True ignorance is not the absence of knowledge, but the refusal to acquire it.   Karl Popper, quoted in The Times

Believe those who seek the truth; doubt those who find it.”  Andre Gide

(The Week 21 March 2020)

Question to agony aunt:  “When giving negative feedback, is it better to start with the admonition and end with a compliment, or vice versa?”.  (Gillian Peall, Macclesfield, Cheshire, UK)

First answer: “Definitely give the compliment first. Knowing you have done something right may make the negative feedback more acceptable. Giving the bad news first can make the compliment seem patronising or condescending.”   (Julia Barrett, Oakhill, Somerset, UK)

Second answer: “When I ran my company, I used a technique called sandwich criticism. You start by commenting on something good about the person, then move to the negative and finish on a positive. If you start with a negative, a person’s defences go up and they can hardly hear anything else you say. This is also true about the use of “but” or “however” as they are triggers for defensive behaviours.    There are those who say that this method is rather stale and can sound contrived, but it is up to you to make sure that it isn’t.    (Ron Dippold, San Diego, California)

Third answer: “It depends on the severity of the issue, and the sensitivity of the recipient. A repeat bad actor will grasp any compliment as a straw to continue their behavior, so it may be counterproductive.

“For best results, the answer is to do both, also known as bookending. Offer a compliment, give the admonition, describe what bad effects it has for them and other people, then end with the positive benefits of fixing the issue.”.  (Robert Willis, Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada)

Fourth answer:   “Various studies have found that employees want more feedback, not less. A global survey by OfficeVibe in 2016 found that 82 per cent of employees appreciate feedback, whether it is positive or negative.   Standard advice used to be to “sandwich” negative feedback between positive comments. This has been shown to be less than effective: employees quickly recognise that the positives are only window dressing and so all comments are considered dubious and disingenuous.

”Tactful honesty is the best approach. Being direct and polite makes employees feel respected. Constructive criticism offers both a critique and a solution. Research shows that people don’t quit jobs, they quit managers. Learning appropriate people skills can go a long way“.  (Tim Lewis, Landshipping,Pembrokeshire, UK)

Fifth answer:    The classical sandwich of praise, criticism, praise often fails as the employees cotton on. Asking the employee if they are open to feedback and then asking them for comments on their own behaviour or performance, good or bad, is more productive.   (Terry Gillen, Tring, Hertfordshire, UK)

Sixth answer:    “Neither. The problem with mixing praise and criticism is that the feedback becomes “contaminated”, causing confusion. A more effective approach is to begin with an objective acknowledgement with which both parties can agree. Then state clearly the change you want, and finally provide a reason to make the change.

”As I said to my son once when he was very young and angry with me: “When you speak to me like that, I have difficulty listening to you. If you take a few deep breaths and say it again in your normal tone of voice, I promise I’ll listen.”.  (Simon Phillips, London, UK)

Seventh answer:   I’ve spent countless hours in training sessions on giving feedback. One thing seems clear: the order in which you give feedback doesn’t really matter. What’s important are your intentions and soft skills.

•  Do you genuinely want to help the other person by kindly indicating where improvements could be made?
• Are you sensitive to the other person’s feelings? Can you see their point of view or sense when someone is becoming defensive? If the conversational flow needs to change, do you have the words ready to effect that change? Can you be funny or engaging? Can you use eye contact and friendly body language to reassure?

“If you can master such skills, the order in which you deliver feedback becomes irrelevant.”   (Pauline Grant, Business psychologist, Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire, UK)

And from the agony aunt: ”Please consider carefully if feedback is needed at all. If someone has behaved in a way you judge to be substandard or inappropriate, check first how they view the situation. Ask questions – real, open questions – and listen to the answers.

”Mostly we know when we have made a mistake, and someone else pointing it out is at best unnecessary and at worst deeply patronising. If they don’t know that they have made a mistake, it may be that a conversation is appropriate.  The result will tell you if your feedback is likely to be helpful. Finally, being open and humble will always help with the outcome.”

The plight of impoverished children anywhere should evoke sympathy, exemplifying as it does the suffering of the innocent and defenseless. Poverty among children in a wealthy country like the United States, however, should provoke. shame and outrage as well.

Unlike poor countries (sometimes run by leaders more interested in lining their pockets than anything else), what excuse does the United States have for its striking levels of child poverty? After all, it has the world’s 10th highest per capita income at  $62,795 at and a gross domestic product (GDP) of $21.3 trillion. Despite that, in 2020, an estimated 11.9 million American children — 16.2% of the total — live below the official poverty line, which is a paltry $25,701  for a family of four with two kids. Put another way, according to the Children’s Defense Fund, kids now constitute one-third of the 38.1 million Americans classified as poor and 70% of them have at least one working parent — so poverty can’t be chalked up to parental indolence. (Rajan Menon, Tom Dispatch  3 Feb 2020).

My take: I regret to say that this situation is not going to change anytime soon.  The country is firmly in the grip of those whose dearest wish is to emulate the group of billionaires, who pay, in terms of taxable percentage of wealth, less than their secretaries, chauffeurs and gardeners.   It’s going to take a sea change in the attitude to American capitalism and social fairness before any kind of leveling out occurs, however careful and gentle.  And this has to start with a change of heart among the evangelical christians and the hard-heads at Fox News.  If these people soften their hearts and realize that the country is headed in quite the wrong direction, resulting in decline, not greatness, then America could be equitable and fair.

Yes, this is, unapologetically, is  a political statement, but not a party political statement.  There is no reason on earth why the champions of uncompromising capitalism cannot moderate their opposition to, say healthcare, to mention just one vital issue.   If we don’t start treating one another with consideration the results are not worth contemplating.  Epicurus ( plus a host of other wise people) would agree; there is nothing wrong with compromise and a feeling of community.