It is an unfortunate fact that, within many companies, important feedback is reserved for when things go wrong. We are often told that we learn from our mistakes – but does this mean we should learn only from our mistakes?   

Many project managers may find themselves highlighting mistakes more readily than celebrating successes. This is often understandable – frequently, project managers and their organisations tend to see themselves as problem solvers. More often than not, this leads to a tendency to consistently focus upon identifying and remedying issues and mistakes.   

‍

The problem with this mode of thinking is that project managers and companies who operate in this way tend to lose the ability to acknowledge success and perceive themselves as successful organisations. Certain common phrases, such as “we can’t make the same mistakes as last time” and “we’re going to have to all work hard, this is a difficult one!”, are symptomatic of this attitude – where they occur, a culture of blame is never far behind.   

So how much pressure do we need to work effectively? Conventional belief holds that employees will only work effectively if enough pressure is exerted; after all, pressure makes diamonds, or so we’re told. In truth, excessive pressure tends to reduce performance levels; employees often achieve their best results at only a moderate level of stress.  

To illustrate why this is the case, it’s useful to think about how pressure operates on an organisational level. For companies who equate greater pressure with greater performance, enforcers – normally in the form of ‘management’ – are required to ‘police’ employees. When someone inevitably makes a mistake, a control mechanism is introduced and the employee receives a sanction; this could either be in the form of a reprimand or, worst-case scenario, a disciplinary warning. As a result, the employee will seek to protect themselves in future, either by sweeping their “mistakes” under the rug or trying to shift the blame onto others.   

This culture of finger-pointing spreads up the company hierarchy, with departmental heads and managers accusing each other of poor performances. Efforts are made to quantify errors and assign blame to particular departments, sending a clear message from senior management that they see everything.   

By seeking out a culprit and installing ever-increasing controls, organisations reduce their efficiency significantly, all the while employees and departments expend energy defending their corner. It should be obvious that this style of project management is counterproductive – so why is it still so common in project management practice? And what alternatives might take its place?  

‍

‍

‍

The key to good feedback in project management practice is transparency. After all, both employees and managers can only respond appropriately once it’s clear what’s happening. By adapting to a more transparent system, it is easier to provide immediate feedback; as a consequence, individual members can make changes to framework conditions, carry out necessary adjustments and enter into consensus discussions. ‘Mistakes’, similarly, should be addressed immediately and, above all, without sanctions.   

It is often forgotten that employees are motivated to work when they initially join the company. Despite the variety of different management styles, employees’ needs remain fairly consistent: they want to engage in meaningful work, gain recognition for their contribution and be paid fairly. These salient facts should remain at the forefront of any strategy for offering effective feedback.  

In terms of how to integrate these considerations into a feedback strategy, there are any number of creative directions to take things. You may wish to install a bell in the stairwell of the office building and, every time a significant milestone is reached, ring the bell and encourage all employees to take a break from work to applaud and celebrate their achievement together. Alternatively, setting up individual meetings with heads of department to present the highlights and achievements of the department to the entire company can be fruitful. If adopting this method, it is important that each department’s success is linked to the company’s overall success.   

Naturally, when it comes to project management as in life, everything can’t always be going well. Occasionally, human error will inevitably creep in – so how to address these using this new system? The hallmark of improvement-oriented companies is the tendency for employees and senior management alike to be motivated to see progress in their own areas and the company as a whole. The way to achieve this? In a word, communication.   

Employee idea management is one effective way of generating this kind of company-wide attitude. The organisation’s supply chain is sketched out on a magnetic or digital board and divided into meaningful areas of cooperation – this is referred to as the “I-Board” (Ideas Board), which is divided into three columns. On the left, we have new ideas or identified weaknesses. In the middle, we find the employees responsible for processing and implementing the ideas to such an extent as is feasible. On the right-hand column, we find the success column – this is where implemented ideas are listed. If an idea pertains to another area of operations, this can be forwarded to the relevant improvement board by the moderator; the important idea here is for employees to engage primarily with improvements in their own area.  

‍

These ideas are meant to be discussed through open communication across the team. An employee will suggest a new idea and, if the employees are in agreement, another employee will receive the improvement card. This second employee becomes responsible for processing it before the next meeting – the I-Board team may receive a small monetary incentive as recognition of their dedication to company-wide improvement. This shows employees the important point that the process is supported by management. For the same reason, each small team should have their own budget for handling improvements, so small changes can be implemented immediately and without bureaucracy.   

The trick to systematic changes such as these is to instil in employees a sense of their worth within the company, which, in turn, will motivate them to find ways to improve the company’s operations. By facilitating these kinds of discussions, employees invariably become more invested in the project as a whole, since they can see a clear connection between the project and their own contributions.   

‍

‍

‍

To conclude, a transparent system of communication is vital in cultivating improvement-oriented thinking. By incorporating employees’ needs into any feedback loop, and avoiding terms like “mistake”, “fault” and “problem”, the results quickly become apparent. Instead of an atmosphere of fear, suspicion and timidity, employee idea management will empower your employees to strive for positive and meaningful contributions to the company as a whole. Ultimately, when everyone wishes to succeed, the project will too.