerned that potential solutions—closing product lines, selling deals, and restructuring how sales and product development interacted to serve customers—could hurt the company's culture and morale of the organization.

This CEO's concerns raised questions that went beyond typical training. In addition, he believed that the issues were too substantive and even controversial to be adequately addressed by the company's regular strategic review processes and discussions. Because his leadership team was so tight-knit, he realized that senior leaders were walking carefully when discussing these issues: they were hesitant to be seen as critics of their peers or unwitting bullies of the CEO. He admitted that his senior team may be "too close" to the problems to recognize and propose appropriate actions. He even wondered if it was too emotionally difficult for them to face what had to be done.

The CEO decided to take an unorthodox step. He created a working group of six up-and-coming senior and mid-level executives and challenged them to look at the business with a blank sheet of paper, asking, "If I were to start this company from scratch today, these are the markets we want? would work? Are these the products we offer? Are these the people we would hire? Is this how we would organize, pay, and promote our people? What changes do we need to make, given our different competencies and strategic aspirations?" He gave them six weeks to complete the task (on top of their day jobs) and convinced them that there should be no "sacred cows" and that they shouldn't worry about being "politically correct" in their findings.He also explained that while he won't embrace all proposals, wants to hear all your recommendations and ideas.

Six weeks later, the team came back with several bold recommendations. The team suggested the sale of two obsolete product lines that, until then, senior leadership considered off limits because they had already been managed by the CEO and were considered part of the CEO's legacy. They also suggested a number of organizational changes, including creating sales and customer service functions, developing (or acquiring) updated distribution capability in emerging markets, and realigning the company's compensation incentives.

The CEO was surprised by the boldness of the board and surprised that they completely agreed with him. He realized that he might be too close to the business to recognize what needed to be done, and he felt liberated to receive those specific proposals. As a next step, the CEO had the task force present his findings to his senior leadership team, who unanimously agreed with the recommendations and immediately began working on plans to implement them.

A year later, the CEO reported that the changes were difficult but substantially strengthened the company. He felt much more confident about the future of the company and the strength of his leadership team. In addition, he decided to launch a strategically focused "clean paper" task force every year or two to complement the company's regular strategic processes. He and his leadership team believed that this new approach would allow them to create a new intervention capability that was not subject to the potential inertia and political pressures of regular strategic processes. Additionally, this exercise created an opportunity to challenge emerging executives and see them in action, providing participants with a highly motivating learning experience.

This approach is based on efforts to create a bottom-up coaching environment for senior leaders. It allows you to get training based on the strategic needs of the business and it is also a great way to have a new vision of your company. It reinforces the need for leaders to have the courage to ask the right questions and ask their people for help. This type of approach, combined with robust one-on-one coaching processes, can help build a powerful competitive advantage for your organization.

The approaches in this article are intended to help you get more feedback and should complement the 360-degree feedback process or board review processes your company already uses. While 360-degree feedback is invaluable, it often comes at the end of a year and is therefore often left behind to highlight key issues. In a rapidly changing world, you need a more hands-on approach to get real-time guidance and advice. While some of the activities suggested in this article (see sidebar, "Four Ways to Get Started") may seem awkward at first, I encourage you to work through some initial discomfort to gain more ownership of the feedback. By developing this mindset, you will improve your ability to ask the right questions and dramatically increase your effectiveness and the performance of your organization.