Handling criticism wisely

“We’ve already tried that.”
“You’re making this very complicated.”
“That’s easy for you to say.”

Remarks like these can turn a conversation. A proposal gets pushed aside, your expertise is called into question, or you suddenly have to defend a position you never took.

In that moment, content and reaction easily get mixed up. Who says something, how it is said and who is listening all shape how you receive the words. A remark from a manager can land differently from the same words from a colleague.

Being hurt by a remark does not tell you whether the other person is right. To judge that, you need to separate what was actually said, which objection it contains and what you are adding yourself.

A question is sometimes also an accusation. A summary can change your proposal so much that no one would support it. And a confident statement can persuade without any solid reasoning behind it.

In this workshop you learn to recognise these moves. Is your argument being examined, or is the reaction about you as a person? Are only two options being offered when there are more? Is a single example being used to draw a general conclusion?

You also look at your own reasoning. Perhaps the other person has a fair point. Perhaps you explained something too briefly or missed an important consequence.

By looking more precisely at the words and arguments, it becomes clearer what deserves an answer and what first needs clarifying.

You do not have to rebut every remark. Sometimes a question moves the conversation forward. Sometimes you need to correct a misrepresentation, acknowledge an objection or set a boundary.

That choice gets harder under pressure. That is why we work with SHIELD™, the six-step model developed by ianka fleerackers to examine your first reaction and choose a deliberate next step.

You apply the model to concrete remarks. That way you practise making room to think while the conversation carries on. The aim is to respond on substance and hold your position, without making yourself smaller.

You bring a remark, a critical question or a conversation from your work. For example from a team meeting, a project meeting, a presentation or a client conversation.

We look at what was said, what reasoning it contains and why the reaction stuck. Then you practise different answers: you ask a question, explain your position or correct what was misrepresented.

You practise in small groups and discuss selected situations with ianka. That way you notice what your wording does to the conversation, and where a different response leaves more room for the content.

We also discuss where this approach reaches its limit. Threats or intimidation call for other steps than finding a better answer.

For professionals who make proposals, take positions and discuss choices or solutions with others as part of their work.

The workshop is relevant for experts, managers, consultants, project teams and client-facing staff. And for teams where sharp remarks, quick judgements or stalled discussions get in the way of working together.

You understand better why a remark gets to you and how to examine its content. You have practised with a situation from your own work and have several ways to respond to it.

You receive the compact SHIELD™ card and a short protocol for situations where threats or intimidation call for different action. So you have a practical tool at hand for the next conversation.