Giving Constructive Criticism

It’s a fact of life we can’t avoid. Whether it’s working in a professional environment, learning in the educational realm, or interacting with friends or family, at some point in time we all have to face criticism.  How we may perceive that criticism depends on whether we are on the giving or receiving end.

When done right, constructive criticism is not meant to hurt or humiliate a person.  Rather, constructive criticism is meant to build a person and push him / her to reach the next level of success. Learning how to give constructive criticism makes a difference in regards to how others view an individual and also how he or she demonstrates leadership.  This issue of Astronology takes a deeper look into how to give constructive criticism in the workplace.

The Fundamentals of Giving Effective Constructive Criticism

If someone needs to give constructive criticism to an individual, it is highly important to find an instrumental time to share this feedback. ChangingMinds.org, a website dedicated to the book Changing Minds in Detail by David Straker, advises, “When criticism is needed, do not avoid it, although you should pick your moment.”  Other tips include the following:

• Do not criticize in public

There’s nothing worse than being publicly embarrassed, even if the mistake is small.   It is better to give the recipient his or her dignity and due privacy.

• Be specific

Explain exactly where the person can improve.  Specifics can help the person receiving the constructive criticism to understand that he or she is not incompetent, and can make some adjustments in a specific area to become better.

• Check for understanding

Ensure that the criticism is understood clearly to help erase any doubts the person may have that he or she is being singled out as a target.  Rather, the feedback is for his or her benefit.

• Check that the individual knows the positive future change focus

Part of making sure that the criticism is understood includes checking to make certain that the individual perceives the feedback is for positive future change.

• Discuss what happens next…support the person in moving forward

Make the discussion a positive dialogue by addressing what happens next. This includes creating goals or steps to move forward.  This step also allows the individual to feel confident he or she has the support needed, and to view the criticism positively.

Psychotherapist Dr. Barton Goldsmith Ph. D. also noted that tone of voice and eye contact are also essential when giving criticism.  Both communicate sincerity, which demonstrates to the recipient that he or she is receiving positive council.

The Top Three Ways to Give Bad Constructive Criticism

Usnews.com published an article entitled “7 Mistakes Bosses Make When Giving Criticism.”  Three of these critical mistakes include the following:

• Not Putting The Criticism in Context 

By not putting the criticism in context, the individual can become confused as to how the criticism fits with his or her goals within the organization. This may also lead to the person to ignore the feedback.

• Not Explaining Consequences

By not explaining the consequences for not taking action as a result of the constructive criticism, the person provided the feedback leaves himself open to misunderstanding and unnecessary “office drama” between workers who did not understand the possible consequences sooner.

 

• Not Having Consequences

Just as bad as not explaining consequences is not having them at all. The goal is not to “scare” employees into changing.  Rather, it’s imperative to communicate that change is necessary in order to help motivate.  Having some consequences helps to remind employees that they play important roles in the success of their organizations, and that they must continue to make progress in order to help build their organizations.

Criticism, even when it’s constructive, can sometimes hurt. In the workplace, it is highly important that the person tasked with giving constructive criticism do so in such a manner that gives the receiver of the feedback due respect and dignity. Sharing feedback privately, making sure the information is clear and helpful, and providing it in a positive and supportive manner are all important steps in making a potentially challenging conversation a positive one.

Workplace Frustration and Social Media Usage

An employee’s Facebook post and its comments about an organization resulted in the organization firing all employees that participated in the on-line discussion. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found that these employees actually were engaged in protected concerted activity, making termination inappropriate.

Workplace venting via social media is becoming an increasing concern for employers and employees alike. Where do labor laws stand on the ever-growing issue of personal social media accounts and the workplace? How do organizations handle it? 

Since 2012 state lawmakers have been introducing legislation to prevent employers from requesting passwords to candidates’ and employees’ personal internet and social media accounts in order for those individuals to get or keep a job. By 2015, around 23 states have introduced or considered legislation that would protect employee privacy by barring employers or potential employers from requesting usernames or passwords to social media accounts and / or requiring employees to invite their employer to join their personal social media network.  Nine states (Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Montana, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Virginia) enacted some form of social media legislation in 2015.

Besides being aware of state legislation, it is also important to understand labor laws from the National Labor Relations Board’s perspective.  One major legal concept to remember is the protection of an employee’s rights to engage in “concerted activity.”  Examples the NLRB’s website uses to explain concerted activity include the following:

·       Two or more employees addressing their employer about improving their pay.

·      Two or more employees discussing work-related issues beyond pay, such as safety concerns, with each other.

·       An employee speaking to an employer on behalf of one or more co-workers about improving workplace conditions.

The Wolters Kluwer Legal & Regulatory U.S. blog gave other real-life examples of areas where employers have to be mindful not to violate employees’ rights in regards to social media usage, as well as not violate other labor laws:

·       Hannah v. Northeastern State University: Discriminatory Facebook posts from two professors were viewed as evidence to demonstrate hostility exists in the department…it also advanced the discriminated employee’s claim of retaliation as the two professors were also allowed to vote on said employee’s tenure (which was denied).

·     Pier Sixty, LLC: An employer was found violating NLRA sec. 8(a)(3) by firing an employee for venting workplace frustration on Facebook. The NLRB also noted the employee made the comments while on break and there was no evidence that the work environment was interrupted.

·     Liverman v. City of Petersburg: A federal court in Virginia found only one of two police officers disciplined for a Facebook conversation about rookie police officers in leadership positions was protected by the First Amendment. The city was found not liable because it never ratified its social networking policy.

Does your organization have policies and practices in order to avoid violating employees’ rights when it comes to social media usage and workplace venting? Are you keeping up to date with the evolving laws? What advice would you give to other employers in regards to how to handle this situation? Share your comments with Astronology – we’d love to continue the discussion with our readers!