The abstract: "To call attention to and motivate action on ethical issues in business or society, messengers often criticize groups for wrongdoing and ask these groups to change their behavior....
The abstract:
"To call attention to and motivate action on ethical issues in business or society, messengers often criticize groups for wrongdoing and ask these groups to change their behavior. When criticizing target groups, messengers frequently identify and express concern about harm caused to a victim group, and in the process address a target group by criticizing them for causing this harm and imploring them to change. However, we find that when messengers criticize a target group for causing harm to a victim group in this way—expressing singular concern for the victim group—members of the target group infer, often incorrectly, that the messenger views the target group as less moral and unworthy of concern. This inferred lack of moral concern reduces criticism acceptance and prompts backlash from the target group. To address this problem, we introduce dual concern messaging—messages that simultaneously communicate that a target group causes harm to a victim group and express concern for the target group. A series of several experiments demonstrate that dual concern messages reduce inferences that a critical messenger lacks moral concern for the criticized target group, increase the persuasiveness of the criticism among members of the target group, and reduce backlash from consumers against a corporate messenger. When pursuing justice for victims of a target group, dual concern messages that communicate concern for the victim group as well as the target group are more effective in fostering openness toward criticism, rather than defensiveness, in a target group, thus setting the stage for change."
The conclusion:
"As a communication and persuasion strategy, dual concern may have applications to a wide range of ethical issues in business. From CEO and corporate activism to cause marketing and to non-profits, the need to communicate the importance of an issue and criticize those in the wrong is becoming exceptionally common. However, criticism often increases defensiveness among the very audience that needs to be receptive to a message calling for change. Our research demonstrates that calls for organizational and social change may unintentionally give the impression that messengers have no concern for the groups they criticize, leading these messages to backfire and inadvertently alienate the targets of criticism. But messages that are crafted in ways that avoid prompting this defensiveness—by showing that critical messengers nonetheless have moral concern for the people whom they implore to change—ultimately result in more openness to change. To prompt the changes that they want to see in the world, critical messengers need to learn to criticize with care."
Personally, I've always referred to this as a "compliment sandwich." If I have to tell you something bad about your performance or actions, I'll lead in with a reminder about how I recognize and respect the good actions you're doing, then transition to the problem area(s), then finish with a reminder that you're still valued and respected and that everyone has things to improve upon.
The abstract:
"To call attention to and motivate action on ethical issues in business or society, messengers often criticize groups for wrongdoing and ask these groups to change their behavior. When criticizing target groups, messengers frequently identify and express concern about harm caused to a victim group, and in the process address a target group by criticizing them for causing this harm and imploring them to change. However, we find that when messengers criticize a target group for causing harm to a victim group in this way—expressing singular concern for the victim group—members of the target group infer, often incorrectly, that the messenger views the target group as less moral and unworthy of concern. This inferred lack of moral concern reduces criticism acceptance and prompts backlash from the target group. To address this problem, we introduce dual concern messaging—messages that simultaneously communicate that a target group causes harm to a victim group and express concern for the target group. A series of several experiments demonstrate that dual concern messages reduce inferences that a critical messenger lacks moral concern for the criticized target group, increase the persuasiveness of the criticism among members of the target group, and reduce backlash from consumers against a corporate messenger. When pursuing justice for victims of a target group, dual concern messages that communicate concern for the victim group as well as the target group are more effective in fostering openness toward criticism, rather than defensiveness, in a target group, thus setting the stage for change."
The conclusion:
"As a communication and persuasion strategy, dual concern may have applications to a wide range of ethical issues in business. From CEO and corporate activism to cause marketing and to non-profits, the need to communicate the importance of an issue and criticize those in the wrong is becoming exceptionally common. However, criticism often increases defensiveness among the very audience that needs to be receptive to a message calling for change. Our research demonstrates that calls for organizational and social change may unintentionally give the impression that messengers have no concern for the groups they criticize, leading these messages to backfire and inadvertently alienate the targets of criticism. But messages that are crafted in ways that avoid prompting this defensiveness—by showing that critical messengers nonetheless have moral concern for the people whom they implore to change—ultimately result in more openness to change. To prompt the changes that they want to see in the world, critical messengers need to learn to criticize with care."
Personally, I've always referred to this as a "compliment sandwich." If I have to tell you something bad about your performance or actions, I'll lead in with a reminder about how I recognize and respect the good actions you're doing, then transition to the problem area(s), then finish with a reminder that you're still valued and respected and that everyone has things to improve upon.