Feedback is an incredible tool to use for changing something ( a product, a behavior, an repeated action etc.). If not interpreted correctly though, the emerging change might not be always for the best, even if the quality of feedback is great. When we (at Parking Defenders) try to evaluate feedback, we are working from four different angles.
The four aspects
From our prospective, feedback has four (4) different views:
- What they are saying
- What are you hearing
- What are they trying to say
- What do you want to hear
To make things more clear I will use an example. Let’s pretend that I construct pins and one day I decide to change the color of the pins – from White to Dark Gray. I communicate the idea and wait for feedback. Finally I received the following input: Great color! It ’s darker than I expected.
Is it clear? Possibly no. So, I will evaluate it by looking it from the four different angles (that can be converted to questions).
They are saying: Great color! It’s darker than I expected.
I am hearing : Great color!
They are trying to say: It’s should have lighter colors.
I want to hear: Great color!
Is “What I am hearing” the same with “What I want to hear”? Then probably I need to re-evaluate feedback. If that’s not necessary, the product is ready!
Answering the 4 questions is a process that requires both sides (givers and receivers) so it’s essential to try to get answers right after you get the initial feedback. At that time the user is most eager to help you and remembers the best why he gave that feedback at the first place.
My 2 cents!
Republished from djsolid - scratching discs of code & entrepreneurship [19 clicks].
Read the original version here [0 clicks].