Tag Archives: city

Can negative feedback be positive?

Posted on by

This Blog Post by Heidi Grant Halvorson  is worth checking out, as it debunks the notion that we should only give positive feedback. There is a classic scene in the movie “Meet the Fockers.”  In the movie, the lead character’s (Greg) father-in-law is stunned to find out that they make 9th place ribbons. He makes this discovery while perusing a shrine to Greg still maintained by Greg’s parents that feature a number of the mementos to mediocrity. I think it rather brilliantly illustrates the idea we should only encourage and never criticize. Criticism though is an important and necessary component of staff development, and understanding when to use each is important.

So what purpose does positive and negative feedback serve?  Positive feedback does help to increase staff commitment by enhancing their experience and boosting their confidence. Negative feedback is more explanatory as it provides feedback on where staff needs to spend place additional effort, as well as offering insight into how they might improve.

With that understanding, you can see that positive and negative feedback each serve a purpose. For an inexperienced staff member, positive feedback may help them to stay optimistic and comfortable given the challenges they are facing.  This added encouragement is something novices tend to need more than the seasoned pro. When you are dealing with an expert, and they essentially are looking for those opportunities for incremental improvement, it’s negative feedback or criticism that will help them achieve at the next level.

Keep this lesson in mind when trying to develop staff.  This isn’t second grade soccer, so we don’t have to hand out 9th place ribbons.  Negative feedback may be exactly what certain members of your team need to be on top of their game.

Municipal Budgets and Placemaking: Peanut Butter and Jelly, or Oil and Water?

Posted on by

As a member of the League’s staff with expertise in municipal finance, I find myself in the rather unique position of speaking to large groups of people about both the importance of place, as well as municipal finance and budgeting. Obviously these two topics have nothing in common, or do they? While it seems to some that these are divergent topics, I would suggest that they should be uncompromisingly intertwined.  Preparing a budget without the proper vision is like making a sandwich without bread.  It will meet the basic requirement, but it isn’t very appealing.

We all know too well that we have been dealing with some of the most challenging financial circumstances in memory.  Too often the budget process becomes an agonizing contest with the singular focus of balancing revenues and expenditures without remaining grounded to a fundamental placemaking strategy.  Some of the first targets of the local budget process can frequently be community assets that help define our community. Somehow these facilities and programs lose out to other more “critical” operations.  We must remember however, that a community’s unique sense of place is its greatest asset. Therefore it must be the foundation of any budget, and the balancing decisions should reflect that fact.  To put it another way, why do people choose to live in your community?  Why did you choose to live there?  If the budgets you adopt don’t reflect the answer to that question, then aren’t you destroying the “sense of place” that brought you and other residents to your community? Isn’t this further diminishing your community’s value?

Clearly you all have difficult decisions to make, but in doing so you should resist the temptation to uncouple place from budget.  To do so is not in your community’s best interests, and that strategy will actually work to exacerbate an already challenging situation. Place isn’t just a buzz word that we talk about to make ourselves feel better; it is at the core of who we are and why we exist.  Money spent supporting our own unique places are dollars well spent.

Budget accordingly.

Communication Breakdown

Posted on by

I was reading a great post about communication the other day that really resonated with me.  The focus of it centered around the importance of intimacy. No, not that intimacy, that’s a different blog.  It was on the importance of intimacy as it relates to communication.  In short, the greater the distance between leaders and workers, the less likely you are to be aware of new ideas or problems on the front line.  It’s too easy to pull together a big group and declare victory as it relates to your internal communications.  If you are viewed as the person in the ivory tower,with the possible exception of your inner circle,  you can’t expect anyone to give it to you straight.  To be effective, communications need to be more personal and sincere.

They describe four techniques to help have more meaningful conversations:

1. To learn more, listen better.

2. To have a big impact, meet in a small group.

3. To build trust, show trust.

4. To be a better communicator, be who you are.

These are simple but effective ideas to help any leader get closer to their employee group, and improve the intimacy of their communication.   Check out the full Blog post for more information.