Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Staff Feedback! Making It Effective and Worthwhile: A Behavioral Brief
Staff Feedback! Making It Effective and Worthwhile: A Behavioral Brief
Making it
effective and worthwhile
A Behavioral Brief
by
QBS
www.QBSCompanies.com
• Follow us @QBSinc
We will consider:
• Antecedents
• Study results: methods of feedback
Group/Individual
Peer
Self-motivated
Graphic
• Staff Preference Assessments
• But… what if I don’t have time to give
effective feedback?
7
Resources
8
Reinforcement should be:
• Genuine/honest
• Specific
• Appropriately timed
• Preferred by the individual receiving it
9
But how do I know what type of
Reinforcer/feedback a staff member
prefers?
(and why does it matter?)
10
Staff Reinforcer Preference Assessment
• Public/private
• Verbal/written
• Praise or tangibles
• What would they most appreciate?
⮚ Ideas: gift cards, come in late/leave early, snacks,
special reserved parking spot, choice of projects,
etc.
11
Staff Reinforcer Preference Assessment
12
Keep in mind…
• Group/Individual
• Peer
• Self-monitoring
• Graphic
14
Individual supervisory feedback
Should be:
• Based on observations
• Specific
• Constructive
• Solution-oriented
15
Don’t throw out empty praise…
• Genuine
• Based on observed behavior
16
Public verbal feedback
17
Procedure
Wilson, P.G., Reid, D.T. & Korabek-Pinkowski, C.A. 1991. Analysis of public verbal feedback as a staff management procedure.
Behavioral Residential Treatment. 6(4), 263-277.
18
19
Specificity is important!
20
Why/why not public feedback?!
• Pros:
⮚ Reinforcing for some
⮚ Gives reminder to group of expectations
• Cons:
⮚ Might embarrass some
⮚ Might make those who are not receiving public
praise feel frustrated
21
Peer feedback
22
23
Peer feedback pros/cons?
• Pros
⮚ Cost-effective
⮚ More valid?
⮚ Acceptable to staff
Cons
⮚Apprehension giving/receiving feedback?
⮚Some may prefer feedback to come from
supervisor
24
Self-monitoring
Richman, G.S., Riordan, M.R., Reiss, M.L., Pyles, D.A.M. & Bailey, J.S. 1998. The effects of self-monitoring and supervisor feedback
on staff performance in a residential setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 2(4), 401-409.
25
26
Pros and Cons
• Pros:
⮚ Cost-effective
• Cons:
⮚ Accuracy
⮚ Should be paired with additional feedback
27
Graphic Feedback
Daniels, A.C. 2000. Bringing out the Best in People. McGraw-Hill, Inc., 103
28
Graphic feedback
• 2005
• Restaurant servers
• Clarification of tasks, verbal feedback and
graphic feedback intervention package
Austin, J., Weatherly, N.L., & Gravina, N.E., 2005. Using task clarification, graphic feedback and verbal feedback to increase
closing task completion in a privately owned restaurant. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 117-120.
29
30
“But…..” you say…
Feedback = Time
31
Suggestions for feedback and
reinforcement
⮚Even if you don’t have a lot of time…
• Get out into the work area!
• Pair your presence with positive comments
• Look for small improvements- provide immediate
feedback
• Contingent on performance
• Provide something the person values
• Frequent!
32
References
Austin, J., Weatherly, N.L., & Gravina, N.E. 2005. Using task clarification,
graphic feedback and verbal feedback to increase closing task completion
in a privately owned restaurant. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38,
117-120.
Daniels, A.C. 2000. Bringing out the Best in People. McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Fleming, R., & Sulzer-Azaroff, B. 1992. Reciprocal peer management:
improving staff instruction in a vocational training program. Journal of
Applied Behavior Analysis. 25(3), 611-620.
Richman, G.S., Riordan, M.R., Reiss, M.L., Pyles, D.A.M. & Bailey, J.S. 1988.
The effects of self-monitoring and supervisor feedback on staff
performance in a residential setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.
2(4), 401-409.
Wilson, P.G, Reid, D.T. & Korabek-Pinkowski, C.A. 1991. Analysis of public
verbal feedback as a staff management procedure. Behavioral Residential
Treatment. 6(4), 263-277
A QBS Presentation © 2016 33
Questions?
For More Information
go to:
WWW.QBSCOMPANIES.COM
Follow us