Last post looked at one aspect of being criticized by others. While we can learn from everyone, there are some from whom we will pay more attention than from others. Here’s another form of critique and correction we hear less about, but doing this pays huge dividends.

Self-correction is a key strategy of one who leads, sells and lives successfully. It also tends to be a trait of one who is of high character.

Does this conflict with the fact that those of high character tend to stand very firm on their guiding principles? Not one bit.

As Zig Ziglar says, “Be firm on principle but flexible on method.”

There is also no natural dichotomy on being principle-based and admitting one is wrong. Successful people are not only open to hearing about their mistakes via both solicited and unsolicited feedback, but find ways to provide themselves with needed feedback?

But, aren’t we simply “too close to the situation” to see things objectively?

Indeed, that’s a challenge. And, it can be overcome through the use of reverse visualization, or instant-replay.

You may recall a post suggesting we can prepare for potential interpersonal conflicts by simulating them first in our mind. This is much the same way an astronaut simulates future missions? This so that – when eventually in-flight – they have already experienced the situation. 100 percent effective? No, but pretty close.

Now, let’s do just the opposite. How did you handle that difficult interpersonal situation? Or, the objections during your one-on-one sales presentation? Or, the challenging question from the committee-member during your group presentation? Were you able to make the person feel comfortable by being tactful and kind, while still effectively and persuasively communicating your point? Or, did you kind of fumble that one?

Not sure? Then do what they do in football (U.S.); go to the replay. See if it was a fumble or if you handled it cleanly? Did you have both feet in-bounds when you made the catch? Or did your big toe hit the chalk?

Check it out; study it; dissect it. The trick is to do so with as much honestly and as little emotion as possible; focusing on not letting your ego take over. Yes, it can be difficult. Make that…very difficult. And, it’s well worth it.

The next step is to take your findings to your coach or mentor, or whomever you trust to provide you with the helpful and honest feedback you need. Even better is if they were actually there, but it’s not totally necessary.

Final step: Once you’ve determined that you did handle the situation improperly, and if the context is such that you can offer an apology, do so. It goes without saying to not make any excuses; simply apologize.

Actually, there is one final step after that: regardless of whether an actionable item such as an apology was feasible, make the decision to learn from your mistake and – hopefully – not repeat it. If you’re like I am, you most likely will repeat it until you have the lesson learned. Then again, that’s part of what being human is all about.

Fortunately, we can always go back to the replay.

Back in college, I was heavily involved in school politics. Whether in college or the “real world”, anyone in public is subject to opinions that are not always complimentary. In those days, I was prone to taking this type of criticism personally. Very personally!

I’d often complain to my friends, Bruce and Joe about this “unfair treatment.”

At the time, Bruce was President of the college’s Student Government Association and Joe was Senate Chair. One thing I really admired about them both was that they didn’t seem to mind criticism that would come their way. I found that quite fascinating, because it surely bothered me!

Whenever I’d moan about it, Joe used to simply say, “Bob, consider the source!”

In other words, before getting upset, determine how much weight you should even give this person’s opinion.

Actually, considering the source of the criticism is a good idea at both ends of the spectrum. When receiving disturbing feedback, if the source has said similar things that were nonsensical or baseless, we can pretty much “chalk it up” to a pattern and not pay it a whole lot of attention. (Unless, of course, he or she has a valid point.)

On the other hand, if you know the source to be rational and clear-thinking, and if you’ve previously agreed with some of their other thoughts, now it might be productive to “consider the source” differently. Perhaps their critique should be given thoughtful attention. Not that you have to agree, but a look from their viewpoint might turn out to be very helpful.

Even if you were to take someone’s criticism seriously, you still do not need to take it personally. Those are two different concepts. Either way, this is an excellent opportunity for practice. First, practice determining whether the criticism is worth taking seriously. If it is, act accordingly and be prepared to make changes. Secondly, you can practice not taking it personally, regardless of the first part.

Either way…consider the source!

How do you do in that regard?

I remember the jolt I received even though it was so many years ago. I was reading Dale Carnegie’s timeless classic, How to Win Friends and Influence People for the very first time and he told a story on himself.

In summary, while at a banquet, Mr. Carnegie corrected a statement made by another guest about something trivial. Dale’s friend, sitting next to him, over-rode his correction, stating that the person was actually correct.

Later, when Dale asked his friend — whom he was certain knew better — why he did that, he received an admonishment. Paraphrased, it was, “why prove to someone that they are wrong? Why not let him save face?”

It jolted me because I often did that very same thing. It was as though I couldn’t resist pointing out someone’s error, even something harmless and trivial. (Thereby, of course, highlighting my superior knowledge.) And, while no good was accomplished, it embarrassed the other person (often in front of others) and caused resentment towards me.

Now, you might be thinking, “But, Bob, is it right to not correct when you know something is factually incorrect?” And, my response would be that it depends upon the context of the situation. For example: is it important enough that it needs to be corrected? Is there a benefit to doing it? Would it be more helpful or harmful to do so? Will it shame the person or be well received?

Example: Someone says, “Yes, that Ted Williams was the best. Last guy to hit .406. Way back in 1940.”

The truth is that it was in 1941. My suggestion is that — whether to correct the person or not depends upon the above questions. If it’s a discussion between two friends, of course, correct. If not, and/or it would embarrass them publicly, don’t. Should you tell them later? It depends? Probably no harm in doing so. You could even use one of the lead-in phrases such as, “I might be wrong about this”…and then continue with, “I’m thinking it might have been in ’41.”

What will happen is that — if he or she really cares enough to know the truth — they will check.

Yes, this is a very minor example. Yet, how often have you seen people correct others publicly as described above, doing more harm than good? Ever? Have you ever done that? Has someone ever done that to you? How did you feel about it…and, about them?

Again, each situation is different. But, when in doubt, best that if you’re going to be right, that it not be at someone else’s expense.

Recently, I tweeted the following:

“The Law of the Out: the bigger the out (or backdoor) you give someone to take…the less they’ll feel the need to take it”

We’ve discussed this concept before, and how and why it is effective both in general as well as selling-specific situations.

One person responded:

“I think people get too many outs. So many regrets later for not taking the chance.”

I responded in two tweets. The first one was:

“My suggestion is to try and see that tweet in the context in which it was intended. Remember, there’s a time and place for most everything.”

My follow-up, however, was the one more specific to this post:

“I’ll also suggest to you that to the degree you try and pressure someone to do what you think is in their best interest, they will resist.”

In other words, you are not giving them the “out” or “backdoor” in order for them to take it. But, rather that they feel comfortable enough to not feel the need to take it. Of course, if they feel it is in their best interest to do so, they will. But, they would have anyway. Or, had they instead capitulated to your demands because they felt pressured to do so, they would have then had to either go back on their word or perhaps they would have sabotaged the process.

It reminds me of one of my favorite sayings from the brilliant Dondi Scumaci that, “compliance will never take you where commitment can go.”

Let it be their decision and — if they make the decision to proceed — they will feel good about it because it was their decision, not yours.

And, the best way you can can increase the odds of this happening is to make the option for them not to do it, very clear.

One could quite correctly say that whenever we discuss the topic of persuasion (a/k/a “Winning Without Intimidation) we are within the context of negotiation. Really, any time we want something from someone, whether it’s money, an act of kindness, respect, or anything else, we are negotiating. More and more books these days are being written on win/win negotiation skills. I like that, and I’ve learned a great deal from many of them.

Suggestion: While these posts will help equip you in terms of negotiation skills, I encourage you to pick up some negotiation-specific books and audios and perhaps even attend a class on this topic. You’ll learn some very simple strategies you can use to help you further your persuasion abilities.

Important: You’ll also be introduced to some of the negotiation tactics that skilled negotiators might one day (or already do) use against you. Why is that important to know? Because ignorance, at least in this context, is anything but bliss. What you don’t know absolutely can harm you, financially and in other ways. I remember, many years ago, while beginning to study this topic, how amazed — how astounded! — I was by the very elementary tactics I’d succumbed to. And, I mean elementary stuff!

Of course, you’ll never use manipulative or harmful tricks against others. However, you will benefit greatly by others not being able to use them against you!

Have you found this to be true? And, what excellent resources have you come across that teach win/win negotiation?