Are there different levels of maturity for responding to criticism? If so, what is the most mature level?

Over recent weeks we have been pursuing an answer to these questions (see for example, Responding to Criticism: Four Levels of Maturity and Responding to Criticism: The Most Mature Level). During this pursuit, I put forth a tentative proposal for a most mature level because I think that’s a good way to get into these types of questions. Not only have I described what I think is the most mature level, I have presented arguments against this most mature level and arguments for it.

When I have taught these types of lessons in a classroom setting, despite all that I have already said on this topic, many of my students continue to raise some additional questions. And so, in this post I will try to clarify some points of confusion that have been brought to my attention by my students over the years.

Clarifying the Difference Between a Pawn and an Origin.

Responding to criticism at the most mature level requires that we seek to lead the criticizer to feel more like an origin than a pawn.

Many of my students have asked me to talk more about this point.

When people feel like pawns, they feel pushed around, and they feel that they are like puppets with someone else pulling the strings. Somewhere in our hearts and minds we realize that bossy people create a revolt against perceived illegitimate power. Calvin’s father, in the following comic, begins to realize this.

Feeling like a pawn may be contrasted with feeling like I have an influence over what I do—that I have played at least a part in originating my behavior.

When you respond to criticism at the most mature level, you seek to come across as “not being bossy.” By trying to come up with some way to steer in the direction of the criticism, you come across as showing that you can be influenced by the person who is criticizing you.

Providing More Examples of Steering

After explaining a little more about the difference between feeling like a pawn and feeling like an origin, many of my students ask me to provide some more examples of people using steering.

In the DeCharms study I discussed earlier (Pawns in The Classroom), teachers who had learned to steer put fifteen minutes aside once a week to ask students to criticize how things are going during the week. The teachers in the study didn’t actually use the word “criticize.” The students were asked to provide “suggestions.” Suggestions, as we have discussed are, in a sense, criticism because people only make suggestions when they first make some sort of evaluation of what they perceive. Based on the evaluation, they then declare what they think might be an improvement.

The teachers were taught to listen to the student suggestions in a manner very similar to the description of level four on the five levels rating system. However, when teachers who use steering feel a suggestion does not make sense they do not merely attempt to disagree without being disagreeable. Instead, they try to use some aspect of the suggestion so the student feels the suggestion has been taken seriously.

For example, let’s say a student suggests that if the class works hard all day, the last hour should be free time. Suppose the teacher, let’s call her Mrs. Jones, feels that a daily hour of free time would waste too much learning time. Mrs. Jones can still steer in the direction of the suggestion. That is, she can explain her concern about wasting too much time; then she can propose that if by the end of the week the students had done a spectacular job all week long, the last hour on Fridays they will be given the freedom to choose either to get a head start on homework, write in their journal, or read a library book; then, after proposing this, Mrs. Jones asks the class if they want to give this a try. Notice that she is using the student’s suggestion of free time to influence where she steers the activities for the week.

Steering frequently ends up with the criticized person offering some type of choice to the criticizer. But there is a difference between providing a choice using a steering model and offering a choice in general. Consider a teacher who offers a choice to a student by saying, “Either you do the assignment or fail the course. Those are your choices.” This is not an example of steering. Nor is this—a teacher says, “I’m giving you a choice between playing ‘Math Blaster’ or ‘Race to the Moon.’ Hurry up and pick one, I don’t have all day!”

A teacher who is using steering would be more likely to say something like, “Here are two games that teach some math skills. Which one do you think would be best for you?” Notice the difference in attitude between the approaches. In the first two examples, the choice may not be perceived as a genuine choice but more of a demand to pick either one or the other. In the Peanuts comic below, we get a sense of how strong a reaction can occur when a child comes to believe the choice he or she is given is not really genuine.

Steering by teachers demonstrates a degree of respect in that the teacher is genuinely interested in the student’s opinion and is willing to have that opinion count in deciding what will be done.

Here’s an example involving a father and his son.

In the For better or for Worse comic, Michael criticizes his father’s decision that it’s time to go to bed. The father, no doubt, disagrees with his son’s criticism. Yet, rather than just saying his son is wrong, he seeks instead to come up with a way that utilizes some aspect of his son’s criticism to come up with a new alternative.

I think that the father, by asking his son to ask EVERY kid in town about bedtimes was unreasonable, but I trust that you get the point I’m trying to make in this example.

In the Luann comic below, Knute’s effort to work out what to do on his upcoming date with Crystal is evident.

Knute’s effort to find something to do that they will both like probably will be far more helpful in establishing a relationship with Crystal than if he insists on taking her to a monster truck rally.

Now, some people confuse steering with compromise. Steering can involve a compromise, but oftentimes it leads to something better than a compromise. The classic example of a compromise occurs when someone wants to buy something, let’s say a used car. The car dealership wants ten thousand dollars for the car, but the buyer wants to pay only five thousand dollars for it. In the end, they settle on $7,500. Both parties don’t end up getting quite what they had hoped, but they settle so they can close the deal. Both parties may walk away a little disappointed.

Oftentimes, when steering occurs, neither party is disappointed.

Steering envisions that the person criticized makes an effort to see if there is some way out of the conflict, a way where two opposing views can be reframed into an original and larger context that provides new values to both parties. This may be difficult and at times not always possible or desirable, but as we move along, I hope to show that it is possible far more often than commonly believed.

Rudyard Kipling’s Poem, If

Back in 1897, Rudyard Kipling wrote one of his most famous poems—If. Relevant to our discussion is the part that says:

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise…

Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son!

When someone is blaming, doubting, hating, or lying about you, they very likely are criticizing you and in a rather unflattering manner. How would it be best to respond to this?

Among the things Mr. Kipling encourages you to do is to keep your head even when others are losing theirs—admittedly, not always an easy thing to do. He urges you to trust yourself when all doubt you and make allowance for their doubting too. I’m not sure I completely agree with this, for spending some time in doubt seems to prod me, at times, to consider some important alternatives—but I think I have some sense of what he was trying to get at here.

Although I’m tempted to analyze Kipling’s poetry with a fine tooth comb, the thing about poetry is that the poet seeks to capture more than what can be analyzed. With just the right mixture of words and phrasing, Kipling strove to capture a certain subtle emotion and attitude.

I present the poem for your consideration in hopes that you will see that there is something in it that captures the emotion and attitude of the two highest levels of the five levels rating system. If you read the poem a couple of times and then the description of the two highest levels, you may find, when taken together, that they share a truth beyond words.

Well, that’s today’s lesson. I hope you enjoyed it.

———————

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Welcome to From Insults to Respect.

Most people would agree that some people are less skillful at handling criticism than others.

Those following this blog well know that I have been encouraging readers to be able to recognize five levels of maturity for responding to criticism. As I began my efforts, first I provided a lesson about the first four levels of maturity (see Responding to Criticism: Four Levels of Maturity).

In that post, I described level 4 as follows:

4. Level 4 individuals listen to the criticizer in a supportive, warm, friendly style, and then make it clear that they fully understand what was said. Moreover, they put the criticizer at ease by making statements that indicate that the wise learn from criticism. Some time is spent on showing that they are thinking about the criticism. If, after thinking about the criticism the criticism is deemed to be correct, they make a statement frankly indicating, “I can see your ideas have merit and I intend to use them in the future.” If they are not sure if they agree, they make a statement indicating that they are very interested in what was said, plan to think a little more about this over the next few days and then they will be ready to discuss this further. If, after thinking about the criticism, the criticism is deemed to be incorrect, a statement is made designed to disagree without being disagreeable. More specifically, a sense of humor, some listening in a caring way and a few smiles help to traverse rough terrain. As the episode winds down, the criticizer is encouraged to feel comfortable communicating suggestions in the future.

After describing all four levels, I explained why the ordering of the four levels makes some sense. For example, I explained how I had made a lot of TV shows with a variety of actors.

In each show the actors respond to criticism in different ways. Then I asked others to watch the shows. Together, we discussed their reactions to the way the people in the video recordings handle the criticism.

I soon became very familiar with what people like and respect when it comes to responding to criticism. This helped me to come up with four different ways to handle criticism. I put them in order from the least respected to the most respected. Level one is the least liked. Each higher level is viewed as more mature, likable, and respected by those who watched the video recordings.

Unlike the first four levels of maturity, it is not as easy to make video recordings of people displaying a level 5 response because quite a bit of this level’s response occurs up in the head of the responder. To understand this better, let’s briefly review the level 5 response (For a complete description of level 5 see Responding to Criticism: The Most Mature Level).

LEVEL FIVE. In addition to actions consistent with level 4, people responding to criticism in a manner consistent with level 5 seek ways to use, whenever they disagree with the criticism, a technique known as steering in the direction the criticizer would prefer to go. That is, rather than just disagreeing without being disagreeable, the criticized person seeks to find a new choice of action that creatively utilizes some aspect suggested from the criticism. Steering cannot be incorporated into all situations, but it is an additional goal of the most mature individuals.

Here’s a quick example of someone responding to criticism at level 5. My wife, Andrea, and I are getting dressed to go to a party. When Andrea sees what shirt I put on, she criticizes my choice, saying, “That’s not quite right for this occasion.”As I prepare my response in my mind, I realize that I disagree with her. But before I begin to disagree with her, while at the same time trying not to be disagreeable or defensive, I silently ask myself, “Is there someway I can steer in the direction of Andrea’s criticism?”

I quickly realize that I have two other shirts that I would enjoy wearing to this party as much as the one I initially picked out. And so, I pulled them out of my closet and said to Andrea, “Well, if you don’t like the one I picked out for this evening, how about either of these two?”

“Oh,” she says, “the one on the left would be perfect. Thanks dear.”

And so, from this example, you can readily see that a good part of my response occurs in my head as I tried in my mind to come up with an option that both Andrea and I would end up feeling comfortable. Said a little differently, I searched my mind to see if I could find a win-win response to her criticism.

To illustrate my using a level 5 response, I could use some type of a gimmick such as having me strike a classic pose of someone thinking and then my head would appear above me, and it would start to speak the words I’m supposedly thinking. This has been done effectively in the movies, but it’s just not as clean an approach as the one I used to demonstrate the validity of the first four levels, and I’m not sure how to go about creating the special effect of the extra head gimmick. And so I’m going to defend level 5 in another manner.

Originally, I had formulated the current five levels system as a four levels system, but when I heard Professor Richard deCharms speak at a conference back in 1977, he convinced me to add the fifth level. He spoke about how most teachers treat their students like pawns, rather than origins.

When people feel like pawns, they feel pushed around, and they feel that they are like puppets with someone else pulling the strings.

Feeling like a pawn may be contrasted with feeling like I have an influence over what I do—that I have played at least a part in originating my behavior. Such a feeling, Professor deCharms told the audience, is what he called, “feeling like an origin.”

An idea that is similar to the one Professor deCharms describes has been referred to as the powerless versus empowerment spectrum. People who perceive themselves powerless often experience alienation or reactance against those perceived as the bosses.

In the business world, leaders attempt to get their subordinates to “buy into a plan” by asking for their feedback and trying to use their suggestions as best as they can to strengthen the plan. This strategy doesn’t always work, but leaders know that it has the potential to improve the process of implementing the plan.

To see what happens when teachers act in ways that are designed to lead students to feel like origins, Professor deCharms and his colleagues designed a project that provided a unique training program to inner-city teachers. His findings are dramatic.[1]

Academic achievement as measured by standardized tests was significantly better in the classrooms after the teachers received the training. In fifth grade, the children in this inner-city district were typically more than one-half year behind national norms in grade equivalent scores. This downward trend continued in the children who had teachers who did not receive the training so that by eighth grade they were a year behind national norms. The trend was reversed for the children who had the trained teachers to the point that they gained, on average, more than a full year between the end of sixth grade and the end of seventh grade and maintained their advantage through eighth grade.
School attendance and punctuality were positively affected in the classes with trained teachers.

More recent studies[2] provide further evidence that students are more likely to act in accordance with group decisions or school rules if they have participated in forming them.

Steering not only improves learning and behavior but health outcomes as well. In a remarkable series of studies at a nursing home,[3] elderly residents were each given a choice of houseplants to care for and were asked to make a number of small decisions about their daily routines. Nurses were taught to steer in the directions the residents requested. For example, residents requested a movie be provided each evening in the community room. Although there was inadequate funds for this, the nurses did increase the number of movies that were shown from occasionally, to once per week. A year and a half later, not only were the residents who had nurses that learned to steer more cheerful, active, and alert than a similar group in the same institution who were not given these choices and responsibilities, but many more of them were still alive. In fact, less than half as many of the decision-making, plant-minding residents had died as had those in the other group.

Some people, when they first hear about steering, express concern because it seems to them that it requires that they give up on holding fast to their treasured ideals. “It is just designed to promote conformity!” claimed a student. “If a teacher criticizes the length of my hair, if I don’t cut it a little shorter, does that make me immature?”

“I’m against war,” said another student. “With steering does that mean that to be mature I must come to a position that holds that a little killing is okay? Steering means that the only proper ideal is to be middle of the road, a position that I despise.”

My response to these examples is to explain that I am not proposing that every time you are criticized you must make some change. Steering envisions that the person criticized makes an effort to see if there is some way out of the conflict, a way where two opposing views can be reframed into an original and larger context that provides new values to both parties. This may be difficult and at times not always possible or desirable, but as we move along, I hope to show that it is possible far more often than commonly believed.

[1] Richard deCharms, Enhancing Motivation: Change In the Classroom, New York: Irvington Publishers, 1976.

[2] N. Way, & M. G. Robinson, 2003, “Effects of Perceived Family, Friends, and School Experiences on Change in Self-Esteem among Urban, Low-SES Adolescents,” Journal of Adolescent Research, 18, 324-346. M. Wang, 2009,

“School Climate Support for Behavioral and Psychological Adjustment: Testing the Mediating Effect of Social Competence,” School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 240-251.

[3]E. J. Langer and J. Rodin, 1976, The Effects of Choice and Enhanced Personal Responsibility for the Aged: A Field Experiment in an Institutional Setting, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(2), 191-198; J. Rodin and E. J. Langer Rodin, 1977, Long-Term Effects of a Control-Relevant Intervention with the Institutionalized Aged, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(12), 897-902.

———————