Who Decides if Criticism is Constructive?

Raise your hand if you like to be criticized.

Yeah…me neither.

Webster's dictionary defines criticism as "Disapproval expressed by pointing out faults or shortcomings". But, I doubt you need a dictionary to tell you what criticism is any more than you need a dictionary to tell you what pain is. You know it when you feel it.

Perhaps in some (and by "some", I mean very few) cases criticism is warranted, but even then, the likelihood of it bringing about the effect the criticizer was hoping for is going to be on the low side (and by "low", I mean almost non-existent). Why is that? Because people don't like pain and criticism is painful; therefore, as a way of shielding ourselves from the pain, we disregard the validity of the negative things being said about us. This isn't an intentional, conscious, decision. It is the ego protecting itself, and we all do it.  This is what makes the concept of "constructive criticism" so highly unlikely.

We all need to rid ourselves of the notion that we can give someone constructive criticism. We cannot. If constructive criticism exists at all, it exists only at the discretion of the receiver - never the giver - because criticism can never be truly constructive until it is received and acted upon. It is only the receiver that has the power to transform the message, no matter how true or well-intentioned, into something useful or constructive. If the person being criticized doesn’t choose to positively interpret and apply what you have said, then the criticism isn’t constructive at all, regardless of your intent.

Let me offer an example that may help to illustrate the point. I used to have a dog that was incredibly good at leaping into the air and catching anything I threw at him; balls, Frisbees, sticks…he could catch them all. He would launch himself gracefully into the air, arc his body, adjust for the flying object's trajectory, and land gracefully back on all fours with the thrown object proudly gripped in his mouth. Success! Big fun! What a game! However, when I launched the stick at my husband's head his response was less agreeable. As it turns out, he was not as enthused about the “catch-the-stick-in-your-mouth” game as my dog was. One was primed to receive, the other was not. And so it is with criticism.

If there is any other way to make a point about something (and there usually is) avoid using criticism as the delivery method. Unless your receiver is already willing and prepared to deal with the sharp-pointed sticks you’re throwing at his head, he’s unlikely to see the value of the exchange. 

There are alternative approaches with a much better track record, and they are worth learning. Some of the most effective, in my experience, are presented in Marshall Rosenberg's books, Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life, and Speak Peace in a World of Conflict: What You Say Next Will Change Your World . Whether you use these books or other resources, the point is to identify and adopt approaches that have the greatest chance of success, and to discard those which are likely to lead to hard feelings and resistance. 

On the very rare occasion when we must point out another's faults or shortcomings, we would be well advised to follow the advice of newspaper columnist Frank "Parson" Clark, who wrote: "Criticism, like rain, should be gentle enough to nourish a man's growth without destroying his roots."

I still, on occasion, act more like a hurricane than a gentle rain, but I’m learning. How about you?