Side note: aren't these title styles becoming such a common click-bait trope that everyone automatically discounts any information in the article by now?
Horrible title aside, it's actually a fairly reasonable point, but feels like a missed opportunity to write something more compelling about trading business-speak for empathy.
Another approach is "how does this suck, and how do you think it could be better?" starts off with a premise of unpolished-edges seeking honest input. Also, only ask strangers, preferably likely customers, for feedback/advice because it can seem a catch-22 to most friends and family.
I don't think this has much at all to do with the words used.
Give it a few goes and eventually "advice" will become the bad word. People will realise that they're just getting the same response that dissuaded them originally from responding to requests for "feedback".
It's not the word you use, it's way you respond to what you receive.
My CEO currently asks for (and receives no) "questions".
Of course, it's just as likely that the causality is the other way around, and language serves paradigm. That is, new ways of talking about things are devised as new things to talk about are found. The two situations will look nearly identical in situ. I'm more inclined to agree with pricechild and the "euphemism treadmill" hypothesis.
What do you think the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is? I don't see how it is remotely applicable in these circumstances.
It's not about words or diction. It's about language as a broad, thought-influencing and -limiting tool. It's about what is thinkable to someone who uses a particular language.
"Unlock attention from villagers by shouting 'Wolf!'"
Words only mean what the social structures surrounding them dictate that they mean. Attempting to change social structures by using different words ultimately results in nothing more than altering the meaning of those words to fit the social structures into whose service you're conscripting them. Cf. every generation of teenagers ever.
Don't ask for feedback or advice. Ask for money. If someone is willing to buy that's a very positive sign and you have a new customer. If they're not then you can have a conversation about why, which either leads to some useful feedback or you get to quickly ascertain that the person doesn't need what you're building, in which case their advice (or feedback, or questions) would have been pointless anyway.
This article reminds me of sales techniques in general. For example, there's a talk somewhere on YouTube by a sales guru I can't remember the name of, about the art of closing. In the video he suggests using the word "agreement" over "contract". People never want to sign a contract but everybody loves to agree on something. The point is some words have unintended negative connotations and word choice is very important when trying to steer a conversation or a decision-making process.
Advice suggests guidance for a present or future task.
I agree that this small distinction is important. Even if it's something like "here's what just happened, what's your feedback on how I handled it?" vs "here's what just happened, what's your advice on how to deal with these situations in the future."
Asking for advice is perfectly fine, provided that those giving it have no expectation that it will be followed. I mention this only because sometimes, when advice is given, there's an implicit assumption that it will be followed - "You asked for advice, I told you to do X, but then you didn't do X! Why'd you even bother asking for it then?!" - when the person asking for it can (and will) do whatever they want.
Of course, this doesn't help with hurt feelings when a person doesn't implement advice, but that'd happen regardless of whether you're giving feedback or advice.
22 comments
[ 7.2 ms ] story [ 83.3 ms ] threadApart from that, being a "hated auditor" for more than a decade I agree that "seeking advice" has a better ring than "seeking feedback".
Advice can be considered friendly, (sometimes) unofficial and positive, while feedback "will be permanently put on your record!"
Give it a few goes and eventually "advice" will become the bad word. People will realise that they're just getting the same response that dissuaded them originally from responding to requests for "feedback".
It's not the word you use, it's way you respond to what you receive.
My CEO currently asks for (and receives no) "questions".
"The principle of linguistic relativity holds that the structure of a language affects its speakers' world view or cognition." (emphasis mine)
It's not about words or diction. It's about language as a broad, thought-influencing and -limiting tool. It's about what is thinkable to someone who uses a particular language.
"Unlock attention from villagers by shouting 'Wolf!'"
Words only mean what the social structures surrounding them dictate that they mean. Attempting to change social structures by using different words ultimately results in nothing more than altering the meaning of those words to fit the social structures into whose service you're conscripting them. Cf. every generation of teenagers ever.
Advice suggests guidance for a present or future task.
I agree that this small distinction is important. Even if it's something like "here's what just happened, what's your feedback on how I handled it?" vs "here's what just happened, what's your advice on how to deal with these situations in the future."
Of course, this doesn't help with hurt feelings when a person doesn't implement advice, but that'd happen regardless of whether you're giving feedback or advice.