Dr Mushtaque B Barq
Sigh. The crimson of agony spreads its wings across the canvas of imagination to match my own protocols. “Shall I rely on my defined lines or erase them all?” whispered my wishful heart. I tried to hold back conventions. Conventions usually rest on credentials crafted by champions devoid of challenges. Much like how traditional academic recognition often favours those who conform to established norms rather than those who dare to challenge them. Challenges only create history. For instance, many innovators initially faced rejection before their ground breaking ideas were acknowledged. These currents toss a man like me irrespective of mercy, leading self-proclaimed prototypes to be discarded as outdated. However, from nowhere, the imagination falls back upon blankness, and an echo of reformation brings a new verve into the nerves, renaming my crimson as Confidence. As Marcus Garvey aptly put it, with confidence, you have won before you have started.
Before dethroning preconceived ideas, one must search for tesserae in a mosaic to create a picture. A complete figure has a bit of vociferous elements and a tinge of delicacy fanned by verbosity. This combination repackages conventional alignments for a new age. For hard-core conventionalists, it may be a popularly ragged paperback of stagnation, but, on the other hand, it may certainly challenge the straw man’s argument. In both cases, at least a ripple is created; it either carries one to the shore or leaves the other to vanish with the fading wave. Those who are carried by the currents are always accompanied by the minutiae lying in the surroundings. Learning from bits is more effective than taking chunks from everywhere because a minute detail of any chunk makes the heap appear to be somewhat easier to explore.
Judgment and Its Role in Feedback
Judgment, whether rational or investigative, shapes how feedback is received and applied. Kahneman’s Dual-Process Theory (2011) highlights this by distinguishing between intuitive (System 1) and analytical (System 2) thinking, both of which influence feedback interpretation. The onlooker at the bay qualifies himself as a judge, enjoying grandmotherly airs. However, the process of categorization requires either logical reasoning or investigative rigor. A thorough inductive process can dismantle established verbal or perceptive structures or challenge habitual judgments that lack legal or logical grounding.
Being merely judgmental can never serve as a valid feedback mechanism for those lacking the time to delve into intricate observation and critical analysis. Feedback, when reduced to conjectures disguised as insights, denigrates ‘the subject.’
Feedback Theories and Their Implications
Kluger and DeNisi (1996), in their Feedback Intervention Theory (FIT), suggest that feedback affects performance if it is directed toward identity. Carver and Scheier (1982, 1998), in their Cybernetic Model of Feedback, describe feedback as a self-regulatory mechanism where ‘the subject’ compares his performance to a standard and adjusts accordingly. They argue that negative feedback highlights discrepancies between actual and desired performance, leading to corrective action. However, research (Ilgen et al., 1979) suggests that emotional responses often hinder this process, meaning that feedback must be carefully framed for true efficacy.
Pendleton’s Feedback Model (2003) emphasizes that a structured approach is needed to deliver feedback, as it involves ‘the subject’ self-reflecting before receiving constructive criticism. Sadler (1989), in The ASK Model (Ask, Show, Know), declares that effective feedback requires ‘the subject’ to understand what good performance looks like, where he currently stands, and how to close the gap.
Countering the Cybernetic Model
Sigh. Carver & Scheier’s Cybernetic Model of Feedback (1982, 1998) envisions feedback as a self-regulatory mechanism, a corrective force guiding one toward refinement. Yet, does mere acknowledgment of feedback suffice? The model assumes that discrepancies between actual and desired performance will naturally drive corrective action, but it fails to consider the inertia of neglected insights. Feedback is a tool that, if wielded with precision, can mend both performance and opportunity gaps. However, when left unattended, these gaps deepen into chasms, and what could have been a moment of redirection mutates into an unaddressed ailment, resistant to remedy. Simply receiving feedback does not herald progress; its efficacy hinges on how it is framed, how it resonates, and ultimately, how it is enacted. Feedback, when misbelieved or ignored, ceases to be a force of growth and instead festers as stagnation.
The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Feedback
People who generally hold leadership positions in reputed organizations have added feedback as their primary resource to manage human resources. Providing feedback should not result in the misallocation of human resources but should instead focus on improving performance and restructuring plans to optimize resource retention. Those who provide feedback must be aware that emotional intelligence should be applied to deal with sensitive subjects. A missing perspective often creates a biased and one-sided argument, which not only reduces validity but also encourages ignoring counterarguments. For example, in workplace evaluations, if only managerial perspectives are considered without employee feedback, the resulting assessments may lack accuracy and fairness, ultimately leading to dissatisfaction and decreased morale.
Unverified evidence leads to false conclusions. Any conclusion based on weak evidence is never a conclusion but a confusion meant to pile up beyond one’s reach. It is imperative to find a solution rather than leave a Himalayan task for future generations to break into pieces. To reframe the pieces, one generation must be ready to rectify and reconstruct the remnants of the mess. Ultimately, feedback is not merely a corrective force but a dynamic tool whose effectiveness depends on perception, emotional response, and structure. If ignored or misapplied, it can widen performance gaps rather than bridge them. To cultivate meaningful learning, future generations must refine feedback mechanisms to ensure that evaluation fosters growth rather than stagnation.
Dr.Mushtaque B.Barq is a Columnist, Poet and Fiction Writer. He is the author of “Feeble prisoner, “ Wings of Love” and many translation works are credited to the author like “ Verses Of Wahab
