Part V: creating the EQ-i 2.0 and EQ 360 2.0

EQ-i 2.0 Group Report Supplement

Section Two: How to Provide Group Feedback

What is the ideal group size to use for conducting group feedback sessions? Optimal group size is dependent on many factors such as the purpose of the group session and the preferences of the group facilitator. We recommend that group feedback sessions be conducted with groups of four to twelve members (Kitzinger, 1995; Tang & Davis, 1995). When providing group feedback, the best results are obtained when the group is not too small or too large. Using appropriate group sizes can increase group members’ willingness to express their thoughts and simplify the process of reaching group consensus about developmental strategies.

Providing group feedback involves the communication of group information (e.g., regarding the group’s actions, performance, processes, or behaviors) to the group as a whole or to individual group members (Gabelica et al., 2012). Researchers found that feedback delivered in private or in a group environment both had positive effects (DeWett, 2003). For example, Nadler (1979) found that giving group-level feedback in a group setting led to increased feelings of group involvement and emotional attraction to the group and giving individual-level feedback in a group setting led to improved individual performance. Studies like this demonstrate that coaches may use group settings to influence individual group members’ commitment to behavior changes.

In other words, even though individual group members will already know through their one-on-one sessions with the coach the areas or behaviors on which they need further development, the coach may increase the commitment of individuals to follow through with their developmental strategies by discussing in a group setting how specific behaviors or skills could be improved. For instance, imagine a scenario where some of the group members obtained a lower score for Assertiveness and you had already discussed with them during their individual feedback sessions the strategies they may use to increase their Assertiveness score. During the group feedback session, you may want to provide these group members with additional motivation to engage in change behaviors and consequently, you may ask the group to describe situations in the past where they themselves successfully displayed assertive behaviors or situations where they observed other group members displaying assertiveness appropriately. You can then follow up these examples with a discussion about how increased assertiveness could benefit the group.

On a cautionary note, when asking for examples of behaviors exhibited by group members in the past, we would advise coaches to ask for examples of only positive behaviors. Mention of negative individual-level behaviors in group settings may increase group members’ tendency to try to identify and blame other group members, which can lead to targeted individuals feeling greater resistance or reluctance to engage in developmental behaviors. The negative emotions experienced when a person is publicly blamed may also increase the likelihood that he or she will disengage from the team (i.e., from the source of the constructive feedback; Philo, 2004).

Best practices for delivering feedback usually follow these conditions (Alvero, Bucklin, & Austin, 2001; Gabelica et al., 2012). Specifically, it is best if the feedback:

• Is provided in a timely and nonthreatening manner.
• Is specific, verbal, and accompanied by visual representations such as graphs.
• Is provided in combination with other procedures such as employee training or linked to behavioral consequences.
• Is given by managers and third-party experts such as EQ-i certified individuals rather than by managers alone.
• Is shared among group members or distributed in an equal manner.
• Allows group members to compare their individual performance to a standard, such as team performance or previous performance experiences. People’s reactions to feedback are often influenced by the performance status of the group to which they belong.

So far, we have been discussing methods for providing feedback in general. However, you may be wondering whether these recommendations also apply to the delivery of constructive feedback. For example, how should a group feedback session proceed if you are dealing with a group who has overall low EI? While many researchers agree that imparting positive group feedback can lead to many beneficial group outcomes (such as increases in group performance, proficiency, and more positive attitudes towards tasks), research findings regarding the influence of constructive feedback given in group settings are more conflicted (Gabelica et al., 2012).

When constructive feedback is presented to a group, the group may respond by demonstrating a variety of reactions such as blaming (internal to the team or to an external source/situation), excuse making, or if they accept the constructive feedback, they may strategize methods of improvement (Philo, 2004). Group members that share experiences of past successes or possess high levels of intragroup trust are more successful at accepting and processing constructive group feedback, especially if they perceive the presentation of constructive group feedback as potentially benefiting the group in some way (London & Sessa, 2006; Peterson & Behfar, 2003). On the other hand, Peterson and Behfar (2003) report that newly formed groups may view constructive group feedback as a “threat,” with the delivery of constructive feedback being linked to increased occurrences of conflict within a group. These and other similar research findings suggest that when a group or team is newly formed or possesses low levels of intragroup trust, then the provision of constructive group feedback can be more detrimental than motivating and can lead to increased levels of intragroup conflict in the future (Peterson & Behfar, 2003).

Consequently, prior to deciding what type of feedback is needed for a group and how it should be delivered, you may find it helpful to first determine the learning goals and developmental status of a group (e.g., established group versus newly-formed group, group with shared successes versus failures, group with high versus low levels of intragroup trust; London & Sessa, 2006). If your assessment of the group’s developmental status leads you to believe that they may be receptive to constructive group feedback, you may experience greater success at gaining the group’s engagement by utilizing some or all of the following recommendations (Parker & Baughan, 2011), as you deem appropriate:

• Be specific about the ways in which this feedback may benefit the group’s future by improving the group’s future performance and relationships.
• Discuss both the strengths and challenges of the group for the subscales in question (as opposed to only focusing on the constructive aspects).
• Constructive feedback is more likely to positively affect group performance if you are able to get group members to accept responsibility for previously performing below ideal standards without lowering or threatening the group’s self-concept or self-esteem (Philo, 2004). Consequently, it is advisable to begin by discussing the group’s strengths in high-scoring subscales (and raise their self-esteem) before bringing the focus towards their potential challenges (i.e., lower-scoring subscales).
• Provide a standard or goal of the types of EI behaviors they should be striving for within a low-scoring subscale; identify or discuss the gap between this standard and their current EI performance for that subscale. Lastly, provide specific guidance for how to make improvements so that they may close the gap between the goal and their current performance (Fishbach & Finkelstein, 2012).

Additionally, in the interests of preventing the potential blaming of individual group members, a possible deterioration of group harmony, and a decrease in feelings of intragroup cohesion, it is advisable for you to keep anonymous from the group any information that may identify specific individuals as low scorers on EI subscales. Instead, it is best to discuss with individuals in the privacy of one-on-one sessions the areas of emotional intelligence where further development is recommended.