How to respond to the co-worker who criticizes your presentation, to your spouse who disapproves of the way you load the dishwasher, or to the random stranger who passes judgement on your parallel parking?
Everyone has been on the receiving end of criticism. If you’re lucky, the criticism was relevant, and delivered with sensitivity and tact. Unfortunately this is often not the case. Criticism can be delivered so badly that any value it may have for the recipient is all but impossible to recover. (See my previous post for some ideas about how to give constructive criticism.) Yet attending to criticism, no matter how tactless or ill-conceived, is important. We get better by attending to critical feedback. One of the biggest differences between novices and experts in a given domain is that while novices pay more attention to positive feedback, experts hone their skills by attending more to negative feedback.*
Much of what I’ve seen written about responding to criticism is not very good. Recipients of advice are told not to “take it personally.” But whether or not it is useful to take criticism “personally” depends very much on what kind of criticism we’re talking about. Certainly, a scientist should not take it “personally” if her methodology is criticized. And a graphic designer should not take it “personally” if a client rejects one of his designs. Yet some legitimate criticism is of a personal nature, and one can only learn from it if it is taken “personally.” A customer service rep who is criticized for having an abrasive manner does in fact need to take the criticism “personally” if he or she wishes to change and be more effective in the job.
The most important thing about responding to any criticism is to put yourself in the correct mindset so that you can learn from criticism. Think carefully about critical feedback. Try to separate those aspects of the criticism that may be useful from those that are not. This can be difficult to do. It might help to discuss the criticism with a trusted friend or mentor – someone who respects you enough to tell you the truth, even if the truth is hard to hear.
Another piece of advice I’ve seen regarding criticism is to “ignore the haters” – with the implication that anyone who offers criticism is a “hater.” A more helpful suggestion is to consider the source of the criticism. Is it your boss delivering the criticism, a co-worker, your spouse, a stranger? How seriously to take the criticism and how to respond will depend on the answer to this question. Is the person criticizing you angry or upset? This might mean that the criticism is unfair or inappropriate. But it is impossible to be sure: True words are sometimes be spoken in anger. Again, discuss the criticism with someone you trust, or try to have a conversation with your critic when he or she is more calm.
When responding to criticism, even unfair or misplaced criticism, try not to be defensive. Do not attempt to answer your critic on the spot. It is much more important to make sure you understand what is being said. Repeat back your critic’s words. This will show that you have been listening, and it will also give you time to frame a response. Ask questions to make sure that you have in fact understood. As difficult as it is to hear criticism, walking away confused or unsure about what you may have been doing wrong is worse and more damaging in the long run.
Sadly, some of the people who criticize you (while perhaps not “haters”) will have questionable motives, and some may be acting from confused emotions. But if someone genuinely wants to help you, or is in a role where giving critical feedback is appropriate, then listen, learn what you can, and be grateful. It isn’t easy for most people to offer negative feedback, and when they do so out of a desire to help you, recognize that they have tried to do you a favour.
* Stacey R. Finkelstein and Ayelet Fishbach, “Tell Me What I Did Wrong: Experts Seek and Respond to Negative Feedback,” Journal of Consumer Research. June 2012.
Monday, July 30, 2012
Monday, July 23, 2012
How to Give Constructive Criticism
At the grocery store the other day I saw a great example of how not to criticize someone. I have no idea what started it, but when I walked by the “Customer Service” desk an angry woman was berating the employee there: “You don’t have the right personality to work in customer service!” she said. The employee shrugged and mumbled something to the effect that she was trying her best. There wasn’t much she could say. How can you effectively respond to a stranger who criticizes your personality?
The incident made me think about the correct (and incorrect) ways to offer constructive criticism. What was wrong with the customer’s actions? She offered criticism when she was angry, in public, about someone’s “personality” (rather than say, about some specific actions), seemingly without any consideration for feelings or the impact that her words might have.
There are better ways to criticize, and a lot has been written on this topic. I’ll keep this to a few suggestions.
Reflect on why you want to offer criticism. There are many reasons to offer constructive criticism. It might be part of your job description to offer critical feedback to others. You might have a genuine impulse to help a friend who could benefit from the advice. But the desire to criticize can also have a dark side, and taking a few moments to examine your own motives is a good idea. Are you angry or upset with the person you are thinking of addressing? Are your comments intended to be wounding? Does criticizing others make you feel better about yourself?
Pick the right time and place. Find a time when both you and the other person are calm and undistracted. Don’t offer criticism (however well-meaning) to someone who is angry or upset. Don’t criticize someone in front of others – wait until you can be alone. (This holds true when criticizing children as well.)
Be transparent about your intentions. What is the purpose of your criticism? Is it part of a routine performance review? Is it a response to a request for feedback? Do you want to help the other person achieve some goal? Are you trying to get him or her to change some specific behaviour? Share the reasons for your criticism with its recipient. Your remarks should not come “out of the blue.” Constructive criticism is easier to take if it is put in a larger context.
Be nice. Focus completely on the other person. Although some people have had more practice than others at receiving critical feedback, I don’t think that anyone ever looks forward to it. Be as tactful as you can. Focus on the other person and stay in the moment. Attending fully to others is a way of showing respect, and this is especially crucial if your message is likely to be unwelcome.
Criticize actions and behaviour – not character or personality. Compare: “You are often late for meetings,” and “You are so selfish that you don’t care if others have to wait for you.” The first is a criticism of specific behaviour; the second is an attack on character. Which do you think will make the other person defensive and possibly hostile? (And remember – it isn’t always possible to read intentions from actions. I have known several chronically-late people who were disorganized and overwhelmed rather than inconsiderate.)
Keep it positive. When you give specific advice, make your suggestion positive. If possible, focus on the actions that the person should do, rather than what he or she should refrain from doing. For example, say you have single male friend who goes on a lot of first dates …. but not many second dates. He asks for your advice, and you’re pretty sure that his tendency to speak at great length when given the opportunity is part of the problem. Rather than telling him to talk less, advise him to listen more. It is easier to initiate a new habit than it is to monitor and curtail an old one.
Start and end with a compliment. (Sometimes called, “Hug them in and hug them out.”) This is especially important if you are giving criticism as part of an official role, say as a manager, coach or teacher. Find something nice to say about the person you are about to criticize. Begin by complimenting him or her. (Again, try to make the compliment about specific actions or behaviour; not about general characteristics.) Then deliver the criticism as tactfully as you can. Finally, repeat the compliment (or offer a different one) before ending the encounter. Make sure that your compliments are sincere. The other person will recognize it if they are not.
Next post: How to respond to criticism.
The incident made me think about the correct (and incorrect) ways to offer constructive criticism. What was wrong with the customer’s actions? She offered criticism when she was angry, in public, about someone’s “personality” (rather than say, about some specific actions), seemingly without any consideration for feelings or the impact that her words might have.
There are better ways to criticize, and a lot has been written on this topic. I’ll keep this to a few suggestions.
Reflect on why you want to offer criticism. There are many reasons to offer constructive criticism. It might be part of your job description to offer critical feedback to others. You might have a genuine impulse to help a friend who could benefit from the advice. But the desire to criticize can also have a dark side, and taking a few moments to examine your own motives is a good idea. Are you angry or upset with the person you are thinking of addressing? Are your comments intended to be wounding? Does criticizing others make you feel better about yourself?
Pick the right time and place. Find a time when both you and the other person are calm and undistracted. Don’t offer criticism (however well-meaning) to someone who is angry or upset. Don’t criticize someone in front of others – wait until you can be alone. (This holds true when criticizing children as well.)
Be transparent about your intentions. What is the purpose of your criticism? Is it part of a routine performance review? Is it a response to a request for feedback? Do you want to help the other person achieve some goal? Are you trying to get him or her to change some specific behaviour? Share the reasons for your criticism with its recipient. Your remarks should not come “out of the blue.” Constructive criticism is easier to take if it is put in a larger context.
Be nice. Focus completely on the other person. Although some people have had more practice than others at receiving critical feedback, I don’t think that anyone ever looks forward to it. Be as tactful as you can. Focus on the other person and stay in the moment. Attending fully to others is a way of showing respect, and this is especially crucial if your message is likely to be unwelcome.
Criticize actions and behaviour – not character or personality. Compare: “You are often late for meetings,” and “You are so selfish that you don’t care if others have to wait for you.” The first is a criticism of specific behaviour; the second is an attack on character. Which do you think will make the other person defensive and possibly hostile? (And remember – it isn’t always possible to read intentions from actions. I have known several chronically-late people who were disorganized and overwhelmed rather than inconsiderate.)
Keep it positive. When you give specific advice, make your suggestion positive. If possible, focus on the actions that the person should do, rather than what he or she should refrain from doing. For example, say you have single male friend who goes on a lot of first dates …. but not many second dates. He asks for your advice, and you’re pretty sure that his tendency to speak at great length when given the opportunity is part of the problem. Rather than telling him to talk less, advise him to listen more. It is easier to initiate a new habit than it is to monitor and curtail an old one.
Start and end with a compliment. (Sometimes called, “Hug them in and hug them out.”) This is especially important if you are giving criticism as part of an official role, say as a manager, coach or teacher. Find something nice to say about the person you are about to criticize. Begin by complimenting him or her. (Again, try to make the compliment about specific actions or behaviour; not about general characteristics.) Then deliver the criticism as tactfully as you can. Finally, repeat the compliment (or offer a different one) before ending the encounter. Make sure that your compliments are sincere. The other person will recognize it if they are not.
Next post: How to respond to criticism.
Monday, July 9, 2012
Bill 168: A Recent Arbitration Decision
Bill 168 has been law now for just over two years, and we haven’t yet seen many decisions interpreting and applying the legislation. A recent ruling by arbitrator David Starkman is of interest to labour and employment lawyers and HR professionals because it provides some guidance about Bill 168’s scope and application. Below I briefly summarize and discuss this very interesting case.
Background: In 2010 the Peterborough Regional Health Centre, faced with the need to reduce costs, took a decision to replace some of the Registered Nurses (RNs) in the Hemodialysis Unit with Registered Practical Nurses (RPNs). RPNs have less education than RNs, earn less money, and have narrower scope of practice. The Health Centre Management planned a 6-week orientation period for the RPNs when they would be mentored by the RNs. However many of the RNs were unhappy about the introduction of RPNs, which would result in the layoff of RNs, and which they feared would compromise patient care. Several RNs refused to volunteer to mentor their new colleagues.
Incidentally (or maybe, not so incidentally), the RNs’ concerns were later shown to be valid. An Independent Assessment Committee found that the hospital failed to plan adequately for the staffing changes, and failed to evaluate whether the changes affected patient care.
Allegations: Although there seemed to be a great deal of tension and bad feelings in the unit when the RPNs started, one of the RNs in particular was particularly hostile. (I will call her Sally.) She engaged in non-verbal behaviour designed to make the RPNs uncomfortable, including rolling her eyes at them, staring and flapping her hands as they walked by her work area, refusing to make eye contact, and on one occasion, walking directly toward an RPN and making contact with her shoulder. Another RPN reported that, while she was washing her hands at a sink, Sally came behind her, tried to pull her hair in to a ponytail, and made remarks to the effect that, patients do not want hair in the way.
The Employer’s Response: Reading the testimony presented to the arbitrator, there were clearly many problems on the unit. Several of the RPNs quit and spoke of an atmosphere of bullying. Morale was very low. After a number of complaints abut Sally, the employer met with her to discuss their concerns. Sally did not acknowledge any wrongdoing. When her inappropriate behaviour continued, Sally was put on paid leave while the employer undertook an investigation. The result of the investigation was that Sally was found to have engaged in a pattern of intimidation and harassment and was terminated for just cause. Sally grieved both the decision to place her on leave and the firing.
The Arbitrator’s Decision: Mr. Starkman found that the employer had just cause to discipline Sally and to put her on paid leave pending an investigation. However, they did not have just cause to terminate her employment. Although the employer had discussed their concerns with Sally she was never formally disciplined. While Starkman acknowledged that Sally’s conduct was very subtle and therefore difficult to evaluate and discipline, he held that the principle of progressive discipline nonetheless applied, and that termination was too severe a penalty. However, he also found that Sally’s conduct, her refusal to acknowledge that her behaviour was inappropriate, and her failure to apologize, meant that she should not be returned to the unit. Instead, he directed that Sally be paid damages in lieu of reinstatement.
(Just an aside – some of you may be wondering, “Can Sally really not have understood that her behaviour was inappropriate? I’m afraid that this is entirely possible. For one thing, her co-workers were very reluctant to confront her about her actions. And trying to understand it from Sally’s perspective, she likely saw herself as a strong advocate for patient care, not as someone who made the workplace a nightmare for others!)
Lessons for Employees: If you disagree with management’s decisions, don’t take it out on others. Even if you have a valid point, the organization’s code of conduct still applies. And if management raises concerns about your behaviour, take it seriously. If you are on the receiving end of inappropriate behaviour, speak up – either raise a concern directly with the offending party or if that is not possible, speak to management or HR.
Lessons for Employers: Several of the people who spoke with the arbitrator reported that Sally’s behaviour in the workplace had been a source of tension for a long time. When employers fail to deal directly with inappropriate behaviour, it rarely corrects itself on its own. Inaction and delay result in greater costs down the line. (See my post on the costs of workplace strife for more information.)
Lessons for Everyone: Eye-rolling? Flapping one’s hands? Is this really intimidation and harassment, such that discipline is appropriate? The answer is yes. It is clear from the testimony that the RPNs felt bullied, harassed, and unsupported in their work. As Mr. Starkman wrote in his decision, Sally’s actions were “extremely subtle, and in that sense were extremely insidious. Bullying and harassment can consist of a single incident, or a series of repeated incidents both of which can have great impact upon the victim of the behaviour.”
Note: I offer investigations of complaints related to workplace harassment, bullying, sexual harassment, and other matters covered under bill 168. See my website for more information, or contact me directly to discuss the situation in your workplace.
Background: In 2010 the Peterborough Regional Health Centre, faced with the need to reduce costs, took a decision to replace some of the Registered Nurses (RNs) in the Hemodialysis Unit with Registered Practical Nurses (RPNs). RPNs have less education than RNs, earn less money, and have narrower scope of practice. The Health Centre Management planned a 6-week orientation period for the RPNs when they would be mentored by the RNs. However many of the RNs were unhappy about the introduction of RPNs, which would result in the layoff of RNs, and which they feared would compromise patient care. Several RNs refused to volunteer to mentor their new colleagues.
Incidentally (or maybe, not so incidentally), the RNs’ concerns were later shown to be valid. An Independent Assessment Committee found that the hospital failed to plan adequately for the staffing changes, and failed to evaluate whether the changes affected patient care.
Allegations: Although there seemed to be a great deal of tension and bad feelings in the unit when the RPNs started, one of the RNs in particular was particularly hostile. (I will call her Sally.) She engaged in non-verbal behaviour designed to make the RPNs uncomfortable, including rolling her eyes at them, staring and flapping her hands as they walked by her work area, refusing to make eye contact, and on one occasion, walking directly toward an RPN and making contact with her shoulder. Another RPN reported that, while she was washing her hands at a sink, Sally came behind her, tried to pull her hair in to a ponytail, and made remarks to the effect that, patients do not want hair in the way.
The Employer’s Response: Reading the testimony presented to the arbitrator, there were clearly many problems on the unit. Several of the RPNs quit and spoke of an atmosphere of bullying. Morale was very low. After a number of complaints abut Sally, the employer met with her to discuss their concerns. Sally did not acknowledge any wrongdoing. When her inappropriate behaviour continued, Sally was put on paid leave while the employer undertook an investigation. The result of the investigation was that Sally was found to have engaged in a pattern of intimidation and harassment and was terminated for just cause. Sally grieved both the decision to place her on leave and the firing.
The Arbitrator’s Decision: Mr. Starkman found that the employer had just cause to discipline Sally and to put her on paid leave pending an investigation. However, they did not have just cause to terminate her employment. Although the employer had discussed their concerns with Sally she was never formally disciplined. While Starkman acknowledged that Sally’s conduct was very subtle and therefore difficult to evaluate and discipline, he held that the principle of progressive discipline nonetheless applied, and that termination was too severe a penalty. However, he also found that Sally’s conduct, her refusal to acknowledge that her behaviour was inappropriate, and her failure to apologize, meant that she should not be returned to the unit. Instead, he directed that Sally be paid damages in lieu of reinstatement.
(Just an aside – some of you may be wondering, “Can Sally really not have understood that her behaviour was inappropriate? I’m afraid that this is entirely possible. For one thing, her co-workers were very reluctant to confront her about her actions. And trying to understand it from Sally’s perspective, she likely saw herself as a strong advocate for patient care, not as someone who made the workplace a nightmare for others!)
Lessons for Employees: If you disagree with management’s decisions, don’t take it out on others. Even if you have a valid point, the organization’s code of conduct still applies. And if management raises concerns about your behaviour, take it seriously. If you are on the receiving end of inappropriate behaviour, speak up – either raise a concern directly with the offending party or if that is not possible, speak to management or HR.
Lessons for Employers: Several of the people who spoke with the arbitrator reported that Sally’s behaviour in the workplace had been a source of tension for a long time. When employers fail to deal directly with inappropriate behaviour, it rarely corrects itself on its own. Inaction and delay result in greater costs down the line. (See my post on the costs of workplace strife for more information.)
Lessons for Everyone: Eye-rolling? Flapping one’s hands? Is this really intimidation and harassment, such that discipline is appropriate? The answer is yes. It is clear from the testimony that the RPNs felt bullied, harassed, and unsupported in their work. As Mr. Starkman wrote in his decision, Sally’s actions were “extremely subtle, and in that sense were extremely insidious. Bullying and harassment can consist of a single incident, or a series of repeated incidents both of which can have great impact upon the victim of the behaviour.”
Note: I offer investigations of complaints related to workplace harassment, bullying, sexual harassment, and other matters covered under bill 168. See my website for more information, or contact me directly to discuss the situation in your workplace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)