A coworker (who will be called Awesome Technician from now on) went to a leadership seminar yesterday and told me all about it because I couldn’t go. The subject was giving and receiving feedback. Our lab really struggles with this. I don’t think I could understate how non-confrontational people here are, especially those in charge. While it’s nice to not be scolded or put down all the time, sometimes it is important to notify each other of problems. We mostly get along famously, but when there are issues, the passive aggressive nature of these non-confrontational personalities leads to an undercurrent of discomfort for everyone.
There were two main messages Awesome Technician conveyed to me from the class. The first, and most surprising, was that you should not give positive and negative feedback at the same time. Surprising since many people think it’s best to try to say something nice before delivering criticism. Doing this devalues the positive and makes is seem not genuine. Also, the receiver cannot enjoy the positive and in future feedback situations expects the positive to be followed with a “but”. Additionally, it can be confusing as in, “you just said I was doing great and now you’re saying I suck”. The second point was that positive feedback sounds more sincere if it is specific. Rather than, “you’re doing well”, say “you really improved your technique on procedure X”. Awesome Technician thought this was intuitive but I didn’t.
Awesome Technician and I work together a lot and frequently supervise interns together. It will be interesting to see if I can detect her using the suggestions from the class either with me or with our next intern.
I think that leadership skills are often lacking in PIs. The skills that are selected for through the post doc level do not necessarily overlap with the skills necessary to be a good leader/manager (i.e., PI). In fact, the skills of a bench scientist may even be counter to those needed by a manager. There are more leadership classes available from our HR department that I might try to take, since I’d like to be proficient at my job even after I’m away from the bench.
4 comments:
Bingo! You're right on--the traits selected for in successful post-docs--the traits required to make it to the PI-level--are NOT the same as the traits required to be a good and successful PI. And in many instances, I think they really do run counter to it.
That sounds like a great leadership seminar that your friend went to. I never thought about some of those issues before--like the mixing of positive and negative comments, for instance. But your friend is right.
By the way, thanks for the comment on my blog! Life after science? I'm still conflicted, more than a year later. Maybe I'll blog about it sometime...
Good advice, I think. I have been thinking a lot about how to be a good leader the past year after being thrown head over heels into a managing position with no training whatsoever for the spring semester this year. It was a huge challenge and a leadership course would have come as a gift/ life saver at times.
I totally agree - so many PI's are not good leaders and many of them in teaching postions are not good teachers. How is that we end up selecting agaisnt the very skills we want?
This is very interesting... I will think harder before giving feedback from now on. It is true though, that most PIs are completely non-confrontational.
Post a Comment