4 ms·

>While some managers or teammates will give you feedback with good intentions in mind, others will critique you out of frustration and negative emotions. [...]

>While some managers or teammates will give you feedback with good intentions in mind, others will critique you out of frustration and negative emotions. [...] > The path forward is to embrace the fact that you can't please everyone. Instead, have a deep understanding of what your goals and values are. And, act accordingly. How others react or judge your actions are only important insofar as they help you achieve your goals or align your actions with your values. I think the "feedback is a gift" perspective works regardless of "manager genuinely trying to help you improve" or "manager who will just want to get rid of you in a HR-approved way if they don't like what you're doing." And similarly, regardless if your goals are "genuine self-improvement" or even just "don't get fired." If you get negative feedback from someone who is viewing you negatively you're in a better position than not getting negative feedback from someone who views you negatively. It might only be valuable as a warning, if you are working in a fairly inhumane bureaucracy, but it's still better than not knowing where you stand. (It's important here to be able to tell "feedback" from "frustration," though. For instance, if you've got a manager who's grumpy towards everyone or about everything, you need to calibrate for that...)

fairity 6y ago
Totally agree that viewing negative feedback as a tool for self-improvement can be a useful and resilient perspective. My main concerns over the advice in the original comment are that: - It suggests that people only give feedback to you if they care about you or have to work with you again, which isn't true. - It implies that you should value whether people like you (or care about you). You're obviously free to choose whatever values you want, but external validation is a poor value imo because it's largely outside of your control. A more resilient mindset is to derive self-worth from intrinsic values e.g. hard work, self-improvement, kindness.
kubanczyk 6y ago
You assume communication can only benefit a party, because it cannot decrease the amount of information in your possession. How Shannon-esque. In my life however, I've often met people who could and did harm others (meaning: me) using verbal communication only. And so, I don't share your assumption. I don't feel responsible for processing it all. If I'm suspicious about the intent, I'll likely just cut it off and drop it on the floor like it never happened. If I see the intent is improvement and self-improvement, I'm ~100% invested right there; you can literally put me through hell and I'll be grateful.

fairity 6y ago

Totally agree that viewing negative feedback as a tool for self-improvement can be a useful and resilient perspective. My main concerns over the advice in the original comment are that: - It suggests that people only give feedback to you if they care about you or have to work with you again, which isn't true. - It implies that you should value whether people like you (or care about you). You're obviously free to choose whatever values you want, but external validation is a poor value imo because it's largely outside of your control. A more resilient mindset is to derive self-worth from intrinsic values e.g. hard work, self-improvement, kindness.

kubanczyk 6y ago

You assume communication can only benefit a party, because it cannot decrease the amount of information in your possession. How Shannon-esque. In my life however, I've often met people who could and did harm others (meaning: me) using verbal communication only. And so, I don't share your assumption. I don't feel responsible for processing it all. If I'm suspicious about the intent, I'll likely just cut it off and drop it on the floor like it never happened. If I see the intent is improvement and self-improvement, I'm ~100% invested right there; you can literally put me through hell and I'll be grateful.