If you read few my post, I am greedy for feedback. I was even thinking a lot about how to engage the audience to give it. Feedback analysis is only possible when you have feedback.
At that time I forgot about test:fest and how much feedback comes after this conference.
This is Feedback Analysis of mine panel Let’s steal from scientists on test:fest 2018.
And I finally got my score and comments from test:fest.
I was hoping to do here little public retrospective of my panel to see how I felt and how others felt about it.
Lukasz Kmiec did a presentation on giving feedback. His performance was an introduction to Stand Star-ar models.
Originally I planned to do some STAR scoring of the comments I’ve got. But I decided against it. Publicly reviewing them felt ungrateful. That why I will leave it as the exercise for viewers.
Note I did some artistic freedoms in translating feedback to English to add more anonymity for authors. But the meaning wasn’t altered.
It’s Time for Feedback analysis!
„Worst Discussion Panel I have ever attended. Mr Maciej gave out the impression that he didn’t know what he wants to talk about.
Stick notes idea was good, but it wasn’t explained well.
First 10 minutes was well prepared but rest it was the improvisation on some useless subjects. Still, I have no idea what author was trying to present. Just small talk in English. The presenter has to work on his English he was talking too fast and without an accent.”
Yeah, I said I wouldn’t look from Star perspective. But in my opinion, this one is an excellent example of well-done STAR feedback. The commenter described very well situated. (Author didn’t know what he wants to say)
Actions (for instance Sticky notes weren’t explained well)
Result – she didn’t get what my panel was about.
I will address the part about accent first – I think commenter meant that I am speaking with a thick polish accent instead of „no accent”.
Unfortunately, that is true. – Working on it but it will take time. Even two years in Ireland haven’t fixed it. But I asked my English teacher for help with this.
And Yes First 10 minutes was fully prepared for me it was a presentation to put people in the mood and warm them up.
I could also explain better the idea of Sticky notes.
It is hard but I must admit I was improvising. I had lots of materials prepared, but I wanted to avoid changing this panel into the presentation. When I saw poor activity on previous and my discussion. I’ve got stressed out. Deciding to forgo original plan and move with sticky notes to at least build some engagement before moving to stuff I wanted to tackle.
Truth is I need to attend little more panels with the goal of observing how people lead them. And be more prepared.
That was Harsh but constructive feedback I am very thankful to its author. I am sorry that for you It was the weakest panel you ever attended. It makes me grateful for the amount of work you put into the feedback.
About voting with your feet.
„Weakest element of test:fest.. Total waste of time.”
I hope that author of this comment managed to vote with his feet and leave to do something better with his time.
And this is advice to you all! Vote with your feet! We are there for you! If you are bored or think the presentation/panel is not working for you don’t be afraid to leave and go for something more in your taste.
I will leave to view deciding if this feedback fulfils STAR.
Thankfully comment above explains why this guy could fill this way.
A little positivity to brighten the mood.
„Great idea with candies for active participants. You need work on your aim. IT will make a better effect. The subject was interesting.”
The little background I was afraid of low engagement from the very beginning that why I had prepared candies and sticky notes.
And I was throwing candies to active participants. The problem was my aim is terrible, and it was causing havoc.
And a little more
„Nice Subject, Pity the discussion didn’t go well (I think people were afraid, maybe it is typical for them). You should moderate it little better.”
I agree with the author that I should moderate better. My skills require more work. But I thought about it, and I don’t see how that would improve this panel. The engagement was so week that there wasn’t much to moderate. So yes I need to work on how to moderate, but I need to figure out how to build engagement first.
Pole should speak Polish
„I didn’t get what author tried to say. A presentation would be better if author a Pole would speak in his native tongue.”
About speaking in Polish. We had an at least one person on the panel that wasn’t speaking Polish. And he was also the speaker who had the presentation on a complementary subject. So it had to be in English.
Also what happened to famous polish hospitality?
But It is defiantly last time I am making English panel in Poland.
Few short ones
„I regret not coming.”
„Cool Idea, Nicely done Panel, Thanks!”
After reading all the previous negativity, I wonder If author put his feedback in form for a different panel. But joking aside it was nice to hear this.
„Cool mood, Cool idea, But too little meat. Again it could be turned it into the interesting presentation and less rigid panel.”
I have my doubts about more meat in the presentation. It makes them harder to follow. And easier to lose people.
But it is something worth considering.
„A bold panel in English. I regret low user engagement.
My advice – more histories from life/experience as relations to presented theory.”
I like the advice; I am afraid it will turn this panel into the presentation. But It is worth giving a try.
The Most confusing feedback
„IT was more like presentation then panel. The subject from an audience was collected carelessly and selected in the way to agree with slides of a presenter.”
After reading this comment I have replayed the panel in my had many times (I wish I had recorded it). The problem is I have trouble seeing what author said. I am not saying he is not right. But I miss the context which leads him to that opinion. This is the example of the comment that would benefit from STAR.
But it is also one comment I hoped to avoid getting. I’ve spent a lot of time in preparation trying everything to avoid turning this panel into a presentation. Pity that at least in one person eyes I failed.
The audience topics were collected during the break before my panel started. I was casual, but I won’t say I was careless.
The part about sticky notes selection is also confusing to me.
From my perspective, there was nothing there that suited my slides. I made some selection yes I was choosing the cards that were most promising for discussion on the subject.
Unfortunately, I failed.
Goals, Goals, Goals
„The goal of the Panel wasn’t defined clearly. Same for its moderation.
I had an impression you didn’t know what you were trying to achieve, and you were counting on an audience and „it will work somehow”.”
I had goals, but I haven’t presented them in a clear manner. – that is good remark. Yes, I was counting on an audience. It is discussion panel. But I think the author hit the spot while saying about goals. If they are not clear it is hard to get people to talk. It is ironic I spent so much time harping on lack of clear goals in automation yet I haven’t noticed it in my own performance…
Two more to go.
I’ve got feedback from the actual scientist that I haven’t miss represented their work. She also gave me few more ideas to use if I ever return to this subject.
And I’ve got the one more real useful feedback. Problem is it is too big for me to translate so that I will bring it as bullet points:
– stories would enhance the message.
– there was no conclusion.
So how it is from my perspective?
I have an unrealistic goal of getting a perfect score. I know it will never happen that why it is the great goal that motivates me. Of course, from this perspective, I have Failed.
From more down to earth perspective:
This was my second panel. My first one on AAdays went much better.
I wasn’t able to get user engagement.
Of course, I have few ideas why.
-Even if I had clear goals I haven’t explained them to an audience well.
I was so obsessed with giving audience freedom to speak. That they were at a loss what to speak about.
– I’ve got stressed out. Which meant I was speaking faster then I should. And I wasn’t able to think quick on my feet.
– A panel was in English, and a few events during the conf showed people are not willing for that. Plus the printed out timetable didn’t have info about language…
-I had plan b and c – stick notes and candies. But they couldn’t salvage above mistakes. Plus they had their own implementation mistakes.
After talking with Marta, I realised too much on the fact there is a lot of scientists in Wroclaw test environment. And I was hoping for their active participation.
Also, most of my conferences presentation was done in front of a smaller audience on meetup first. And then I was improving them.
In this case a that didn’t happen.
So What is the action?
Back to drawing board.
– I need to work on my English. (I have lessons in Objectivity I had already asked for help with this problem).
– Rework panel. Give audience freedom by limiting it giving them structure.
– Add more stories.
– And return to doing PoC in front of a small audience.
That all folks.
I hope you that my open analysis was useful to you.
If you were on my panel feel free to share more feedback.
Once again thank you all for the feedback I’ve got more feedback from test:fest then from SEETEST, AADAYS and TESTWAREZ put together.
And what do you think?
Was the feedback I’ve got useful? Or I am overanalyzing?
Did I deal with it fairly? Or was I too dismissive/defensive?
If you want to read my normal weekly retrospectives you can check it here.