Getting your recipient involved in the criticism process is important for many reasons but mostly because having him interact with you in a positive manner greatly enhances the chances for productive resolution. Each of you begins to contribute to the task. A synergy begins to build.
There are many ways to get your recipient involved in the criticism process. You may, for example, have your assistant problem-solve the criticism situation with you rather than simply providing instructions on what to do. You can also get your recipient involved in the criticism process by having him report back to you periodically concerning progress.
One of the more important ways of keeping your recipient involved is asking for his input about what you are saying. This action serves multiple purposes. For one, it keeps your recipient involved at the moment. Your request will force him to pay attention and contribute to a dialogue. Second, asking for his thoughts will help you determine whether your recipient understands your message; if not, it will be impossible for him to respond productively.
Many times when we criticize, we fail to assess whether the recipient understands. We make an unstated assumption that the recipient comprehends the message. Often we are mistaken; then we get angry when the expected results do not appear.
Besides clarifying understanding of the issues and creating dialogue, asking for the recipient's input will also provide you with his views on the situation and a sense of whether he agrees with your criticism. If there is a disagreement, find out why. Many times, his reasons for disagreeing will supply you with insights that will change the status of your criticism. Although you can force the person to agree if you are the boss, there is little probability that he will attack change with enthusiasm and commitment. Knowing that he disagrees permits you to pursue a different avenue or to reassess the validity of your criticism.
You will also find that when you ask for the other's input, you will minimize her defensiveness. Most of the time when we are criticized, we are thinking of our rebuttals even before the critic is finished. We can hardly wait to respond and frequently interrupt to defend ourselves. When you let someone know you want her feedback, her receptivity increases because she knows that she will get the opportunity to express her viewpoint.
A good way to build this point into your criticism is to use the prediction technique. You implement this gambit by saying something like, ''This is how I see things; I know that you may see things differently, and that's okay, or you may agree.''
If in fact the recipient appraises the situation differently, you have already given permission and said it is okay to disagree. You guide the recipient into thinking: ''He's right. I do disagree. I'm glad he can accept that. But let me listen to what he says.'' In essence, your statement makes room for your recipient's point of view, and this makes the encounter more comfortable. If in fact he agrees, then you are already going in the same direction.
Why is this called the prediction technique? Because your recipient is going to either agree or disagree with you regardless of what you say. Since we know that most people are mentally disagreeing with the critic as he speaks, it becomes a smart strategy to overtly acknowledge that the recipient is ''allowed'' to disagree because he can do it anyway, and because most people become more receptive when they know they can freely express their own opposing views. The point is, whether your recipient agrees or disagrees, the criticism process is facilitated.
Another way to keep your recipient involved in the criticism process is for you, the critic, to become more involved in the task of helping your recipient make the changes necessary for the criticism to be resolved. Use a co-op plan.
To do so, you must sit down with the recipient of your criticism and together formulate a plan that will help the individual respond productively to the criticism. It is usually successful because it lets the individual know that she is not alone in the change process. You keep her involved by involving yourself. You will find the co-op plan to be especially useful for criticized behaviors that take time to remedy.
Consider the case of the computer programmer who was considered very talented but a pain in the neck. He would demean the intelligence of others, criticize their every comment, and talk to people as if they were computers. It was no wonder that his team members usually forgot to inform him when meetings were being held; as you would expect, the team was not performing up to its capabilities.
To reprogram the programmer, the supervisor helped him change his alienating behaviors by meeting with him and developing a plan; together, they wrote out a series of goals. The programmer would, for instance, forever substitute the word ''customer'' or ''client'' for ''user'' (the idea was to get him to view himself as a businessperson supplying a service to customers rather than as a programmer interfacing with a user). He also agreed to ''ask more and tell less'' at meetings so he could get the design information he needed. He agreed to be more polite.
Although implementing the plan wasn't easy, his supervisor recalled that ''the upshot was that over a period of time, he definitively improved to the point where he had changed his perceptions of internal clients. Complaints fell off and cooperation increased.''
The supervisor was effective because instead of putting the responsibility of change solely on the subordinate, the superior increased his involvement in the criticism process by helping the subordinate develop a concrete—and ultimately effective—plan to resolve the criticism. In effect, the supervisor's increased involvement ''forced'' the programmer to stay involved and resolve the criticisms.
To be effective, make sure your co-op plan covers the following six points:
Emphasize the importance of the person's job. A person who believes her work is valuable is likely to respond in a positive way. Make sure you state why her job is important; otherwise, you will be giving a pep talk.
Seek out her evaluation of the behavior or situation you are criticizing. This shows that you respect her opinions and that you expect her to take part in resolving the criticism. It also indicates that your own ideas are not fixed and that you are willing to learn from others. She is likely to respond with explanations and suggestions for improvement rather than with denials or excuses.
State clearly how resolving the criticism will benefit her.
Enlist the subordinate's aid. The new plan of action must make sense to the individual if she is to be motivated by it and committed to it. Ask the individual how the criticism can be dealt with, then involve her in formulating the specific implementation of that plan.
Ask her how you can help her implement the plan and how you can be supportive. This is the most important part of the co-op plan because it directly involves you in the implementation of the change process. It drives home to the individual the point that you are going to cooperate in and share the responsibility for the change process.
To get the power of positive criticism, do your share of the plan and help the individual do hers.
If you fail to get your recipient involved, you will find yourself not only giving a laborious monologue but also facing the Herculean task of trying to help another person improve her behavior without her assistance.
On the other hand, getting your recipient involved in the criticism process is most important because it helps you and your recipient make criticism a cooperative process, which lays the groundwork for good relationships, greater commitment to resolving the criticism, and a common reason for generating a meaningful solution. All of these factors help you get the power of positive criticism.