Hunting for Feedback

Everyone would agree the importance of feedback for improvement. However, how well and we are open to hear input, when input came in front of our eyes? A businessman friend of mine knew exactly that moment is now, the sophistication of the setting 'cash flow' is the key defense and binisnya current success. He also approved the hires an executive who can perform more sophisticated financial arrangements. When the executive had suggested improvements and changes he decides to move, businesses are directly hedged. With strong power of persuasion, he would direct the executive to do it the old way.

In other situations, I witnessed a superior listening presentations presenting subordinates 'brutal facts' that need to be wary of. Funny thing, the boss did not'welcome 'facts presented, neglecting to explore the facts with a healthy skepticism, but instead attempted to persuade the audience to think that there is a possibility of incorrect data, incorrect data retrieval means, and the many considerations that are not included. Finally, the "brutal facts" encountered countered again, the situation had not changed, improved and even rejected because it did not get into the minds of the thinking of those in attendance.

We often hear comments from people who are experiencing the "ribet'an:" You do not understand how the problem, anyway "In fact, when we are in uncertainty and complexity like this, the input of others becomes very important. I think we need to adapt the attitude of researchers who always puts the creative and critical attitude in acquiring and processing data. "Stakes are high, feedback is a must," said one.

Input: Objective or Subjective?

Hunting around the input is like asking the opinion of neighbors about the cuisine for the first time we have created. The feeling is different, ranging from the wonder, pride, offended, or alarmed. Are the opinions of others objectively? Do not we know more about what we focus on? Are they sufficiently skilled and not the origin cuap? As long as we can be sure that the input was useful, we'll be able to use it. We just need to actually listen first. We often forget that it does not recognize the input of rank, status or age. Input from elders, seniors, or a petty official can be as valuable, depending on how his pass that input to our needs.

We also can not necessarily doubt the objectivity of those inputs. Almost all complex situations or products judged subjectively and did not have the right size. Call it the product "I-MAC Super-thin" or the movie "Transformer". We will not be able to see and determine whether the input of subjective or objective, according to taste like or dislike. Then, if so, whether we will stop chasing input?

Transparency is Valuable

In an article about the trend in 2009, said that this is the era of 'instant feedback'. Through GPS (Global Positioning System), the presence and conversation anyone could be tracked in real time. People need to take pictures of traffic jams at this time also, 'poll' opinions about the popularity of himself as a politician should be accurate and current, even instantaneously. This is the era of transparency. "Corporate governance" has actually been no need to be socialized because it can not be negotiable. If a party to cover up the fraud, there must be others who would dismantle the facts. Just look at how the KPK so cleverly getting the facts, so did the press.

When we do have to compete now racing to get the facts, both about the market situation, competitors, corporate performance, the new policy is made, especially about themselves. It is time we create an environment where everybody used to speak their opinions without fear. The need to input that does not mean tossed professionalism and robustness of our principles, but we need to believe that our minds have limitations and we need another opinion, especially for matters concerning the complex decision-making.

Keep the ball in our Hands

We may not be aware that we often flatly refused entry. In fact, for those institutions that do business service as well as people who are used to move forward, they are even willing to pay a mechanism of "feedback" with high prices. Individuals who provide input are rewarded, even buying the results of research and customer satisfaction surveys worth billions of dollars were carried out. Why is awareness of the need to hunt these inputs are not evenly distributed? In fact, government managers also seemed reluctant to hear the facts on the ground, ignoring the advice of qualified experts, even refusing 'brainstorming', which really can add insight and repertoire of knowledge before taking a decision.

Often, closed minds and hearts to hunt down the input, because we can not distinguish between feelings and our dedication to the problem objectively. If we are too melt into the problem, we can feel 'attacked' when we questioned the opinion or action. Instead, we too often forget that we do not need to immediately change what already exists in us or policies or actions that we have made, if we get feedback that contradicts or "eccentric". The ball remains in our hands.

We need to intensively evaluate our actions, and the only input that other parties could be utilized. Imagine, how 'old' his stubbornness and not want to receive' feedback '. Only people who actively hunt for feedback which can advance and be able to penetrate unpredictable, unclear who was feared by everyone.