Using the Johari window to get feedback at work
This article is based on a quick presentation I did at an Unmade Team Talks session about getting feedback using the Johari Window framework.
At Unmade we’ve been focussing a lot recently on how we can create a feedback culture and create the safety, trust and processes to give each other regular, candid feedback. This is one technique I used earlier this year to seek feedback and I found it really helpful, so I’m sharing the process.
Why did I want feedback?
Over the course of being at Unmade I’ve officially changed roles from product design to product management (there’s another post in that sometime!) and wanted to get some feedback on if I was doing a good job and my skillset matched up to expectations of the role.
Thinking about personal development objectives at the start of the year and how I might use our training and development program, I also wanted to focus down on getting some specific feedback on the most important areas to improve, so I could use the training most wisely.
What is the Johari window?
It’s a method developed in the 1950s for people to assess their perception of self against other people’s perception of them.
The ‘relationship’ aspect was what appealed to me to use this framework. It seemed relevant to the collaborative way we work and to my role in particular, where it’s critical to have a relationship where I can be open to ideas and viewpoints but also clear and decisive.
The Johari framework sets out a list of 30 or so adjectives that relate to personality traits. I tweaked some of the supplied words after reading this article by Anna Shipman as some of the words are a little weird or irrelevant for a work setting (ie religious).
You then privately pick 5 or 6 traits that best represent your perception of yourself, and then you send the list to others and ask them to privately pick 5 or 6 traits that describe you too.
Then the results you receive can be plotted into a 2x2 matrix — the words both you and others picked going into a ‘Self-Aware’ quadrant, the things others but not you picked going into ‘Blind Spot’, and so on.
This helps you identify where your own perception of yourself misaligns with other people’s, to identify areas you might want to improve, or amplify (in the case of the ‘Hidden’ quadrant). The goal is generally that ‘Self-Aware’ is the sweet spot quadrant where your own perception of self matches up with how others see you, so having a lot of answers fall into there is a good sign.
How did I use it?
I sent out the list of words to 14 colleagues using a Google Form as recommended by Anna’s blog post, with a bit of explanation text, then waited for the results to come in.
Everyone who I sent it to completed it, and there were immediately some rather clear trends to spot...
The entire results (not included above) when put in the matrix were really interesting to look at, especially the long-tail of choices in the Blind Spot quadrant where a few words were picked 6–7 times by others and some were picked only once. It was nice that four of the words I picked for myself were also picked by others, so I’m doing pretty well at the Self-Awareness part.
Considering the frequency at which words were picked, their relevance to my job, my own perception of what I needed to improve, and the potential for more negative implications, I chose direct and assertive as two key words that I wanted to focus in on for the next stage of more detailed feedback.
The idea was to find out next that when people chose those word, why did they pick it, and did they perceive it as a strength or weakness? When were times when this helped you work with me, and when was it a challenge?
My manager Ben sent out some more detailed questions to some of the original 14 respondents, asking for examples of when these specific behaviours were either positive or challenging, and any feedback on how I could manage these traits better to be most helpful to others. He collated this feedback and shared it with me.
What was the outcome?
The outcome of the more detailed feedback was broadly really positive. Most people thought these traits were a good thing and helped people work with me more effectively. There was also some helpful constructive feedback where I could make some changes to be more open to others’ views and be more productive in meetings.
I was then able to pick a training workshop that was most relevant to addressing this feedback: in my case a communications workshop that helped coach towards the right balance between being assertive but also tailoring my approach to the needs of others when relevant.
Three final tips
- Curate your request: The initial exercise is so lightweight it was an easy ask for people to complete it, so it got a higher response rate than a more open-ended request for feedback might do. Getting specific feedback in one (most impactful) area made it easier to act on the results and pick training that would be most helpful. I think a more traditional 360 might have resulted in less focussed feedback and probably a lower response rate, and would therefore have been less helpful.
- Couple with self-reflection: By asking for feedback using a framework that also demands self-reflection, it was easier to be open to receiving the feedback and acting on it.
- Ask for help: Ben’s help was really valuable in terms of being a second objective opinion throughout and helping me seek the more qualitative anonymised feedback. I am sure any manager or even colleague would help anyone else the same way, either within or outside of the normal review processes.
Reflections / what might I change
There was still to my mind a bit of ambiguity about whether the exercise is designed to identify strengths only or general traits associated with a person. Anna Shipman took it as strengths, but I think uncovering weaknesses or negative traits is more interesting and useful ground to get feedback on. So I mixed up the word list a bit to add more negative-toned words.
Additionally, in applying it to a work context it’s worth being clear that you are looking for feedback on workplace traits. Some of the responses I got — probably from people who know me better — were not the most relevant to the workplace setting, although they were accurate (ie introverted). I would have been clearer on this.
We discussed that it might also be most effective once you have been in a company for a while and have had a chance to work with a range of people who can get to know you a bit. It might be less useful for a 3-month review for example.
Resources
- Wikipedia entry on the Johari window with more information and the original list of adjectives.
- Anna Shipman’s blog post that inspired my process, with more useful insights.
- Google Forms template if you want to run the exercise yourself and use this as a basis.
