@thom_fuller
Moneyball Analytics
February 2018

People Analytics
Our intent:
Technology and data that “informates”
(information mated with everyone: data
insights available to everyone in real-time)
giving organizations an information
advantage in: (1) attracting talent, (2)
retaining talent, and (3) developing talent.
To be able to see early signals of burnout,
turnover, hiding, learning challenges –
giving leaders the ability to inject programs
and solutions before it’s too late.
2

What have we learned
about feedback?
Insights in …
1) Receiving feedback
2) Giving feedback
3) Org Design iterations

Receiving Feedback
Insights
4

LEARNING INDEX
5

NOT TRYING IS WORSE THAN
GETTING A BAD SCORE
Leadership has to demonstrate that “taking
a shot” is good. And that hiding is bad.
Also – it is not intuitive, but we found that
“investment in loss” is better than flat. If
you are leading, you will get criticized.
REDEFINE WHAT IS BAD
6
Learning NOT Learning

KEY INSIGHT
7
As a leader:
Receiving a lot of feedback doesn’t
guarantee performance,
but NOT receiving feedback highly
correlated to low performers

Giving Feedback
Insights
8

Get in the GAME
9
As a junior Next Jumper:
Giving a lot of feedback doesn’t
guarantee performance,
but NOT giving feedback highly
correlated to low performers.

People naturally “rate high”
(at start)
Like Uber or Netflix rating – people tend to
“barbell” (high or low)
When feedback is new in an organization,
people tend to give 3s and 4s
2 = “what you expect from them”
PROS VS INTRAMURAL CANDID FEEDBACK GIVERS
10

People are so unpracticed
at giving feedback – it is often
ambiguous.
The number clarifies what you mean.
Seeing role model/others of candid
feedback helps improve identifying
nuances.
MODEL CANDID FEEDBACK : NUMBER RATING + COMMENT
11
“I really liked the summary of
results – a good innovation.
But overall preso was a hard
follow & I think you lost a lot
of people”
“good job.”
sh#t sandwich
blow off (amateur-sport back pat)

Give 5 minutes at end of
meetings …
VISCERAL (FAST) vs THOUGHTFUL (SLOW)
12
If you give people a lot of time
to write feedback – they will
logic their way to being nice /
political … and water-it-down
And get more “empathetic” – and the
empathy lowers their directness
Often, the more time you give, the less
feedback you get. They forget to do it.

Org Design
Insights
13

Make hiding uncomfortable
Peer pressure is more effective to get
people “in the game”
INFORMATE PUBLICALLY
14

KNOWN GROUP + ANONYMOUS FEEDBACK
15
Candid feedback from peers
that know you
Easier to see patterns
Group size no less than 6. Ideal often 8 to
20.
Ex: our MV21 leadership group

Higher performers seek
feedback more FREQUENTLY
• Consistency vs intensity
• The combo of both QUANTITY and
FREQUENCY builds to a habit of
feedback
• Value is in seeing PATTERNS
• It is rare that one piece of feedback is a
“huge” insight – rather, seeing the
patterns is insightful
FREQUENCY & QUANTITY MATTER MORE THAN THE SCORE
16
Leaders of High
Performing Teams
Leaders of Low
Performing Teams

INVEST IN THE RECOVERY PROCESS
17
Feedback is often badly
delivered, poorly phrased,
unfair … hard to hear. But it is
up to you to find the gold.
Recovery Process:
1. Talk about it and “vent” with a trusted
partner (“burn off” emotion)
2. Sleep on it
3. Print out and read again
4. Cross out what doesn’t resonate
5. Highlight patterns
6. Watch Video
7. Discuss with TP

18
Building “Feedback Muscles” - Level it up
Build the Feedback Muscle in
steps
We found that building the feedback
muscle takes practice
Starting with safer feedback on how to
make an event better, or your plan better

Thank You
tom@nextjump.com
twitter: @thom_fuller