Skip to content

The Crit Stick: High Quality Feedback

These are some things I’ve learned over the years that I hope might be helpful. I’ve also written up a Giving and receiving feedback page, but that’s more about behaviour. This is more about peer reviewing.

Let’s being with a sweeping statement! Feedback is how we get better. I might even go so far as to say it’s the only way we get better.

The feedback-ish activities that I am most familiar with are:

  • design critiques;
  • pull requests;
  • audits.

Three steps of feedback

  1. Out: present a piece of work.
  2. In: get feedback on it.
  3. Update: make changes based on some of the feedback.

1. Out: present a piece of work

You have to “sell” it, to some degree.

  • Things aren’t always self-explanatory.
  • You have context others don’t.

It seems like in an ideal world things would be completely self-explanatory. But, we do not live in an ideal world. And, having worked on this you have some (maybe lots) of context that other people don’t have, to be able to evaluate this work effectively. In particular: the outcome you’re trying to achieve.

2. In: get feedback on it

Giving good feedback is hard!

  • Say what kind of feedback you want.
  • Say what the objective of the work is.
  • Listen to all the feedback, ask questions. Don’t agree or disagree, yet.

3. Update: make changes based on some of the feedback

You don’t have to act on all the feedback.

  • You might know something they don’t.
  • It might be just bad feedback, or bad advice! We all make mistakes.

Giving feedback

My three top qualities.

  1. Specific
  2. Humble
  3. Relevant

Specific

  • Which bit you’re talking about.
  • What you’ve noticed.
  • What you think about it.

Humble

  • Assume this is their best work.
  • As objective as you can.
  • The work, not you and not them.

Relevant

  • Stay on topic.
  • Give the type asked for.
  • One thing at a time.

Low Quality feedback

Now for a bit of fun. Give the worst feedback you can on these examples from a definitely fictional web page.

  1. Link text: “Click more”, “Read here”.
  2. A design that has #eee background and #ddd text: light grey text on a very slightly lighter grey background.
  3. A form that with placeholder text instead of visible labels.

High Quality feedback

Okay, now be cool. Give the best feedback you can on those same examples.

  1. Link text: “Click more”, “Read here”.
  2. Design has #eee background and #ddd text: light grey text on a very slightly lighter grey background.
  3. A form that with placeholder text instead of visible labels.

Receiving feedback

  1. Before
  2. During
  3. After

Before

  • Provide context
  • What you’re trying to achieve
  • What and what type

During

  • Listen closely
  • Ask clarifying questions

After

  • Say thank you for the feedback
  • Decide if you want to act on it
  • Don’t have to decide immediately

Ouch and Argh

Some particular notes about negative things. Negative things are generally much harder to hear than positive things

Inwards

  • We tend to take negative things personally.
  • We read critique as about us, not about the work.

Things that tend to hit the hardest:

  • a domain we care about;
  • an area we feel uncertain about.

Outwards

The Fundamental Attribution Error:

  • We assume negative things in other people are personal attributes;
  • We assume negative things in ourselves are contextual or situational.

(Pssst. If you’re thinking: oh yeah, that’s true, but not me: please remember that many biases are unconscious. )

Right time, right place

  • Our mindset, expectations, and current state change how we interpret feedback.
  • We receive feedback best in low-stress states, when we’re relaxed and open.

This doesn’t mean don’t mention negative things. It means that if your goal is for your feedback to heard (And possibly acted on), be a bit more sensitive and context-aware when dropping some negative vibes.

Further reading