Why the ‘sandwich approach’ matters
ELBONOMICS: Effective people management can only be done by positive discipline.
W ould you still consider the “sandwich approach” as the best tool for giving feedback to errant employees, including the socalled millennials? I’ve read many articles on the Internet that criticize such an approach as ineffective and one the “undermines your feedback.” Please let me know your thoughts. — Peanut Butter.
Love is the paint that covers the faults of others. That’s how you treat your loved ones. But since you can’t do that in the workplace, you have no recourse but to apply the “sandwich approach” instead. This means requiring you to start and end with positive statements about a person and in between, explain the actual issue or issues on hand.
It’s the best thing that you can do, especially if you’re talking to a stubborn fool who is expected to resist by holding his own views after you have enlightened him about your assessment of his actual work performance. And speaking of the “sandwich approach” as being for everyone, you as a people manager can’t afford to rely on what you have read from the Internet.
I checked one of those articles. And the first thing that came in was the one written by Roger Schwarz on the topic “The ‘Sandwich Approach’ Undermines Your Feedback,” which was published on April 19, 2013 by the Harvard Business Review. Instead of the “sandwich approach,” Schwarz, who is an organizational psychologist, recommends an “effective, transparent strategy” as described in the following quotable example:
“Alex and Stacey, I want to talk with you because I have some concerns. The presentation you gave to the senior leadership team this morning may have created confusion about our strategy. Let me tell you how I’d like to approach this meeting and see if it works for you. I want to start by describing what I saw that raised my concerns and see if you saw the same things. After we agree on what happened, I want to say more about my concerns and see if you share them. Then we can decide what, if anything, we need to do going forward. I’m open to the possibility that I may be missing things or that I contributed the concerns I’m raising. How does that work for you?”
Schwarz says “( t) his transparent approach is more effective than the sandwich approach for several reasons. First, by sharing your strategy and asking them if it will work, you, Alex, and Stacey jointly design the meeting process, increasing the chance that you will all learn from it.
“Second, because everyone knows the planned sequence of the meeting, everyone can work jointly to keep the meeting on track. Finally, by expressing that you may not have all the information and that you may even have contributed to the problem, you shift the meeting from one in which you’re simply telling Alex and Stacey what you think to a meeting in which all of you are exploring together what happened and planning how to move forward.”
OK, fine. It may work in that example, although I have some misgivings. Because of Schwarz’s rejection of the “sandwich approach,” he forgot to say something positive about the presentation format, which I’d like to believe was done using the most advanced graphic designs and the latest data available. But how about in other cases like handling problem employees and employees with problems? Without the “sandwich approach,” you tend to make people stiff the moment you go direct to the point. And more important, it is important to note that Schwarz is referring to the American context of management.
And so, how we do it in the case of Filipino workers, including millennials?
The “sandwich approach” is an important face-saving device for us — Filipinos. And it’s not even a monopoly of Filipinos. It’s an Asian thing you can’t ignore in people management, much more to the Japanese, who abhor assessing the performance of their workers.
You don’t simply barge into the work station of an erring employee and immediately berate him for a missed deadline, sub-par report, or off-tangent accomplishments. You need to establish the right climate and continue with your rapport-seeking effort. Much more, you can’t castigate someone for his habitual tardiness or absenteeism or what-have-you in your Code of Conduct while in the presence of other people.
Schwarz says the boss in his example admits he “may be missing things or that I contributed the concerns I’m raising.” Sure does. He’s partly to be blamed. Why don’t he request Alex and Tracey to review the presentation with him before they made that presentation to top management?
The “sandwich approach” was invented as an important technique to reduce resistance to change. Of course, you need to be transparent as well — by giving clearlyworded and agreeing to mutually developed performance targets up to budgets and timelines, among other things. If you want to motivate people, make sure your bread is palatable to all concerned.