Accepting criticisms: "You're gonna die!"

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

This is huge, and applies even to intelligent, well-educated people. I conceptualize it this way; when I want to deliver potential criticism to someone (let's say at work), I approach 2 identical people only distinguished by their shirts; one wears a shirt saying 'Intellect,' the other a shirt saying 'Ego.' If I walk up and say something abrasive, Ego shoves Intellect out of the way and gets between us, confronting me with an agenda to defuse the threat I pose to his sense of self. He'll rationalize, spin, deny, shift focus, externalize blame, basically pursue an agenda of defending himself. It's hard to talk around him to reach the Intellect.

If (and this isn't always possible) one can tactfully approach Intellect in a non-threatening way without triggering Ego, one can deliver an idea for consideration and potential acceptance. TS&M's posts in contentious threads were a model of this in years past.

Disclaimer: a number of my co-workers would be rolling on the floor in hysterical laughter to see I wrote that. Decide for yourself on a case-by-case basis how much it matters to 'sell' your idea to the recipient. If you'd rather hit people over the head with your point of view and they can like it or lump it, well...could be your ego is a factor, too?

And on the receiving end, it's hard not to react this way. I try to analyze the critical input for what of value I might glean, but it takes time for my natural defensiveness to die down, and even then it's easy for ill will to linger. For me, time is often the answer...if criticism is hurtful, it may take awhile before I digest it.

Trying to be right is natural. Learning to articulate your ideas into a logical argument grows out of a natural desire to 'win.' Making the choice to respect your target (possibly opponent) and persuade rather than 'verbally batter' can be unnatural.

But you get better long-term results.

Richard.

Great post Richard! Thank you!
 
These are great posts, but they center more on how to give criticisms, not how to accept them. Being who I am, I receive more criticisms, both valid and weaponized, than most. My mods are told to not ever delete these criticisms because I think they are important. Indeed, I consider all feedback a bonus and try to learn from each and every comment. Why not? I can't get better if I don't see my faults, and given my first person perspective, I'm not in a good position to see them. One of my favorite proverbs simply states "As iron sharpens Iron, so one person sharpens another!" This is true in the water, on the forum, trying to communicate to others and so on. I need others, aka YOU, to show me how to get better or I will be mired in mediocrity. So, how do we get there?

First, we need to identify those things that prevent us accepting criticisms as well as those things that will prevent others from offering us criticisms. Here's my list of things that stop me:
  • Ego (As @drrich2 pointed out)
  • Trust
  • Anger
  • Fatigue
  • Fear
  • Confusion
  • They have been weaponized!

How many times have I let any of these stop me from getting better at what I do? As an instructor, I see them all the time and while I try to get around them or ameliorate them, how much easier it would be if my students could get past them on their own. I recently had a fairly well known instructor come over to learn how I teach neutral buoyancy. He's heard about my classes from others and had even read about that here on SB. I couldn't really get through to him as he countered every attempt to show him how easy it was with a "I already do that". Looking at his tag along student in the water, no he hadn't. The student accepted my criticisms and greatly improved, but I don't think I helped the instructor one whit. Yes, the student noticed and was fairly disgusted by the ego display.

Here on SB, we are assaulted with an array of attitudes, some great and some not-so-great, and a few are downright dangerous. The question is: how are you going to accept any criticism leveled at you? Will it be with a certain amount of circumspection and grace? Or will the hackles on the back of your neck go up and perceive it as some kind of an attack? It's my guess that most criticisms here aren't weaponized unless you're in the Pub. Sure, there are some clueless posters telling you that if you wear split fins that you're going to die, but we have a lot of intelligence and skill here on SB. It would behoove you to listen and digest what they're telling you. Some are young and full of vim and vigor. Some of us are old, a bit crotchety and we don't suffer fools well anymore. There's a lot to learn from all of us and yes even those noobie divers that give a great insight.

What are your strategies to open your mind? How do you force yourself to read and attempt to apply criticisms? It can be challenging especially if there's a bit of controversy involved.
 
Personally, I think that there are a lot of factors that contribute to how one gives, and how one accepts criticism, and these factors are often intertwined.

For over 30 years in the RCAF, every training exercise I did, every mission or real world op I participated in was debriefed thoroughly after it was over. Many of these were brutally honest, no holds barred events (and in a couple, there were "career limiting consequences" that resulted from them). The goals of these debriefs, however were always how to improve and how to ensure that the things that were done wrong are not repeated and if something was exceptional let's make sure that is captured and included in our "TTP" (Tactics, Techniques & Procedures).

The key was that they were never personal especially in public (such as at Post-ex mass debriefs). (If an individual had to be debriefed specifically, that was done behind closed doors.) Obviously, if an individual did something wrong, it was addressed and covered in depth, but it was done factually without personal attacks. Although a specific individual might have done something, it was the action, not the person that was brutally critiqued.

All too often, criticism seems to be either delivered, or taken personally when it shouldn't be. It is a lot easier to accept criticism, even (perhaps especially) brutally honest criticism when the person giving it sticks to the facts and does not personally attack the person receiving it. The person who is on the receiving end of this criticism has a responsibility to weigh the validity of it. (Is the person criticizing me trained to the point where they are competent enough in the skill or procedure that their criticism carries weight or are they just spouting off because they only know one way to do something and you weren't doing it "their way"?) Criticism is also much better received if the goal is to genuinely make things better for the person receiving it. It is also very important to not take criticism personally. We can all improve. Maybe someone has seen something from their vantage point that you were not able to see yourself.
 
What are your strategies to open your mind? How do you force yourself to read and attempt to apply criticisms? It can be challenging especially if there's a bit of controversy involved.

Like Hoag said, my approach to criticism: does this improve me?

I tend to analyze things from a engineering point of view, how does it work, what can be done to improve, streamline, make safer, etc.
Using this approach, one of the best ways (for me) to put my ego in check is to ask "why"? Oftentimes this will deescalate the person delivering criticism and engage them in a more constructive conversation.

Understanding the mechanics of why I should do something this or that way helps me retain that information. Putting criticism into practical application can sometime lessen the sting. Sometimes...........
 
It's true, that some criticize in order to punish the person they are criticizing. I call this "weaponizing" criticism. Once someone starts in with my weight in a derogatory fashion, it's easy to dismiss them outright... but I don't. I really try to learn something from each and every interaction, even when it's obvious that the person delivering the criticism does not have my best interest at heart. Why not? If I don't, then the whole interaction is a waste of time. MY TIME. One thing I've learned is that it's never good to counter criticism for criticism. Then it simply becomes a pissing match. That's not the same as trading conflicting view points. I mean, why would we need a forum if we're all going to agree? But, when it comes to any criticism, weaponized or not, it does no good to simply banter back with a reciprocal slur.

BTW, when it comes to brutal honesty, I have found that the giver is usually more focused on being brutal rather than honest. In a like vein, the phrase "I just say it as I see it" is also a cop out usually to excuse boorish behavior. Still, we can still learn from jerks like this.
 
BTW, when it comes to brutal honesty, I have found that the giver is usually more focused on being brutal rather than honest. In a like vein, the phrase "I just say it as I see it" is also a cop out usually to excuse boorish behavior. Still, we can still learn from jerks like this.
Richard Needham said the same thing (except for the learning part) : “The man who is brutally honest enjoys the brutality quite as much as the honesty. Possibly more.” (link)
 
Weaponized online criticism is not criticism, it is picking a fight while hiding behind the safety of a keyboard. One option is to ignore it PROVIDING it doesn't perpetuate incorrect information that thousands of other readers can be mislead by. Sometimes a succinct fact-based response works (or the jerk sobers up), but more often it becomes tiresome.

Taking the bait is ill advised and responding with criticism instead of logic and fact is a good way for both of you to end up bloody. People that just want to pick a fight hate being ignored.
 
BTW, when it comes to brutal honesty, I have found that the giver is usually more focused on being brutal rather than honest. In a like vein, the phrase "I just say it as I see it" is also a cop out usually to excuse boorish behavior. Still, we can still learn from jerks like this.
I have been on both sides of a "Brutally Honest" debrief, and while there are, of course exceptions, I have found that what you said is not typical of my experience. (Following one training exercise, I was debriefed that I was so far behind the power curve that I thought I was ahead of it and my failure to recognize this combined with my overall incompetence put the entire East Coast at risk. And, in retrospect, the debriefer was absolutely right. By being brutally honest, this debrief served as a wake-up call and from that moment on, I worked hard to improve every day. If they had tried to address my short commings in a tactful manner, it would not have had the same effect and I might never have improved.)

The "boorish behavior" aspect is addressed by keeping the critique factual, not personal. Critique the flaw, not the person.
 
These are great posts, but they center more on how to give criticisms, not how to accept them.
Ah!

Now it all makes sense to me. So after reading a bit, it seems to me that personality clashes fuel most of this drama.

My suggestion for anyone wishing to improve would be to take one of the online personality tests. You will not only gain personal insights but see how others are wired.

@drrich2, I like the Briggs/Myers approach. I'm no expert on this, maybe you could suggest better?
Free personality test | 16Personalities
 
This may be the best ever thread on ScubaBoard.
 

Back
Top Bottom