Stop Start Continue
“Well, THAT was awkward!” For the last few minutes of each team member’s annual performance review, I used to ask about how I was doing as their manager. While we had good relationships, there was nevertheless a bit of awkwardness when they were asked to critique me directly. Also, some of them were a little surprised by the request and had difficulty articulating their inputs. I was genuinely interested in learning from what they were thinking and needed a better way to get truly meaningful feedback from my team.
On the advice of my manager at the time, I adopted a slightly more structured approach that made a big difference. Rather than asking an open question about whether they had any comments about my performance, I asked 3 narrower questions:
(1) What have I been doing that really isn’t working and I should stop doing it?
(2) What is something you’ve seen other managers do that would work well in our group and I should start doing it?
(3) What is something I’m doing that works well and I should continue doing it?
This Stop-Start-Continue format was highly effective; the helpful feedback flowed. It worked because it focused the wide-open “how am I doing?” down to asking about just 3 specific behaviors. Further, the phrasing made clear that I was after suggestions that could be put into action straightaway. Re-scoping made it much easier for people to answer, and the focus on improving the group’s performance, rather than on me personally, made it more comfortable for them to answer candidly. I used this format regularly throughout my career, and implemented many of the suggested adjustments to my management style.
Over the years we’ve been exposed to Six Sigma, Juran, Deming PDCA, 8D, Dale Carnegie, A3, Shainin, and more. Each technique works pretty well, and has been demonstrated many times in a wide variety of industries and circumstances. At the core they are all essentially the same!
Each approach relies on an underlying logical flow that goes like this: [a] make sure the problem is clearly defined; [b] be open to all sources of information; [c] vet the information for relevance and accuracy; [d] use the process of elimination to narrow down all possible causes to the most likely few; [e] prove which of the suspects is really the cause of the issue; [f] generate a number of potential solutions; [g] evaluate the effectiveness, feasibility and risk of the potential solutions; [h] implement the winning solution(s); and [i] take steps to make sure your solution(s) don’t unravel in the future.
The differences between the paradigms resides in supplementary steps and toolkits. For example, 8D contains the important “In
Your primary role as a manager is to ensure your team’s success. Internalize this. Make sure your team members know this. Build an environment of trust and collaboration. A direct report of mine would frequently leave me out of the loop as problems escalated, preferring instead to “work harder”. It was clear that he felt uncomfortable delivering bad news to me (his boss) when things were not going according to plan. Let me tell you the rest of the story.
