We are excited to have the opportunity to adapt our ACT communication model to help navigate the difficult terrain of providing critical feedback from supervisor to supervisee. We have been invited to host a workshop for our APP colleagues who are part of a UR Medicine leadership group.
Working through this process has illuminated significant, and interesting, differences relative to apply the MVP model to typical Serious Illness Conversations.
Fortunately, since the feedback conversations involve two human beings, the structure of the MVP steps, supported by the 3 “E” skills, still work…with just a few tweaks.
For one, we’ve replaced the “Medical Situation” with “The Facts.” FVP may not be as catchy as MVP, but we’ll do our best!
It’s also worth noting that when speaking with a patient, the Plan is truly negotiated. In contrast, at least some, conversations providing critical feedback will involve communicating a Plan that is fixed and not negotiable. We have in mind things like compulsory remediation, firing, etc.
Fortunately (at least hopefully!) such drastic conversations are relatively rare. Other conversations involve critical feedback are likely to take the form of Empowering the supervisee to express his/her “side of the story,” be(ing) Explicit when articulating the cause(s) of conflict and options for a Plan forward…and…Empathizing…probably a lot.
So, wish us luck on Monday in this new venture!
(Oh…and we also hope to have an exciting announcement about a new, or perhaps evolving, Rochester-area collaboration. Stay tuned!)
act-ur.com 