It is common etiquette these days that if one has critical feedback to offer, one should ask first whether the feedback is welcome.
On the receiving end, it's not as clear by what standards one should decide whether to welcome critical feedback. Without a clear standard, the tendency is pretty strong to claim to welcome it, so as not to appear unreceptive. Here, then, are a few standards for deciding how and when to welcome critical feedback:
1. Don't pretend you're receptive to all feedback: Many of us like to think we're open to critical feedback anytime. In practice, none of us are completely open, and with good reason. To take focused action in the world, we make commitments -- bets as to what to attend to and what to ignore. We make these bets while harboring doubts about whether we're ignoring something important. In fact, we always are. No matter what commitments we make, other worthy commitments are possible. To fulfill our commitments, we suppress our doubts. Because critical feedback activates these doubts, it has the potential to diffuse our focus. All of us, therefore, naturally tune some feedback out.
The first standard, then, is to not hold yourself to the unreasonable standard of complete receptivity. When someone asks you whether you are willing to accept feedback, really consider the question. Don't feel pressured to accept so as to avoid looking closed minded. Remember that all of us are closed minded about something. The trick is not to be open to everything, but to be open to the feedback that will hone and refine our focus so we grow in useful directions. As a New York Times publisher once said, "I like to keep an open mind, but I don't want my brains to spill out."
2. Receive it completely: Assume that accepting feedback means taking full possession of it. Once you take it, it's yours. It can't be returned. Treat it as a favor given, not a conversation started. Assume, before accepting it, that there will be no opportunity to rebut, refute, deny, explain, or edit the feedback with its provider, no opportunity to reply with insights into his or her motivations for providing it. Decide whether you can trust the provider's motivations before accepting it, not after you've received it. And if you decide afterward that you can't trust the source, don't voice this to the provider. Just don't invite that person's feedback next time it is offered.
3. Distinguish between ingesting and digesting feedback: Ingesting is simply taking it in. Digesting is using what's nutritious and throwing out the rest, sorting the feedback you will use from the feedback you won't.
Don't try to digest while ingesting, or you'll end up with indigestion -- an inability to sort it well. Supportive feedback tastes good going down, but critical feedback tastes bad no matter how tactfully it's served. Guided by appetite alone, we'd reject all critical feedback. It's therefore not a good idea to make digestive decisions while the taste of ingested feedback lingers, or you'll tend to discard the critical feedback, and savor the supportive comments.
4. Distinguish between what tastes good and what's good for you: When you've taken critical feedback in, allow anywhere from an hour to a day for ingestion. Expect your face to contort and your chest to constrict while the unpleasant flavors of critical feedback go down. Excuse yourself if you can. Make your faces silently and alone. Take walks. Hug your chest. Whatever you do, don't decide about the nutritional utility of what you've ingested until the unpleasant taste subsides. Trust that once the critical feedback has moved on to your digestive system, you'll have the competence to sort it well, making use of what is useful and discarding the rest.
