Art professors and curators have honed a facilitation skill most IT folks need to practice: critiquing works-in-progress. Too often individuals’ communication styles can block or limit a clear pathway from feedback to improvement.
Meet-the-curator event at Artspace in New Haven Oct 2012
In the art world, there are many structured formats for conducting a critique. The one I tend to reach for as a model for software teams is a kind of Perfection Game compatible with principles of Non Violent Communication.
The process consists of group members performing four observable actions in sequence. Prompts for each action take the form of questions. In steps 1 & 3, the responses are open-ended. In steps 2 & 4 the responses are binary. This pattern of alternating open-ended and binary questions sets up the framework for a productive critique.
1. Describe – In its current state, what do you notice first about this work? What are its salient features?
2. Analyze – Do the relationships among the various parts create an overall sense of harmony or distress? Does every element really need to be there?
3. Interpret – What do the form and functionality here imply about the intent? What might bring this work closer to fulfillment?
4. Judge – (go ahead, it’s safe at this point!) Is the work gelling or not (yet) in its current state? Is the “Why?” of this thing obvious?
Bonus game-within-a-game: The group can create a mnemonic device for remembering the sequence of actions according to the first letter of each word. For example, DAIJ can stand for “Dem Apples Is Juicy” or “Do All Introverts Joke.”
Art students who practice giving and receiving feedback embody the knowledge that creativity relies on structured group communications. Peers in such forums have a responsibility to help each other clarify and measure intent. Full realization of anything complex is an iterative process, generally requiring more than one round of group critique.
MANY THANKS to predecessor Lee Devin, co-author of Artful Making: What Managers Need to Know About How Artists Work and The Soul of Design. And to the team at Independent Software who practiced the artful critique in their demos.
Want to know more about models from the arts that apply to business? Schedule a Creative Companies consultation with Elinor Slomba. Email artsinterstices at gmail dot com.
Verge Arts Group 
Thank you! We all need to be more “coachable”, and this process helps create a less threatening bridge between the creator and the one with a helpful and positive critique.
Arthur, I am glad you see the relevance. Coachable is a great word! Thanks to you, I will keep it close at hand in the weeks and months to come. I might say it’s a responsibility (to one another, on teams) just as much a need.
Thanks Elinor for referring to the Perfection Game exercise from my weblog
I like how you combined it with NVC in your exercise. The feedback helps people to discover what is driving them, their strengths and the joy that they have. Being aware they can use that to improve.
@BenLinders
Co-author of Getting Value out of Agile Retrospectives
You are most welcome, Ben! The repository of tools and exercises you advocate is so rich, it is easy to find connections. The strengths-based approach does lend itself to an improvement-oriented mindset. I wonder…have you found there is a maximum frequency for retrospectives to be effective, or is retrospecting something you cannot really do too often?
Retrospectives should aim to find the vital few improvement actions, which are things that teams can do immediately and help them to improve quickly. As long as you keep actions small and finish them, there’s always room for a next retrospective.
@BenLinders