Benefiting at work from Brain Based Insights

This is a terrific post, Ellen. Too many people give themselves permission to criticize in the name of helping the other person(s) "make it better." But you're right, criticism shuts down innovation and elevates defensiveness.

Years ago, someone described the difference between criticism and effective feedback this way: Picture handing someone a pair of scissors with the open blades toward them. That's criticism. Now picture handing them the scissors by holding the closed blades and the handles facing the other person. That's feedback.

Hey, we should do a bit of co-posting bringing both our experiences and expertise to bear on a topic we like. Interested?

Ellen - I'm certainly no expert on how the brain works, but I have to agree that an environment of criticism breeds snipers and skeptics. It's a caustic place to work - a new idea doesn't stand a chance. The sad thing is that if you're not careful - you join in fray.

Would you prune a seedling? That's what criticizing new ideas is like. It's like cutting off all the leaves on a little stem before you can even tell what kind of tree it could be!

That's not to say that there isn't a time and place to thoughtfully consider ideas, their viability, and their applicability to your future plans.

Hmmm...I think I'm feeling a post coming on too!

Oh Tammy -- now there is creating! Wow -- that would be so much fun. The first thing of think of is a tackling fun question ... that pokes out and bubbles up and rumbles around ... until it is satisfied enough to setttle down somewhat satisfied in two minds! What did you have in mind? Count me in!

Ann, you have SO MUCH to say on this topic -- it's popping up all over! The metaphors here are the stuff of a book! Ann ... there is so much here -- and yes ... how easy it is to slip into that fray and feel the creativity possibilities drained in one sitting! Before I know why that happened and what the brain's reaction to it would be -- I just found myself drained and discouraged at times when things got too critical!

Now ... I see it coming more ... and that helps me to move away... faster.... Yet criticism will often woo us in ... when we let down guards ... cause it comes cloaked in such "basal ganglia" logic! What do you think?

I agree with you. I used to work in a very critical environment and didn't realize how critical and skeptical I had become until I left. I would say it took a good 6-12 months to "heal". Now, as you, I am much more aware of that path when it's starting - and I try to avoid it!!!!

Honestly - it's very seductive when you don't have any ideas of your own - or you're afraid to take a risk. The safest thing you can do is shoot at others - HOW SAD!

There are problem setters and problem solvers - some times one person is able to do both thing. Mostly this is not the case.

A critical approach is required to set a problem just as much as a creative approach.

Many problem solvers skip the critical phase because the problem has already been posed.

This is OK except that some creatives conclude no critical activity took place simply because they elect to avoid being critical.

This then is an attempt to be creatively critical.

Keith thanks for the fine new flavor you add to the discussion! I like your distinctions! There are problem setters and problem solvers - some times one person is able to do both thing. Mostly this is not the case.

Guess for me the "critical approach" required to set a problem ... is more a reflective approach. That's because critical can started out rather lofty while at the same time can end ... as a caustic way of cutting people, ideas and life in general down.

You seem to have a very different idea about what it can do and how it might be used to help ideas forward! Bravo -- we need just that, I agree!

I'd love to hear more about your notion of ... "Many problem solvers skip the critical phase because the problem has already been posed."

Any example to help me understand? Thanks for stopping by Keith, and thanks for your refreshing ideas to add new angles to our discussion.

On points 2 to 5, I would want to line up on the side of the innovator. However, for item 1, being a critic and a creator can be the two sides of the same coin. Some entrepeneurs/creatives reflect on a current situation, critique it and start creating a solution. I think a lot of innovative new services get created in this way. Criticism can be the springboard for innovation. Maybe the intent behind criticism is the important factor to consider. One would ask: what is the purpose of the person's criticism? One might also need to evaluate what alternative the person is proposing. When one understands the context better, one can reach a conclusion about the behaviour. So for me, criticism in this context can be the cousin of innovation.

You make some great points here Galba, and I like the links of cousinhood. You are also defining critique in ways that refresh a person... and I suspect that your use of it does just that too:-)

On the other hand, I can think of dozens of occasions where an idea was still in an incubator ... when burning critiques killed it and took out the innovator in the process. Another time comes to mind when one of the finest leaders I've known was asked to share his vision. With great humilty he laid out what many thought was brilliant. A leader from another department cut his plans so small we all felt the sting of his words. I've seen people drop out of PhD programs after scathing critique. Encouragement and support does more and gets people there with brainpower to boot. We cannot judge people's intent itself ... but we can hear disharmony in the poor tone of critics and the evidence tells me that support and encouragement go further. It's the difference of saying ... "that stinks..." in the vernacular ... or of saying "Could I suggest an addition to your good ideas...." Both may get you there efficiently ... but the second one is more fun... at least for me.

Thanks for your comment. Maybe I "bent" the direction of your original post a little. I did not look at it from the perspective of personal criticism. I thought of an experience where I critically reviewed some training methods that I saw some other people using. I said nothing to anyone else, but I had a strong sense that the method was inappropriate. I brainstormed my ideas, produced some notes, nurtured my ideas and developed an approach that I thought was more appropriate. Perhaps the post reflects my thoughts about what drives me (and possibly some other people) to improve on a status quo that isn't working. I strongly agree that good ideas can be killed by inept criticism. I wrote an article arguing that we have a hard wired tendency to kill ideas by saying "yes, but," where, if we were to remain curious and openminded, we would be more likely to nurture the ideas of others and everyone would gain as a result.

I come to this very late via my friend Ann Michael's blog. I agree with you about whiners but I cannot accept your implicit assertion that criticism cannot come from a creative place and that a critic is inherently uncreative. The whole concept of disruption as a source of innovation is very hot at the moment and I see that as being essentially innovation via explicit criticism of the staus quo. Ann will tell you that I am not entirely curmdugeonly but I do revel in accentuating the negative. However, I see that as being done in a creative way and coincidentally enough returned to that theme on my blog just today. As ever, it's critical not to make assumptions about our definitions of terms like criticism.

I John ... you build a great case for the minds that create through looking at what could improve and I am all for that. Sometimes words are just not quite descriptive enough to say it like you mean it. My role is to watch the research - which shows brains and learning that shuts down under negative and harsh crticism, and that shows amazing creativity spikes under constuctive additions, ideas, helpful ways to improve and so on. Does that makes sense? Again thanks - this has been a good discussion and helps us all to think about what we do and how we create:-)

It takes less than a minute to criticize, but it often takes a whole lifetime to innovate. What a difference. I'm glad Marie Curie did not bow down to her critics! It takes really strong people to innovate and stand in the face of critics.

Galba, I like how you handled the episode about training materials that did not work well. You did not get up as if you knew better than the folks who had them. You merely saw the flaws and moved from there to make it better. That's a far cry from being in a session and putting on a sour face and telling everyone they don't and won't work as some critics do. You were very professional in how you handled it. And to your credit you created something that does work.

One facet of criticism acually rests in intrapersonal intelligences. When a person feels lesser than or is jealous of more successful players, she tends to become a critic. So the criticism likely has nothing to do with an innovation, but a lack of satisfaction within a person.

Just my two bits.