Review

I’ve always believed that the other disciplines could learn a lot from the practice of design critique. This book does a good job at explaining how to get it right, and how easy it is to get wrong.

You Might Also Like:

Book Review and Summary: Inmates Running the Asylum by Alan Cooper

Get a comprehensive review and summary of the best-selling book "Inmates Running the Asylum" by Alan Cooper, the software development expert and author. Learn about the key principles and practices for creating user-friendly software and avoiding common pitfalls in the development process.

andrewclark.co.uk

Book Review and Summary: The Mom Test by Rob Fitzpatrick

Get a comprehensive review and summary of the best-selling book "The Mom Test" by Rob Fitzpatrick, the startup and customer development expert. Learn about the key principles and practices for validating and refining your business ideas and products through customer conversations and feedback.

andrewclark.co.uk

Articulating Design Decisions

Master the art of communicating design decisions with this insightful summary of Tom Greever's "Articulating Design Decisions". Learn how to effectively present your work, foster agreement, and gain support from stakeholders. Discover key strategies for building relationships, preparing for meetings, responding to feedback, and navigating challenging situations. Enhance your ability to articulate the problem-solving, user-centric, and business-oriented aspects of your design choices. A must-read for designers and product managers looking to improve their communication skills and drive successful outcomes.

andrewclark.co.uk

Key Takeaways

The 20% that gave me 80% of the value.

• It takes a team to build a great product, responsibilities and expertise are divided amongst members so we need to be able to discuss our work. We need to get better at having these conversations.
• When we ask for feedback, we aren’t being specific enough in describing what we want feedback on and why. Typically we get back a gut reaction, riddled with personal bias.
• Remember ‘You are not the user’: when collecting feedback from stakeholders, we need to ensure that the user’s needs, goals, and contexts are kept in mind.
• Reactive and directive feedback are limited in their ability to help us understand if the design choices we’ve made might work toward the product’s objectives.
• Critique: Identifies a specific aspect of the idea or a decision that’s being analysed. Relates that aspect or decision at an objective or best practice. Describes how and why the aspect or decision work to support or not support the objective or best practice.
• Critique is important because it helps us…
• Build a shared vocabulary - Develop a shared language within the team as members naturally adopt common terms and phrases over time, enhancing communication.
• Find relevant consensus - Saying yes without being clear on what you’re trying to achieve isn’t helpful. Critique helps us have regular conversations about the elements of an idea that are most effective toward a particular objective.
• Drive effective iteration - having points in our process that drive that evolution and indicate where changes should be made moving forward (that is, the next iteration)
• Critique is the art of reflection, part of the learning process. Critique it’s a a life skill, not a design skill. Improving the quality of critique can result in better collaboration, efficiency, and designs. The ultimate goal is to change the way we talk about what we’ve designed regardless of the type of meeting or conversation we’re in.

• There are two players in any critique:
• The Recipient: receiving the critique who will take the perspectives and information raised during the critique, process it, and act upon it in some way.
• The Giver: give the critique who are being asked to think critically about the design and provide their thoughts and perspectives.
• Intention is important: why are we asking for/receiving/giving feedback? Both players have to have an appropriate intent to have a successful critique. Both players need to act with the intent of using the information and perspectives raised during the critique to strengthen the design.
• The recipient has to want to understand whether the elements of the design will work to achieve the objectives.
• The giver should want to help the designer understand the effect that elements of the design will have on the product’s ability to achieve its objectives
• Great ideas can come from anywhere but critique is not the place for exploring new ideas. Good critique avoids problem solving because it can detract and distract from the analytical focus of the discussion.
• Best Practices for Giving Critique
• Lead with questions (not interrogation) → ask questions on which to base your analysis and give stronger, actionable feedback. Show you’re interested in the work and the thinking behind it, you get more information and you can make the designer more comfortable
• Examples of questions you might ask:
• Can you tell me more about what your objectives were for [specific aspect or element of the design]?
• What other options did you consider for [aspect/element]?
• Why did you choose this approach for [aspect/element]?
• Were there any influencers or constraints that affected your choices?
• Beginning every question with ‘Why’ can feel abrasive or like an attack. Use lighter phrases like “Tell me more about...” instead.
• Use a filter → Hold onto initial reactions, investigate them, and discuss them in the proper context, as appropriate. Does your reaction relate to the objectives of the product, the audience for it, or any particular best practices that should be followed?
• Don’t assume → Find out the thinking or constraints behind choices. Avoid assumptions by asking about them.
• Don’t invite yourself → Get in touch and ask to talk about the design. Give her the opportunity to prepare to listen.
• Talk about strengths → Critique isn’t just about what’s not working. We often take the positive for granted.
• Think about perspective → from whose “angle” are you analysing the design? Avoid feedback based on personal preferences rather than being tied to the objectives.
• Ask: Where are you in your process? What can I help you with the most? Opinions are easy. Help at the precise time it’s needed is difficult, but not impossible.

• Critique contains 3 important details:
• It identifies a specific aspect of the idea or a decision in the design being analysed.
• It relates that aspect or decision to an objective or best practice.
• It describes how and why the aspect or decision works to support or not support the objective or best practice.
• These 4 questions give us what we need to think critically about a design:
• What is the objective of the design?
• So we can focus on what’s important
• What elements of the design are related to the objective?
• Identify elements of the design that work for or against the objective.
• Are those elements effective in achieving the objective?
• Asking whether we think those choices will work to achieve the objectives
• Why or why not?
• How close it is it to the objective? Will it work counter to the objective?
• Other questions to think about?
• What other objectives should the designer have been considering but didn’t?
• What new problems, complications, or successes might arise from the choices being proposed

Receiving Critique

• Ask for feedback and be ready to examine the choices you made and when you do, be ready to listen and act on what you learn. Value the expertise and perspectives of your teammates.
• The goal is to understand and identify opportunities for improvement.
• Listen and think before responding - prevent your natural tendencies to form rebuttals.
• If feedback doesn’t seem relevant try and relate it back to the objectives of the design.
• Participate and shift your mindset and become a critic yourself.

• Critique is a linchpin for iteration. For a critique to be fruitful, your processes must allow for iteration. Team’s need time and space to analyse and rethink decisions.
• The team need to be comfortable with the idea that what they are creating is only temporary.

The cultures that are most conducive to good critique value collaboration and iteration. They understand that for teams to make good decisions together, critical thinking is necessary, and that to accommodate critique and continuous improvement, iteration must be supported.

Setting the Foundation for Critique

• Get everyone on the same page use a Mini Creative Brief, which should include:
• A brief summary of the problem statement or purpose of the product
• The key users (personas) of the solution
• The main scenarios in which the solution will be used
• The business goals that have been established for the product
• The design principles to be followed

Practicing Critique

• Find frequent opportunities to critique, both formally and informally. This improves critiquing skills, builds awareness, normalises critique in team conversations and slowly changes team culture Start small - Work with 1 or 2 others initially, practice often to build comfort, gradually progress to larger groups. Critique competitors' designs for practice which helps with competitive analysis.

• Critique as a standalone meeting is often the most effective. Start Small - The more people you add, more effort it takes to facilitate a useful conversation. Think before you speak - Focus on listening, taking in information and consciously interpreting it to form an understanding that directs how we behave. Think carefully about who to include - be intentional.
• Standalone critiques are when we have a discussion with the sole purpose of critiquing a creation. The space allows more targeted and focused feedback on specific areas. The focus helps us facilitate create a safe place to share and analyse work.
• Critique is only effective in a limited window. After the designer can articulate well formed ideas - but before time runs out and opportunity to iterate is lost. E.g. after it is 20 percent baked but before it’s 80 percent baked.
• Ideally critique is immediately useful - the designer can quickly iterate on feedback given.
• Too much critique doesn’t allow for progress to be made between sessions, stalling momentum.
• You can critique sketches, wireframes, visual designs, prototypes and more. Anything you want to improve can be critiqued. The framework stays the same.
• What are the objectives?
• What elements or aspects of the product relate to those objectives?
• Are those aspects or elements effective?
• Why or why not?.
• It’s best to separate critique from approval. The problem with design reviews is that there intended outcome is approval.

• Facilitation is essential for gathering useful critique
• Avoid problem-solving during critique sessions; focus on analysis
• Problem-solving can derail the session and prevent meeting goals
• Don’t rush decisions on changes; explore and generate solutions after critique
• The goal of critique is understanding design effectiveness, not listing changes
• Avoid using “I like” or “I don’t like”; focus on design objectives
• Establish critique rules to set expectations and provide guidelines
• Proper preparation for critique sessions ensures useful insights
• Tools and techniques for effective facilitation include:
• Defining critique scope and goals
• Active listening
• Using structures like Round Robin and Quotas
• Direct inquiry for relevant expertise
• Using Thinking Hats for lens-based analysis
• Taking notes to capture discussion points
• Using third-party facilitators for early-stage critiques

Deep Summary

Longer form notes, typically condensed, reworded and de-duplicated.

Chapter 1. Understanding Critique Conversations Matter

• It takes a team to build a great product, responsibilities and expertise are divided amongst members. We need to to talk with one another to combine our skills, to discuss what it is we’re designing, why we’re creating it, and how it will all come together.
• Conversations about design can turn emotional and painful. Left unchecked soon it can feel like team can’t agree on anything, which reduces collaboration.
• We need to be able to discuss our work. We need to get better at having these conversations.
• The Problem with Asking for “Feedback” - Feedback is an important part of the design process, but the term itself it too broad and can produce conversations that aren’t useful.
• We aren’t being specific enough in describing what we want feedback on and why
• We get back gut reaction, personal bias and ‘I would have designed it like this’.
• You are not the user: when collecting feedback from stakeholders, we need to ensure that the user’s needs, goals, and contexts are kept in mind.
• There are three kinds of feedback, only critique is helpful from stakeholders.
• Gut Reaction: Fast, passionate, emotional and visceral. Driven by personal expectations, desires and values. Or people just say what they think they want to say.
• Gut reactions from actual users can tell us something.
• Direction: Begins with an instruction or suggestion. They have their own design or expectations in mind, or they feel a problem is not being addressed. Direction without an explanation doesn’t tell us much about the effectiveness of our decisions in meeting the objectives of the design.
• Critique: Identifies a specific aspect of the idea or a decision that’s being analysed. Relates that aspect or decision at an objective or best practice. Describes how and why the aspect or decision work to support or not support the objective or best practice.

Reaction and direction are limited in their ability to help us understand if the design choices we’ve made might work toward the product’s objectives. Critique uses critical thinking, is feedback that focuses on exactly that understanding.

• When designing we need to switch between creative thinking (generating ideas or assembling parts of ideas) and analytical thinking determining if we’ve achieved what we set out to). Experienced designers are deliberate in controlling when to make this toggle, periodically pausing their creative work to take a step back and critique what they have so far.
• Critique is important because it helps us…
• Build a shared vocabulary - Develop a shared language within the team as members naturally adopt common terms and phrases over time, enhancing communication.
• Find relevant consensus - Saying yes without being clear on what you’re trying to achieve isn’t helpful. Critique helps us have regular conversations about the elements of an idea that are most effective toward a particular objective.
• Drive effective iteration - having points in our process that drive that evolution and indicate where changes should be made moving forward (that is, the next iteration)
• Critique is critical thinking. Design with a set of objectives in mind, we can stop to analyse what we’ve done so far to inform how we might go forward.
• Critique is the art of reflection, part of the learning process.
• Critique it’s a a life skill, not a design skill.
• Improving the quality of critique can result in better collaboration, efficiency, and designs.
• The ultimate goal is to change the way we talk about what we’ve designed regardless of the type of meeting or conversation we’re in.
• To ensure our conversations with teammates are useful, we need to apply critical thinking to the topics we discuss.

Chapter 2. What Critique Looks Like

• Giving good critique is a skill that begins with the right intentions. Help the recipient understand how effective the design is by making sure that you’re avoiding selfish, untimely, incomplete, or preferential feedback and by following best practices.
• There are two players in any critique:
• The Recipient: receiving the critique who will take the perspectives and information raised during the critique, process it, and act upon it in some way.
• The Giver: give the critique who are being asked to think critically about the design and provide their thoughts and perspectives.
• Intention is important: why are we asking for/receiving/giving feedback? Both players have to have an appropriate intent to have a successful critique. Both players need to act with the intent of using the information and perspectives raised during the critique to strengthen the design.
• The recipient has to want to understand whether the elements of the design will work to achieve the objectives.
• The giver should want to help the designer understand the effect that elements of the design will have on the product’s ability to achieve its objectives
• Great ideas can come from anywhere but critique is not the place for exploring new ideas. Good critique avoids problem solving because it can detract and distract from the analytical focus of the discussion.
• Bad critique is often:
• Selfish - used to achieve personal goals of the critic at the expense of the team. To attract attention or be seen as superior. If presented with selfish feedback put in the work to understand what someone is trying to tell us and determine if there’s some useful feedback on the design.
• Untimely - unless asked it’s unwise to assume it’s a good time to critique. The receiver needs to be in the proper mindset to listen.
• Incomplete - The recipient needs to understand the why behind any reaction to the design, so they can understand what they might need to change in their next iteration.
• Good critique is actionable - the “why” behind the feedback helps the designer understand the comment so they can take action and propose alternatives. What is and isn’t working? And why?
• Preferential - when designs are torn apart because they don’t match what the give likes and not because the design isn’t working
• Best Practices for Giving Critique
• Lead with questions (not interrogation) → ask questions on which to base your analysis and give stronger, actionable feedback. Show you’re interested in the work and the thinking behind it, you get more information and you can make the designer more comfortable
• Examples of questions you might ask:
• Can you tell me more about what your objectives were for [specific aspect or element of the design]?
• What other options did you consider for [aspect/element]?
• Why did you choose this approach for [aspect/element]?
• Were there any influencers or constraints that affected your choices?
• Beginning every question with ‘Why’ can feel abrasive or like an attack. Use lighter phrases like “Tell me more about...” instead.
• Use a filter → Hold onto initial reactions, investigate them, and discuss them in the proper context, as appropriate. Does your reaction relate to the objectives of the product, the audience for it, or any particular best practices that should be followed?
• Don’t assume → Find out the thinking or constraints behind choices. Avoid assumptions by asking about them.
• Don’t invite yourself → Get in touch and ask to talk about the design. Give her the opportunity to prepare to listen.
• Talk about strengths → Critique isn’t just about what’s not working. We often take the positive for granted.

Part of the design process involves the deconstruction and abstraction of ideas and then recombining them in different ways or with ideas from somewhere else. It’s a common way in which we take a familiar concept for which there is room for improvement or added value and then innovate from there..

• Think about perspective → from whose “angle” are you analysing the design? Avoid feedback based on personal preferences rather than being tied to the objectives.
• Ask: Where are you in your process? What can I help you with the most? Opinions are easy. Help at the precise time it’s needed is difficult, but not impossible.

A Simple Framework for Critique

• Critique contains 3 important details:
• It identifies a specific aspect of the idea or a decision in the design being analyzed.
• It relates that aspect or decision to an objective or best practice.
• It describes how and why the aspect or decision works to support or not support the objective or best practice.
• These 4 questions give us what we need to think critically about a design:
• What is the objective of the design?
• So we can focus on what’s important
• What elements of the design are related to the objective?
• Identify elements of the design that work for or against the objective.
• Are those elements effective in achieving the objective?
• Asking whether we think those choices will work to achieve the objectives
• Why or why not?
• How close it is it to the objective? Will it work counter to the objective?
• Other questions to think about?
• What other objectives should the designer have been considering but didn’t?
• What new problems, complications, or successes might arise from the choices being proposed?

Forming critique is a simple four-step process. What are the design’s objectives? What are the elements of the design related to those objectives? Are those elements effective? Why

Receiving Critique

• Ask for feedback. When receiving switch modes and be ready to examine the choices you made and when you do, be ready to listen and act on what you learn. Value the expertise and perspectives of your teammates.
• Critique Anti-Patterns
• Asking for feedback without listening
• Asking for feedback for praise or validation
• Not asking for feedback at all
• Best Practices for Receiving Critique
• Critique isn’t about judgement - The goal is to understand and identify opportunities for improvement (remember nothing is perfect).
• Listen and think before responding - try to prevent any natural tendencies to form rebuttals and instead focus on listening to people’s entire thoughts.
• Return to the foundation - If feedback doesn’t seem relevant return to previously agreed-upon objectives, try to work with the person giving the critique on relating it back by asking her follow-up questions related to the objectives.
• A product’s objectives describe the reasons for its creation, who it is for, and what it will do. If you can’t determine for yourself how the feedback relates to the product or project’s objectives,
• Participate - As the receiver shift your mindset and become a critic yourself. By participating in the analysis and openly talking about the aspects of our design that could be improved upon, we can make others feel more comfortable participating in these discussions.

Critique isn’t about judgment. It’s about analysing the design so that you can improve it. Participate in that analysis. Listen to the feedback you collect from others and relate it to the objectives of the product you’re designing.

• Good critiques that are productive for the entire team—are the result of dialogue. We need to ensure that we’re doing our best to make them as conversational and focused as possible.

Chapter 3. Culture and Critique

• The dominant force in collaboration is typically coordination or consensus. It can be challenging to incorporate critique into both:
• Coordination is the act of aligning individual work efforts to be assembled into an end product. The problem for critique lies when bringing things together, if the team aren’t comfortable and experienced in in giving or receiving feedback, it can lead to less than aligned products and processes silos that insulate them from one another.
• Consensus is collaboration that is contingent on agreement. Teams don’t do anything unless everyone (or nearly everyone) agrees that it’s the right thing to do. Critique can be seen as unhelpful as it isn’t intended to get everyone to agree.
• Teams where critique fits easiest are those that:
• Believe they should offer their perspectives on what will or will not work.
• A trust that their perspectives will be taken into consideration.
• The understanding that although their perspective will be taken into consideration, a different direction or decision might be made (based on other perspectives, expertise or objectives of the product.
• Critique is a linchpin for iteration. For a critique to be fruitful, your processes must allow for iteration. Team’s need time and space to analyse and rethink decisions.
• An incremental approach is largely additive - an end state is imagined, broken apart into pieces, each phase a new piece is created and connected to the pieces created in the previous phases.
• An iterative approach appreciates that the initial solution is unlikely to be completely effective and therefore the goal is to repeatedly modify a solution to gradually increase its effectiveness. The iterative approach is recombanatory. In each iteration a team begins by creating its best attempt at a solution, noting where it is making assumptions. As a solution is created, it is then analysed to assess its effectiveness, preferably through some interaction with actual users.
• An effective process will include both iteration and incrementalism.
• The team need to be comfortable with the idea that what they are creating is only temporary.

The cultures that are most conducive to good critique value collaboration and iteration. They understand that for teams to make good decisions together, critical thinking is necessary, and that to accommodate critique and continuous improvement, iteration must be supported.

• Setting the Foundation for Critique
• Get everyone on the same page to avoid conversations where participants all have varying ideas, visions, and goals in mind.
• Agree objectives of a project or product:
1. Reach its goals
2. For the given audiences (personas)
3. By creating a design with the right behaviours and characteristics (principles)
4. To produce the desired experience when used in the applicable contexts (scenarios).
• Alongside the practical goals of personas, include emotional goals (how they should feel) to drive visual style and voice.
• Use scenarios to articulate visual hierarchy needs.
• Who’s the most important persona for this scenario?
• What’s the first thing that persona should see or notice on the screen?
• What should the persona notice after that?
• Which things on the screen should the persona notice only by exception, or when more detail becomes necessary?
• Keep asking: which persona, which scenario, which goal?
• Personas are tools to clarify understanding and create conversational shorthand.
• Goals and principles describe where you’re trying to go with the design; they outline the future you’re trying to create and ways in which you want to create it.
• Goals are the desired, measurable outcomes that result from the product being used. They should be achievable and meaningful and that they should correlate to a change in user behaviour. Avoid goals that are binary or output based.
• Principles are the qualities and characteristics that the product will exhibit (e.g. content, behaviours) as people use it and interact with it.
• A Mini Creative Brief includes:
• A brief summary of the problem statement or purpose of the product
• The key users (personas) of the solution
• The main scenarios in which the solution will be used
• The business goals that have been established for the product
• The design principles to be followed
• You can read more about the Mini Creative Brief here

• Keeping critiques focused on what matters for the product means having a mutually understood set of objectives. By working to uncover what these are and referencing them regularly throughout a project we not only have better critiques, but we begin to change the culture and dynamics of a team to better support critique.

• Personal Barriers to Critique
• Many people avoid critique to prevent hurting feelings.
• Cultural differences affect openness to critique; some see it as rude, others are straightforward.
• Respect and trust are crucial for effective critique.
• Negative past experiences with critique influence participation.
• Critique should be a safe, collaborative environment.
• Set and communicate clear rules for critique to foster a positive environment.

Practicing Critique

• Practicing Critique
• Find frequent opportunities to critique, both formally and informally.
• This improves critiquing skills, builds awareness, normalises critique in team conversations and slowly changes team culture
• Start small: Work with 1-2 others initially, practice often to build comfort, gradually progress to larger groups.
• Critique competitors' designs for practice which helps with competitive analysis.

Chapter 4. Making Critique a Part of Your Process

• Create opportunities for critique, as a standalone meeting, or part of a collaborative activity or design review.
• Start Small - The more people you add, more effort it takes to facilitate a useful conversation.
• Think before you speak - Focus on listening, taking in information and consciously interpreting it to form an understanding that directs how we behave.
• Think carefully about who to include - be intentional.
• Standalone critiques are when we have a discussion with the sole purpose of critiquing a creation. The space allows more targeted and focused feedback on specific areas. The focus helps us facilitate create a safe place to share and analyse work.
• Establish a critique operating rhythm - blend one-on-one meetings, group critique and all design meetings.
• Two things need to be in place to critique an idea in a useful manner:
• We need to be able to clearly communicate the idea to others.
• We need to have the time to process the feedback we receive from the critique and use it to iterate on our idea.
• Critique is only effective in a limited window. After the designer can articulate well formed ideas - but before time runs out and opportunity to iterate is lost. E.g. after it is 20 percent baked but before it’s 80 percent baked.
• Ideally critique is immediately useful - the designer can quickly iterate on feedback given.
• Too much critique doesn’t 2allow for progress to be made between sessions, stalling momentum. Team members with low confidence shouldn’t rely on critique as a validation mechanism.
• You can critique sketches, wireframes, visual designs, prototypes and more. Anything you want to improve can be critiqued. The framework stays the same.
• What are the objectives?
• What elements or aspects of the product relate to those objectives?
• Are those aspects or elements effective?
• Why or why not?
• Design Studio:
• Each round there’s a charrette: Sketch > Present > Critique
• Typically you’ll have two or three rounds.
• The first round you work as an individual.
• Make sure you provide participants with the problem statement, business goals, scenarios, personas, and any other previously agreed-upon artefacts
• Don’t use a design studio if there isn’t a clear agreed framing of the problem.
• It’s best to separate critique from approval. The problem with design reviews is that there intended outcome is approval.
• Design reviews are often scheduled too late in the process too.

Chapter 5. Facilitating Critique

• Facilitation is essential for gathering useful critique
• Avoid problem-solving during critique sessions; focus on analysis
• Problem-solving can derail the session and prevent meeting goals
• Don’t rush decisions on changes; explore and generate solutions after critique
• The goal of critique is understanding design effectiveness, not listing changes
• Avoid using “I like” or “I don’t like”; focus on design objectives
• Establish critique rules to set expectations and provide guidelines
• Proper preparation for critique sessions ensures useful insights
• Tools and techniques for effective facilitation include:
• Defining critique scope and goals
• Active listening
• Using structures like Round Robin and Quotas
• Direct inquiry for relevant expertise
• Using Thinking Hats for lens-based analysis
• Taking notes to capture discussion points
• Using third-party facilitators for early-stage critiques
• Review critique findings to determine actions and priorities
• Follow up with participants to outline next steps and keep momentum
• Critique is a continuous process throughout a product’s life

Chapter 6. Critiquing with Difficult People and Challenging Situations

• Conversations and situations can become challenging; be prepared for that and don’t lose heart.
• Make sure those who aren’t saying much have opportunities to share their thoughts - ask them directly for feedback.
• Know what questions to ask and when, even if it means having a separate discussion.
• Steer challenging conversations back to the main concerns and keep them centred on the product.
• Expect communication miscues, conflict, and frustration when collaborating, and handle them with patience and tactics.
• Not all feedback is wanted, relevant, or actionable—salvage what you can.
• When giving feedback to someone who struggles with it, focus on the work, be honest, and balance strengths and weaknesses.
• Use the question "Why?" methodically to facilitate reactive or directive feedback.
• Ensure everyone understands what useful feedback is and its focus to keep conversations efficient and on track.
• If someone puts forward an alternative design, analyse the differences and discuss them.
• Use goals, personas, scenarios, and principles to centre conversations.
• Communicate ahead of time with difficult individuals.
• Refocus conversations on the objectives when things go awry.
• Keeping the focus on the product can help manage unwanted critique or difficult situations.
• The 10 Bad Habits That Hurt Critique
1. Reacting
2. Being Selfish
3. Getting defensive
4. Starting from Disparate Foundations
5. Lacking Focus
6. Focusing on What Isn’t Working
7. Lack of Discussion
8. Avoiding Participation
9. Problem Solving
10. Confusing Critique with Review