Critiques using words like 'beautiful' or 'ugly' are often perceived as moral judgments on one's identity. In contrast, using less-charged, functional words like 'boring' frames the feedback as an objective problem to be solved, making it more palatable and actionable for the recipient.
Related Insights
The biggest professional and personal problems often stem from a lack of candor. Withholding honest feedback to "keep the peace" is a destructive act that enables bad behavior and builds personal resentment over time. Delivering the truth, even when difficult, is a gift that addresses problems head-on and prevents future failure.
To give difficult feedback, use the Situation-Behavior-Impact (SBI) model. Instead of making accusations, state the situation, the specific behavior, and crucially, the impact it had on you. This approach prevents triggering a defensive, fight-or-flight response in the recipient.
Effective coaching requires a two-step process. First, directly confront an individual's flaws ('poke the zit'). Then, immediately reframe their negative self-perception by explaining they are 'hurt,' not broken. This prevents them from spiraling into self-loathing and opens them to change, turning a harsh truth into a constructive catalyst.
Feedback often fails because its motivation is selfish (e.g., 'I want to be right,' 'I want to vent'). It only lands effectively when the giver's genuine intention is to help the other person become who *they* want to be. This caring mindset dictates the delivery and reception.
The abstract, subjective term 'beauty' often incites disagreement. More useful and agreeable words are 'interesting' (the opposite of boring), 'charming' (playful and considerate), and 'meaningful' (contextually relevant). This provides a better framework for design and critique.
Values affirmation—actively thinking about what truly matters to you (family, creativity, etc.)—broadens your sense of self. This psychological buffer makes specific criticism feel less like an all-encompassing attack on your identity, thus reducing defensiveness and improving openness to the message.
The "99% Invisible" team uses shorthand phrases like "CWGHF" (Can We Get Here Faster?). This coded language transforms potentially harsh criticism into a shared, objective problem to solve, depersonalizing feedback and protecting creative morale during intense group edits.
Instead of trying to find the perfect words, preface difficult feedback by stating your own nervousness. Saying, "I'm nervous to share this because I value our relationship," humanizes the interaction, disarms defensiveness, and makes the other person more receptive to the message.
People are more willing to accept and incorporate feedback about traits they see as secondary, like being "well-spoken" or "witty." Tying feedback to core identity traits, such as kindness or integrity, is more likely to be perceived as a threat and trigger a defensive response.
A growing trend in psychology suggests relabeling emotions like anger as “unpleasant” rather than “negative.” This linguistic shift helps separate the aversive sensation from the emotion's potential long-term benefits or consequences, acknowledging that many difficult feelings have upsides.
