why we assume correction is better than praise

As a species, we have evolved over a very long time to identify and respond to threats. In the social world we inhabit, acceptance and rejection is often subtle and implied. The threats can be fuzzy or faint, easy to ignore. 

At work, these threats are often far more explicit. It’s easier to tell at work whether you're being accepted or rejected: You're hired or fired. You're promoted or not. You're given feedback in specific meetings and the feedback is either good or bad. Work is a much more complete receptacle and mirror for our shame. 

At work, we are reasonably encouraged to predict and prevent threats at all times. And it's hard to say to a human being that that's not what they should be doing. Our hard wiring and the social cues all point in that direction.

A leap of logic we often make is that what’s most valuable at work is that which avoids and corrects for underperformance. On the surface, just relying on the defaults, it seems like we should be prioritizing corrective feedback. That’s the way we minimize threats.  

In fact, we spark more growth and achieve more, faster, if we master the habit of giving praise.

In the most effective, joyful schools where I’ve worked, teachers know that you'll have way less defensive, self-serving behavior if students and colleagues feel accepted and safe. And they are vastly more likely to feel that way if they know their strengths are going to be noticed when they’re shown.

Sparse praise confirms for people that threat reduction is the smart game to play. Consistent, ready praise opens up other games that enable greater growth and are more enjoyable for everyone to play.

-ben