By: Jordan Spector
Edited By: Jim Halsell
The essay series “Professional Horizons: Reflections and Insights,” explores concepts in leadership, team dynamics, and personal growth. The series aims to share professional insights and experience to inspire contemplation and open dialogue that supports the professional development needed to thrive, adapt, and lead effectively in an ever-evolving workplace.
This essay is the second of a two-part essay on the importance of feedback and the professional imperative to pursue it. While Part 1 focused on feedback in one-on-one situations with relevance to individual development, this essay will focus on feedback in group settings and the corresponding effects on team growth and organizational culture. Common in both scenarios—one-on-one or group settings—creating an environment where good feedback flourishes can be challenging. Different groups and organizations have policies, cultures, and personalities that can make feedback more or less normalized and effective. It is worth noting that establishing good feedback practices in group settings is inherently less controllable because it is subject to the willingness of others to participate. For leaders, teammates, or employees attempting to shape or influence these dynamics, effective deployment of feedback tools should consider the unique variables in their group or organization. This is why it is generally better to begin with establishing good one-on-one feedback precedents. Honesty, vulnerability, tact, and receptiveness are valuable interpersonal skills fostered more easily one-on-one that can transfer directly to groups. Though not required, building on good one-on-one feedback culture will facilitate the group feedback methods discussed in the rest of this essay to be deployed more naturally and without prohibitive friction.
One of the most successful examples of group feedback can be observed in Military Aviation Post-Flight Debriefs. Deeply rooted in aviation culture, these events are known for their detailed and transparent nature and occur for every mission flown, whether in training or operations. Lasting for hours if needed, these events cover every aspect of a flight to ensure that any small but potentially significant detail can be aired. Rank and ego are absent, with senior officers as self-critical and receptive to criticism as the most junior pilots. All members are required to contribute observations, including self-assessments, evaluations of others (even superiors), and insights on the group as a whole. This creates an incredibly powerful collective awareness. While universal deficiency recognition is an important part of the debrief, it is better understood as a byproduct of the underlying objective: an impartial assessment to improve the group’s performance. Positives, negatives, and statements of fact or perspective are delivered for the goal of enhancing safety and effectiveness. Though military culture may bring a “colorful” delivery at times, the result of even the most critical debriefs is a closer, more self-aware, and more committed team.
For many organizations, complete adoption of aviation-style debriefs would be extremely challenging and likely unnecessary. However, distilling themes from this format of group feedback can yield substantial organizational benefits. Establishing equal footing for all team members, including leadership, breaking barriers of vulnerability through self-criticality, and devoting enough time to ensure full transparency are characteristics that can be applied in many group formats.
It is also important for groups to establish formal timeframes for these feedback sessions to occur. For example, the Agile Development Process used by software developers calls for sprint retrospectives held regularly every 1-4 weeks. During these retrospectives, teams reflect on successes, challenges, and areas for improvement. This structured cadence sets clear expectations for feedback timing, content, and outcomes, making feedback an established, normalized part of the process. By setting a consistent rhythm, Agile helps teams anticipate regular feedback, enhancing accountability and reinforcing a culture of continuous improvement.
One of the biggest challenges in establishing constructive group feedback sessions is creating an environment for truly open dialogue. Leaders must actively work to promote the broadest possible participation, eliminate fears of repercussions, and maintain group cohesion. The Blameless Post-Mortem process used in many tech companies, like Google and Netflix, is effective because contributions—regardless of outcome—are protected from punitive responses. This commitment might seem counterintuitive when issues can be traced to individual errors, but the benefits of adhering to this policy are well-documented. By prioritizing true root cause analysis, teams gain a deeper understanding of the process factors that contributed to the issue (e.g., resource limitations, unclear procedures, or other systemic challenges). Not only does this approach promote honest feedback and greater awareness, but it also nurtures a culture where mistakes are seen as opportunities for individual and organizational improvement and growth.
Informal gatherings are also a valuable avenue for candid conversations and spontaneous feedback. As students here at SAIS, we put this into practice naturally through club activities, meet-ups outside of class, and study group discussions. These informal settings help us build stronger relationships that enhance our collaboration in academic and professional contexts. This obviously extends to the workplace. However, overly emphasizing informal group engagements as a primary method of feedback carries risks that should be recognized. Overly formalizing informal events by making them mandatory can strip away their natural ease, and pushing for frequent participation at out-of-work meetups might inadvertently alienate those who can’t or prefer not to join. Ultimately, balance is essential. Still, it must be acknowledged that group feedback can sometimes flow more freely in a relaxed environment outside the office.
Each of these feedback tools has its place, and like one-on-one feedback practices, they must be applied thoughtfully to maximize their effectiveness. Even modest integration can have profound outcomes, and groups that commit to substantive feedback methods improve not only their own effectiveness but also that of the organization. A culture that prioritizes growth, accountability, and shared responsibility will always be more adaptable, resilient, and responsive than one that does not. Good feedback practices are how these values are achieved. They transform even high-performing teams into forces of sustained improvement and drive organizations toward lasting excellence.
Author Bio:
Jordan Spector is an officer in the United States Navy and a Politico-Military Fellow in the Master of International Public Policy program. His focus is on strategic policy and the underlying economic, legal, social, cultural, and psychological influences that guide global behavior. Jordan also has a special interest in leadership and is the author of the ongoing essay series, Professional Horizons, which aims to share insights and experiences into personal and organizational dynamics. Jordan will return to the Navy upon graduation in 2025.