Mark McGuinness - Resilience: Facing Down Rejection (12 page)

The memory of that bloody episode survives today as
tall poppy syndrome
—the idea that people who distinguish themselves from the crowd by their talents or achievements are liable to be resented and criticized (or worse).

As soon as you try to achieve something original, you start to stick out like a tall poppy. Rise too high and some people will inevitably start itching to cut you down to size. But it’s the nature of some poppies to grow tall, just as it’s your nature to dream big.

Dare to be a tall poppy.

Note:

Titus Livius,
History of Rome
, Book 1
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19725/19725-h/19725-h.htm

24. Is constructive criticism a myth?

“Can I give you some constructive criticism?”

Seven of the most terrifying words you will ever hear. This is partly because we all have our own definition of ‘constructive’ and partly because, however well-intentioned the critique, very few people are good at delivering it. And partly because some people use it as a convenient term to take you down a peg or two while pretending to be nice.

For one reason or another, criticism usually feels a lot more ‘constructive’ to the giver than the receiver.

So is ‘constructive criticism’ a contradiction in terms?

I’ll put my cards on the table and say I believe criticism
can
be constructive—in fact, it’s essential if you want to become outstanding. But because it can mean so many different things, I’ll start this section by clarifying what I mean by different types of criticism:

• Feedback
  
• Constructive criticism
  
• Destructive criticism
  
• Personal abuse
  

Feedback

This is a nice neutral sounding term. Business coach Steve Roesler points out that it got into circulation via the aerospace industry:

Feedback started as a term used to describe the signals sent from a rocket back to earth in order to determine the accuracy of the rocket’s course. By tracking speed and trajectory, ground crews could determine when and where to make corrections.

At some point in time, the term Feedback was incorporated into business language as a way to talk about performance. And, as in rocket flight, it has been determined that the best way for a person to stay “on course” is to assess where one stands at any given moment in relation to the task or goal at hand.

Here’s the really important point: The chances of impacting performance increase with frequency and timeliness of feedback. That implies the need for ongoing “How are we doing?” conversations. It’s our best chance at knowing whether we’re on track or not.”

Steve Roesler, “What, Why and How: Feedback”
http://www.allthingsworkplace.com/2012/05/what-why-and-how-feedback.html

Unfortunately, the term feedback has taken on a lot of negative connotations, effectively becoming a code word for criticism. As Steve says, its meaning has morphed from “Here’s how I think we’re doing” to “Here’s what you need to correct.” Which is why, when clients ask people like Steve and me for tips on ‘giving feedback,’ they generally aren’t talking about praise.

But for my purposes here, I want to reclaim the neutral meaning of feedback, so that it refers to
any process that raises your awareness of your performance and helps you improve it
.

It can take various forms:

• A genuinely neutral, observational description of your performance, e.g. “the ball landed two inches inside the back line.”
  
• A video or audio recording of your performance.
  
• An instruction that directs your attention to a specific aspect of your performance.
  
• For example, “As you speak, I want you to notice the sensation in your throat, whether it feels relaxed or tense.”
  
• A question that directs attention to a specific aspect of your performance. For example, “How do you feel you handled the dialogue in that chapter?”
  
• A measurement of some specific aspect of your performance. For example, the average minutes per mile in your last run, or the percentage of visitors to your sales page who made a purchase.
  

Feedback is often sadly neglected in favor of advice.

To observers it seems
so obvious
what the performer should do differently that we can’t help telling them. But being told what to do isn’t always the best way to learn. For one thing, most of us have a natural resistance to it (I know I do). And for another, it’s far more powerful to see—really
see
—something for yourself than to be told about it by someone else.

This is why many experienced coaches and teachers see their job as creating the conditions for the performer to see and feel for themselves where they are going wrong. When I first started giving presentations, I would occasionally receive feedback that I wasn’t very expressive, and could do with showing more emotion. But it wasn’t until someone showed me a video of myself presenting that I saw it for myself and laughed. After that, it became obvious what I needed to change and much easier to do it.

Feedback isn’t always enough, but since it’s often neglected, using it could well give you a competitive advantage.

Constructive criticism

This is when
someone has a definite opinion on your work or performance, and expresses it in a way that is helpful
. It can take the form of either helpful advice (telling you what to do next), or just an insightful critique (in which case you work out what to do next).

Constructive criticism can be either positive or negative, that is the critic may either like or dislike your work, and offer either praise or suggestions for improvement.

Here are some of the characteristics of constructive criticism:

• Perspective
  —the critic makes their own viewpoint clear, without claiming to be all knowing.
  
• Specific
  —the criticism is detailed enough to make it clear
  exactly
  what the critic is talking about, and what criteria they are using for judgment.
  
• Examples
  —the critic backs up their judgment with specific examples.
  
• Relevant
  —the critic focuses on the most pertinent aspects of the work.
  
• Nuanced
  —the critic recognizes that performance can be measured in fine gradations, and that there may be alternative ways of evaluating it.
  
• Respectful
  —the criticism is not personal and there is no implication that you are a bad performer. The critic talks about you in a way that implies you have the ability to make any necessary improvements.
  

Whether constructive criticism is encouraging or discouraging is up to you. Of course you are likely to feel encouraged when someone offers you praise. But even if a constructive critique exposes multiple errors and flaws, I’d suggest you shouldn’t feel discouraged (even if you don’t feel over the moon).

If it’s genuinely constructive, then it presents you with an opportunity to fix the problems and improve. I can think of a few times when a critic has respectfully but thoroughly ‘shredded’ my work, and I have left the room excited to explore the new possibilities they have shown me.

One of your career goals should be to find good sources of constructive criticism. Like feedback, it will give you an advantage—especially over all the people who are too precious to expose themselves to any kind of criticism.

Destructive criticism

This is when
someone has a definite opinion, but either they don’t know what they’re talking about, or they don’t know how to express it properly—or both.

I call it destructive because of its effect: if you’re not careful, it can seriously dent your motivation, your creativity, and your ability to learn. It would be just as accurate to call it
incompetent criticism
, since it reveals more about the critic’s failings than the performer’s. If criticism is an art, incompetent critics are the ones who can barely draw a stick man.

Here are the typical characteristics of destructive criticism:

• Lack of perspective
  —the critic speaks as though he or she is the ultimate authority, rather than a human being with a limited viewpoint.
  
• Vague
  —the work is dismissed in general terms (‘awful,’ ‘terrible,’ ‘no good’) without specifying what criteria the judgment is based on.
  
• No examples
  —the critic fails to back up their judgment with specific examples.
  
• Irrelevant
  —the critic introduces irrelevant criteria, or focuses on an irrelevant aspect of the work.
  
• Exaggerated
  —sweeping, black-and-white judgments, with no acknowledgment of fine grades of quality, or alternative points of view.
  
• Disrespectful
  —the critic is rude, aggressive, or otherwise insensitive to the performer’s feelings.
  

If the incompetent critic is a reviewer, heckler, or internet troll, you may decide to just ignore them. If it’s a boss or a client, you have a problem—see
Chapter 37
on how to deal with them.

Personal abuse

Personal abuse is when
somebody makes negative or insulting comments about you personally, with malicious intent
. It should not be confused with criticism.

People who resort to personal abuse tend to do it out of ignorance, prejudice, or because they have ‘lost the argument’ and realize they can’t get at you via legitimate criticism, but it generally doesn’t help much to know this.

We’ll look at how to deal with personal abuse in
Chapter 35
and
Chapter 36
.

Your next steps:

Next time someone offers you some ‘criticism,’ ask yourself which of the four categories it fits into:

1. Feedback
   
2. Constructive criticism
   
3. Destructive criticism
   
4. Personal abuse
   

Then go to the relevant step below for how to deal with it.

1. Feedback

Welcome it. Not only that, you should actively seek out sources of accurate feedback, such as:

• Measuring and recording key data.
  
• Recording yourself on video.
  
• Working with a good teacher or coach.
  

Make time to consider the feedback and ask yourself what you can learn from it.

You can also give yourself feedback, by asking yourself the following questions when you finish a performance or piece of work:

• What specific things did I do well?
  
• How can I maintain that in future?
  
• What specific things didn’t I do so well?
  
• How can I fix that in future?
  

2. Constructive criticism

As with feedback, you should actively look for people who can give you informed and constructive criticism.

Learn to recognize the characteristics of constructive criticism. Whenever you encounter genuinely constructive criticism (positive or negative) ask yourself what you can learn from it.

When receiving constructive criticism in person, engage with the critic, by asking them to explain anything that isn’t clear, and letting them know how much you value their critique and what (if anything) you are going to do with it.

3. Destructive criticism

If destructive criticism comes from someone who isn’t directly involved in your work, ignore it.

If it comes from someone who is involved (e.g. a teacher, client, or boss), talk to them and get them to clarify their criticism. I’ll explain how to do this in
Chapter 37
.

4. Personal abuse

See
Chapter 35
and
Chapter 36
for advice on dealing with this.

25. Why we get criticism out of proportion

“Too long.”

“Too many updates.”

“Too many words.”

“Not as insightful as Seth Godin.”

“Boooring!”

“Not enough practical tips for succeeding as a problogger.”

These are some of the messages I’ve received as reasons for unsubscribing to my blog. Compared to the thousands of people who have signed up and stayed happily subscribed for years, the proportion of unsubscribers and messages like this is tiny.

Similarly, the overwhelming majority of comments and emails I receive in response to my blog articles are positive and enthusiastic, expressing agreement or gratitude. Even when people disagree they usually do so politely and respectfully. The rude and nasty ones are very much the exception to the rule.

But it doesn’t always feel like that. If I’m not alert, a nasty comment can spoil a morning. I’ll turn it over and over in my head, wondering what they meant, why they had to be so rude, or what planet they are living on (or maybe all three).

This can happen even when the criticism is absurd. I once got the ‘too many updates’ feedback after sending out my first blog post for six months! I don’t blog about succeeding as a problogger, nor advertize my blog as offering ‘practical tips for succeeding as a problogger,’ so that person was obviously in the wrong place.

Why do we get criticism out of proportion like this?

Negativity bias
is a well-established principle in psychology, which means humans typically focus more on negative information (such as bad memories and threats) than positive information (such as good memories or opportunities). It’s easy to explain hypersensitivity to threats as a survival mechanism with evolutionary benefits: if our ancestors had taken a more relaxed attitude to growling noises in the bushes, they would not have survived long enough to become our ancestors. These days the threats are thankfully verbal rather than physical for most of us, but as we saw in
Chapter 3
, the threat of social exclusion can feel like a matter of life or death for human beings.