Train-the-Trainer by DataHomeLab
Concept

Giving criticism

Giving criticism is the structured way an instructor delivers behaviour-focused feedback so the recipient can change, rather than defend. Criticism is blind-spot data: others can see patterns you cannot see about yourself. Done well it shrinks the Johari Blind Spot. Done badly it provokes defensiveness, breaks trust, and corrupts the next session.

Load-bearing principle: criticism is a gift, and the gift must benefit the receiver, not release the giver. Venting frustration, scoring a point, or reasserting authority is not criticism; it is a release. The five-stage protocol below is the discipline that keeps the transaction professional.

Five-stage protocol

flowchart TB P[1 Prepare
Who What Why Where When How] --> D[2 Deliver
behaviour · effect · awareness] D --> Di[3 Discuss views
listen · clarify · compromise] Di --> C[4 Consequences
both branches] C --> S[5 Summarise
agreed change]

1. Preparation

Answer six questions before you speak. Most of the work lives here; weak preparation cannot be fixed by clever delivery.

Question Discipline
Who Right person; ready to receive (not exhausted, still processing the sim, or under unrelated stress)
What Behaviour, not person; only behaviour that can change; specific examples
Why Benefit to the receiver; reasonable and achievable ask; consequences if they say no
Where Place that sets them up to receive well
When Appropriate, and as soon as practical after the event
How Assertive: no vague insinuation, no personal attack; respect their rights and your right to ask for change

2. Delivery

Three components, in order.

Describe their behaviour. Specific and observable, not generalised.

  • Weak: "That approach was a complete mess."
  • Strong: "When you don't respond to advice that I offer you…"

Describe its effects. Own the effect ("I feel concerned that…") rather than impose a label on them ("you are slowing yourself down").

Check awareness. Open the two-way door: "Had you realized?" That may cover either the behaviour or the effect. If they already knew, move into discussion. If the data is new, start from acknowledgement.

3. Discuss their views, look for solutions and any compromises

This is where change is negotiated. Response is usually positive. If not, ask why they behave that way, why they prefer their way, and why it matters to them. Stay assertive in tone and body language. Ask what they might do differently. State clearly what you want:

"I'd like you to use the advice I give you or ask if you don't understand."

Look for compromise and offer support; reaffirm the desired behaviour without escalating into aggression or collapsing into submission.

4. Describe the consequences

Two branches.

If agreement: state the positive outcome of the new behaviour.

"I'm sure this will improve your performance and will make the training more enjoyable."

If no agreement: state the negative consequence.

"If you do not respond to my advice it will be difficult for me to continue with your training."

The negative branch only works if the consequence is true, proportionate, and one you will follow through on. Bluffs die in the next session; disproportionate threats break trust. Decide this back at Preparation (Why and "what if they say no").

5. Summarize

Restate the points agreed and confirm understanding:

"Are you clear that is what will happen?"

Without the summary the conversation drifts; with it you have an actionable agreement the next session can build on.

Worked skeleton (checklist pacing)

Setting: first officer repeats the same after-take-off checklist timing error across sessions.

  1. Prepare. Right person is the F/O; behaviour is starting the checklist before flaps are up; place is debrief room now; manner assertive and specific.
  2. Deliver. Behaviour: checklist starts before flaps up, forcing a re-read. Effect: concern that the pattern will cost PRO (Application of Procedures) in the next check. Awareness: "Had you realised the timing was occurring that way?"
  3. Discuss. F/O was chasing time; agree a callout-and-pause so both time and gate are met.
  4. Consequences. With the new pacing, expect a higher grade on the next session; without it, the pattern remains visible.
  5. Summarize. "After-take-off checklist starts only after flaps-up indication." Confirm, close.

Receiving criticism

The reciprocal skill. When someone offers you blind-spot data, your job is to let the gift land.

  • Ask for it: end debriefs by inviting feedback on your own performance (tone, question load, clarity of aim).
  • Listen fully (Active listening): stay tuned; test understanding; neutralize the urge to defend mid-sentence.
  • Treat content as diagnostic, not as status threat. Refusing the gift leaves the Blind Spot intact.
  • Act on what is changeable; thank the giver. Reciprocal ask without genuine receipt teaches trainees that feedback is theatre.

Instructor use

In debrief with trainees

  • Prefer facilitation first so the crew discovers the issue. Use the five-stage protocol when the gift must be given more directly (repeated pattern, safety-critical habit, trainee not seeing what you saw).
  • Keep criticism inside behaviour that can change and inside the session evidence. Personality labels have no place in the protocol.
  • Embed the protocol inside the wider debrief arc: specific observation, effect on safety or grade dimensions, joint plan, clear close.
  • Stage 3 fails without real listening. If you are drafting your rebuttal while they speak, you are not in the protocol.

For your own performance

  • Run the same preparation discipline when you request feedback (who, what you want to know, when the room is safe enough for honesty).
  • Use trainee and peer criticism as Johari Blind Spot reduction on yourself; that is instructor development, not optional courtesy.

Connections

  • Johari window. Criticism is structured blind-spot reduction; the gift framing and self/trainee mapping live there.
  • Active listening. Stages 2 (check awareness) and 3 (discuss views) collapse without LISTEN discipline.
  • Questioning technique. Awareness and discussion stages run on good questions, not monologue.
  • Human behaviour in flight training. Ego, stress, and defence patterns that decide whether the gift is receivable.
  • Facilitation. Primary debrief technique; structured criticism is the direct alternative when discovery alone will not land the point.
  • Instruction versus facilitation. Direct criticism is instruction with a behaviour-change purpose; still must stay assertive, not aggressive.
  • The briefing, conduct and debriefing loop. Reciprocal instructor feedback closes the debrief; crew-directed criticism sits inside the analysis phase.
  • Just culture. Climate that makes honest feedback receivable without career panic.
  • C-A-L model. Analysis and evaluation rows often surface the behaviour that the protocol then addresses.

Sources