Editor's Note: Is there an optimal ratio of positive to constructive feedback? Lots has been written on this Classic topic. In this post, Stephanie Thomas explores the findings of a particular research initiative and what they tell us.
Which is more effective in improving team performance: using positive feedback to let people know when they're doing well, or offering constructive comments to help them when they're on track?
Jack Zenger and Joseph Folkman posed this very question in their post at Harvard Business Review. While both are important, they note that some newer research suggests there may be a golden ratio when it comes to achieving a balance between positive and negative feedback.
Emily Heaphy and Marcial Losada looked at the "effectiveness" of 60 strategic-business-unit leadership teams at a large information-processing organization. They measured "effectiveness" based on customer satisfaction ratings, financial performance, and 360-degree feedback ratings of the team members. Heaphy and Losada found that the main difference between the most and least successful teams was the ratio of positive ("I agree with you", "That's a great idea") to negative ("I don't agree with you", "We shouldn't even consider doing that") comments:
- Highest performing teams had a ratio of 5.6: nearly 6 positive comments for every one negative comment;
- Medium performing teams had a ratio of 1.9: 2 positive comments for every one negative comment;
- Lowest performing teams had a ratio of 0.3: three negative comments for every positive comment.
Negative feedback is a double-edged sword. While it's an important part of growth and development, a little bit goes a long way. As Zenger and Folkman point out:
Negative feedback is important when we're heading over a cliff to warn us that we'd really better stop doing something horrible or start doing something we're not doing right away. But even the most well-intentioned criticism can rupture relationships and undermine self-confidence and initiative. It can change behavior, certainly, but it doesn't cause people to put forth their best efforts.
As with most things, it's a delicate balancing act. Think about how close you are to the golden ratio of performance feedback - the closer you get to the "6 positive per 1 negative" ratio, the more effective your team is likely to be.
Stephanie Thomas, Ph.D., is a Lecturer in the Department of Economics at Cornell University. She teaches undergraduate and graduate courses on economic theory and labor economics in the College of Arts and Sciences and in Cornell’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations. Throughout her career, Stephanie has completed research on a variety of topics including wage determination, pay gaps and inequality, and performance-based compensation systems. She frequently provides expert commentary in media outlets such as The New York Times, CBC, and NPR, and has published papers in a variety of journals.
Apparently a 5-1 or 6-1 ratio is "magical" in other areas as well. See the references below:
Ratio for interactions with children - https://www.apacenter.com/magic-ratio-positive-parenting/
"One of their findings is that in stable, healthy relationships there is a ratio of 5:1 positive feelings and interactions for every one negative feeling and interaction."
Teacher ratio - https://repository.asu.edu/attachments/56392/content/Sprouls_asu_0010E_10359.pdf
"Likewise, recommendations have been made that teachers should sustain a ratio of six positive social engagements for every negative interaction in order to encourage a positive classroom climate (Latham, 1992)."
Posted by: Chris Thorpe | 12/28/2018 at 12:08 PM