The American School would suggest that honest, constructive feedback can also enhance trust in competency. “I know how to ask for, accept and make use of feedback.” The central administrators in the human service delivery system were impressed with not only the unit leader’s willingness to accept feedback (trust in intentions), but also with the skillful and careful way in which these leaders solicited and engaged the feedback. The unit leaders asked questions to clarify the feedback and took steps to ameliorate the problems identified in the feedback. This led the central administrators to consider their own role in the problems that had existed for many years between themselves and their unit colleagues. They modeled the feedback soliciting, receiving and enacting process of the unit leaders—further evidence of their trust in and respect for the competencies of these leaders.
The American School is less likely to emphasize the impact which feedback has on the third form of trust: a shared perspective. This form of trust is often ignored because the American School tends to be relatively naïve with regard to differing perspectives on feedback in other societies and cultures. It is often assumed among practitioners of American School training and consultation that all parties value feedback and an expanded Q1. It is assumed that all cultures are operating in the “American” spirit. This assumption of shared perspective was generally warranted in the case of the human service delivery organization with which I consulted. Most of the unit leaders and central system administrators were deeply embedded in the American spirit of candor and task-related openness.
There was one member of the unit leadership team, however, and one member of the central system administration who had recently come from other societies. One of the members of the unit leadership team had come from an Asian society and one member of the central administration had come from an African society. The Asian-born unit leader was very uneasy about asking for feedback. On the one hand, it showed disrespect for the central system administrators. “Shouldn’t they be giving us feedback, when they think it is appropriate? We seem to be saying to them that they don’t know when or how to give us feedback.” Conversely, the African-born administrator was very reticent to give any feedback, because in his society feedback is usually given in a more indirect manner. It is insensitive and a sign of intense anger to give someone direct feedback, when it is usually being given through a third party.
