Criticize by Creating
Keys to Innovation Part 7: Build, Don't Tear Down
Welcome to Polymathic Being, a place to explore counterintuitive insights across multiple domains. These essays explore common topics from different perspectives and disciplines to uncover unique insights and solutions.
Today’s topic is Part Seven in our Keys to Innovation series, where we explore new ways of thinking to unlock true innovation. This key proposes a new model for critique that leverages our social superpower and builds ideas together to create a better idea.
Intro
We’ve all likely been in a group trying to solve a problem. Ideas flow, but they keep being rejected. No sooner does someone recommend a course of action than someone else comes up with a reason why it won’t work. It’s frustrating when nothing seems to gain traction, and rejections start to feel personal.
Simply put, it’s not a very innovative environment as the quiet personalities withhold their ideas from rejection, and the solution seems to gravitate toward the loudest or most senior voices, not the best ideas. So, how do we break out of that common trap?
First, it’s good to know that this isn’t a new problem among us humans. In fact, we’ve been dealing with it for millennia. So much so that a brilliant solution was proffered over 2000 years ago by Cicero, a Philosopher, Statesman, & Lawyer in ancient Rome, who said:
“I criticize by creation, not by finding fault ”
What this highlights is that the solution to bad ideas is better ideas. It’s critique, not through destruction, but construction, where we build off of others and create something better.
Creation:
Years ago, I remember a co-worker recommending a simple change in the vernacular when discussing and debating ideas.
“Instead of saying Yes, But… try Yes, And.”
It’s a simple reframe that doesn’t immediately turn and deconstruct an idea. More than just a simple change of words, it also actually changes your mindset. It moves you from a state of critique ‘but’ and shifts to a state of additive creation, ‘and.’
The power of ‘And’ is the manifestation of Systems Thinking, which I’ve captured as:
Insatiable Curiosity
The Humility to accept we don’t know as much about the system as we think.
Intentional Reframing of the problem to see if it changes (The Enemy’s Gate is Down)
This simple framework creates a very solid foundation for creation, and by tying together collaboration, humility, and a broader perspective, we can drive our solutions to consider new, unique, and even, as we explored in our first key to innovation, divergent ideas.
This doesn’t mean you have to agree completely or that you have to accept everything being said. In fact, you can take just the parts you find useful, extract them, and build onto them. It’s a good way to build collaboration, give credit, and create better ideas. More importantly, it’s a way to push yourself to consider how you would apply someone else’s ideas intentionally. As Isaac Newton said:
“If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”
Collaborative creation, building on the ideas of others, is one of our human superpowers of social learning. Individually, we aren’t as smart as we think, but combined in an additive incubator of ideas, humans have created transformative technologies that were unimaginable just 100 years ago. With the foundation of creation, we can now look at the proper application of critique.
Critique
“Yes, BUT.” is technically a form of critique and I’m sure we’ve all cringed as it’s been levied against our ideas. Really, what’s being said here is, “Yes, I heard your stupid idea, but here’s where you’re wrong.” It’s hard not to take that interpretation because that “but” has to be followed by a contradiction. It’s certainly a critique… and it doesn’t add anything to the conversation. It merely deconstructs the original idea.
Critiquing like this is easy. Any fool can tear something down. As we briefly explored in the essay Do You Really Think Critically? being a true critic is harder:
With the onslaught of social media platforms, it appears that everyone’s a critic! However, a critic, from Greek krites, was a judge or umpire, valued for making informed decisions. Being a critic is more than an ability to mindlessly bludgeon an idea and lynch anyone caught in disagreement. Instead, a critic should be one who can provide a rational, skeptical, and unbiased analysis.
To be a true critic requires mindfulness, that is, the ability to identify, sort, and challenge internal and external assumptions.
Sometimes, the best way to provide that rational, skeptical, and unbiased analysis is to accept someone’s idea and work to build it into something useful. It’s taking an imperfect idea and working to create something better with it. A true critic is a creator, and through that creation, we can actually test the true merits of an idea
Conclusion
Anyone can be a critic; it takes a lot more to be a creator. This doesn’t mean you have to have all the unique ideas yourself. In fact, one of the most unique ideas is to be the glue that can tie together a lot of other great ideas to create a better idea.
It’s a different and somewhat uncommon way of thinking. However, it’s very well aligned with our superpower of social learning, how creativity really works by building off of others, and allows us to build a collaborative and team-oriented mindset that helps unlock diverse insights. As Buckminster Fuller said:
“In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete.”
The old model is “but,” and the new model is “and.” This allows us to criticize by creating, where our creation is the fusion of many great ideas to unlock innovation.
Check out the other Keys to Innovation Here.
What experiences do you have in criticizing by creating or changing your language from “but” to “and?” I’d love to hear your insights and experiences.
Did you enjoy this post? If so, please hit the ❤️ button above or below. This will help more people discover Substacks like this one, which is great. Also, please share here or in your network to help us grow.
Polymathic Being is a reader-supported publication. Becoming a paid member keeps these essays open for everyone. Hurry and grab 20% off an annual subscription. That’s $24 a year or $2 a month. It’s just 50¢ an essay and makes a big difference.
Further Reading from Authors I Appreciate
I highly recommend the following Substacks for their great content and complementary explorations of topics that Polymathic Being shares.
- All-around great daily essays
- Insightful Life Tips and Tricks
- Highly useful insights into using AI for writing
- Integrating AI into education
- Computer Science for Everyone
Excellent post!
I read somewhere long ago that if you use the word “but” in a sentence, people often ignore everything before it and focus only on the following negative part. I’ve also observed this in my interactions with others. No matter how many positive things are said before the word “but,” they are typically overlooked. Using alternatives like “and” or “however” is a more effective strategy to convey a message's positive and negative aspects without overshadowing the positive.
Additionally, based on my observations, you are correct that most people stay quiet or avoid speaking if they feel their ideas will be rejected or perceive that the person with the loudest voice will dominate the conversation. Psychological safety plays a crucial role in addressing this issue. When people feel safe to express their ideas without fear of judgment or retaliation, they are more likely to contribute. However, it’s also important to actively encourage participation. Some individuals will only speak up if explicitly invited, while others might prefer to share their thoughts privately outside the meeting.
This behavior can often be attributed to personality traits like introversion and extroversion. Extroverts think by talking, while introverts process internally and typically need time to reflect before expressing their thoughts. Understanding these personality differences is key to devising effective strategies. For example, allowing quieter individuals to speak early in a discussion before louder voices and extroverts dominate can create a more balanced dialogue. Revisiting quieter voices to hear their perspectives toward the end of the meeting is another practical approach.
Knowing your team’s personalities and preferences helps in tailoring strategies to ensure everyone feels heard. Encouraging pre-meeting preparation by providing an agenda and document about the discussion topic so everyone has time to think about the subject before coming to the discussion, structuring discussions to include everyone, and creating follow-up opportunities are additional strategies that can improve participation and collaboration in group settings.
Some basics for successful idea-generation in a team:
- no egomaniacs participate,
- all must have real skin in the game,
- expertise in similar projects has good value but is not vital,
- expertise in entirely different field can add enormous value by joining in unprecedented ways,
- pause in-between,
- sleep over it,
- ...