Critics vs Vanity

In science, the questions tend to have a concrete answer as "five" or "mass times velocity of light squared." In contrast, in the arts and design there is "constant" or "equation" or "laws" to settle what is "right" and "wrong." Instead, we turned to the ancient and venerable tradition of criticism as half a work that seeks to improve as many subjective criteria.

Many of the criteria that are judged works of art are increasingly useful to apply to the business:

Humanity: raises an interesting question about the way we live?

Progress: the work constitutes a breakthrough in a field?

Formalism: presentation demonstrates some expertise or talent?

Completeness: Are we at the end of the cycle of a creative or even half way?

And may I add, or invent, even more criteria can be based on evaluations. Sounds inaccurate? Yes and no. What happens in a critique is simple but powerful act of testing a hypothesis from every angle of attack or praise. But these words are dangerous.

The word "attack" should be used with care, there is an old legend about criticism in art schools where the teacher picks up a picture of the wall and walk through it to show his displeasure. This criticism falls into the category of malicious criticism ", which can serve to be dramatized in movies, but it does very little to the development of an artist. Similarly, the word "praise" should be used with care because a continuous barrage of applause can generate creative paralysis. It is always nice to hear "I love it, but every artist knows that their work can always be better, hence the" I love "can be just as harmful," This is garbage. " The specificity is important in any good review.

Criticism allows pros and cons come to light for artists to listen, and learn to defend themselves from an audience of experts and peers. Delivery method for judging the slippery answers to questions that have no concrete answers. Given the ambiguity surrounding the innovation, it is easy to see how honest criticism can also be a useful business practice. In other words, being open to criticism makes you into an avid auditor and sensitive to real-time contributions of the world around him.

Today was much debate about the best way to give feedback to employees: If you focus on the strengths or weaknesses, or doing an annual review effective. The head corresponds to "criticize" the work of their subordinates, but what about the reverse? In the traditional model of authoritarian leadership, it is expected that the leader has the right. The criticism of the boss is behind closed doors, or back, and almost never done openly. But my studies in creative leadership tells me to be critical of is an important way to ensure that their actions are relevant.

Be open to criticism means that you are open to the idea that I could be wrong, and therefore that the only way to test their hypothesis by subjecting them to criticism. It also means that you are open to larger questions about his work and its validity within the organization. In other words, be open to criticism it more accountable.