Criticism and reaction to it is a high—voltage part of communication. On each side there are living people who can be careless with other people's feelings, perceive words on a personal account instead of a worker, dig deep into experiences. As a result, the team atmosphere can heat up, and the parties can sharpen knives on each other.
In order to maintain the mental balance of employees and the productivity of the team as a whole, rules are needed both for the one who criticizes and for the recipient of criticism.
In my Telegram channel "Scriabin's Heresy" I talked about the rules of the "Palindrome", which help to avoid conflicts and misunderstandings in the team. I share it with you.
The mission of any feedback is to solve a joint problem. Therefore, you need to speak so that the person hears you. Here's how to do it.
We need to understand why we want to give feedback. Bad goals are to punish, offend, point out a person's mistakes. The good ones are to figure out what went wrong, find a solution to the problem together.
Warn that you want to give feedback. It is necessary for a person to prepare for a conversation, to understand the nuances of the project himself, to come to the discussion assembled. Criticism is stressful, even if we try to perceive it correctly. Experiences are inevitable, so give the person time to prepare.
People often perceive public criticism as a jury trial. Feeling ashamed in front of others causes a defensive reaction, so the information will be rejected. It is best to give feedback in private. If the conversation turns out to be very productive, then you can pack your thoughts into conclusions and share them with the team.
Use the principle of the "green marker": first of all, "circle" the advantages of the work. Highlight the complexity and volume of the project, list the strengths. After that, proceed to the errors. This is a classic shit burger. If you neglect the "green marker", the person will have the feeling that you hate him.
We are not discussing a person, but how he worked in a particular project. Remember that people are good and beautiful by default, and mistakes do not determine a person's character. Most often, fakaps are associated with the fact that the employee did not understand something, forgot about something or did not know something. We need to figure this out and figure out how to fix it.
That is, confirm your words with facts. Taste, speculation, muddy estimates will not help during feedback. Refer to the documents, the statement of the task, the technical task, deadlines — anything that proves your objectivity.
Do not present criticism in the format of a catastrophe. And after the feedback, emphasize that almost all errors are fixable. The main thing is to find the break points together and figure out what to do now.
If the consequences of the error are catastrophic, the person destroyed the project, then there is no point in criticism. Feedback is not given to those with whom they want to part instantly.
Let the person feel not like the accused, but a linear participant in the process. Ask the interlocutor questions: how to fix the error, what broke down in the chain of actions, how he himself assesses the risks caused by the error.
Ask what the feedback recipient thinks about the problem, offer your solutions, encourage his suggestions. Emphasize in every possible way that the main purpose of the conversation is to understand each other, agree and correct mistakes.
When we have been working on the project for a long time, it is a priori dear to us. We have invested a lot of professional and mental resources in it. Because of this, we want to protect him from any ill‑wishers. When we are told about the shortcomings of the project, there is a great temptation to react unconstructively.
I will assume that the response algorithms were laid down in childhood. Parents criticized us incorrectly, so a psychological blood clot formed and destructive scenarios of reaction to criticism.
There are only three of them.
In all these scenarios, a person avoids working with feedback. But this leads to stagnation. When you deny, ignore or criticize in response, you lose your qualifications, refuse to develop and spoil relationships with colleagues and loved ones. If you feel that you are following these scenarios, stop and try to get out.
I am sure that constructive criticism moves the world. Therefore, it should be treated with gratitude. The person spent time, found mistakes, showed them, helped improve the project. He's great, thanks to him. If people didn't criticize each other's work, there would be no good products.
How to respond to feedback so that it is useful? Here are four steps:
There are situations when criticism is difficult to withstand. It becomes painful, tears roll in. Such a reaction is normal, we are alive and vulnerable. In this case, the mantra helps: "I am not my mistake, all people make mistakes. It doesn't make me any worse."
