Team Engagement Journey > Team Engagement Toolbox > Learning From Mistakes

Learning From Mistakes

A SCHOOL TOOL: LEARNING & GROWTH

Making a mistake once is normal, but repeating that mistake can get very costly. This tool provides a framework to helps team members offer and get valuable feedback, limiting mistakes and sub-par performance.

DOWNLOAD THE PDF

Purpose

To help team members offer valuable feedback on completed tasks, facilitating continuous improvement of the team.

Typical scenarios

  • The same mistakes are repeated
  • Team members or managers don’t know how to discusss mistakes or subpar work
  • Team members don’t know how to ask for feedback

Why this is important

Mistakes are normal, but when they are repeated they can become costly, and hamper continuous improvement if a team doesn’t have a systematic way to learn from their mistakes and successes. This tool provides a process for teams to give feedback to their team members.

The process

Steps to provide constructive feedback

“You did a good job” is nice to hear but not very helpful feedback if the person does not know what you are referring to. Specify what they did well, and if their work was exceptional clarify what made it stand above the rest. The same applies for critique; if you don’t specify what is wrong and the standards you expected, the team member will likely find it unfair and have no tools for producing better output in future. If someone gives you feedback on something you never focused on, the feedback will not be that helpful, and it could even create unnecessary conflict. 

To provide effective feedback, clarify the following as a team

  1. A list of things that will be evaluated
  2. The criteria for evaluation

It is very important to list all the things that will be evaluated beforehand. Setting the criteria as a team creates an opportunity for group identity and group standards to be formed with buy-in from everyone. 

When giving feedback, try to be as specific as time allows. Put down the highest priority items at the top. Think about quality, timeliness, communication, values, flexibility, etc. Setting standards help to clarify expectations. Feedback such as “You did a good job” is also not very helpful if the person does not know exactly what “good” means. Does “good” mean it was done as per expectations, or does it mean exceeding expectations? Standards need to be clarified. We suggest you set the standard at a level that is seen as “good enough”.

At the start of the feedback session, remind each other that the reason for this exercise is to learn. The feedback session is not to police or manage performance, but rather to grow and continuously improve, which benefits the team as a whole. 

The best time for this exercise is as soon as possible after the task/project is completed. Many people need feedback to help them debrief and move on with their working life, so postponing this exercise could result in uncertainty and anxious feelings.

After the task/project has been completed, this step comes into play. First have the person(s) evaluate themselves against the criteria that has been set beforehand. Self-evaluate by reflecting on the following:

Why or why not?
It is important to clarify why the expectations were or were not met to identify what should be continued or what should be corrected or avoided in future. In this way, great learning takes place. 

Did I meet the criteria?:
This question allows for good self reflection and self evaluation against the criteria and standard that was set beforehand. 

Once group norms have been set and helpful feedback has been given that compares the tasks to the group standards, the team has an opportunity to recalibrate against those standards. 

In this step, the reviewer(s)/manager should give feedback on the performance. They give feedback in three rounds:

Blue recommendation: small things that are probably easy to correct or are only a slight improvement.

Did you meet the criteria?
Either affirm what the self-reflection was, or give a different point of view on whether expectations have been met. 

Why or why not?
More relevant than whether expectations were met or not is where there is gap between the team member’s perception and the perception of the reviewer. The severity of the gap should also be clarified — if there is a big gap, there is reason for concern and more detailed feedback.

Recommendations:
Give feedback on how they can do better next time. Make sure that character is not being attacked. The focus should be on learning and improving. When recommendations are given, it is important to clarify the severity of each recommendation. The following severity framework could help:

Red recommendation: Critical issues that require urgent attention. 

Yellow recommendation: areas that can be improved on.

Blue recommendation: small things that are probably easy to correct or are only a slight improvement.

Learning From Mistakes Sample Spreadsheet

EVALUATION CRITERIA SELF-EVALUATE RECALIBRATE
Stipulate in terms of "good enough" Did I meet the criteria? Why or why not? Did you meet the criteria? Why or why not? Recommendations (red/yellow/blue)

Download resources

DOWNLOAD THE PDF
DOWNLOAD THE SPREADSHEET