zlacker

[return to "Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up"]
1. random+zE[view] [source] 2021-03-28 22:38:10
>>femfos+(OP)
Female founder friend (non tech space) was in a female focused incubator / competition. She got only one set of somewhat critical feedback - ie, lacks experience in X and Y which are key in product space Z.

She posted a comment on her social media focusing on this feedback as "criticism" that came from a sexist guy "of course". It was pretty easy to draw the line to the three panelists, one of whom was a guy. Ouch.

In a previous life, I'd worked in a awesome (female led!) product company. While I had no experience prior to this, I quickly realized that the product itself and its quality etc was almost irrelevant to success, the X and Y mentioned by the male panelist was unfortunately everything, which you'd only know if you were in the space itself. The female led company I worked for was bought out by a (male led) competitor, who then using much strong x and y skills - cleaned up. Company I worked for got basically nothing.

Fast forward - my friends business not doing so great, she asks me for feedback. I said nothing other than enthusiasm. Partly because I was really enthusiastic - she'd put her heart into this project. But her comment on social was in my mind - I had no desire to be next sexist guy "shooting down" an idea

She's out of the business I think mostly. Anyways, this parallels the take of the article.

◧◩
2. bastaw+XJ[view] [source] 2021-03-28 23:18:11
>>random+zE
> lacks experience in X and Y which are key in product space Z.

Obviously you didn't post the feedback, but I wonder how this was phrased. If the feedback was "improve X and Y", I think I sympathize with the panelist. The feedback was solicited! If it was framed as "unlikely to succeed because inexperienced in X and Y" then I think that crossed a line from critical feedback to a somewhat demeaning comment, even if it was right.

Regardless of how it actually played out, there's a good lesson here that you should be mindful of how your communication is understood. It's not enough to be right, it's important to speak in a way that makes sure what you're conveying is delivered in a useful way.

◧◩◪
3. daniel+yL[view] [source] 2021-03-28 23:29:08
>>bastaw+XJ
There are better and worse ways to communicate, sure. But fundamentally, you cannot control how people interpret the words that you say.
◧◩◪◨
4. ntr--+ZS[view] [source] 2021-03-29 00:21:21
>>daniel+yL
I disagree.

Effective communication requires effort, but many people speak impulsively and fail to convey what they actually mean. If someone is unable to clearly express themselves without being misunderstood then either their thoughts need to be distilled further or the statement needs to be carefully worded.

If I am not responsible for how people interpret my words, who is?

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. coldte+4n1[view] [source] 2021-03-29 06:13:07
>>ntr--+ZS
>If I am not responsible for how people interpret my words, who is?

Others too.

First because "Effective communication requires effort" from BOTH sides.

And also because others can deliberately misinterpret your words for their own gain, or because they're biased, or because they've been primed by factors outside your control, or for lots of other reasons...

>If someone is unable to clearly express themselves without being misunderstood

That has been the case for everybody for the entirety of history.

There are better or worse ways to express something, but there's no foolproof way to express even the simplest thing in a way that you "wont be misunderstood".

Sometimes even saying "yes" or "no" with the wrong tone (or what the other person perceives as the wrong tone) can be misunderstood.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. ntr--+Ay8[view] [source] 2021-03-31 11:16:53
>>coldte+4n1
> Others too. > First because "Effective communication requires effort" from BOTH sides.

Yes, but we only have control over our own side and have to make it as easy as possible for the receiver to do their part.

[go to top]