Interesting article John! I 100% agree with the importance of focusing criticism on the behavior NOT the person. In the real world, you are working in a team and not as a long wolf, so using the word "we" more often than "you/I" helps you come off as easier to work with.
One area of improvement in the example from the article could revolve around the wording: "I noticed some errors in the proposal, I would like to see them addressed before we review it with the team again. List specific examples..."
If I were in the shoes of that communicator, I personally think that you can still be direct and encouraging. Instead of saying "errors in the proposal", I'd phrase it as "suggestions/areas of improvement" that way the recipient focuses on the "improvement" aspect rather than "you have 20 errors in your proposal"
I talk a lot about the time a client tried to have me removed from a project for saying he was wrong. Or more specifically, that what he was asking for was not physically possible.
And while I will, to my dying breathe maintain that he grossly overreacted and that sexism played a large part, the specific piece of feedback I received from my direct supervisor, that I have tried to follow ever since, was that what the client was upset about was not so much that I pointed out that the request could not be done. It was that I had said so in a reply-all email.
I mean, hey, I'm not the one who cc'ed 10 people in a direct request he was making to me, the person with the direct responsibility of over the thing to be done. And in my mind, if I had not informed those people why I could not fulfill the request they very publicly made, then I would appear to not being doing my duties to those others.
But the client took it as a public humiliation. I can't say that I understand the ego that it takes to believe that you know everything and should never need to be corrected. I mean, it was such a tiny detail that prevented me from complying. If it were not for my close familiarity, I would have assumed it was possible as well.
So now I'm just extra careful about being circumspect in pointing out errors, and also try to predict when someone is going to make one before they do, and then before they make it, bring up the idea and address my concern to it
Unfortunately many people cannot stand to be corrected / or pointed out to be wrong in public.
I'm made this mistake too and since then I've taken to speaking to them directly, preferably in person / on a call to discuss the issue, then agreed for one of us to reply all with the agreed outcomes.
Then everyone is updated and they can present it as an evolution of our thinking, rather than being that someone was "wrong".
I’ve been really enjoying your posts on soft-skills. Very helpful!
Thank you Paul, much appreciated.
Any suggestions for topics you'd like to see covered are very welcome.
Interesting article John! I 100% agree with the importance of focusing criticism on the behavior NOT the person. In the real world, you are working in a team and not as a long wolf, so using the word "we" more often than "you/I" helps you come off as easier to work with.
One area of improvement in the example from the article could revolve around the wording: "I noticed some errors in the proposal, I would like to see them addressed before we review it with the team again. List specific examples..."
If I were in the shoes of that communicator, I personally think that you can still be direct and encouraging. Instead of saying "errors in the proposal", I'd phrase it as "suggestions/areas of improvement" that way the recipient focuses on the "improvement" aspect rather than "you have 20 errors in your proposal"
Just my 2 cents
Great suggestions Karthik thank you.
I talk a lot about the time a client tried to have me removed from a project for saying he was wrong. Or more specifically, that what he was asking for was not physically possible.
And while I will, to my dying breathe maintain that he grossly overreacted and that sexism played a large part, the specific piece of feedback I received from my direct supervisor, that I have tried to follow ever since, was that what the client was upset about was not so much that I pointed out that the request could not be done. It was that I had said so in a reply-all email.
I mean, hey, I'm not the one who cc'ed 10 people in a direct request he was making to me, the person with the direct responsibility of over the thing to be done. And in my mind, if I had not informed those people why I could not fulfill the request they very publicly made, then I would appear to not being doing my duties to those others.
But the client took it as a public humiliation. I can't say that I understand the ego that it takes to believe that you know everything and should never need to be corrected. I mean, it was such a tiny detail that prevented me from complying. If it were not for my close familiarity, I would have assumed it was possible as well.
So now I'm just extra careful about being circumspect in pointing out errors, and also try to predict when someone is going to make one before they do, and then before they make it, bring up the idea and address my concern to it
Unfortunately many people cannot stand to be corrected / or pointed out to be wrong in public.
I'm made this mistake too and since then I've taken to speaking to them directly, preferably in person / on a call to discuss the issue, then agreed for one of us to reply all with the agreed outcomes.
Then everyone is updated and they can present it as an evolution of our thinking, rather than being that someone was "wrong".