„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

A Representation of Reality
What results, of course, is a representation in abstract symbols (numbers) of the
organizational reality in which respondents live. Events have been summarized by each
respondent across some period of time considered by him or her to be appropriate,
translated by the survey into numbers, and summarized in the tabulation across all
members of the group. Their subsequent ability, in the feedback process, to translate this
into a common experience base about which joint conclusions can be drawn depends on
the clarity and concreteness of the original questionnaire items. Clear, concrete,
descriptive items are more readily converted in the discussion into clear, concrete
examples than are fuzzy, abstract ones. It is precisely this translation-summaryconversion
process, resulting in a shared view of problems and strengths, that lies at the
heart of survey feedback’s payoff potential.
Perception of Threat
Confidentiality of individual responses also plays a considerable role in the validity
question. Survey feedback is seldom undertaken in other than hierarchical organizational
settings. The differences in positions, roles, status, and power that this fact implies make
each respondent vulnerable in some respect to being held accountable in punitive terms
for having expressed himself or herself. If the threat is real and is applicable to the
majority of respondents, the facilitator’s attempt to use survey feedback to develop
constructive problem solving obviously faces a situation of model nonacceptance.
However, more common, and in some ways critical, is the real perception of an
unreal threat; and it is this anxiety that the confidential treatment of individual responses
helps to allay. Even though it is obvious to respondents that some handful of personal
background items could identify them, there is considerable reassurance in not having to
write their names on their questionnaires. “Taking attendance,” scrutinizing a
respondent’s questionnaire as it is handed in, and peering over the respondent’s shoulder
are similarly to be avoided, as is the practice of including immediate superiors and their
subordinates in the same questionnaire-completion session.
Observing these cautions, together with aggregating data across all respondents in
the group and into summary indices geared to the group’s size (a mean response
preserves confidentiality in small groups, whereas a percentage spread does not), helps
to guarantee that the results will be truly consensually valid and reasonably free from
distortions attributable to a threatened position.
CRITICAL ASPECTS OF THE FEEDBACK PROCESS
The usefulness of the survey data depends as much on the nature of the feedback process
as on the character and quality of the actual data. Although a complete treatment would
involve a consideration of specific aspects of this process, we will focus at present on
only four additional major issues: (1) the role of a resource person in the process, (2) the
preexisting role relationships of people in the groups, (3) feedback sequencing for
The Pfeiffer Library Volume 6, 2nd Edition. Copyright ©1998 Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer ❚❘ 171