Last week's article on criticizing for success generated quite a few comments and a host of email messages on the subject. Several asked for additional thoughts on the difference between cynicism, critical observation and judgment.
Ancillita put it this way:
Reading your article Are You Trying To Criticize For Success? - I felt compelled to write you my opinion ... constructively.The words criticism and judgment are highly charged in our culture. In part we have lost the ability to not only be discerning but unhappily, the ability to express what is being discerned primarily out of fear of "offending". We live in a society increasingly concerned with political correctness and avoiding "offense" rather than seeing through into the heart of the issue, that is "intellectualism".
When you use the term criticism, are you really referring to passing judgment? I suspect you are. In my opinion, we have lost the ability to discern between the two. . . criticism is an essential aspect of critical thinking... critical thinking is sorely missing in our society. Knowing when and how to give "constructive" feedback is a skill that very people are taught. Combined with a society in an era that cares less about character, integrity and authenticity this confusion you reinforce leads to increased dumbing down, and dismissal of *any* expression of criticality as "intellectualism" or merely, "offensive".
Perhaps you could write another article extolling the virtue of critical thinking and the use of intelligence to discern to encourage people to have the courage to be more discerning and to speak out when they see things that are wrong - not to stand in judgment, not to be violent, but to bring light into situations. We need more critical discernment, not less.
in service
ancillita
Well, thank you Ancillita! A great observation and I appreciate you sharing your thoughts, as do I to all the others who took the time to write and comment.
And, yes, that appreciation does extend to my critics. It took me a while to get past my sensitivity to criticism. As much as I care about people, I am often too eager to please in order to avoid the sting of their critical comments.
Last week, I looked up criticism quotes on the 'net and found these two lovely specimens from Winston Churchill:
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.
Indeed, I do see myself as someone who has stood up for something - human compassion, caring and capability are chief amongst them.
And, I do appreciate the irritating experience of the criticism that comes my way. Whenever I find myself irritated, I am reminded of two things: sandpaper makes rough surfaces smooth (thanks for smoothing my edges) and if I find myself in reaction, then some part of the criticism must be true (thank you Bucky Fuller).
Here are a couple of distinctions that I have found useful:
One of my mentors puts it this way: a negative situation is already sufficiently negative without having you add negativity to it.
Spelling tests put us in a particular bind. If you spell 44 out of 50 words correctly, how many did you miss? No trick question here -6 is the obvious and correct answer. When you got your paper back, what did it say on top? For many of us, it read minus 6 (-6) and usually in red ink.
Did you miss six? Absolutely. Is 44 out of 50 pretty good? Depends on your point of view. 44 out of 50 translates to 88 percent which is somewhere between a "B," "B+," and even an "A-" depending on where you went to school. Surely, nobody got an "F" for 44 out of 50. And yet, for most of us, the focus was on what you missed.
If you had enough of the -6 kind of feedback growing up, two things might be true: you may want to avoid any more "criticism" having already had enough, and, you may be reluctant to pass any more on, knowing how it feels when "good enough never is."
Of course, another obvious challenge in all this is the notion that absent the "critical" feedback, it's going to be pretty hard to improve. How practical or effective would it be for an English paper to come back where the teacher circled all the words you spelled correctly?
One part of the challenge is developing the ability to point out what is missing, inaccurate or ineffective, without adding even more negativity to it via judgment. The corollary is how to provide feedback that affirms forward movement without becoming soppy in the process.
A good friend of mine, Alex, has a delightful way of prefacing some kinds of feedback that is aimed toward improvement. In a very simplified example, he might come to me and ask this kind of simple question: "if my zipper were down, would you tell me?"
What a lovely way of saying, "your zipper is down." Of course, most of us would say, "of course." The simple question is enough to raise our awareness such that we don't even have to say "of course."
I do not yet know a perfect answer to the question of how to offer insightful criticism in a way that is accurate, positive and immediately useful. Perhaps you do?
Care to offer your thoughts?
Please do leave a comment here or drop me an email and let me know how this strikes you.
Russell Bishop is an Educational Psychologist, author, professional life coach and management consultant, based in Santa Barbara California. You can find out more about Russell at http://www.lessonsinthekeyoflife.com. Contact Russell by email at: Russell (at) lessonsinthekeyoflife.com
Follow Russell Bishop on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Russell_Bishop
Tom Ferry: Are You Addicted to Worry?
Ed and Deb Shapiro: How Your Attitude Gives You Altitude! (VIDEO)
A while back after an intensive, multi-faceted, off-site 3 day leadership training with at risk youth, school professionals, parents and community leaders, those of us who coordinated the training from inception through completion, met with the lead facilitator for feedback. At the time, he told us the result of our combined effort was "good enough." Needless to say, we were all disappointed in his final critique.
He quickly explained that he wasn't criticizing us, that “good enough” was as good as it gets for him. I answered that his sentiment wasn't the greatest morale booster for the team and let it go. And then an amazing thing happened... a major ad agency created a commercial for PacBell using the slogan, "At Pacific Bell, we too believe 'good enough' isn't."
After hearing the ad air for a week, he popped his smiling face into my office, referenced the slogan and said – “point taken.” Setting the bar impossibly high, virtually unattainable, is a guaranteed lose-lose. And seriously, who wants to succeed by losing?
I have become so sensitive to this notion that I am always expecting myself to have such a reaction when there is no reason for me to have one. This "expectation" ends up giving me a guilty conscience and making me fearful of making mistakes...which only makes me more anxious and edgy so that I end up looking as if I AM having a reaction because of what someone else said or did (and therefore making me look like I must have something the matter with me) when in fact it is simply my anxiety about EXPECTING such a reaction.
Does that make sense? Any thoughts on that?
So then you get what you expect yourself to have - a reaction. No surprise there. the fact you expect it is the reason why you have one.
"This "expectation" ends up giving me a guilty conscience and making me fearful of making mistakes...which only makes me more anxious and edgy so that I end up looking as if I AM having a reaction because of what someone else said or did (and therefore making me look like I must have something the matter with me) when in fact it is simply my anxiety about EXPECTING such a reaction."
All of this, including what you said above my first answer, is all your own choice(s) and your own doing. This is a control mechanism of your egoic mind.
Wat.
I think there is a difference between critique and criticism. I think criticism is inherently harmful. Critique, however, allows for the intellectual exploration of flaws and sees them as opportunity for growth.
I avoid this kind of person, once they're revealed themselves.
Mo Rage
the blog
I believe uninvited criticism of others is a waste of time and leads to ill feelings; however, criticism of bad behavior that infringes on others is fair game -- invited or not. Examples: smokers huddled in doorways choking the air and littering pavements with cigarette butts; people who spit on sidewalks; people who play their own brand of music in open office spaces; people who leave filthy dishes in a sink for co-workers to clean.
Now that I'm on to the workplace, let's talk about evaluation -- those dreaded annual performance reviews. How on earth did this Victorian school-room practice ever find its way into the workplace? They are almost always biased and subjective, often performed by untrained, poorly performing managers, some with their own agendas. They create untold and relenting employee damage, and cut deeply into the bottom line.
Companies where communication is held in high esteem don't need annual performance reviews. Situations are ironed out along the way.
Afterburner, the organization of former fighter pilots, teaches organizations how to evaluate in debriefings after a project. Rank is left at the door, and respectful analysis given and taken up and down, with solutions followed through. Rank is re-instituted after the meeting. Criticisms go no further; no surprises on annual performance
This is a learning correction; not a criticism.
The correct grammar: I appreciate your sharing your thoughts
Not: I appreciate you sharing your thoughts