Workshop Planning
Feedback card, MethodKit for Workshop Planning
Card 53 of 60 · MethodKit for Workshop Planning
  • ThemeCapture & close
  • CardCard 53 of 60
  • Questions5 to explore
Capture & close

Feedback

Participants giving & receiving feedback

Feedback between participants is one of the most valuable things a workshop can produce, and one of the most frequently botched.

Feedback in a workshop setting covers two directions: participants giving feedback to each other on their work, ideas, or presentations, and participants receiving feedback and knowing what to do with it. Both require structure. Without it, feedback defaults to vague encouragement or awkward silence.

The method matters a great deal. Open-floor feedback tends to be dominated by the loudest voice and leaves quieter participants unheard. Written feedback creates a record but removes the chance to clarify. Structured protocols, such as timed rounds, warm and cool feedback, or specific prompts, produce more useful and more equitable input.

Your job as facilitator is to set the norms before feedback begins, not to improvise once things go sideways. Decide the format, the time limit, and whether responses are allowed, and make that clear to participants before they start.

Easy to missTell participants exactly what kind of feedback is useful (specific, actionable, related to the stated goal) before the activity begins, because vague instructions produce vague feedback and the presenter is left no better off than before.

How experienced facilitators handle it

The same building block, handled by people who have run a lot of workshops. Patterns and illustrations to react to, not rules to follow.

Give it structure

Experienced facilitators use a specific format rather than open questioning: two things that are working, one thing to develop, or the I-like / I-wish / what-if protocol. Structure reduces bias and keeps feedback useful.

Set the norms out loud

They name the norms before the activity: feedback is specific, it addresses the work not the person, and it is offered to help rather than to impress.

Protect the receiver

They build in time for the person receiving feedback to simply listen, without having to respond or defend immediately, which produces more honest feedback from givers.

Close the loop

They end the feedback activity by asking the receiver to name one thing they heard that they will take forward, which signals that the feedback was received rather than just endured.

Questions to plan around

Use these on your own or in a group. There are no right answers, only better conversations.

  1. What format will feedback take, and have you explained it clearly to participants?

  2. How much time will each person or group have to receive feedback?

  3. Will feedback be written, spoken, or both?

  4. What norms will you set to keep feedback useful and specific rather than general and polite?

  5. How will participants record the feedback they receive so they can act on it later?

Watch for

  • Open-ended 'any thoughts?' invitations tend to produce a few dominant voices and leave most participants silent; a structured prompt gets more from more people.
  • Feedback rounds frequently run long because no one wants to be the one who cuts off a thoughtful comment; time it clearly and keep the role of timekeeper with someone who will actually use it.
  • Participants sometimes conflate feedback with judgment; naming 'feedback is to help, not to score' at the outset changes the quality of what people are willing to offer.