What would it look like if I provided this honest, detailed, and appreciative feedback to my friend? I risk losing my friendship, for my friend could interpret my behavior as being “nonsupportive” of his risk-taking performance at the meeting. My friend could challenge me regarding my participation (or non-participation) at the meeting: “I didn’t see you standing up and speaking your mind.” My friend might, rightfully, provide me with feedback regarding my lack of public support for his views. I was sitting in the stands and taking (critical) notes, while my friend was out there on the playing field getting hit from all sides. It is very possible that my friend’s poor performance resulted from his own level of anxiety. He feared that the lions were attacking him, and the resulting sympathetic (fight/flight/freeze) state would be of no benefit. Perhaps I should be assisting my friend in preparing for future meetings and providing the kind of support for him that could help him reduce the anxiety.
What do I do if my friend reacts “negatively” to what I have presented or if my friend is offering me some critical feedback regarding my feedback to him? I can easily become defensive, accuse my friend of becoming defensive, and co-produce an interpersonal experience that is undesirable and counterproductive for both of us. We both wish that everything could retreat to nothingness. However, the lid is open. We can’t put the negative interactions back in the box. What we can do is keep the lid open and spend time talking about what has just occurred.
Meta-Communication: this process of talking about what was just being talked about is often called “meta-communication” (Watzlawick, Beavin and Jackson, 1967). First, I set aside some real time with my friend and find a “safe” and comfortable place in which to provide him with my feedback. I begin our meeting by disclosing something about my own unease in providing him with feedback. I want to be helpful and would like to devote some time at the conclusion of our feedback session to talk about how we both felt about the meeting and what we think has been accomplished.
Before providing my feedback, I also suggest that I want not just to present my feedback but also want my friend to provide their observations about what happened at the meeting and their comments on how my feedback is and is not both valid and helpful. This process is called “advocacy-inviting-inquiry” (Argyris and Schön, 1974; Argyris and Schön, 1978). By introducing this collaborative, introspective perspective, we have been honest in sharing our own feelings and concerns. We have been caring in requesting our friend to provide us with feedback. The self-concepts of honesty and caring are both manifest in this initial framing of the feedback session.
With the feedback from me to my friend, and my friend to me having been engaged, we reflect on what went well and what didn’t work in this “crucial conversation” (Grenny, et al., 2021). This “meta-communication” not only helps to ensure that both parties are clear about what has been shared; it also helps to nurture the relationship itself. Both my friend and I can anticipate that future interactions will not only be constructive but also sources of important interpersonal learning for both of us.
