My #1 Technique for Improving a Work in Progress
Photo of John Borstel & Liz Lerman from www.lizlerman.com.
If you’re scared of something, it’s because it matters to you.
No wonder so many of us are terrified of having our work critiqued by others!
When you’ve been burned by critical voices in the past, it can seem difficult to put your stuff out there. Plus, it’s common that those same critical voices don’t even wind up providing the kind of useful feedback that actually improves the final result. Instead, those voices often just create feelings of insecurity that are detrimental.
Did you know that there is an incredible technique out there that can be used to overcome this exact issue?
It’s called Critical Response Process, and I was lucky enough to have been trained in this style of facilitating highly productive, positive critique sessions by its creator, the acclaimed American choreographer and educator Liz Lerman. She describes the Process as “a method for giving and getting feedback on work in progress, designed to leave the maker eager and motivated to get back to work.”
I use this facilitation technique during client Brandstorming Sessions to help me generate brand breakthroughs for creators and entrepreneurs. It’s an absolute godsend!
If you want to really learn how to properly facilitate using Critical Response Process, or CRP, you should buy Liz’s book here. But, consider this blog as a cheat sheet that will be more than enough to familiarize yourself with how it works!
How does CRP work?
In her book, Liz says: “Through the supportive structure of its four core steps, Critical Response Process combines the power of questions with the focus and challenge of informed dialogue. The Process offers makers an active role in the critique of their own work. It gives makers a way to rehearse the connections they seek when art meets its audience or a product meets its purpose.
The key elements of a Critical Response Process session are the four core steps of the Process and participants in three roles: an artist showing work, a facilitator, and a group of responders.
In use for over 25 years, Critical Response Process has been embraced by art makers, educators, scientists, and theater companies, dance departments, orchestras, laboratories, conservatories, museums, universities, corporations, and kindergartens.”
The Three Roles
In traditional CRP, there are three roles:
the Creator (Liz refers to them as the Artist, but I prefer to use the term Creator),
the Facilitator (that’s me), and
the Responders (the audience, focus group, team, or other group of people who are there to critique the work).
For most Brandstorming Sessions, I lead a modified version of CRP that involves just a creator (you) and a facilitator/responder (me). We can both take on the role of a responder throughout the session as we go along, while I use my magic facilitator powers to keep everything on track.
As Liz notes in her book, “much of the success of a good Critical Response session lies with the facilitator.”
Wink wink, nudge nudge. ;)
The Four Steps
There are four steps to the Process, and they’re traditionally used in a very specific, structured manner.
Step One: Statements of Meaning
To begin, the facilitator will ask responders, “What has meaning for you about what you have just seen?” or “What was stimulating, surprising, evocative, memorable, touching, meaningful for you?”
These questions help evoke responses that let the creator know what aspects of their work already have significance, or meaning. Liz says, “Critical Response Process begins with the philosophy that meaning is at the heart of an artist’s work.”
Step Two: Artist as Questioner
One thing I love about CRP is that the creator gets to ask the questions first! In this step, the creator asks specific questions about their work that they want to hear feedback about.
For this step, it works best to ask questions that aren’t too broad, but aren’t too specific either. Liz says, “The more artists clarify their focus, the more intense and deep the dialogue becomes.”
Step Three: Neutral Questions from Responders
Usually, this step is the most difficult to get right. But with my modified version of CRP for only two people, we don’t have to worry about educating the responders.
In Step Three, “the dialogue is now reversed, and responders can ask the artist informational or factual questions.” The trick is that all questions must be neutral, meaning that they are free of any embedded opinions.
Here’s an example of how to form an opinion into a neutral question:
“The cake is so dry.” (opinion)
“Why’s the cake so dry?!” (question containing an embedded opinion)
“What kind of texture were you going for?” (neutral question)
Liz says, “Many quickly discover that they can say whatever is important through this mechanism, and in the process, get the artist to think more reflectively than he might if the opinion or solution were directly stated. … When defensiveness starts, learning stops.”
Step Four: Permissioned Opinions
This might be my favorite step, although Step 3 comes close!
In Step 4, responders are now allowed to give their opinions, but they must be delivered using this exact sentence template: “I have an opinion about ____. Would you like to hear it?” The creator then has the chance to either say yes or no, depending on whether they would like to hear an opinion about that particular aspect of the work.
Liz says, “The step may seem formal, but often the formality, discipline and structure inherent in the Process make it safe for people to go into a more challenging dialogue.” I have also found this to be true.
As a plus, I’ve even used this template in regular, day to day conversations with amazing success! (That’s why this is my favorite step.)
“Opinions can feel very much like objects thrown at us. If we have no preparation we can often feel affronted rather than engaged. But with a little notice and a moment to adjust to what’s coming at us, we can be in a much better position to “catch” the opinion.”
– John Borstel
Follow-Up & Follow-Through
According to Peter DiMuro (of the Liz Lerman Dance Exchange) there are three fantastic strategies to sustain the Critical Response spirit after the session has ended:
Labbing the work, driven by dialogue between artist and facilitator
Subject matter discussion, often exploring artistic ideas or social context
Generating a research list for information that can’t be gleaned from immediate lab or discussion.
At the end of our Brandstorming Session together, we’ll utilize one or more of these strategies to make use of the insights we discovered together. When we know that we’re going to want to lab together, it’s usually a good idea to book a double-length Brandstorming Session ahead of time.
Liz says, “Based on what you’ve experienced in this conversation, what’s your next step in working on this piece?”
Want to try it out for yourself?
If you’re an artist, creator, entrepreneur, or professional who’s ready to welcome in a higher level phase of your brand, my Brandstorming Sessions are the place to begin.
Are you a facilitator, consultant, mentor, or coach in your own right? Then I absolutely recommend reading Liz’s book. It dives into all the details you need to know as a facilitator, and provides many examples that I didn’t have room to include here. She also provides training courses where you can achieve the same level of in-depth instruction and practice that I received. However, applications are currently closed. You can check her website for more information about future trainings here.