The evil twin of constructive criticism could only be destructive criticism … aka an hour on Twitter. Our team was joking about moving to a destructive criticism model to shake things up, but the sad thing is that we’re probably all so familiar with it that we might not notice its sexy leather uniform and preferred, but optional, goatee.
Disclaimer: It is 100% a bad idea to focus on things you don’t want, so, hopefully, you’ll be able to dump this from your brain after a quick check that there’s none of this anywhere near your game or team. Get back to the good stuff ASAP, but if you want a little tour of destruction, here we go…
What is Destructive Criticism?
When I say “destructive criticism”, I mean feedback that only takes and gives nothing.
It takes good vibes, self confidence and trust in the team. It gives nothing useful. It sometimes makes hollow promises to deliver the “good stuff” down the track once the receiver jumps through poorly defined hoops or pleases the critic in some way. Even if there is some gold at the end of that rainbow, on a game schedule, who has the fricken time?
Examples of destructive criticism:
Example #1: Wet-blanket statements
“I hate it” or “it’s the worst” are all just feel-bad blanket statements. They are so vague it doesn’t give you anything to go with beyond a general sense of public shaming. It’s also super lazy. Understanding your gut reaction is important, but it’s step one.
Example #2: Shade not aid
Snark is fun, but it’s also deeply frustrating, which might be the point. Beyond the obvious dunk, there’s the sense that the other person knows better and could help you but would rather just kick you for laughs. “No one is going to overlook that UI” or “well, at least it won’t detract from the core of the game”.
Example #3: Playing the person, not the ball
Personal attacks are pretty obvious. Telling someone they “suck” or whatever lacks imagination, and is pointless unless you just want them to shut up and go away, and if that’s the dynamic you are going for on your team you have much bigger issues.
Some People Just Want to Watch the World Burn
Unfortunately, some people will argue for the place of these kinds of statements because it supposedly will:
– Toughen people up (meanwhile, life says, “Hold my beer.”)
– Be the unvarnished truth (hmmm… only if your truth ignores everything good and only presents the bad)
– Motivate people (I guess – if you like driving 90% of people away and leaving only those who are motivated by a belly full of spite .. spite that may or may not be used for good instead of evil).
The Pros and Cons of Destructive Criticism
Tongue firmly in cheek…
Pros
+ Lols (assuming you aren’t meant to fix the problem)
+ Venting. Sometimes venting is good (as long as you aren’t being vented on, and it’s not public)
+ Fuels competition where you really want to step on someone’s spleen to get ahead
+ You can establish alpha dominance of the group without peeing on the office furniture
Cons
– Kills morale
– Offers zero practical solutions
– Makes cooperation and teamwork harder
– Annihilates trust
– Makes people reluctant to ask for help or advice so mistakes take longer to find
– Makes everyone involved look bad, unless you are a generational wit (which you are not … unless you happen to be John Oliver or my mate Matty Lovkis, that guy’s a riot.)
Stars & Wishes to the Rescue
We’ve started a pretty simple feedback system at Ultimerse. I learnt about it from my partner who’s learning to teach school kids. It goes back to the late 90s and this book: Embedding Formative Assessment: Practical Techniques for K-12 Classrooms by Siobhan Leahy Dylan Wiliam, but it is also gaining speed on the tabletop roleplaying game circuit.
We’re talking Stars and Wishes.
Stars are things that we like. We are praising something that’s good.
Wishes are an area where we see an opportunity. This is something that we wish could be a bit different or that we’d like to jump in and change.
I know this sounds both a bit childish and maybe bordering on toxic positivity, but give me a moment to explain why it works. In games we build things in iterations. We do a small test of a feature or a system, check it in place with everything else we’ve done and then see if it works.
Building in iteration lets us:
– Test ideas in context of complex game systems
– Fail quickly if things don’t work, without wasting resources
– Test the experience of a thing, and not just the theory as soon as possible
– Plan additional resources or re-scope an idea if the basics prove more easy or difficult to make and integrate than we’d suspected
How Stars & Wishes Works for Us
So, basically, every 2-week block of work we plan is an experiment that tells us if something is working and feels good, or is not working and needs more time or a re-think.
Stars are critical in a process like this. We don’t just want to call out what isn’t working, but lock in what is. By celebrating the good elements we can look at how to make more of them, or how to elevate star features further to make them a showcase.
Wishes are also a really good construct because they suggest action. They are doing ideas. The person proposing the wish might not know the perfect solution, but they are identifying an issue and suggesting a direction they might like to explore.
When things are Actually Not Good…
Let’s not kid around, there are times when things do suck. There are experiments that completely fail. There are whole games that don’t work, and you probably can’t make work with the resources you have.
Sometimes Stars and Wishes won’t carry the day. Sometimes, you do have to make a blanket statement like: “this is not working. It’s terrible.”
But that can never be it.
The next idea needs to be “here’s how we fix it.” And, sometimes, how you fix it is to call it quits. That’s something you can do after you weigh up the options and do the analysis. It’s not designed to make anyone feel bad or tear anyone down, it’s actually constructive. You’ve found a way to move forward. A way to build other things.
Constructive Criticism on Destructive Criticism
Destructive Criticism is always half of the thought. The uncharitable part of you that might be useful taking down a bully twice your size on the playground is pretty much poison in a team environment.
A lot of this is obvious stuff. We’ve all heard the phrase “constructive criticism only”, which is a good use of the word “only”. Constructive criticism builds trust, rather than takes it. Games are iterative. That means we build, we test what we built and we make it better and then we try again. Games are built on failure and then knowing what to try next to make it better. We fail as fast as we can until we figure out how not to.
There is a vulnerability in failing and getting back up, but there is also a wild freedom and a joy. That’s the joy that comes through in what we build. Now evaluate how this core process works doused in Destructive Criticism. Play forward how well it works punishing people for doing what they, 100%, need to do for their job.
There is no place for wanton destruction in most healthy relationships, but there is especially no place in a process built on failure and joy.
—
Thanks for reading this, hope it helps you and your team!
Timothy Best
Creative Lead
Ultimerse on Twitter – I’ll be sharing tips on how to deal with destructive criticism there soon.
