SoftSkillHero

Don't defend yourself

Now that we've suggested a way to react to criticism, let's quickly say why we don't recommend a common reaction to negative feedback: defending yourself. To illustrate, consider this possible reaction to Harper's criticism.

Reacting to Harper in this way has three big disadvantages. First, you gain less insight about how you could improve than if you had asked for clarification. Second, defending yourself is often emotionally more stressful for you than asking for clarification about how you could improve. If you defend yourself, you fight; if you ask for advice, you collaborate. And third, acting defensively might give you a reputation of not being open to feedback. Harper and other colleagues might stop sharing helpful feedback with you.

Of course, you may come to the conclusion that the criticism is fundamentally flawed, for instance because it is based on incorrect information. If you think it's worth bringing this up with your colleague (e.g., because they decide whether you'll get a promotion or not), then consider doing so in a later meeting. This gives you time to process the criticism and prepare your response to it.

It's important to stress that the method we suggest is intended for situations in which your performance at work is criticized. You shouldn't use the method when a colleague raises an objection to an argument you made in a discussion. For example, suppose that Harper says that she isn't sure about your claim that the team should focus their marketing on teenagers because similar products have failed in that market segment. In that case, you shouldn't apply the method suggested here because Harper raises an objection to the content of an argument you made rather than criticizing your performance at work. Instead, you should respond to Harper by offering further reasons for the soundness of your argument. If you haven't done so already, check out the sections of our website that will help you make better arguments and contributions to discussions.

‹›