How do you not take criticism of your work personally?

What you have encountered is actually one of the necessary steps to really become "a senior developer". And congratulations, you have already passed the biggest part of that hurdle: becoming aware of the issue.

There are things that are fragile, things that break when they encounter a shock. Such as porcelain, when transported. There are things that are non-fragile, things that do not break when they encounter a similar shock. Like a teddy bear, when transported. And there are things that are anti-fragile, things that improve when they are exposed to a shock, like the immune system. If you are not exposed to series of smaller shocks as a child, your immune system does not develop properly.

So you need to develop an anti-fragile attitude towards criticism, in order to become a better developer from the criticism. If you do not learn that, you will be stuck at the level you are at the moment. You can do this at the meta-level as well at the same time: become anti-fragile towards handling criticism in general, and becoming a better human being from it.

The key to hacking yourself is to increase your awareness of your emotional state. When you become aware that you are angry, the anger is losing the grip it has over you. When you are angry, you are sometimes doing things you would not have done if you were not angry. (Sometimes anger is healthy, it may also be a signal to us that our boundaries have been violated.)

Kudos on the realisation and desire to improve. There are a couple of tricks you can use, especially when it’s asynchronous textual communication:

Assume positive intentions from the other person. Imagine them as having written with a genuine smile on their faces. Don’t think of it as them versus you, but you and them together against the problem. That defaults ambiguity to the more pleasant side and allows you to reply in a kind manner in turn. In general you get out of a conversation what you put into it, so add kindness.

That doesn’t mean you have to take abuse. But even if someone is unambiguously disrespectful (e.g. name calling) you can generally be respectful when pointing that out or simply not respond. Instead of wasting brain cycles getting more angry as you write the perfect zinger, let it go and you’ll forget about it soon enough. Focus on feeling better, never on making the other person feel worse.

If you do have to reply, don’t do so immediately. Let it marinate and respond when your initial feeling has subsided. That allows you to get some emotional distance between yourself and your work, thus seeing (and fixing) the problem in the thing not yourself. Waiting has the secondary effect that another person may reply in the interim, shifting the burden away.

When you feel bad, stop to think. Observe your own reaction and calmly try to realise why you’re feeling that way and what’s your goal. The introspection alone can make you see that the situation is unimportant and thus taking it personally is disproportionate.

The first few times might be hard but eventually it becomes second nature as you adapt and find the approach that works best for you.

At some point, I realized that there's a disconnect between "me" and "my work".

My work is a result of circumstance, like, what my mood was when I did it, how well I know the particular domain, if I've seen solutions to similar problems before, what tools were available and understandable to me at the time.

In other words, the quality of my work depends much more on what the particular task was, than on some inherent quality within myself.

So, try not to let it influence me either way, to not feel some unjustified pride that I made something "difficult", or shame that I couldn't manage to do something "easy".

One liberating tactic I employ, is that I clearly announce when I've messed up, and I'll be the first to do it, and usually with a joke.. "Yeah, so that amazing queue we got up and running last week, I took the liberty to totally mess that up, I learned a lot about how not to do it, I'll eventually learn how to do it right, no worries, I'm working on it." This takes the pressure off, people know it's broken, who broke it, and who's fixing it, and they expect that I come for help if I need it. One thing I don't do, is say sorry, I'm not sorry, this is my job, we do software development, we break stuff, we make errors, and I'm not sorry about it.

In art school, we spent a lot of time learning how to give and receive critiques, because the fastest way to improve was to try frequently and critique often.

You learn very early to divorce your ego and sense of self from your artworks and embrace every attempt as an opportunity to improve towards an ideal you can never reach.

You also learn how to give meaningful criticism without being an asshole.

Writing code is very much the same.

Unfortunately, most software engineers haven't been to art school and have no formal training in how to give and receive useful feedback.

I recommend reading Art & Fear: Observations On the Perils (and Rewards) of Artmaking. It's a good book that helps you build a healthy mindset towards growing as a creative:

https://www.amazon.com/Art-Fear-Observations-Rewards-Artmaki...

At the beginning of my career when I was out to prove myself, I took my job so seriously that my sense of personal self-worth was intricately tied up with the quality of my work. After a particularly disappointing experience that knocked me off my horse for a while, I concluded that putting some distance between my career and the subjective experience of my place in the world was essential to my mental health.

I try to be mindful that the relationship between my work and my person / identity is one of many such relationships in life, and maybe even not the most important one. I think that mindset makes it easier to accept criticism or even to reject it when I think it is irrelevant, misguided, or malicious, as unfortunately workplace criticism can sometimes be.

If your work is being fairly criticized, it's an opportunity to learn and grow. Take it as a compliment that someone actually cared enough about your professional development to offer advice on how to be better. It means they already think that you're good and worthy of improvement. On the other hand, be willing to accept the possibility that that criticism is not actually constructive but intended specifically to make you feel guilty or ashamed. Unfortunately, some people are just petty, small-minded, and manipulative, and will do anything to make you feel small in order for them to feel big.

The reason I took criticism of my work personally was that I build my identity around the fact that I'm smart and good with computers. If you think of yourself as having value BECAUSE you're good at X - it's almost impossible not to take criticism personally.

You can pretend not to care, because it seems professional - but inside you'll still be hurting, and by default you'll still act to prevent the damage to your ego - anything else will require constant attention. It's not sustainable.

The solution is to detach the perception of your value as a human being from your work.

Some good advice in the comments so far, but I don't see any which highlight the one thing that transformed me in this regard permanently. I suffered from your problem terribly, to the point that it almost drove me into depression.

The one thing that solved this for me, and I mean utterly cured it, was _talking to my coworkers about it_. This of course only works if you feel comfortable being vulnerable to your coworkers. I was lucky enough to work with people who I am also friends with. I literally said to them over a first pint after work: "when I get critical PR comments it makes me feel bad and defensive. Sorry if I sometimes come across guarded that way".

This opened an amazingly productive conversation that changed my relationship with my colleagues forever, as they opened up about their struggles in this area (you would be surprised at how common this is, it is human nature after all) and we shared advice and jokes.

Sometimes I think we (as a software community and species) try to tackle these things alone to avoid displaying our vulnerable sides, but I think this is a tragic facet of modern culture.

Two things: Humility and Empathy.

Humility I may be wrong, Empathy that if I get it wrong the customer will suffer (in varying magnitudes, of course)

Some of my first programs were in C. 100s of Hours and millions of switch to terminal, gcc, error message beat it into me -- "The computer isnt wrong, I am" . Now I am ok with hearing "This code has properties you didn't anticipate" because that's been true millions of times. And it's produced the humility, that I can't get it right on first try, and it's rare I get it right even by 3rd or 5th try.

Instead we implement, seek feedback (from compliler, tests, peers, more tests, datadog), iterate.

And I like to remind myself also of empathy. Do my feelings matter if it's going to affect the customer? If I get reactive and refuse to solve someones feedback, the customer will suffer. If I get reactive too often, it will silence the feedback (but not improve my coding). The customer suffers, so for that reason My feelings do not get a vote.

Edit: I'd also like to note the religious link that people have lost a spiritual connection of their self-worth[1], and in it's place have adopted a professional and materialism meaning when their professional work is criticized, so is the root of their identity.

Edit: Ok "millions" was hyperbole. A better estimate is something like half a million compilations/builds in my ~20 yrs writing code in a non-hobbyist context.

[1]: (at least in my religion it affirms your inherent value as God created and declared "Good" in design and nature, lets not turn this into a religious debate)

It's natural to take criticism of your work personally so I think the first thing is to accept the initial emotional reaction as "ok" and not something to beat yourself up about.

The next step is to tame your emotional response. It's almost never a good idea to act based on emotions so you first need to get a level head before responding. You can journal, meditate, go in a room and rage out if you need to, but just get that chimpanzee in your brain to settle down. Not easy but has to be done if you want to transcend whatever is coming your way. Sometimes you will fail but there's always next time so just keep at it.

Once you've settled down, now it's time to rationally consider the content of the critique and decide how to respond. Criticism can come in many different shapes and sizes: valid, invalid, clear, vague, harsh and nice, well timed, ill timed. Unfortunately, some people can be downright mean so handling harsh and uncivil criticism is a skill that takes time to master. If you notice most highly successful people, they take nasty criticism like water off a duck's back. That being said, it's really unacceptable to have people making snarky comments on your work and if it's a pattern there, I'd consider finding a more nurturing place to work.

Once all that's done, decide whether the argument is valid and if so make the adjustment in good faith. If not respond, with your reasons respectfully and with an open mind. They may respond in turn, and if so you and your colleagues will have achieved a harmonious spirt of working together towards a higher truth and you will benefit in ways that cannot be overstated.

I had a job where they gave training on how to constructively engage with the open source community, and one of the big points was, "you don't suck, the patch sucks".

Oh you have a bug in the patch? No, there's a bug in the patch. Oh you missed an edge case? No, there's an edge case nobody had documented yet.

The point was mostly about how to give feedback on the patch, and to never phrase it about the person personally, but perhaps it would help to try and catch yourself thinking of the feedback this way and have your internal dialog look at the patch as being separate from you.

Yes, it's your work, but it's always a work in progress, and it's everybody's work to try and make incremental improvements to the code, to the process, etc.

I used to think I didn't like working with inexperienced engineers, but I noticed that what I actually didn't like was people who were unwilling to candidly discuss ways to improve, whether they were junior or senior - it's just a little easier to spot in people more junior than one's self. So kudos to you for recognizing this, because if you can learn to absorb constructive feedback it's a real game changer for you and for everyone around you too.

You've got some good advice already, but one that I'll add here is adopting the principle of charity [0]. Every time someone talks to you, interpret their words in the way that is most favorable to their argument and your mutual interactions. This assumption goes a long way to short-circuiting any negative thoughts you might have about their intentions.

For example, if there seem to be two interpretations of a comment on a PR, one that is genuine and one that is snarky, assume they were genuinely trying to help and reject the snarky version. This is easier said than done, but it's a useful skill to practice.

[0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity

I don't know how healthy this is but: I haven't run into many people who are harder on my work than I am.

I have an attitude that there's absolutely nothing I do that can't be improved. This may sound miserable on the surface, but for me it's actually quite freeing. It has the effect of making it easier to accept that things aren't actually going to be perfect (so it can help avoid the trap of over-engineering) and at the same time, it makes it much easier to have productive conversations with co-workers about what to improve/delete/rework because the existing product is something that could be better.

The other thing to think about, IMO, is that that PR comment, snarky or not, was something someone put the time in to come up with. For you. It's a gift. I've worked in places where getting any kind of PR comment beyond "approved" or "Fix your indenting" was an uphill battle. So getting a comment from a colleague that is meant to a) help make you better at what you do and b) help you both create something you can be proud of, is massively positive. It took time and effort for them to read what you did and think of a way to make it better.

You probably won't see my comment as it's late to the party, but these things help me:

- You are not your work. Try to take any demerit toward your work as pointed at the work, not at you as an individual.

- Make an effort to do the best job you can given your resources, knowledge, and deadlines. Sometimes you have to make trade offs because of an aggressive deadline and it's not the best situation to put out the highest quality code possible. Make sure it's known and try to get back to fixing it the best way when there is time.

- In code reviews, use it as an opportunity to learn from your seniors and to try to come up with ways it won't hurt you or others in the futures. If you made a mistake that affected a model or some code in another area, ask how they knew that would affect it? Is it documented anywhere? Are there tests? Is there a better way to handle this so that it won't affect things negatively downstream? This will help you and others avoid that mistake next time

- Assume that the person making the comment isn't doing anything intentionally to be snarky or shitty, but call them out on it if it's a repeated offense. It's very easy to come off meaner/short/curt through text than speech and some people just don't realize it. Alternatively, they do realize it and they're being an asshole to not just your but others. Either way, this will challenge them to think and act more professionally

This is what happens when you are identified with your work to some degree. The work becomes you, hence criticism appears to be no longer about your work but your person.

My experience is that this often happens to individuals who have a perfectionist tendency. A very admirable trait that unfortunately can backfire in the form you described.

I think you already made the first step, which is becoming conscious of this. In my experience, the second and harder step is to stay conscious.

For me personally, it helps to take a step back and get some distance from work (even if it is very short).

Also, what greatly helps is not condemning yourself for your reaction to that criticism as that would just add one more layer of negative feelings on top of it.

The reason you react this way shows some very positive traits in you. Appreciate them.

"criticism" is a bit broad, there's a few different scenarios:

- If someone reports that my code crashes with some seemingly valid input, I won't take that as criticism, but rather somebody trying to help improve my code. It's for their own benefit, but still it's still a contribution.

- If someone points out some stupid flaw in my code and has a suggestion on how to improve that, I'll also welcome it as a contribution. It's also an opportunity to learn from the mistake.

- If somebody points out that some code is imperfect (but works in the intended use cases) with no suggestion or obvious path on how to improve it, then they're just being annoying. I have other stuff to do, so try not to pay attention to this (I'll admit this is harder than it sounds).

- If somebody points out that my code kinda sucks and points at something else that's better written, I'll appreciate them sharing some knowledge and go look at the other code and see what I can learn from it.

Generally, I when somebody points out a problem with my code, I'll assume they're having the same stance that I do when I report issues. When I report issues, I generally want to help them get fixed to improve the program since I want it to work for my specific scenario (and for anyone else trying to do the same).

Being someone who always complains about things that are broken (or can be improved) help understand that when other complain they're just trying to indicate that things can improve. They're (most likely) no trying to attack me.

One mindset approach I’ve learned is to ask myself often:

“Hmmm… what can I learn from this?”

It reframes criticism from right/wrong or blame/defensiveness.

It also helps me shift out of my own inner critic’s response - such as trying to evaluate if the person critiquing is qualified enough to do so.

I’ve genuinely seen that the most intelligent & successful people I know truly believe they can learn from anyone - including people who are factually wrong.

It seems like your current reaction isn’t a choice, so that’s a personal growth opportunity.

When you feel critiqued it’s helpful to:

1. Notice how you feel 2. Express it & feel it fully - not to others, but with yourself 3. Give yourself space & support to have the experience you are having with no expectations 4. Once you feel that space, get curious about how you’d like to respond

If you weren’t treated this way as a child, this approach can seem very odd or even dangerous.

Meditation and Gay & Katie Hendricks’ work has been helpful for me here (https://foundationforconsciousliving.org/).

But mostly what has helped me is time. Learning to take care of our own feelings & choosing our responses to things around us are a part of maturity.

It has taken me years to develop these skills, but the impact on my relationships and career trajectory is very clear.

So be kind to yourself, set 1% better goals in terms of how you respond, and recognize that you are enabling yourself to become more coachable.

Are you a salaried / wage-earning employee?

If so, you may find it helpful to remember that the code you are working on does not belong to you, it belongs to the company/shareholders, and your job is to make it do what they want, more or less how they want.

That doesn't mean you have to do anything that is dumb, or not in the best interests of the company, but if someone asks you to do something that is dumb or not in the bests interests of the company, you may have to explain (very clearly, and often repeatedly) why it is not in the best interests of the company, and in doing so you may find that you had imperfect information about all of the relevant stakeholders and requirements.

Failure to remember this may result in being reminded the hard way, by being terminated / laid off, managed out.

Conversely, if you have great ideas and want to control everything, feel free to start your _own_ company, find your own clients, etc.

Congratulations - you have already succeeded enormously by seeing that this is the case.

Stoicism.

If something that someone says or does causes a problem for you, it is something inside you that is the real cause of the problem.

It takes lots of work but you can eventually work on controlling your thoughts and you can learn to deploy counter thoughts. “I have a problem when people say this, so I can discount this particular negative thought that is occurring right now” etc.

I have found that informing others out loud about such struggles is awesome as well. “Thank you, I have had problems taking such and such feedback before, but I am working on it.” You can actually turn this weakness into your strength as people like people who are honest about working on themselves. They might package this feedback differently, or they might let you know in a sensitive way.

Edit: I’m no expert at this btw. Recently I had a realization that I don’t like taking feedback publicly, would rather receive 1on1. I had an EM who had a tendency to do things quite publicly and I always found those situations difficult to manage. When I arranged for a 1on1 and told him about it, it turned out that he had another quite different concern and rule around doing things publicly - he wanted more transparency in the organization. After understanding each other he backed off of being too harsh, and I started leaning more in on the public channels, helping him achieve this goal.

I work in consulting; everything I do I do for the customer and to improve their codebase. I often see a lot of terrible code. I change it and try to educate the coder who was responsible. When I get comments on my code I will always assume that I am wrong. Not because I am bad but because I am not that long with the company. I am missing the domain knowledge, ways of working, standards and all that. When I do get responses that "this does not work" I ask the person why he thinks that is so. Often it is a misunderstanding on how they think that API works it is not very often that I am wrong but I do not always assume that I am better.

Since I have been working in this manner people are more open to changes themselfs. It works both ways.

It's kind of dumb, but I think about a line from Casino Royale - M says to James Bond "I want you to take your ego out of the equation and judge the situation dispassionately."

It's unlikely that the person making the comment is out to harm or anger you. Ideally you are both on the same team, trying to perform some task for the benefit of your employer. In that case, recognize that your ego or pride has been engaged; observe it, but then put it aside and get back to work.

If they ARE actively trying to anger your or harm your career (rare, but some people are just toxic) all the more reason to ignore the provocation.

My main challenge is when people dig in their heels about technical solutions that I find distasteful. For me that's less about how beautiful the code is and more whether it solves the problem and will be maintainable. Even here a lot of arguments can be ignored. Again, make your ego and identity as small as possible. Brace style? Tabs vs spaces? I honestly don't care. If someone wants to argue about those things I'm happy to let them win.

Be half-monk, half-hitman and get the job done.

For me it was always very simple: who is delivering the criticism. If it was someone for whom I had respect, both individually and technically, then I listened without taking it personally and discussed the why and the how. If it was someone I didn't respect, forget it. Their opinion didn't matter. Yes, sometimes that led to conflicts. For example, I once worked for a manager that I liked personally but didn't respect his management approach. He was a micromanager in the extreme, inserting himself into every discussion he encountered, looking over your shoulder when working, even insisting that every memo you wrote was reviewed and edited by him first. He'd red line your writing like a high school English teacher. Nonetheless, I followed this approach my entire working career and retired satisfied with the work I had done and with my ego and friendships intact. Nowadays I look back and laugh at some of the many characters encountered on the journey.

Study Art! One of my friends did an arts degree prior to entering the software industry. She said that studying and making art prepared her for all the criticism her code would get. You build thick skin.

But on a more realistic note - separating yourself from your work is hard. I accept that at times my code will be bad, sometimes the reasons are external and sometimes I just did not know better. But I try not to repeat mistakes, that is the key. Also I consciously frame it as “the code had a bug” vs “my code was bad”. How you phrase it goes a long way, imo.

You know, you could consider getting therapy. Being sensitive to criticisms often results from something deeper, such as insecurity or some kind of vulnerability. There are lots of different therapeutic modalities, but CBT may work well, since you can look into the roots of this mindfully, and develop meaningful changes. The outcomes can be more than better coping or masking.

I’m going to go out on a limb for the next two suggestions, particularly the second one.

Psychedelics with a strong therapeutic intent, can not only help loosen the psychological armoring we create to shield us from vulnerability, but also help make changes when belief structures can be cleaned up and changes. You would want to work with people who do this way (instead of partying with it), or with therapists that administers this with a clinical protocol. These should include integration sessions to help bring the insights and changes to your daily life.

There is also the option of working with acupressure or acupuncture, with the caveat that most licensed acupuncturists do not know how to work with this. They usually take a holistic approach and stick to what are called the twelve ordinary meridians. If the roots of sensitivity to criticisms is in your physical health, this may catch it. Holistic treatment though, means the provider won’t specifically target what you came in asking help for.

If you are lucky and find a provider that works with the eight extraordinary meridians, there are two specifically related to sensitivity to criticisms. These are the yin and yang qiao mai, with the yin qiao mai directly expressing your consciousness’s ability to receive criticism, as well as insecurity, vulnerability, etc. Yang qiao mai expresses your ability to give others criticism without being a jerk.

It’s not as if using these methods are like using a magic pill. However, they can greatly accelerate whatever therapy you are working with.

1. Own up your mistakes. Write emails that say: "yup that's on me, sorry guys". This is going to turn your world around. Do it enough time, and you'll see your coworkers doing it too.

2. Try self-derision. "Oh man, I must have had too much to drink that night!!!!" or "yeah I got pretty lazy there...". Always very appreciated. Especially if the comment from the co-worker is intentionally snarky.

3. Try and be pre-emptive about it. If someone says: "hey wtf is going on in prod?", you should answer: "shit, it's probably me, I'm looking into it", or if you think it's not you, you can do something like: "I fiddled with this code yesterday, but I am fairly confident that it's unrelated, let me know if I screwed up".

4. Own up your colleagues' mistakes too: "Sorry guys we screwed up on that one". Clients love people who tell them they're sorry rather than people who come up with shitty excuses.

5. If it's far in the past, insult your past self at will. "Well when I wrote this, I was pretty lame I didn't know better".

6. Always remember that what's in the past can't be changed. Only the present and the future matter.

7. Be kind to other co-workers who own up their mistakes.

8. Thank people who fix your bugs.

There are a lot of hidden benefits hidden in distanciating yourself emotionally from the code you wrote:

- You won't want to continue working on "your baby" when your boss offers you a promotion

- It makes the team work a lot more human. We aren't geniuses, and even geniuses screw up. It's all fine.

- If you own up your small mistakes, no one is going to throw you under the bus if you make a much bigger mistake.

Good luck.

To speak to the point about the PR comments, it's quite tricky to get a sense of the intention behind them. In the last few years I have adopted the approach of conventional comments, which has helped a lot with conveying that intention.

I.e. if I want clarity around a code choice it's clear to the developer that I need more context, or if I have a nitpick to point out it's clear that that's why I am pointing it out. I think everyone should comment in this style as it helps to shed light on what you're trying to express, even if the comment is short or unintentionally snarky.

https://conventionalcomments.org/

Of course this doesn't address all the forms of text communication but PRs are generally a pain point when it comes to interpreting meaning.

There is a legitimate difference between accurate, honest advice that is hard to swallow, and being harsh, rude or mean. For some reason that I don't fully understand, some corners of the programming world seem to conflate the latter with the former (sometimes under the guise of "brutal honesty").

Sometimes you won't have a choice and you just have to put up with it. But my advice, in so far as possible, is to surround yourself with people who understand this nuance and for whom it is a goal to be compassionate (while still being honest and truthful about problems that exist).

I just wanted to mention it because some of the advice in this thread doesn't seem to make this explicit. Improving yourself is great, but life is too short to put up with jerks.

It's usually not personal - having a professional detachment helps.

Remember the only way from amateur to professional is by constant improvement, which requires constant critique of your performance.

As you improve the criticism becomes less, you also have to rise above the amateurs who don't know how to adequately structure criticism, so that it written in a less personal way. Early on in your career this may seem deliberate and you will make a lot of mistakes, but it does fade.

You should also have 2 tenets:

- It doesn't matter what happens, you are paid for the code regardless, so don't hold so much pride.

- Make sure your reviews of others hold them to the same standard and language so they feel what feedback like that does and helps them adapt (it's also revenge served cold if that's your thing).

When you’re 20, you care about what everyone thinks about you. When you’re 40, you don’t care about what other people think of you. When you’re 60, you realise that no one was really thinking about you anyway.

It is very hard to do good code review. The reviewer is always missing context. It's easy to overly focus on style nits and not meaningful changes. This is exacerbated when PRs include a large number of changes.

Additionally, code review is the worst time to question decisions made by the developer. You have probably put a lot of work into your changes. Someone callously tossing a "why don't you do it this other way" into your PR feels like bullshit because it is. And again, larger PRs are going to have more (and lower quality) comments, which makes it easy to feel criticized or defensive. The parts you had the most trouble with are likely the parts that people are going to comment on most.

The solution to both of these is to try and break your work into the smallest chunks you can. This makes it easy to catch your own mistakes, as well as reducing the mental burden on the code reviewer. It gives you a chance to validate your strategy before you implement the whole thing. I've never been on a team that pushed back against the idea of splitting a large task into smaller ones.

As to when you do get called out on a mistake, it's ok to feel bad but recognize, people make mistakes. The person did you a favor by finding it in review vs finding out when bug reports start coming in. If it's a good catch, respond by saying "thanks for catching it." Nobody knows everything, nobody writes perfect code.

Assuming the criticism is valid and not nit-picking, embrace the fact that this is free education that isn't saddling you with additional six-figure debt!

Learning on the job is important, and you could treat it as such. (Pay attention to the sort of mistakes you are making, classify them, address the reasons that you are making them. For example, maybe muscle memory leaves you forgetting to check some assumption. Maybe you can invest in linting/testing/patterns that make those classes of errors less likely?)

If you're making small mistakes that are noticed, one way to fix it is to make those mistakes less often -- even better if you can stop your team making the same class of errors too.

If the criticism is more about the way you are doing your work, maybe the focus should be on "soft-skills" instead. Are you expressing your ideas clearly in some well thought-out manner BEFORE coding (so that you can get input and buy-in from other affected parties?). Is the churn in the codebase causing others to be negatively affected in their daily work having to react to the changes you are making? The default opinion of most folk is usually "change is bad", so you need to build a reputation of making net-positive contributions. Solicited feedback from people you work with is very valuable for gleaming where you might be missing this mark.

I think I'm usually decent taking feedback but recently I realised I get really annoyed when someone I don't respect gives me feedback. Doubly so if the feedback is bad or nitpicky. It must be ego, plus my belief that one ought to do minimum due dilligence before giving feedback.

I try not to express this annoyance, so other people haven’t picked it up (though I'm sure it shows sometimes). It's something I'm trying to work on as suppressing that annoyance cannot be healthy for me.

Here is my approach:

It is okay to take criticism personally on the path to not taking it personally. Your thoughts and emotions are not you so first and foremost don't feel bad for feeling this way. I'm not saying you should act on them however.

I suggest sitting down and making time, remembering the feeling and then feeling it. No need to psychoanalyze, and have mental talk. Just feel the pure emotions and be curious about them. Where do you fee them? what shape do they have? how big they are? what texture do they have? etc

The point is to make the task of feeling your emotions interesting for your mind so it stays there enough to get used to it.

Hypothesis: When an emotion is causing us suffering it is usually because we don't want it, but unfortunately thats not how they go away, especially if they are big emotions.

After a while your mind will know the emotion so intimately that it will either be negligible or not come up at all.

Note however, if you go towards the emotion with the intention of it going away this will not work, there must be total acceptance. So cultivating that loving curiosity may actually be the hard part. The trick there is that I like to imagine myself as a child having these emotions and soothing this child as a caring adult.

There are other methods but this has been very helpful to me and I hope it will be helpful to you as well.

1. I stopped seeing my work as a labor of love a long time ago. I love what I do, but my passion is with the technology, not the day-to-day commits. My work is generally good and I'm confident that I'll continue to be valued, but my job output isn't some kind of masterwork (nor does anyone want it to be).

2. The whole point of code review is to find issues. If my code was perfect, we'd skip review. But it's not, and I accept that my mortal flaws will inevitably show in what I put up for review.

3. Criticisms are one of the few feedback mechanisms for your real, tangible job output. It's important to remember that you grow technically by others pointing out mistakes. If you got nothing but praise, you're not actively refining your skills. Catching mistakes before you submit for review is indeed a skill that must be honed.

If the feedback you get is snarky or mean spirited, that's a culture issue. Reply politely, thank them for pointing it out, ask if they have suggestions for what to do better if the right answer isn't obvious. Establish a norm of treating code reviews as a place for being decent. If you don't get respect in return, take it up with a manager: code reviews at work are no place for someone to make you feel belittled.

Let me preface this by saying that I've had some fairly high profile criticism of patches I've been involved with: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/02/linus...

Having people criticise your work fucking sucks. There's no way around that. Someone you respect says you did a bad job? Yes, you'll take it personally. I don't think there's any way to avoid that initial feeling. Have I read patch feedback and wished I could sink into the Earth? Yes. Do I still have intrusive thoughts about a patch I sent almost 20 years ago that was eviscerated by the subsystem maintainer? Oh heavens yes. These are entirely human reactions. It's not a flaw to feel that way.

As others have said, being able to interpret feedback as well meaning can help. But you should also try to find external feedback on whether the criticism you're getting is positive, or whether you're potentially in a situation where you're being exposed to abuse. Sometimes feelings are an overreaction - sometimes they're justified.

Do you react well to some constructive criticism or are bothered by just about all of it? I wonder if you are dealing when some perfectionism issues more broadly.

It’s sometimes hard to remember, but feedback is a gift. It is someone else taking time to show us how to be better. One approach to feel less bad about constructive/negative feedback is to show and feel gratitude to the person giving.

I remember I had a customer who was somewhat hostile and awkward when reporting bugs. One day they reported a bizarre issue related to a race condition and I spontaneously responded “that’s a AWESOME bug find. It’s a cool bug. Sorry it’s impacting you but I appreciate you helping us make the product better.” That and similar interactions changed the tone of our communications- by expressing enthusiasm and gratitude for the opportunity to learn I reinforced those emotions over the angst and worry over the problematic feedback and at the same time changed the tenor with the customer who went from being a little angry at finding bugs to enthusiastic at reporting then. I distinctly remember my smile the first time he started a meeting with “I’ve got a good one for you.”

If you can find a way to value the learning highly it helps reduce the sting to the ego of criticism.

I do not take criticism of my work personally. I think this is because I have already heavily criticized it myself. Everything I make falls short of the ideal form I have pictured in my head. This applies to code, woodworking projects, CAD models, documents I've written and food I've prepared. These works all feel separate from myself despite coming from my brain. That is not to say I'm not proud of them or feel like I've done a good job; quite the opposite! But at the same time it is very rare for me to feel like there is not room for improvement or even obvious shortfalls.

I think with this mindset it is easy to accept others criticism because I already agree anything I made is needs criticism and is worthy of being criticized. It is also one of the only ways to improve. I get excited when I can get someone to provide feedback on food I've prepared (people are hesitant to do that as it seems rude) because it teaches me what they like. For software, sometimes the criticism is just someone else's preferred style and that I take even less personally and try to work with them to see if there is a middle ground that suits both of us or our team.

At my first job, I was on a small team and my boss did all the code reviews.

He would leave comments like:

- "This is really awkward, change it to..."

- "This variable name is awkward and confusing"

- "You have failed to understand..."

- "You are overthinking this. Keep it simple and do..."

- "This causes unnecessary overhead. Think about it..."

Every review, I would have to re-write everything to exactly how he wanted it, variable names, logic and all. To the point that the code was not mine.

I would very much disagree with what he wanted. Any type of constructive push back would be met with enormous backlash.

But it wasn't always what he wanted me to change, - the way he delivered the feedback irritated me the most.

In my following jobs, I have had many reviewers for my code. I've had 30+ other people review my code. They have all been much nicer. And deliver feedback that I actually agree with.

I am thankful when someone finds a bug in my code, or an easier way to do something. Using a function that I am not aware of. This way QA won't find the bug, and I am learning.

Anyways, my advice is to look at how the person is delivering the feedback. Take note of that, and know it is them if they are toxic. And when you do a code review for someone else, be sure not to be that person.

Jeff Atwood has a great article The 10 Commandments of Software Engineering (something like that) and one of the first ones is "you are not your code". There's no trick to this. Sometimes you write bad code. Even if you're a bitwizard demigod who can explain the route of an electron through your web3 Blockchain distributed app or whatever it is you do, you can still write bad code (and will). Nobody writes perfect code all of the time. Nobody writes beautiful mind algorithms all day with ease. It just doesn't happen.

Letting go of the ego a bit is something you have to find within yourself.

After that, it's easy. If the criticism is about the code, either accept it or be analytical with a thoughtful "defense" of the code. It leads to good technical conversation and the code benefits from it, and either one or both of you will learn something. Learning things tends to go away the more senior you get so the opportunity becomes exciting at some point.

If it's about you personally, then it's no longer constructive criticism and thus a civil response about keeping things on topic usually suffices.

For me, I put my mistakes in perspective.

Did anyone die?

No? Then on the scale of important consequences the mistake was statistically inconsequential.

My day is ok.

It may be the case that you’re ambushed by critical reactions. Prime yourself before reading comments, get your guards up a little. This puts some distance between you and the comment(er). Your skin may still be hit, but not your soul.

Secondly, if somebody says something that you dont agree with but is not really important or interesting, or even snarky, don’t respond. Just ignore it. Respond to another comment (if present) thay you do find constructive and interesting. This is very powerful because you actually respond to the snarky comments without responding. This can sometimes be the loudest and best response. Don’t waste energy where there is no gain.

It helps. Remember also that finding flaws is a lot easier than creating things, especially if new ideas are involved. Also remember that love makes blind; it’s easy to fall in love with one’s own ideas/solutions and so ignoring its shortcomings. The easiest to fool is yourself. But that’s fine if you allow yourself to adjust.

Finally, allow yourself to be convinced. If somebody has a good argument against your case, give them a little credit. Try to have a conversation and not a debate.

I have always taken feedback poorly, and my brain has been very unkind to me during performance reviews. I don't really trust people who claim to "love feedback" or find it "good for personal growth". It sounds so faux. But ya know, great for them. With PRs, I try to imagine myself in my reviewers' shoes, and try to form some kind of internally-consistent vicarious defence for why they're behaving or talking that way. Maybe they're having a bad day? Maybe they're annoyed and busy at the sheer persistence of interruptions? Or maybe I'm just incredibly sensitive? It's usually the latter. I have a persistent desire to please people. And in deficit of being able to, my brain convinces me that they don't like me. And that I should therefore feel rotten. I've discovered these brain cascades are mostly from mini-traumas of historic social interactions and upbringing. FWIW therapy helped me a lot. Also remember: people, including those in positions or knowledge and power, can be wrong, or unkind, or insensitive. It's not always you.

This is great self awareness that can lead to invincibility. This is how I approach (so it is not an advice for "you" personally).

Be a Stoic. First, start with the understanding that you can only control your thoughts and emotions. You need to seek "truth" in those situations. If it was mistake by you, the comment is justified (and you shouldn't worry about snarkiness because it is due to their ignorance). People who take cheapshots don't know how world works and likely, they will face bigger issues - but try to treat them as being ignorant. Secondly, your issue may be tied to your sense of self or ego. This will take time and the hardest to master. But by being aware you will find your own way. What worked for me was to pick something totally outside my day job that gives satisfaction (It could be still be related. For example, building some open source projects or just fun projects whose quality is under my control). So I am not seeing any "approval" from anyone

I’d think of this as two issues, assuming we’re talking about constructive critiques:

(1) how do I not take snarky critiques of my work personally?

(2) how do I not take kind critiques of my work personally?

Issue 1 is often about understanding why the other person is snarky. Do they get this issue a lot? Do they realize they’re being snarky? Are they just a dick?

The goal here is to empathize so you can translate the feedback to issue 2.

Issue 2 is often about your own relationship with your work. Are you wedded to it, because it’s the creation of your own hands? Is everyone else too dumb to see why your solutions work? Are you in an area where the underlying issues are opaque or challenging?

The goal here is to be introspective + address why you have a gut reaction to the feedback. Eventually, you’re trying to get to a “reviewer and I against the problem” mindset.

All that said - sometimes it’s not a bad thing to take things personally. Recognizing when “feedback” is out of bounds is part of the process. Good luck!

Years back I worked with a senior guy whose motto was “feedback as a gift“. At that time in that company, most people pretended that feedback was important and something they wanted to engage with, but he was the only person I knew who genuinely lived the concept: he would request feedback briefly from everyone in virtually every interaction, irrespective of the relative levels of seniority.

Anyway, this effectively flicked a switch in my brain. Pretty much overnight I went from finding feedback personal and awkward and even offensive, to feedback being something positive and helpful. I think that actively wanting and requesting feedback, rather than grudgingly receiving it, puts you on the front foot psychologically, and after a while, it becomes second nature.

So that’s my advice: decide that you want feedback, then live it. Go out of your way to actively solicit feedback, and make a habit of regularly giving feedback in a constructive fashion.

Most of the points here are about separating your self-worth from your work, and that's certainly good general advice, but it's not the only way to go.

I'll be honest and admit that I connect self-worth with my work, or the sport I'm playing... part of my identity is the desire to do things well.

So yeah criticism hits personally for me. But actually: In a good way. I view every piece of feedback as an opportunity to advance that personal identity.

Usually at work that's desired: The people giving feedback are trying to help. But even that criticism from that stranger on the internet trying to get you down is an opportunity.

It took me a while to get here. I still have half a second of defensive feelings when I receive unexpected feedback. But I've trained myself to quickly let curiosity overpower the defensiveness.

As others have said, your awareness is half the battle. You're on a good path. I hope this alt POV helps!

My suggestion is to do more design work up front before touching code. Write up a plan in a drive document or an internal wiki tool, with a focus on capturing requirements, a high level description of your proposed solution, and detailed sections on the portions you anticipate to be complicated, controversial, or risky. Also include an "alternatives" section where you very briefly summarize technical approaches that you considered but ruled out.

That captures most of the high-value engineering work necessary to solve the problem, and you can move faster, unencumbered by programming languages, linters and toolchains because you're using freeform human communication. That document is allowed to be ugly.

Once you have an initial idea down, even if you don't like it yet, pass it around to your coworkers. Ask them for feedback on the design, especially the requirements, and ask them to help you brainstorm solutions to the parts you don't like. Your coworkers are going to naturally approach your document with a positive, progressive mindset. There's no risk of breaking things or stepping on toes. Chances are there will be design decisions they don't like, or have better ideas for how to do it. Since it's a freeform document, you can quickly rewrite stuff and tweak it until everyone's happy, or you can at least have the tough conversations to reach a compromise.

Once your coworkers have had a chance to provide feedback, then is the time to write code. Since you did that up-front work, you should be able to barf out the code 10x faster. You could even hand it off to someone else like an intern to barf out the code.

When the code goes through code review, it's your coworkers' jobs to be in a very conservative mindset, looking for regressions and maintenance pitfalls. You'll likely have a very different experience, though, because the code is now the manifestation of a previously agreed upon plan. It's simply an artifact. The lines of code are "cattle" to be slaughtered and consumed rather than "pets".

Phase 1: Unaware, unable

Phase 2: Aware, unable

Phase 3: Aware, able

Phase 4: Unaware, able

Congrats, you're at phase 2!

I for one have developed the ability to suppress my initial annoyance simply because other people code has just taken me by surprise so many times. Just ask them to explain why it is better, for me there was almost always something insightful. Idk, maybe I was lucky but a correction from someone has really become an opportunity to learn for me. Of course there are exceptions, and then I do discuss/defend and sometime force my way. But not often.

Also: Over time "Everybody makes mistakes" moves from being "some expression" to absolute reality, by experience. So no reason to feel bad. You may just need time. And as said, going from phase 1 to 2 is already progress, suppressing your annoyance for long enough may just land you in Phase 3 automagically.

Try viewing it as input, and not criticism. Imagine you were cooking a stew, someone tasted it and said, "it isn't salty enough". Are they attacking you because your stew tastes like garbage? Or are they, in good faith, offering their opinion on how you can make your stew better? If it is the latter, you should be grateful they were took the time to taste your stew and offer their honest opinion. It is then entirely up to you to incorporate their input into your project, and add more salt, or discard their opinion, and leave your stew how it is. Either way, going forward, it is useful to know that at least one person thought it needed more salt, and try to be grateful that they offered the input, rather than viewing that input as an attack on your stew-making abilities.

It depends on how many ships you have sailed. Have you worked at different companies and interacted with a good range of people.

If you don't have a lot of experience, you will learn it with time. Check out 48 Laws of Power. Your work also is not everything you have. It doesn't define you.

Criticisms are also not easy to hear because people don't know to give it well. Many times it could be personal. You can differentiate it by how its being framed, is it a comment on you or your work.

Hey Joe, your have become really lazy with your PRs vs Hey Joe, you have repeatedly submitted change requests that don't have good test coverage and have not been able to meet deadlines and it has been slowing down team velocity.

Maybe also consider a change of workplace if you want to start fresh. Going to gym and staying healthy helps too.

1. Having a "growth mindset" is important, it's a mindset that a mistake/failure isn't the end of the world, but instead it's an opportunity for us to grow and get better.

2. They way we "judge" other people could indirectly be the way we "judge" ourselves. When you encountered somebody else making the same PR mistake what would you do or think about the person? I encountered a very similar humbling experience and I found out that I judged people very easily (although I didn't verbalize it) and it affected how I perceive the mistake I made myself. In my case, I learned to be more compassionate and passionate, and to judge people less based off their mistakes

Criticism is the least of your concerns when you live with PTSD :D.

For me work has always been sort of an escape from myself. If I get criticized for the work I do I don't mind too much really because the alternative is the dark place I go to every time I close my eyes.

"So you think there's a problem? Okay maybe there's a problem let's have look at it and reason about it together.

Oh I just suck and my face is stupid and that's why my code sucks? Well I'm really relieved we found the answer to our problem, for a moment there I thought I was the a*hole ;D."

That being the dialogue playing in my head while I haven't said anything to the workmate who simply refuses to listen to reason.

"Okay" I type, and press "Submit Comment"

> Everything from an unintentionally snarky comment in a PR

To avoid this, teams need to come together and learn how to be respectful during code reviews. I find this article to be a very good resource:

https://www.michaelagreiler.com/respectful-constructive-code...

I noticed that there's a huge difference between receiving criticism on something that is work in progress versus something I consider being "done".

When something is still a work in progress in my mind, it is much easier to have a positive attitude towards criticism and see it as something that helps me improve. There's something I can _do_ with the criticism in these cases.

However, when I consider something as done and it is criticized, I can get frustrated and defensive. It's a bigger mental leap that's necessary to make the criticism actionable.

The simple (though not easy) solution is to consider nothing as permanently done.

I don't have great advice. This is just how I think about it:

Nobody is perfect.

I stopped taking it personally after working on an app about 15 years ago. I was reading the code and had an epiphany: it was buggy as shit. Less experienced me probably thought it was fine. But if timings were just right, there were some bugs that would cause all sorts of errors.

But they hadn't ever happened, despite the system running for 3 years at about 10k requests handled per second. So, did the bug matter? I dunno. I fixed it, sure. But it gave me a new outlook. It's impossible to avoid all mistakes. So try your best, and don't beat yourself up over the ones you miss.

The best way is actually to turn the tables around and learn how to give other people feedback in a way that is effective. There are plenty of coaching and other courses you can do that can teach you some good techniques that you can apply.

A useful side effect of knowing how this stuff works is recognizing when others are being ineffective and clumsy. Lots of engineers are a bit deficient with their soft skills. And recognizing when people are shooting themselves in their feet by being passive aggressive, rude, or otherwise causing a lot of issues in day to day communications can help you distance yourself from those situations.

It sounds as though criticism either makes you feel insecure about your own abilities, or resentment when others unfairly blame you for problems.

So here's the thing: management is metadata for actual work. It has very little to do with the day to day business of getting things done. The more elaborate the management system, the more intrusive it is to getting things done. A good manager doesn't look to blame people for problems - they do whatever is required to help each person solve problems, period.

So when you get blamed for things that aren't your fault, don't take that personally. It's not about you, it's about that person's insecurity about their job and need to deflect attention from themselves.

As far as snarky comments go, well... again, it's not about you, it's about the other person and their need to feel or look superior, or to make people think they're funny, or it's compulsive. Unless this same person singles you out constantly, it's probably not personal.

As for feeling bad about honest mistakes... the only mistake you should ever feel bad about is the one you keep making. Everyone makes mistakes - some of us are just better at bullshitting about it. The key is to learn from them, and what questions to ask in advance to avoid them. That's just a thing that takes experience.

Eventually you'll get to the point where you don't take it personally anymore than you take it personally if you go on a blind date and the person doesn't fall instantly in love with you. Does it mean you're not lovable? No. It means that, at this moment, that person didn't want you. Again, it has nothing to do with you, and it doesn't even necessarily mean anybody did anything wrong. That reviewer might have had a shitty day, or might be under undue pressure themselves. Doesn't make it right to use you as a scapegoat, but that's just the world. People aren't always smart or fair.

As long as they don't fire you, you'll just learn to shine it on after a while. Whenever people are forced to interact with other people for any other reason than fun, there's always gonna be friction where they meet.

Increase your life experiences over coming adversity and also releasing greater volumes of work with various numerical measures. This won’t stop other people from being stupid, but it will increase your tolerance for it.

Conversely, if you're receiving comments that have clearly been phrased as diplomatically as possible, take a pause and note that the other person is trying their best to not be personal about the feedback.

As a random example, sometimes I respond to emails on a one-on-one basis, removing the dozens of people CC-d on the original so the sole recipient can quietly correct a mistake and save face.

Something like 50% of the time they'll angrily reply and add back in the original cast of thousands, ensuring that everyone is now painfully aware of their mistake.

You should try to develop an accurate and nuanced view on your skillset. I am simultaneously quite proud of my guitar playing and acutely aware of my deficits. For me, when someone points out a problem I did not realize/perceive, I am thankful (if it comes from the right place). Building your own skill, confidence, and humility (as you try and fail) is the best way to develop resilience against criticism.

You also should develop a supportive peer group. I cannot emphasize how important this is. You probably will not find it at your job. Find friends you admire, and try to be the kind of person they admire.

Constructive criticism should always flow freely both ways. In most professional environments, this does not happen. (Criticism flows down the Org chart.) This is an inherently toxic situation.

Keep in mind, insults can masquerade as criticism. Snarky comments are insults masquerading as criticism (though they may be well intentioned).

Work environments are tough. I have had situations where a manager far less technically skilled than me criticized an architectural recommendation, the business now deals with the consequences of those decisions (bugs, instability, excessive resource usage), and I am comfortable (bemused) because events proved I was recommending the correct decision and I have a support network outside of work. This sort of situation is toxic to improvement if you are not careful. I suspect many people find themselves in these situations professionally so often they just consider it normal.

To me it has been immensely helpful to work with my own projections. As I've realised how much of my own inner world I project onto others, I've become more forgiving and unaffected by other people's projecting onto me.

There are many types of therapy that works with projections: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Personally, i've done the work through ManKind Project, a non-profit for men's work.

Stop measuring your value as a person by the quality of your work. The 21st century has seen a mighty effort to convince us that we are no more than our work ethic. None of this shit matters; I'm sure you have or will sooner or later see something you poured your blood, sweat, and tears into binned at the whim of some ladder climber looking to make their mark, or similar. We're here to live; use your job to facilitate that and remember: it's just a job.

(Assuming youre talking about 'work' in a professional context)

Two points: is your goal to be perfect (i.e., make no mistakes), or is your goal to improve the product? In the later case, constructive criticism is only moving you closer to that end goal, and can be welcomed happily.

Second point, do you respect the person giving your work criticism, and do you accept that it is useful for the product? If yes, then great, why feel bad if the goal was to improve the product, and their criticism will only make your work better. If no, then this can be a difficult situation, and I personally have been here before. I try to see things from their perspective, ask questions, etc., but there are definitely times when you will fundamentally disagree with the utility of the criticism, and this can indeed be a hard spot.

This all said, the manner of delivery makes a big difference. "Do better" is not useful feedback because it is not actionable. If you are getting this kind of feedback, consider finding a new job / manager. Feedback that is well thought out and actionable (e.g. "this can be refactored like so", or "this function needs another test case") is more than likely coming from a perspective that has seen many things go wrong, has an intuition about what can go wrong, and can be a learning experience for you. Sometimes, the problem cannot be articulated so clearly, in which case your manager should be careful to say so and they will have to put in some thought themselves into the problem and how to find a solution. If they are not then they are only doing half of their job.

Don't feel like you're the only one. It seems very common for people to have different flavors and degrees of feelings like this. Some inexpert questions to maybe consider:

* Where you work, does it feel safe in general to acknowledge mistakes? Is there a culture of humility, and the team supporting each other? Are the most skilled/experienced/respected the first to point out when they made a mistake? How do managers/leads react when learning of a mistake? Do you feel a general sentiment like mistakes are human, and that everyone i supporting each other and wants everyone to succeed? (This might not be just you, but something the company can improve.)

* Do you have a feeling about how your skills/performance relate to the needs/expectations of the team? Do you feel like you're appreciated enough? Do you feel the Impostor Syndrome? How does your current experience level fit in your team or company?

* You said "unintentionally snarky", but do you ever feel that someone is being mean, overly critical, or disrespecting? What about that being your initial reaction, and then later you decide it was unintentional?

* Do you feel like the perception of others when you make a mistake threatens your future?

* Do your thoughts seem to be mostly about meeting your own internal expectations of yourself, not so much what others think? Were you raised with high expectations put on you?

* Have you worked with a therapist/counselor on this? I'd think it'll take them awhile to get enough context about your work situation, but that's normal, and they have a lot of relevant training and experience that we don't. Your health insurance probably covers this.

* Have you talked about it with a trusted colleague where you work, maybe a trusted manager? They probably won't be as skilled as a therapist/counselor at all facets of this, but they have direct information about some of the context.

The answer is simple: identity. Insecurity comes when we find our identity in our work and our ability to do it—but our value as people does not and could never derive from it.

Think of it this way: do your friends or family care about you based on your ability to perform to a certain standard? Of course not! (At least I hope not... that's its own problem).

Once you no longer identify with your work, you're able to take the emotion out of it, because it no longer affects how you feel about yourself. When you get to that point, you'll be able to see every experience as an opportunity to learn and improve, no matter who or where it comes from, which is the ultimate goal.

As far as dealing with other people, it's a lot easier once you've figured yourself out. You're better able to recognize that everyone's on their own journey, and their ability to deliver feedback in a constructive way is more about them than it is about you. Once you internalize these things, you'll start to care a lot less about their opinion of you.

Also, from my own experience, learning to confidently look stupid (i.e. admit that I have no idea about something), has been one of the biggest and most successful hacks of my career.

In summary: You are not your work. Focus on your own journey, and unsubscribe from giving a crap about what other people think about you. Conversely, it'll earn you more respect.

All these answers are interesting, but overthinking it. It's simple: find something to do away from work that you love just as much.

It's not your pride or your ego. Never lose your passion and don't let the world beat it out of you. Feel your own greatness in more than one way and it will improve your life in ways far greater than just the ability to take criticism. You need a playground in your life that's not connected to your paycheck to dump your energy into and make a mess.

Me Anglo, currently working for a French company with tons of immigrant co-workers so meetings are a dazzling display of accents and grammar.

When I send a PR the French guys especially come off very snarky, and I mean they're a pretty snarky people, sometimes guys will throw the most savage insults at each other in meetings and it always lands as funny.

Anyways I'm usually pretty good at taking criticism non personally but their pr comments can come off rough sometimes.

I'm not sure I have anything to offer that is not just an anecdote, but it does sound like you haven't really internalized that what goes on in your head goes on in everyone's head yet. I remember when I used to take everyone's words at face value and therefore feel inferior; it took me much longer than it should have to realize just how much most people bullshit all day.

You might be getting defensive, in other words, because you already felt insecure, and the source of that insecurity might be that you believe everyone around you is as self-possessed, competent and confident as they look to you.

Let me assure you that they are not, they're just as much an ape as you are.

I went through something similar. The core of it for me had to do with a fixed mindset vs growth mindset.

The research behind this showed that telling kids something as simple as "you are good at this" vs "you worked hard at this" can trigger a fixed mindset. This shifts their focus (and potentially their beliefs) that it's about them personally as opposed to the work they are putting in. From there all sorts of crazy things happened. Kids would protect their status moving forward, going so far as to lie to others about how well they did on exams. Meanwhile the kids that thought it was about the work they put in continued to grow, improve, and get better - leaving the other group behind.

With this knowledge, I began to change from thinking about comments and feedback to be about me and instead about things I've produced. Eventually it lead to me being able to respond with curiosity, embrace (and celebrate) mistakes, and to learn things much much faster.

This may sound odd, but I now have a visual I play in my mind to help navigate this. In the past, the visual was when getting feedback the other person was pointing at me when saying things - which felt like blaming, shaming, etc. Now it's that they are pointing at a piece of paper in front of us that we are both looking at. That piece of paper has things that I've produced and we are discussing it. It shifts the focus and blame from me over to discussing the results of my actions. This gives me a mechanism to mull over how to change my actions in the future to get different results.

Software is a pretty toxic discipline where everyone is constantly ranking other humans - best school, annual salary, funding round, ARR, leet code. No matter what you do someone will find a way to make you feel small because you aren't ranked good enough on some other metric.

You don't have to participate in those systems. There are places where humans are treated with dignity, not made to feel small and worthless if they aren't at the forefront of every metric, or have all the answers.

Compare yourself to yourself.

I think this is because to some, work is a part of them, or they fell they are solely responsible for it. Neither is true.

Make a distinction between you, and your work. You work, for the work to be given away. To your client. To your boss. To your customers. Dont hang onto it. Let it go out into the world.

You work with many constraints; time, cost, already existing components, other people. So what you do is not fully decided by you. So neither is the fault fully your either.

How you think about your work philosophically, matters here, I think.

Your work is not you. Of course your decisions shape the way your work comes out, and of course you used a considerable amount of time to create the work, so as a result you are involved with it.

But the key understand is if someone criticises your work, they don't usually target you — why would you even think they know who you are?

When they criticise your work they take time to tell you why they feel or think your work could be better. Instead of taking that at face value ("shit I am bad at making good decisions") a good strategy is to take the causal root of the critic seriously, while taking the suggestions they make with a grain of salt. The former comes from a true place most of the time, the latter can stand and fall with the subjective interests and knowledge of the critic.

So think about that causal root ("user had problems to understand X") and see it as a cause to think about the state of that project.

See how it is not about you at all? It is about the project. Of course your decisions shaped that project, but isn't it possible that there are parts within that project where your decisions could have been better? Sometimes we all take decisions automatically without giving it a second thought, so a critic can be a way to provide another perspective, one that we might not have considered before — that is a value in itself.

Criticism about code is either accurate or useless. If it’s useless, no point getting bothered by someone’s bad opinions. If it’s accurate, then thank god you won’t have to discover it later when it bites you in production. Always good to remember all the times you’ve messed up, makes you appreciate the extra eyes. Plus, no matter the quality, you learn a little more about programming and the people you work with by seeing their thoughts applied to something you made.

> I've come to realize that I often take constructive criticisms personally.

Somebody once told me, "never fall in love with your ideas." Because you are not your ideas. You are not the things you create. Your work and your creations exist outside of you and they can receive criticism without it being targeted at you personally.

> Everything from an unintentionally snarky comment in a PR I've made to someone highlight a mistake I’ve made that I probably couldn't have known about.

When someone points at your work and says "this is bad" they are not pointing at you and saying "you are bad" are they? And if they are attacking you directly, and not your work, that seems more like a problem with them than it does you.

> I see this as one of my major flaws and try hard to mask how I feel. But I just hope to learn to stop feeling bad for honest mistakes.

Feeling your feelings is not a flaw. Wanting to stop feeling bad is worthwhile, but many people accomplish it by becoming calloused and cynical. They stop caring about what they do and both they and their work suffer accordingly.

Focus instead on separating your feelings about yourself from your feelings about your work. Be critical of the things you're doing. Acknowledge where things aren't great but you're trying to do better and nothing can be perfect.

First, recognize what constructive feedback is. Not all feedback is created equal. Most developers aren't trained in nor understand what constructive feedback is. Recognizing poor feedback is the first step.

It's easier to accept constructive feedback because it's not directed in a personal way. Someone who leaves constructive feedback isn't questioning your intentions, motives, skills, or choices. They're not leaving snark, highlighting your mistakes, etc. You won't see much use of the words, I or you. Constructive feedback teaches you something and should leave you feeling better about the state of the code.

The difference between...

We should use a wrapper around this type so that...

and

Why did you pass this type without wrapping it?

Is that the former is suggesting a logical change to the code that will have a positive impact on its fitness for use. The latter is interrogating the author and has nothing to do with making the code better.

There's no need to doubt yourself so much. Don't let poor criticism gaslight you into thinking that there is something wrong with you. If you're responding to PR feedback in an emotional way it's a sign that you're trying to protect yourself and there's a reason for that reaction. If there's a problem with the magnitude of your emotional responses, that's a different problem (I've worked with people who were not getting therapy for their anger management issues). However anger, resentment, etc are normal feelings and are useful.

The next step to dealing with it is learning how to be polite and assertive. Once you can identify feedback that is not constructive you need to learn to tell people so and divert them away. In other words, how to tell people to take a walk without telling them to take a walk.

And you can be proactive in this too: talk with your team and team leads about feedback and develop a code review guideline to enshrine some simple rules that nudge people towards giving the kinds of constructive feedback you're looking for.

And if your team is encouraging the kind of environment where you feel bad about honest mistakes then you should consider looking for another team if such discussions don't change anything.

I had to take so much criticism from people who through bizarre turn of luck had to manage me, but were so pathetically bad at what they were doing, I just learned to ignore the criticism.

The difficult part is to make myself take people seriously when they criticize something I did.

For example, I had a boss who didn't like that I used Emacs and tried everything in his power to get me fired because of that. He would change the text of the ticket I worked on the last moment to look like I haven't done what was requested, or deliberately assign me to worthless / tedious manual-labor kind of projects, specifically assign me to work on various design / documentation documents which were stored in Perforce in MS Word format etc. I could quit any time, but the thought that he'd suffer more from having me around than I would from having to deal with his antics won. I realized that watching stupid people suffer as the result of their stupidity is kind of fun. Also, I got paid to do nothing of value. That was ironic, given I could actually do quite a bit for the company I worked for. But, hey, I bought myself a very fancy bike eventually, when I decided to move on, with all that severance money!

Ask yourself calmly , are the criticisms fair? Can you learn and improve from it? if it is yes, then just take it knowing that they are just helping you to improve. Equally important, check what is the intention of the criticisms ? is it done in public？ does he/she critisize in a way that insult you when he/she has better ways to say it? If it is intended to put you down, you should fight back even if the critisms are valid. Intentions matter.

The majority of the comments here seem to be focusing on the generality of the identity <-> work relationship so I'll touch on another aspect with a question; How do folks deal with this differently for in person (or at least "people you know") vs. online comments from people you've never met? I think most people find the first one pretty easy to work out, but the latter one has a very different dynamic.

Sometimes it can sting a little to know that I did a crappy job at something, but I see a lot of value in learning from it.

When my brother was in art school many years ago, he asked me to critique his work. After a few polite comments, he explained that I wasn't being helpful and the end result would be better if I didn't hold back on brutally ripping it apart. That mentality has stuck with me. I want people to tell me if my code is crap.

I have this senior teammate that has been in a field for 11 years. The mistakes he makes are such a beginner level, like, commenting-out 20 lines of code without 'why', over-complicating block of code/not seeing easier solution, premature abstraction, not writing tests etc. I know he feels embarrassed sometimes when I write a lot of comments in PR, but also it feels like he's appreciative. Such a weird mix.

I would like to say first is that: we are all humans.

When you are passionate in the work you do, invest time and effort to completing work for someone to find flaws, it's hard to not be offended and take things personally.

But as humans, we are able to learn. You made a big step in being aware that you are taking criticism personally. From here, you need to learn to disassociate that what you contribute is not a byproduct of you as a person. It is a byproduct of the ask, a byproduct of your knowledge at that moment of when did your work.

To shift your perspective from immediately seeing feedback as a personal attack, practice gratitude. Be grateful that someone else took time from their busy day to look closely at your contribution and provide feedback. Sure, its their responsibility, but they invested their time to review the contribution and provide feedback that you did on your time. Sure, if the feedback is snarky, ask nicely to reword it for next time.

Third, take advantage of every opportunity as a learning opportunity. Maybe you will learn something, maybe you will be more aware of a specific type of feedback next time you are contributing, that you will try not to repeat the same error.

The answer is, be humble, in your comments, and your criticism

If people could read my thoughts, half the time they'd think I was insane, but I know they're insane too :D

It is short term vs long term thinking.

Do you want to feel good for ~ 1 minute, or for the rest of your life?

Just pause, and think, before you answer. Pretend your mother, father, or your children are in the room with you, and you'll do alright

Given how you express yourself, I wonder if you could have some success finding one or more ways to afford yourself to be more detached from your output.

I can sympathize with where you are, as I believe I've been there, but am not there any longer. I've detached somewhat successfully from my own output by virtue of two things, the first and most important one is adapting a growth mindset, which you can read more about here

https://thelearnerlab.com/

and I carry that mindset shift in all parts of my life. Outside of coding, I do a lot of physical activities, and I have meaningfully changed the way I conceive of "failure" so that I have an easier time feeling inspired to try again.

Honestly, I sometimes try to learn by trying to fail as fast as possible. It's quite enriching and takes less of a mental toll.

Besides reading the articles on the Learner Lab (there are some good Power Company climbing podcasts where they interview Trevor Ragan - the guy behind it - that I much prefer to the articles) there is another active choice you could do and that'd be reading the first few chapters of The Rock Warrior's Way which talks a lot about how _not_ to derive a sense of personal worth based on how your performance is perceived by external parties.

Lastly, and this cannot be done actively, eventually, you might find that after you've written buckets and buckets of code during your career you simply care less about it as every design choice you make becomes a smaller percentage of choices you've made in the domain. I believe that's something that has happened to me

I've never had much of a problem with this - giving or receiving criticism - but I can try and shed some light on how I _don't_ have an issue with this.

I find that I naturally frame myself reading comments of my work as being inherently "with" the person. Think of it like watching a movie with someone, you both can comment on the movie you're seeing, and you naturally see yourself either agreeing with their critique or forming your own critique based on it.

In the same way, detach yourself from the work, and instead view your work on equal footing with your reviewers - this naturally leads to a more objective view for everyone involved. Reply not to their criticisms of _you_ but to whether you agree objectively or not, or perhaps suggest a different way they can look at the work. Oftentimes, after reading someone else's critique I can be self-critical in a way I wasn't before and it will lead to me refactoring a bit in response to my new perspective on my work, instead of completely taking their critique at face value. Use it as a perspective shift, but don't take this method as a way to lower your self confidence and give in to critical feedback.

Now I'll admit what I have more problems with is when someone clearly doesn't "get it". I'll bend over backwards trying to explain my rationale, when often the right thing to do is to try and understand what about my content caused them to be confused. Now of course, some people just plain don't get it right away and you should always feel free to defend your ideas.

As for snark.. defuse with humor. It's not always intentional, I've unintentionally come across this way (if you haven't you're probably holding in too much feedback!) so feel free to quip but don't go tit-for-tat. Try and cut through to the core of their feeling about *the work* (read: not you) and address that instead.

I learned to take it personally but not react badly. This way I am not trying to counter a normal human experience, but instead changing something I have total control over, my response.

This is a fight worth having because the more you do it, the better you get at it and you feel less and less attacked you feel when criticism comes your way.

The first few times doing this are the hardest. But after doing this for some time, I rarely feel criticisms are personal anymore. This also affected how people talk to me, and they make it less personal. It's an odd combination of success from both sides.

A key point to all of this, was I needed to make my criticisms less personal.

A manager told me a key point in a private conversation once that help me change my attitude.

He said "I don't like talking about people, I like talking about processes".

I had just been critical of a "person" in the conversation, and I realized how much easier it was to talk about a "process" with my criticism after I took his hint to heart. And others took some time to follow my lead on this, and for me to be consistent about this change of process.

Imagine for a moment that every time you submitted your work the only feedback you ever heard was "Great" or "Thanks". How would that make you feel? Engaged or isolated? Would you wonder if they are even giving your work proper consideration? Feedback is critical to improvement. Improvement is a continuous never ending process. Try leaning into it, Actively asking "Where is this falling short?" "Where is my thinking flawed?" Soliciting comment in this manner makes you an active participant in the feedback process.

Having followed this approach for my entire career, I can say that it has paid off handsomely. Some of the most valuable criticism coming from professionals that would not have offered actionable feedback had I not pushed past their initial stock "looks good" response.

Most of the time criticism = engagement, a person taking time to pay attention to your output. Making yourself vulnerable in this way will encourage a subset of others to behave similarly, which could lead to some pretty awesome peer relationships. Certainly has for me.

Just think about the saying "nobody kicks a dead dog". If there is no hope, there is no kicking. At least there is hope. Encouraging, I know.

One option is to be involved in non-work activities. If your only source of self worth is your job, then any criticism to it is a criticism to your self worth. If you have multiple sources of self worth the a criticism to your work has a smaller effect to your self worth.

For example, you might be a dance teacher in the afternoons where your students really admire you or you are the “popular” person among a group of friends.

First, you need to be able to critically evaluate the criticism.

Incorrect code is incorrect. There should be no ego there. Either in pointing it out or in correcting it. It could be incorrect due to many reasons: faulty assumptions, misunderstood requirements, etc. It's important for people on both sides to realize this is a mistake and they happen. Any single mistake is not a condemnation of an entire person. Let he who has not crashed prod throw the first stone and all that.

Then there is code that is technically correct but needs to be altered for other reasons. What those reasons are and how they are approached are important.

If it's a pure styling issue, first hopefully you have a linter that handles all of that. But if you don't, don't sweat the change. Having code look uniform is important. How they choose to address this matters more. The implication that people who use anything but "the chosen style" are inferior is a bad way to approach the issue. It's simple enough to say "We do it like this here for consistency".

If it's matter of altering patterns or what not, that could be a discussion. Did you do MVC in an MVVM shop? Did you adhere to neither? Do you prefer delegates to closures? Stored procedures vs inline SQL? Any of the vices to any of the versas. In this one, you can make your case. Maybe you have the right idea. Maybe your approach is better for this project. Maybe you win the hearts and minds. Maybe you don't. This you have to let go. And once again, it's important that no one approaches it from the perspective of "idiots do it the other way".

Basically, as long as they are criticizing the product and not you, it's fine. You aren't perfect. No one expects you to be. That's why we have reviews.

Constructive feedback is useful. Why should I feel bad about it? I feel grateful that someone helps me improve.

In the case of a snarky comment, I would assume the reviewer has some personal issues. I feel bad for them, not me.

A honest mistake is not really a mistake. I would do the same thing again if I were in the same situation. The fact that I couldn't have known about it is someone else's mistake.

Maybe dig a little deeper why you feel bad about it: Do you consider your self-worth lowered? Do you worry how others think of you now? Trace your bad feelings to a reason as specific as possible. Then figure out if is actually true. For example, you made an honest mistake, a team mate pointed it out in a review, and now you think the tech lead considers you a bad coder. If you dare, you can directly ask the tech lead. Just thinking about it might already help you realize it is silly though. Ok, to be honest you could realize that it is actually the case that your tech lead now hates you. That is still progress because now you have a concrete problem instead of vague bad feelings.

It depends on the criticism

If it's invalid criticism:

If it's from someone whose criticism matters: pursue the criticism and reach the truth through reasoning

If it's from someone who doesn't matter: ignore, make stuff

If it's valid criticism:

You learned something. You could have continued doing things the wrong way and been worse off for it. You are in a position where someone cares enough to look at your work and take time to give you feedback.

Good input from others about not identifying with your work, and trying to see your colleagues’ inputs as part of the process of creating something better together.

I would add a few things. At work, try to contribute to a culture of not referring to work or ideas as being “owned” by a specific person. This can reduce prestige. For example, avoid “Molly0’s PR” and prefer “The PR molly0 opened”. It’s in everyone’s interest that the PR is as good as possible. The person who opened it hopefully didn’t do so for their own personal satisfaction, but because it contributes something important to the codebase.

What I find most challenging is when discussing different points of view on a subject, rather than eg fixing obvious mistakes. That is, if two people have very different ideas about how best to approach a problem, and start to argue about which approach is better. It can quickly turn personal and prestigious if you only point out perceived flaws in the opposing suggestion. Try to see the different perspectives openly and again, avoid thinking of competing ideas as a competition of people.

I've a Manager who loves one thing - Ask questions. No answer ever comes from him, but he keeps on asking questions. And as you can imagine, I am always at the end of it giving him answers. If I ask clarification questions back, he counters that with a "Five Why" type questioning and most of the time I get frustrated, owns it up to give answers and cut the conversation.

After a few months working under him, I started wearing out and started taking it personally. I started attacking him back. Not only did that cause friction between us, he gave me a bad performance review rating. I didn't give up and kept resisting one way questioning. I reminded company pays him for providing solutions and answers when his team is in need, and not sit there asking questions.

A friend of mine understood the pains I go through, and suggested I read the book, "How to master the subtle art of not giving a f*ck". I can say I am now at peace and don't care a sh#t about most things. I am still employed, but stopped worrying and taking things personally.

> But I just hope to learn to stop feeling bad for honest mistakes.

I'm curious what tone your reviewers are taking?

It takes while to develop a good tone, as a reviewer, too.

Assuming your manager isn't doing the review, bring up some of the feedback with your manager. Tell your manager you're looking for technical help. Don't act insulted, but if the tone of the feedback is really off, it will show.

Beginner answer is first just start by not showing that you take it personally.

Senior and more evolved answer is you separate yourself from your work, "you are not your work". So someone critiquing your work doesn't mean their critiquing you.

More senior answer is that you are not attached to getting the best answer yourself, but more attached to getting to the best answer by any reasonable means (including someone else s*itting on your work).

Ultimately, you are trying to arrive at some truth, which you have produced through the lens of your own conditioning, someone is trying to provide what they think is the truth through the lens of their own conditioning. Behind it all we'd like to think there are good intentions which are all to aspire towards the truth but that when we express this idea and it gets "colored" in some sense by our own impressions of the world, it may not always come out the right way, and so you have to take a deep deep breath, to let it all just be, and press on.

Think more about the consequences. Many times they don't matter.

But think about why this is common amongst engineers, the consequences seem to matter. Software engineers initially get clout from being right, that devolves into criticizing other engineer's code while the usefulness of being right tapers off very quickly. Many of engineers got into the trade after being told they were so smart and intellectual, and this incentivizes being correct and making correctness your whole identity (to the annoyance of others and all your interpersonal relationships). But this is not productive, there is a limit to the utility of this. When you get criticized by another engineer it might seem like there is a consequence, but often there isn't.

One way to combat this is to ask yourself what game you're in:

Are you in the money game? then perfection doesn't matter, you can make the most barely functioning antiquated software that powers the government and fortune 500 companies, and be protected by the state for your own fuckups.

Just remember that.

I used to be the same way, but I've intentionally changed myself to fix it.

First, I don't treat my code as an extension of myself. My code is not me, and criticism of my code is not criticism of me.

I love a good solution, and I write good solutions, but all things created by humans are flawed, and therefore everything I make will be flawed. If somebody sees something I didn't, it's not because they're necessarily better than me (though they may be), but they have a different perspective. Often, it's something I would have seen if I was in their position and not so close to the code myself.

And because of this love for a good solution, I've trained myself to have a love for good criticism. Every piece of criticism is an opportunity. You are not perfect. You have room to grow and always will. Criticism is potentially a door to this room for growth.

Just internalize the mantra of self improvement. "I was wrong" is a wonderful thing. It means the same thing as "next time, I will be right".

If it's a snarky comment in a review, they're the problem, not you. If it's an honest review, then that's life, it's about the code, not about yourself.

Can you look 2-3 years back at your original code and not find any problems? Then that's a problem :P We all learn, evolve, and improve, so at the end of the day, any feedback is better than no feedback.

This is related to your question, but not directly answering it.

I have been privileged to exist in area where a lot of feedback to my projects comes from informal means. Friends taking a look at projects or just giving me time to think about issues. This has led to improvement that may not be as efficient, but was more meaningful.

Importantly, a lot of the feedback was positive. Perhaps overly so. It almost always remained positive, even if my code was shit. This doesn't mean I don't recognize when there are bad smells or practices. It didn't spoil me into thinking all my code was great.

I've made careful and deliberate choices to follow that practice of feedback with others and in other spaces.

So that's cool I guess. Others may have other criteria that are important. Sorry it doesn't explicitly answer the question, I just wanted to offer that.

I struggled with this quite a bit throughout my career until about a year ago. For context, I've worked in the insurance industry for 17 years.

So, what changed/helps:

1. I do a weekly therapy session. It doesn't have to be about or related to work, but I noticed that my propensity to take things personally tied to many other broader issues in how I was raised, grew up, etc. It's probably not happening just by chance. Sorting through my broader mental/emotional balance really helped.

2. A lot of folks have the impulse to react and interrupt when receiving feedback. I think, instead, it's easier to simply let that person exhaust their comment to you, and then take a moment collect your thoughts if you actually need or want to respond, which takes me to my next point...

3. Have a framework for deciding whether that feedback is worth it. You don't need to respond in the moment with any particular comment other than to say "thanks." Never write something out and send/post/etc. immediately without taking a step back, re-reading, and calmly evaluating how appropriate that writing really is.

You can then dissect your feedback with a series of questions to understand if the feedback is worth ingesting or not, like: - what can I learn from that feedback? - was that person stressed about something when delivering feedback? - was I stressed when delivering feedback? - how important was the topic relative to the broader goal or priority list of the company? - Etc.

4. Everyone makes mistakes. Even those people you're thinking about in your company that don't. They make mistakes too. There's lot of subjectivity in mistakes as well, which is another way of saying that no one is perfect. The best way to deal with mistakes is transparently own them and then move on rather than dwell - easier said than done - but effective.

Two key points that helped my team through a rough patch were:

- one of my co-workers setup CI automated formatting/style checks (i.e. PEP8, mypy, isort, etc.)

- much more extensive guides on how to contribute good code with many generalized examples as well as do's/don'ts. When new nitpick comments come out in the PRs - the guides were updated to avoid future nitpick PR comments

After some initial pain - we really haven't had issues with PRs anymore whereas before it was pretty painful. That said we've been working together for quite a while now.

I think a lot of times the original author may have something in mind w.r.t. the codebase/architecture/formatting/schools of thought and expect the others will pick up those ideas naturally and they get frustrated when other team members don't.

The other team members being code commented to oblivion get frustrated with what seems obscure, snarky nitpicks.

By making stuff explicit upfront - people can self help/self correct/self edit before the PR is even generated.

My current strategy is twofold:

- First, allow yourself to feel whatever you will feel. This is unavoidable. Let it be. Not only you are not your work, you are not what you feel.

- Also, recognize that no right decision can be made in a state of anger. So if you are feeling any negativity, you must postpone whatever decision you have, writing an email, or any other (within reason of course).

Go to Architecture school for 5 years. Tutors used to keep scores over how many students they could make cry. Anything else will seem tame in comparison. At the end of it you come to think of your work as something you can discard at a moment’s notice, you’ll have no sentimental attachment to it at all, if anything you’ll slightly hate it already anyway.

It's hard because if you care about your work, there is a piece of you in it. However, it's also necessary. I wrote a whole essay about this here:

https://www.observationalhazard.com/2020/11/on-taking-critic...

Realizing you can’t know everything, don’t know what you don’t know, and respecting other people can have had different experiences than you. All without judging yourself negatively for those realizations. They just are facts. No need to be hard on yourself if you put in sincere effort.

Take all criticism as a learning opportunity.

It is personal.

I've had 18 months working on a project where code reviews were going badly wrong so my perspective might be a little different than it was before this and maybe needs some realigning, but your PRs probably aren't anonymous and reviewers absolutely do change their comments depending on who the submitter is.

If they're genuinely constructive comments made in good faith by a warm and open reviewer prepared to take the time to help you address them, I don't tend to find people take them badly. If that's what's really happening then maybe some retrospection is in order. Your code isn't you, it can be changed and improved and once committed it isn't yours alone if it even was before then.

Reviews inherently revolve around social dynamics, personal relationships every bit as much as a dispassionate, logical view of code. As such, they're fraught with difficulties.

Spend time thinking about times you got criticized but instead of trying to justify, explain, rationalize or just ignore it turn toward it and just accept it. Relax and just let all the thoughts (and more importantly) feelings run over you. Don't resist and don't turn away. Just let all those feelings out. Our thoughts and feelings create an imaginary world that most of us live in in our waking life but that's all it is; thoughts and feelings. Its subjective, transient and temporary. When you can just indifferently witness you'll see how temporary and subjective (and silly) it all is. This removes the person. You (the person) is the one that reacts, reaches and resist the thoughts and feelings. Stop that and the person disappears. It's hard at first because you have to sit through all the uncomfortable feelings. It is worth it though.

What you’re going to have to work on is discernment.

You can’t, and shouldn’t blunt or callous yourself to criticism, after all it’s the important feedback that you get from your environment that informs where your attention should be for learning or applying lessons learned.

Rather, the key task now is for you to increasingly categorize and label this feedback in ways that allow you to appropriately evaluate whether the feedback is valid and perhaps does require introspection.

The more you can evaluate things like this, with curiosity as to other reasons that may be contributory, the more you’ll realize at least in my experience that “it’s not about you” in most cases.

Finding that saddle point of anxious introspection and detached boundaries tasks a while so, be patient with yourself and give yourself grace. I know I’m still working hard on it myself and I’ve been in senior leadership a long while now

Here’s an approach you can try with yourself:

When people criticize you, how do you feel? “Bad” is not an emotion, it helps to be more specific.

Do you feel the way you do way because you’re unhappy with your own performance and you wish it was better? Or because you’re unhappy with the other person’s unnecessary (or unkind) criticism of your innocent, honest mistake?

Or other reasons?

Often these kind of personal investigation questions can help. You may get clarity. Once you figure out clearly what’s there for you, try the same “why approach” on the other people involved, in your own head, without asking them. Why did they say what they said? and how did they feel at that moment? And why did they feel that?

If you find it hard to know a reason, try using your imagination.

Maybe there are insights that you will arrive via this process that will transform How are you see it, and that’ll help make everything seem better for you.

I hope you figure it out and get some peace. :)

Practice! Also group crits. While the format differs from place to place, in art / CGI / illustration / animation a crit (critique) is a session where everybody lines up their work and then you go around the room and each person critiques each others work, saying what you like about it, what you dislike, what you would change etc., while the person being critiqued takes on board or pushes back against the criticisms. Because you're taking it in turns to critique and be critiqued, and are doing it in person, there's social pressure to be polite and constructive, however it is still very uncomfortable to begin with. But do it every week for a few years and you end up with a very thick skin. You can take lessons from the process into other areas of your life and even introduce something parallel when developing where you do group code reviews.

Others have made great points. I'll offer a practical approach that worked for me.

I found criticism was difficult because it came as a surprise. It seemed to me as if the person giving the critique was using criteria that I wasn't made aware. This felt unfair.

The surprise, not the criticism itself was the struggle.

my solution was two-fold:

1. Eliminate the surprise by "shopping" my work around early and often for feedback. 2. By doing step 1 I would learn the "hidden criteria" that others would use to judge my work.

At this point I am rarely if ever bothered by criticism. Since I ask for feedback early when I don't feel "done" there is nothing at stake. Early criticism doesn't stick and just feels like we're working together on a solution.

If you go up the mountain and work alone, for a long time, criticism will feel worse. I do the opposite. Might work for you.

This is from a different disciple - creative advertising, but I think it holds up to most other creative tasks. Advertising is renowned for having sometimes very brutal feedback / cancellations at the last minute / being very competitive etc.

An old creative director I knew used to say, almost like a mantra, to the entire group as work was being presented and judged that ‘we are on a journey’.

If you don’t think about it, it could just sound like wanky media BS. But it’s not.

It’s about kind of surrendering yourself to this journey and that being what’s important. Don’t worry about a few mis steps or failures here and there. Leave your ego out of it. We’re still all just on the journey. It’s also about not getting too obsessed with knowing exactly where you’re going. You will figure that out as you go based on things going right or wrong.

I find it a nice way to think about doing anything creative.

Mistakes should be viewed as a systemic issue.

There is a quality assurance approach or theory from W Edwards Deming that needs to be absorbed by institutions, and it’s that everyone is trying to do their best job and it's the machinery that is getting in the way or creating barriers. Most errors arise from processes but anything in an organization could potentially get in the way. One role of a manager is to work to remove these barriers.

You should demand any negative feedback provided is specific and try and see it as someone taking the time to try and help. Given that someone is trying to help, ask questions you can use to improve things and see the feedback giver as a person who has knowledge you lack and can gain.

You also have to be prepared that you will get unskilled feedback and that is a different opportunity for you to stretch leadership muscles.

The trick is really accepting that you feel that way. When you get the notification, feel the sting, feel the embarrassment.

Maybe even write a letter in defense of yourself to the critic, but never send it.

Take a few deep breaths, and when you’re ready, move on. You’ll have dealt with the feeling but you won’t have ruffled any feathers.

> Do not attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

It's rare that people are trained in the art of criticism. Most of us try our best, but often fail at criticising the work while separating it from the author. It's hard to criticise while simultaneously empathising with the target.

I often think of this when I've received criticism that stings. Most of the time it's simply carelessly written. Ironically, empathising with the critic reminds me that they're only trying to help.

I still remember working hard on some work before showing it to the boss. He pointed out a number of ways in which it could be improved. I wasn't thrilled with his reaction, but followed his instructions. I was surprised to find that the project was greatly improved, and that the criticism was worth taking on board despite my initial feelings.

Don't focus on being right. Focus on the work being right.

Accept that you might be wrong. Welcome anything that can help you toward the task being done right and be thankful.

Of course, if you can avoid being wrong, do. Because you can't always afford being wrong. (in some professions, it's a life or death sentence for someone)

Lot's of good comments already. I personally needed to shift my mind regarding written messages. When I receive feedback in written form and I think the other person has ill will, I perceive the text as angry written and a personal attack.

When I started checking with others how they interpret it, they always saw it as neutral or constructive. So my assumption of the senders state of mind, influenced the way I perceived the feedback text.

For me it really helped to "baseline" with others and/or often just ask the sender what the intention of the criticism was. Get into an analytical state of mind and figure-out what the intent behind the criticism is. If could be that it's made with the best intentions and can help you get better at what you do.

Play team-based online competitive games and you quickly learn to handle criticism. Play long enough, get to a high enough level and you learn to separate the ad hominem flamers and the flamers who are actually constructively showing where you are wrong (while still using ad hominem attacks of course).

Learn to give feedback that doesn’t hurt people’s feelings.

This lets you more easily see what people are trying to say separate from how they say it.

Classically, programmers tend to be both not very sensitive towards how they phrase feedback, and fragile wrt. criticism of their own work. So many programmers work alone because of this.

You couldn’t feel that way if you had no doubt or did not care about your level or worth as a developer. So you do care about how others perceive your level and you are not totally convinced that your self evaluation is right.

I would say don’t judge yourself too much. You don’t have to be perfect (especially if you are not, and nobody is). You probably are in this business to learn, so give yourself some room to learn a bit (or a lot!) more. People that criticize your work may be wrong. Don’t take their criticisms as absolute truth. In case you feel they may be right, drop your ideas right away, ruthlessly steal theirs and make them yours. This is how you don’t get stuck in local minima. You don’t have to care about having been wrong, there are more constructive things to do.

I don’t take criticism of my work personally because I’m usually the one giving it.

I’m only partly being snarky here. I think constantly about how I should improve past code, why I shouldn’t have done x, etc. Self criticism is healthy and takes some of the sting from external criticism.

Beyond that, I think “lean into the punch” is an affective strategy. If someone says my code is crap I can either 1) fight them and try to explain, justify etc or 2) say “you’re absolutely right”. 2 takes less energy and deflates most reasonable people’s criticism, esp in person. Of course if the criticism is wrong then that’s harder and maybe not even appropriate. But even then, framing it as “a valid criticism, but Im balancing that against X” helps the person feel heard and likewise more likely to hear your reasoning.

As @dusted said, one important thing to remember is the disconnect - the work you do is a culmination of any number of factors on a given day. I couldn't agree more.

For me, the biggest thing though is trying to have a learning or improvement focused mindset. Understanding that most comments and every mistake you make are a step in a direction where you've learned something and gotten better. You, the codebase and the reviewer are all better for the experience.

Also - it IS okay to feel a little bad or frustrated when you've done a piece of work you're particularly proud of and it gets a lot of criticism. It's important to keep the above in mind, but it's also human. Don't feel bad for feeling bad. Just try to regulate it, and remember it's for the better of yourself and everyone.

> I see this as one of my major flaws and try hard to mask how I feel. But I just hope to learn to stop feeling bad for honest mistakes

I propose this change in attitude: this is a part of you, accept it & learn to use it to your advantage.

Some people don't care when they're criticized, some do. Who performs better at a task: the person who doesn't care or the one who does? Use this desire to not be hurt to fuel you to improve yourself (you've already started with this post, i'm just redirecting the energy.)

The other thing to be aware of is to make sure you're not blaming the other person for the bad feelings. Your feelings are a signal to you, a signal that something is wrong and that you need to do something to fix it.

It sucks at first, to be extra sensitive, but in the long haul it is an advantage.

Probably the best answer I can think of is to just stop caring what people think (about your work/code), I know my work is never perfect (or even good) but I show up anyway. We are not defined by the code we write or the work we do because to be honest most of it is probably not bringing that much value to society anyway; what defines us is our character. Stay humble and look at every criticism as an opportunity to learn and build relationships.

I've been working for a long time now and I have learned the hard way that nobody is perfect and nobody cares if you are perfect, in fact people tend to prefer those at their own level (not perfect), but most of all relationships matter and are probably the most important part of having a healthy and enjoyable career.

Some body stopped you from shipping a mistake. Just like when someone stops you to tell you your fly is down or a shoe is untied, feel a little embarrassed, and a little grateful that they didn't let you walk around like that all day.

> feeling bad for honest mistakes.

Use it as an impetus to get better. If you make the same kind of mistake repeatedly how can you modify the way you write code to not do that anymore. There is a popular saying "the worst code I know of is code I wrote six months ago", but if you aren't analyzing and improving (not just changing), then it will be just as true six months from now. Code from the previous month should be better than the code from two months ago and so on, otherwise you are chasing fashion and quality is stagnating.

I always try to take the view that anyone pointing out my mistakes is just being helpful, and to be grateful for it instead of being offended.

I used to struggle with this like you describe, and still do to some extent, but I think the fundamental cause is just insecurity, at least in my case.

I just have to remind myself that everyone makes mistakes all the time, and that's why we have code review. If someone spots a mistake in my code in review, they just saved me from looking even dumber down the line when something breaks in prod. I've also learned that feedback from others is the single most powerful way of identifying holes in your knowledge.

Over time, by forcing myself to look at things in this framing, I've come to mostly enjoy constructive criticism, and see it as an opportunity rather than be offended.

Your code is bad sometimes, so is everyone else around you. I've seen people who have been doing this for 30 years and think they are gods because they refuse criticism. In reality all they are doing is creating an environment of hostility and suffering because while they were awarded the seniority they hadn't earned the responsibility to own it until they can admit the first critical step

All code sucks, your job isn't to make great code it's to make great products and do your best to reduce the stress on your team, code quality will follow but first you have to be honest, open, and compassionate and sometimes a JR will take that personally and that's ok, eventually they won't or they will find out this industry isn't for them.

I try to project the criticism back to my original thought process when doing the work. Why did I choose the approach I did? Did I consider the issue brought up in the review? How would things have been different if I had?

I find this last part helps me integrate the feedback by effectively running little simulations of how I could have taken a different approach. It seems to deactivate the otherwise prominent memory of the embarrassment of a bad review by replacing it with memories of the simulations. I have a terrible habit of ruminating over incidents from decades ago that my mind has tagged as shameful even though they’re objectively irrelevant… Thinking about detailed steps for different approaches and building associated mental images seems to help divert the shame tag.

The way I like to think about it is that I imagine, and am probably right, that the person on the other end of the review approaches it the same way I do - When I do my reviews, I don't particularly care who's work it is, I only care about the code itself and the problem it's trying to solve. My feedback doesn't come from a malicious place, it comes from wanting the codebase to be in the best possible state it can be given our collective knowledge. Why would the other person be doing it any differently?

Sure, there's always going to be assholes and people that are just straight up mean for the sake of being mean, but in my experience those types of people don't last long anywhere because nobody wants to put up with their shit.

Information is power. If you're doing something wrong you want to find out. If somebody has some opinion about you - you want to find out. Make sure it's easy for people to give you information even when it's something bad about you.

That being said be careful not to go too far with it. People are only humans, in that they have their own interests, flaws, play power and status games and so on. More often than not criticism, even when it appears to be constructive, it's just a jab at you, especially if it's delivered in public. Nobody's work is perfect and hindsight is 20/20. Take everything with a grain of salt and be careful not to undermine your position in companies or your self image by being too welcoming about criticism.

A lot of good comments here, here's one point I haven't seen: If you can, just respond tomorrow. Use the evening to exercise, visit friends, play trivia, etc. I find it can help you force your brain to see the comments as just one part of your whole life.

I like it, whenever someone is criticizing me or my work I take it as an opportunity to improve.

I always second guess and ask for more details, because the person might just be misunderstanding me and I don't want to act on a false negative feedback.

I also make sure to tell them that's like pair programming for life, that the person making the critic is helping me, that I like it and I also tell a funny story to make them comfortable.

I tell the person that when I was in the army I had big angry men with guns screaming insults at me, there's nothing they can say to me that I might take offense.

Give me feedback please.

In addition to the great advice in this thread, it’s worth being aware of something called “Rejection Sensitivity Dysphoria” (RDD). It isn’t a diagnosable condition according to the DSM-V but is often observed coincident with ADHD. Basically many forms of criticism or even observation can trigger a deep and intense fight-or-flight response due to challenges regulating emotions.

Therapy and medication can help. If you think this might be in play it is worth talking to a mental health professional.

https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/24099-rejecti...

Sometimes it's hard, but most of the times I find it easy. I think it's because I always assume I could write better code.

That is, after finishing something, if I did a rewrite say a month later then it would have a better design, with better code and hopefully fewer mistakes.

Thus if someone else points out my design or code isn't the best or I've made a mistake they're kinda just pointing out the obvious.

An important note though: this does not mean I don't defend my solutions. They may criticize it, but I judge their criticism before answering. Often I'll agree, after all, most of the time my solutions can be improved. But sometimes I'll disagree and then I'll say that and give my reasoning why.

It really depends on the type of criticism. People criticize for different reasons, some are constructive and some are not. I feel that the onus of good behavior lies on both the criticizer and criticizee. People should strive to listen to and accept valid and well-meant criticism, and try to take that small pain from it as motivation to do better. In the larger picture, organizations and teams will only be able to be better when people accept their mistakes and hone their skills. Having the ability to tolerate discomfort and growth is much like lubricant in a machine that prevents it from overheating, and it's necessary.

However, some people who criticize excessively do it for not entirely altruistic reasons or they lack the emotional intelligence to understand when they are breaching someone's limit of tolerance. Even valid criticism should bear in mind quantity, frequency, and severity of impact on the individual being criticized. I think most people who are being thoughtful in the moment will do this, and try to suss out someone's limits and temperament before unleashing a volley of criticisms, but there are some who use such learning opportunities or their position of authority to vent their sadistic urges, or they simply do not understand healthy boundaries and just criticize relentlessly regardless of impact or effectiveness. I strongly believe that this latter category should not be normalized or accepted.

So you've got to ask yourself, are the people criticizing your code probably doing so with the intention to make you better, or the team better, without undue malice? That's usually the case. Try to focus on their intent to help you do better instead of the disappointment of the criticism itself. But, if you've found yourself in the unfortunate situation of being carpet-bombed with criticism maliciously you don't necessarily just have to put up with that and it would be a good idea to try to find an organization with healthier communication. People who have been in such unhealthy environments before (or had unhealthy family environments) will likely overreact even in healthy environments later, and it can take some time to learn that not everyone is out to get you, they just want you to do better next time.

> But I just hope to learn to stop feeling bad for honest mistakes.

What a strange idea. Or maybe not. I always thought of "feeling bad" over my mistake as a way I perceive the brain doing processing of negative learning feedback. So, "stop feeling bad" equals "stop learning" to me. Now that I think of it, maybe there's a way to detach processing from feelings, but I'm skeptical.

Feeling of accomplishment when you've done everything good is too sparse and not intense enough for me.

As for "not take that personally" I have no suggestions. I naturally presume that people care about code and not about belittling me (until there's enough evidence contrariwise).

I feel I am the same way and in every new 1:1 where someone asks how I like to receive feedback, I have learned I need to ask them for it async. I tell people that if they have anything to tell me, to put it in a slack message or email so that I can take the beat, feel negative, feel like I'm being attacked, and then process that emotion before responding.

It's something I'm still working on and as others have said, having worth outside of your career or outside of others is a big portion of my ability to work through the emotions. But while I'm still learning that, I really have found power and stability from letting that emotion pass before responding

I guess it’s a few questions here:

1) is the person honestly just trying to help make the codebase better?

2) is the person wording it in such a way that doesn’t insult you?

3) what is your preferred way they would’ve made their comment, if any at all? Is it reasonable for you to have that preference?

4) what are your thoughts when you receive good faith, non-insulting criticism, and why do you have those thoughts? What is the underlying emotion you’re feeling that’s triggering that kind of thinking? What are the justifications you have under those feelings & are they reasonable ones?

Breaking down why you react the way you do, and all the aspects of that interaction, will help a lot in figuring out how to feel less defensive over it.

Walk away from it, then come back to it in a bit and take the feedback at face value again.

This is obviously easiest with Slack, Google Docs comments, pull request feedback, Hacker News comments, etc. In person feedback might require a poker face and later reflection.

I find, most of the time, that feedback feels a lot less reasonable (and more personal) the first time I see it, but that it feels more reasonable and actionable when I come back to it with a bit of distance. And then there's something to accepting part of their feedback, holding back on some less significant part, for a sort of win/win where you don't have to feel like you gave in on everything.

Easy to say, much harder to do though!

The easy way is to reframe it and create a template for receiving and responding to feedback.

Receive -> Repeat out loud -> Think (take your time) -> Feel -> Filter -> reject/accept -> Respond

Respect other peoples opinions and try to think deeply about them prior to feeling or reacting to them. You may find a significant insight.

Pauses and slower talking receives more respect and comprehension in general.

Defend your work with the sandwich method. Acknowledge and repeat the feedback out loud. Insert a long pause and genuinely think about it. Filter your emotion and identify a logical reason the feedback offends you. Reject or accept the feedback and close with appreciation.

Even though we live in a world where it seems everyone shares opinions freely, that’s mostly just the internet. IRL most people won’t look at you in the eyes and tell you what you think. A healthy workplace is the opposite, where your manager and peers will proactively comment on the quality of your work and your behavior. This might be annoying at times, but you have to look at it like a gift. Most people aren’t at functional workplaces and go through life without ever being seriously chided for unproductive behavior. Or they think their work is higher quality than it could be. Learn to take feedback and you’ll be the best version of yourself.

A frame of mind that helps me is: I am doing important and difficult work and I cannot expect it to land perfectly. Whether it's because I did something wrong or because I didn't explain it well, the "surface area" for someone to see something I missed is pretty large.

So you go into your day expecting that there'd be feedback (and in fact if you don't get any, you should be concerned) Then when you get it, it's not something that smacks you in the fact, it's something you wanted and expected.

BTW no all feedback is useful, you'll still have to filter it for relevance but you need to have an open aperture first.

At one stage in life I had this problem regularly. It was very stressful.

It dawned on me that I was feeling like my own value was bring questioned when I was criticised. The material reality of whether I was actually being criticised fairly or if I even believed it was reasonable to be criticised didn't even factor in. In short, I was having an ego panic.

The fix was unfortunately just a lot of patient introspection. Why do I feel a certain way? Why is one thing my first response instead of something else? Do I like that I do that? Those were the REAL issues. Being contradicted just highlighted it.

Best of luck overcoming your troubles. I am sure you will succeed if you are diligent.

I'll take this one step further.

I am currently writing code that I think is, from a design-perspective, completely wrong. But I've learned to completely disassociate myself with what I code. I'll do the best that I can to accomplish because THAT'S MY JOB. That's how I frame everything. I will protest, I will point out flaws, but once the dust has settled, if my boss says she wants it a certain way, I'll do it. I'm happy to just be coding and if they don't want to listen to my advice then I'll just do what I'm told, go home and enjoy the money that I make by doing the things I want.

Code ownership is a code smell. Your nose is being put out of joint because you interpret criticism of the code as criticism of you. But it's not, it's the team's code, and the team is making suggestions to improve it.

Check out "Thanks for the Feedback: The Science and Art of Receiving Feedback." https://www.stoneandheen.com/thanks-feedback

A friend once explained his philosophy to me, that I find helpful: "Once you've written it, it's just code. Someone can always find a better way or improvements and that's fine"

I think the second sentence is true for everyone's code and that's what makes the job interesting.

Also jobs rarely aim for perfection, they aim to create value efficiently for the business. If the best way of getting there is producing code with a few mistakes that are when later picked up in a code review then that's fine too.

If this resonates with you at all, then when something annoys you repeating to yourself "It's just code" might help. Best of luck!

This is my framework:

1. Acknowledge to myself that I don't know everything. Do the work to the best of my abilities.

2. Anticipate criticism with the optimism that I will learn something from it

3. Receive the criticism, and take time to really understand it. If I don't understand, I ask questions until I do understand. If I do not believe it is better than my solution, I make my point the best I can.

Part 3 is the tricky part because communication is hard. But all team members have to discuss in good faith and understand that the team is more than the sum of its parts; each opinion should hold equal weight (even if its between a junior engineer, and a team lead).

Everyone makes mistakes. The actual mistake is not fixing your mistake. Why take something personally when they are helping you?

The problem is that most people take criticism as if you punched them in the face. If you never criticize another person or thing ever again you'll be way ahead in life. Polite people will never help you, but here's the problem. Your enemies will also not help you. "Never Interrupt Your Enemy When He Is Making A Mistake"

So imagine the rather unique individual who will actually give you criticism. It's the most wonderful thing to experience.

"Love your enemies, for they tell you your faults." -Ben Franklin

Other comments here give good advice about how to deal with well-intentioned technical criticism: meditation, journalling, etc.

For dealing with snarky or nasty criticism of you or your character, I would highly recommend listening to recordings of Marshall Rosenberg's books and/or seminars on "non-violent communication" (available on Spotify, Audible, etc.) The NVC philosophy is absolutely game-changing: it's to change your focus away from the "jackal comments" and empathise with the human needs underlying them. It's God's work -- connecting and healing for you and your critic.

I realised long ago that I am not perfect, there are limits on my attention to detail, and my ideas are not always the best way to do things. If someone spots one of my momentary lapses of brain, they've done us both a favour. If they know a better way to do whatever we're trying to achieve, great.

If we can delete vast swathes of stuff I wrote last week or last year because something better comes along or we just plain don't need it any more, awesome.

Code is a liability, shipping a working product to the best of our team ability is important and (honest, well intentioned and useful) criticism is one good way to keep learning.

It took me a long tome to mostly get over this, but a turning point was realizing how temporal code is. It’s written in a snapshot in time, to solve a problem that may evolve hour by hour, competing with dozens of other tasks also needing attention.

So what you produced in that maelstrom is really just a reflection of the moment, not of you.

This also helps me not judge other peoples' code. I only see the outcome (the code), not all of the inputs so it's hard to know if this is good work or not in a "is this person good at their job sense" (though obviously there is better and worse code).

I’ve found it helpful to remember that the thing being criticized was created by a past version of me.

A version that didn’t have all the information, a version that doesn’t have the skills and experience present me has, a version not even present in the conversation.

It’s a small way to create some distance between the work and your person.

Another thing to remember is to always ensure the criticism is against the work and against some shared measure of quality.

Too often criticism actually is personal (unintentionally or not) or the criticism is about a requirement that wasn’t shared at the time. Both of which are about the inexperience of the critic not you.

I recently heard a criticism that this forum was looking too far backward in tech history and lore. Can I suggest everyone young and old look back even further in moral history. Start with the secret diary of Marcus Aurelius. It is about 2000 years old, and written by an emperor, and not meant to ever be published. But it is easy to read quickly and will teach you every thing you need to know about how to handle a tiny PR criticism. Don't trust me. Read it. No-one will criticize you for like-harvesting or virtue-signalling the same way again. Or at least a bit less :) All the best.

I actually make my objectivity a point of pride.

Yes, there is a bit of a sting when you put up a PR or a design doc and your teammates basically roast it, but then there is a prideful "oh yeah, I'm someone who doesn't take any of this personally."

It's part of being an engineer, working in engineering culture. It's not personal, and it makes the codebase better. It helps to remember that your goal is the long-term health of the platform, not a little bit of your PR that you thought was clever.

It also helps to avoid toxic teams. In a good team, feedback is offered objectively, without judgement or attack.

I feel that this problem might be a part or some shape of an actually quite complex and many-faced impostor syndrome and the best way to fight it would be to try to learn and accept the idea that it is totally fine to not know something or to not be exceptionally good at something. Moreover, only by accepting these ideas and keeping them in mind helps us open up our hearts for new discoveries and that is the only way how do we learn. It is hard to learn something new if you refuse to accept or have hard times accepting that there are things that you simply do not know yet.

> But I just hope to learn to stop feeling bad for honest mistakes.

A: By trying to fix them.... this is the way.

It is simple, the difference with people that take feedback personally and the ones that don't, is that the last people are willing to make an attempt to fix the problems the others don't want to be bother.

I always take personal feedback with this mentality "ok fine, lets do it your way", if it works and its either better or equal than my solution then fine good for you, if it isn't then its the awkward/refreshing? moment when you have to tell them they were wrong and you have proof.

How do you take criticism outside of work? It feels like an exercise in self-reflection. It is easy to attribute code to intelligence, but it is not that simple. When people say "This code is no good", you need to realize that their delivery in feedback, while flawed, could stand to hold some truth, and that doesn't make you any less intelligent. I've been writing software for well over a decade and the most impactful thing I've learned is to lean into and embrace my failures. Try to remove ego from the situation as much as possible. Good luck.

The code is not yours. You are a hired gun and should do what you are told. I have a different opinion all the time about PR comments but I always do the "thumbs up" and change it if it is functionally the same.

The main criteria for code is does it work and some try hard will always want you to over engineer the simplest of tasks, let them have it, who cares. You should not let your job define you and be your whole identity.

Be passionate about your own projects, don't hang out with coworkers in your spare time and never attend a christmas party without overtime pay.

You are not your job so why care about PR comments.

> I see this as one of my major flaws and try hard to mask how I feel.

It's not a flaw. You're learning. Don't judge the sapling as if it's a full grown tree. For me, acknowledging my "bad" feelings was the thing that helped me deal with them constructively the most.

Even better, talk about them with peers you feel safe with. Say "your comment brings up feelings of... In me." instead of "you make me feel...". With the right person, that's a doorway into mutual understanding and reframig the experience for yourself.

Everybody has these feelings, you'll find out.

It's probably a bit late now. But be deliberate in your choices. So if you get critique of them you have a reason and a new view to grapple with. If you follow trends, or just do what others did because thats what they did. Well then you'll find critique hard because you were just a follower. But if you made a choice, cut a corner because of a reason, and got called out on it then you can reflect on that and all of the ego stuff just slides away. I solved it this way, because a bad solution now was better than a great solution two days from now etc etc.

Make deliberate decisions.

Stop judging others so harshly it’s probably the #1 way. Whatever measure you use is going to be used on you. Step #2 is probably to listen fully to the end before ever speaking. This is hard, and took me a long time to get right. Just let them speak.

When receiving feedback, start by saying internally, or even verbally, I realize that I’ve made a mistake, and I’m thankful you have my best interests in mind and feel comfortable enough to approach me about it. I tried my best, but what did I not understand correctly about the problem I was supposed to solve, and what would have you done instead?

I was like this but reality beats it out of you over time as you are experiencing right now.

The reality is you will make mistakes, even if you are the best programmer in the world.

You can shift your mindset and accept that you are making mistakes which you are blind to see and then get feedback as early and often as possible to deliver a better outcome.

Now I welcome any type of feedback, regardless of the tone because you can think about it and fix it if it needs fixing.

Anything worth building requires multiple iterations to get right.

Adopting this attitude will also help you in the workplace because people love to work with people that take nothing personal.

I believe it goes something like "sometimes you win, sometimes you learn". The ends are important, but they do not justify the means. In this case, if the means are you did your best at the time with what you knew at the time, you did good. It's all you can do. Don't worry about what you can't control. Criticism is free growth - no need to attach a price to it by taking things personally. As to how, just remember how you feel when you bring something up to your manager, or a senior executive, or another engineer - you mean well. So do they.

My most successful strategies for my personal growth in this area have been

1. Work to separate my personal identity from my work. This is really hard for me and takes regular reflection and work, but over time it is possible to separate the two.

2. Frequently remind myself that everybody makes mistakes, it is simply part of being human.

3. Practice humility by welcoming the feedback and expressing gratitude for the ability to learn and grow. A little self-deprecating humor doesn't hurt either, and can soften the intensity of the feelings associated with receiving criticism.

Best of luck in your personal growth journey

In the context of things that aren't outright mistakes..

It's important to take some feedback as .. others desires for features, and attempts to share experience with you.

It is easy to use software we write for ourselves, it is important to understand that no one will find our software as usable as we do. Taking feedback is how we get to write software that is usable by more people.

And as you grow in your career, you will meet people who had negative experiences in different ways than you. When this is shared via feedback, it is best to learn from other peoples mistakes than to repeat them.

Taking criticism of your work personally is fundamentally egotistical. The code is not part of you.

If you're making mistakes and feel bad about that, create a checklist and go over it before you ask for reviews on your PR.

If people leave criticism on your PR, ask them how they would do it!

If people point out mistakes, ask them how they would avoid making those mistakes!

If you feel personally attacked or criticized on a PR review you should present the situation to your manager and get an unbiased opinion from a 3rd party.

Comments and discussion are for the code, not you. Don't make it about you. Focus on collaborating with your teammates.

I feel this issue is most likely a reflection of the way your workplace measures and conveys performance. If in the back of your mind you feel your sustenance is at stake due to criticism, you'll never be able to take it lightly.

Ultimately looking at your overall performance (rather than individual bumps up and down in a short period of time) is the way to put employees at ease.

You can't fix how your employer measures and enforces performance but you can learn to evaluate your own work in stretches of 3-, 6-, 12-months rather than at the granularity of a single PR or a single mistake

I mean... Nobody likes having their mistakes or imperfections pointed out, and it feels worse online, where expressing empathy is harder than in person. It's ok to feel bad.

Remind yourself that their feedback, whether it's warranted or not, is just a part of the process of finding the fit within a team. Over time you'll develop a relationship together and find common ground. Try to develop trust in each other, adapt to each other. That will make it feel less bad, and help you write code in a way that your team mates appreciate (even if it's not your preferred way).

1) Take something that you don't take seriously.

2) Compare the submodalities of that to the submodalities of something you do take seriously.

3) Change the submodalities of the latter to those of the former. You will no longer take it seriously.

- - - -

What are submodalities? Qualities of modalities.

So what are modalities? Jargon for the subjective experience of the senses (visual subjective experience. auditory subjective experience...)

Our subjective experience has a structure, you can deliberately change the structure to change your subjective experience.

It's actually pretty easy once you get the hang of it.

Stoicism has a lot of information about how to react to the world and your emotions. A lot of people think it’s just have a stony outward appearance and burying your emotions, but it’s actually much deeper than that. Recognizing that you ultimately choose how you react to a piece of criticism is the first step. Understanding that the flairs of emotions that you have and your thoughts are not you is another. Once you understand that it becomes easier to practice (and you have to practice) stoicism in your everyday life, including during criticism

You give yourself permission to make mistakes. Too many of us come from a background where making mistakes result in bad grades, being marked as a failure, being held back. But making mistakes is how you learn. When you're no longer getting a grade for how you did as an individual along the way, but rather are "graded" by how well your team delivers final results, then you appreciate that constructive criticism is entirely necessary for getting winning results. Ultimately, by being on winning teams, you promote your own growth.

1/2) “Just because you are right does not mean I am wrong”

There is a meme gif that sums this up perfectly

The gif in question has two figures discussing a 6 on the ground which is 6 from one person’s perspective and 9 from the other person’s perspective.

2/2) “I never make predictions, especially about the future” aka Acceptable choices at the time

If you did good work, and operated with as many of the facts that you had at the time, then that is a great outcome.

Not all the facts are known. Even when all the facts are known the choices may be a coin toss. Do not beat yourself up if a choice did not work out

1. Don't care too much about my job/code/etc. Does it really matter?

2. Is this suggestion a good one? Then I will use it, regardless of how it was worded. Is there something to disagree with? Let's talk why it's a bad (or good) idea.

3. Having feedback is better than not having feedback. Or being in a situation where people do not question your technical desisions and just follow along. Non-ideal feedback is inevitable part of that.

4. Do you always give perfect feedback? Think about that next time you see a junior dev submitting a O(n^2) solution to O(log(n)) problem.

In a lot of interactions, the person giving feedback is just doing their job.

I’ve been a team lead and CTO, and when I was presented with some strategy or deliverable, it was my responsibility from that side of the table to speak from experience and point out banana skins and improvements.

There is really nothing personal at all in these interactions, it was just trying to deliver a better product as a team.

If you are putting forward bad work, or I am giving poor advice then the business has a performance management problem, but the to and fro of feedback is just a normal part of teamwork.

It’s understandable to feel personal attachment to one’s work, but it’s important to remember that criticism is not a reflection of your worth as a person. Instead of taking it personally, try to view it as an opportunity for growth and improvement. It may be helpful to seek feedback from multiple sources and identify patterns in the critiques so that you can address specific areas for improvement. Additionally, practicing self-care and maintaining a positive attitude can help you stay grounded and resilient in the face of criticism.

Learn about the concept of diffusion as explained in ACT (acceptance and commitment therapy) best taught by the book: A Liberated Mind by Steven C Hayes. Basically following a set of practices to distance your thoughts from yourself so you can not buy into them.

One of the practices I've felt most helpful is to name the entity that is arguing in your mind and is telling you to take it personally. I named my voice Herman. I often tell him to shut up. It's a great way to distance yourself, albeit, it does sound a little mad.

Something that has helped me, in many similar situation is to restate my intent.

Reminding myself that my goal is to be a better engineer tomorrow and not really to do a great job right now. I am after getting better, current work that i am doing is just way to get better. Taking such a position seems to solve lot of problems.

Criticism becomes something that i am actually after. I am not attached to what I build in the past. Of-course it is crap, i would not do it the same way now as i am better.

Take pride in getting better. Not in in the job done.

What someone else thinks is their business - it's caused not by you but almost everything else that happened in the universe. Sometimes people just didn't eat breakfast, or someone beeped their horn at them on the way to work. Sometimes people are imbalanced and give inappropriate attention to the sign of fault. All of these things are not your responsibility.

What is your responsibility is if you chose to listen or not - you don't have to be involved or give someone else your attention if you don't want.

One thing that’s helped me is to realize that the person submitting the criticism wants the same thing as I do-a better thing- and that it’s not my work but ours.

I think software is creative and a sort of art so work is personal, but it’s collaborative and multiple people work on something. So even though I wrote it and they criticize, that means they are interested and wanting to improve the thing together.

That’s better than not caring or disinterest. Even if it’s their job and the are paid to make it better, it’s easier to build with feedback.

One of the best things anyone ever told me, one of my old bosses once said to me, when I was frustrated and angry about a bug I created, “There are two kinds of experiences in life, winning experiences and learning experiences. And what you’re having right now is a losing experience.”

I subsequently learned to keep my perfectionism in check. As others here have said, honesty is the prerequisite to solving any problem, so please count your self-awareness in this area as a big win. Take your learning experiences in stride.

“Man’s search for meaning” is a book that partly teaches that regardless of the situation, you have control over how you react. I take this to mean regardless of your day, you can still choose to be happy. I’ve had similar communication woes to you, and it’s easier for me to remember I do not control the feedback (or it’s tone, content, etc) but I do control my reaction to it. So if you want to improve as a person, you can do that by having a positive reaction even if you don’t feel that way.

I punch a pillow. J/K.

Personally, there's nothing you can tell me that is denigrating or unflattering about me that I don't already think about myself.

I am a short, fat, brown skinned, unattractive male immigrant of average intellect.

I already beat myself up quite a bit so it makes it very easy to accept criticism from others. It also keeps me constantly trying my best because I never feel like I'm secure in my standing that I can just relax. Keeps you humble too.

But at least I saved a ton of money on my insurance by switching to Geico.

"I did the best I could with the knowledge and resources I had at the time."

That is confidence/self-forgiveness summed up in a mantra.

You have ideas floating around in your head about yourself and external "validation" of those ideas result in pain. When someone does something that results in you feeling pain, it's natural to feel defensive.

So it's a matter of shifting your focus from external (in)validation towards internal validation.

Just separate all critics in 2 parts:

1) Professionals in your sphere: Take as much critics from professionals in your sphere as you can. Sometimes you need to even pay for this. Analyse and go forward. The more mistakes you will make the faster you will reach your goal. Act it as a game.

2) All others: Just tell them magic words: "This is only your opinion, Thanks!" and do nothing.

Be happy )))

I had similar problem early in my career. I improved myself by applying the mix of three:

1. If the change requested was not major I was making mental push to agree and just do it, in many cases comments were not about the very substance of what I was working on but they were sliding on the surface

2. I was learning to read my work and see if reviewer is actually right, as I'm not a genius and there are times I get something wrong

3. I was learning 'the art of not giving a f*ck', well, sometimes this is what you need to do to keep sane :)

tldr; a lot of times, 'constructive criticism' is just a dressed-up personal attack that you are probably perceiving correctly as a personal attack.

I have gotten honest, sane non-trivial constructive feedback/criticism of my work before, but I don't tend to remember it unless it was extraordinary - like someone went way out of their way to pump me up before burning me (my work) down with some accurate and correct criticism. I like managers and senior co-workers like that, good on them.

I don't necessarily remember the specifics of bad criticism, but I feel like bad criticism is bad because it is either designed to be taken personally, or is so careless that it is inevitable that it will be taken personally -- that is, it actually _is_ a personal attack, dressed up as work criticism.

I have vague recollections of various project managers and lead/senior engineers during various tenures that I have butted heads with due to their insecurities, incompetence, etc. There are petty people all over the place, esp in a 9 to 5 environment -- wage slavery can be a breeding ground for all sorts of bad behavior.

I do like working with smart, confident, nice people -- not an easy combination to find in a single person, much less an entire team/company.

That said, I like the whole 'mindfulness' approach to life, think it's worthwhile, don't necessarily see it as 'killing part of yourself' like i used to, more like a necessary evil in this very crazy world.

Depends on environment you work in. I had a great chance to work with people who showed me how it’s done properly and told what can I do better and I did. That was awesome constructive place. At the moment I am in very toxic place, looking for a new job. And I don’t feel anything constructive. It’s really personal. The colleagues try to use every weakness and my every error to take advantage of. Hopefully soon I will be in a better place. Where I can learn again instead of fighting back.

In almost all industries: you are splitting the check, not the atom.

As others have said, it's a senior dev thing, after awhile you realize you won't care by next week. There are some coworkers that are jerks, but they are usually in the extreme minority if you are working at an ok place.

In the lab we used to say "Well, at least no one died!", usually to defuse a situation that was bad. Like say, water from the ceiling leaking on to your half a million dollar laser...

Then you have to learn not making the same mistake again. Either you take it personally or not, the mistake is still made by you. You can't get rid of your own responsibility.

There is more than meet the eye. Some people will mess with you in a subtle way. They are able to play with your emotions in a way you wouldnt think is possible because they learnt at the very young age.

You've got to learn to differentiate "you are acting like a child" and "someone somewhere is playing with you". Listen and trust your feelings. If you're feeling bad, 90% of the time it's your body warning you of some external danger.

Force yourself to trust yourself.

'taking it personally' would mean it affects your own self-perception or sense of worth.

The simplest remedy is discovering your self-worth notwithstanding the comment. Remember your intrinsic value and the accumulated value you've already brought to bear.

Your ability to bring all criticism back into this context lets you treat it from a more detached (clinical) position. Judge the merit of the opinion, plan out any potential improvement or remedy, and frame your response accordingly...

I'm just dead inside so I don't care unless it is going to result in a late night. I really don't like software development; haven't my entire 20+ year career. It pays a dumb amount of money though and I'm a tech lead so not really any other options except a minimum 50% payout to change. Which I've done before when I took a 4 year break from software.

So I just do the best I can which is apparently pretty good and just trudge on without caring.

I thought this was an excellent read on receiving (but also giving) feedback: https://www.amazon.com/Thanks-Feedback-Science-Receiving-Wel...

Lots of discussions on where feedback might come from, what are the types of feedback (praise vs coaching vs evaluation), and how to incorporate (if needed)

I also want to echo the top comment here re:kudos on desire to improve

It helped me to understand that one of the reasons I'm upset about someone pointing out flaws in my work is that it could directly affect my livelihood. Too many problems and I might not get a good raise, or even get fired.

The company I'm at isn't really like that, but I've worked at enough that it's really, really hard not to think they will be. And so the instinctive reaction is to defend myself. I think I do pretty good at controlling it now, though.

It starts by not taking the work itself personally. Then any criticism of it is not personal either. You are not the result of your craft. You are the craftsman doing your best in a given environment, under certain conditions, in a given scenario.

Life is complicated. You are not omnipotent. These are very basic absolute truths.

You need to actively recognise this, and make it a part of your core mentality, and mentality drives the sentiment. Sentiments drive emotions. Emotions control how you react.

An easy going, easy to read/listen, pretty short pair of books that I would suggest taking a peek at, by don Miguel Ruiz, in the order they were published, would be..

"The Four Agreements" https://amzn.eu/d/cB522Cj

and

"The Fifth Agreement: A Practical Guide to Self-Mastery" https://amzn.eu/d/3inVZsD

In some cases, you can preempt criticism by being critical of your own work first in a public manner, such as maybe calling out something that you anticipate another dev might not like and explaining why you did it that way. That said, you may just run into people who like to complain and nitpick, dealing with them is more about being mentally and emotionally prepared to stay calm and grounded and try to steer conversations to a productive place.

I welcome criticism of my work, as long as it is valid and constructive criticism. Like "have you considered naming this X" or "have you considered this edge case? Think about doing this" is constructive and welcome so I can improve my work.

Unconstructive stuff that is almost meaningless and without content like "this is code smell" or "should refactor this" etc. is not, and I will not appreciate that kind of criticism.

Set your goal correctly. Your goal isn't to be flawless, it's to produce optimal output. I think looking at criticism through that lens will help.

I like the "Retrospective prime directive:"

> Regardless of what we discover, we understand and truly believe that everyone did the best job they could, given what they knew at the time, their skills and abilities, the resources available, and the situation at hand.

Assume this attitude when you're looking at other people's work and questioning their decisions. Assume that others will do the same for your work.

IMHO the best way to handle a negative feedback is to try to learn what was wrong and why you made mistake in order to improve and don't repeat them again and again. Everybody can make mistake, the difference between a mediocre professional and a great professional is that the great will not repeat the mistakes.

Remove any kind of personal attack, analyze your actions and think about how you may improve to avoid making mistakes and getting negative feedbacks again.

from my experience, acquiring the self-awareness you need in order to articulate this problem is the biggest hurdle to solving it -- you're on your way!

early in my career, i shared this hangup and because i was so emotionally invested in the products that i worked on, i considered criticism of my work == criticism of me personally.

i think the next step is evaluating how effectively you are separating your work and personal life. when i have struggled with this issue the most, it has correlated with me being too emotionally invested in what i'm working on.

make sure that you have projects and interests outside of work that fulfill you so that you don't rely an outsize amount on your work for fulfillment. often this means having better guardrails about work-life-balance -- do you clearly define when you are and aren't available for work, for example?

the other thing is simply reminding yourself that your work isn't you, and it doesn't define your value. working with complex systems, we are going to screw up at times, it's an inevitability. if you aim to not make mistakes, ever, and bristle when they are pointed out or criticized, you're going to struggle over the longterm to get along with the people you collaborate with.

ironically, i have found that being more open and accepting of the "dumb" shit i do leads others to think more highly of me as an engineer. i think most of us can think of "that person" we've worked with who can't take criticism and recoils when questioned -- when you do, how did that you feel when you experienced that behavior firsthand? if i had to guess, it probably wasn't positive. we can do better!

My personal approach is to not identify with my work. The code is a mean to an end which is solving the problem at hand. If someone has a better approach, they are contributing. If they are bitching in the comments, it means that they have nothing better to do and my time is more important than dealing with them.

It does not always work, especially if I'm tired or distracted, but if I start catching that I'm getting annoyed, I try to take a break.

Understand that the code you’ve written doesn’t belong to you. It belongs to the company.

Take no offence if the company wants it done in a particular way as they’re paying for it.

My tactic is to meditate on the fact that there is always someone better than me at some thing that I’m doing at some point in time.

Learned this lesson mostly from sports, fwiw.

I am on opposite spectrum where I don't fully understand why people take constructive criticism negatively. Over years, I have learned to offer criticism only if asked and only with a lot of praise. (Though I still sometimes make mistakes of being direct with people I am close with).

My parents are highly critical, perhaps, that's why I am not bothered by constructive criticism. Though useless and unasked criticism still bothers me.

I got over it when I saw how often criticism was used as either a control mechanism or as a way to distract from the criticizers flaws or mistakes. I’ve found it sadly uncommon that someone comes from a place of earnest desire to offer meaningful feedback that doesn’t come with an agenda. So often criticism is subjectively stylistic rather than substantive, at which point it’s hard to take it as anything less than personal.

So for me, I take criticisms personally, but only personally. However, it comes across to others that I am upset with them and hence I have heard a lot during my career that "hey, we are very careful giving you feedback, because you can take it personally and react".

I don't know what to do, because I don't like burdening someone else, or failing myself to a point where someone has to give me feedback. Just a perfectionist attitude.

First of all, everyone takes them personally on some days/circumstances and to varying extents.

I try to categorize these bits of feedback by “is it at least partially true?” and “was it well-intended?” If it’s either of those things (most are both), I want to figure out what I can learn from it and realize that I’m the only possible person who will care about this feedback in 2 weeks’ time, so it’s up to me whether to care about it or ignore it.

First, think about if want to do good work (that you can say this is good).

How to know if you are not convinced of that? If it feels like you need courage to fix or redo something. Similarly, if you boast about your courage.

To me that's the difference between an A and B player, both are good but for B doing good work is somehow painful.

To answer your question, since nobody is omniscient, realize that if you feel bad for making an honest mistake you are fighting Nature.

I treat criticism as a valuable resource to help me grow, and I'm grateful that somebody took the trouble to help me do that.

I remember someone once asked how their business could be more successful. The reply was to fail more often!

We will often learn best from our mistakes, if we let a bit of our ego go and avoid being defensive.

Having said that, I'm not some saint! I have to remind myself that criticism is valuable to me, it's natural to feel a bit defensive.

I got better at taking criticism when I started unpacking my depression and anxiety in therapy. My self worth was so low, any critique of my work felt like further evidence I was a worthless person. I think it can go the other way too, where you're ego is so huge you can't fathom having made an error and get defensive. So my small bit of advice is to be mindful of where your feelings are coming from.

What works for me is to just ask everyone for everything that is not great with my code and really encourage them not to hold back. By doing it this way I get a lot of great feedback, and it gets less dramatic somehow. If people can sense that you can't take this kind of feedback they will behave differently and you might pick up that they are unconfortable, making you feel like you suck even more :D Good luck

it takes a lot of experience and wisdom to know when criticism is valid or not and that just takes a lot of time (decades) to learn. Even then, it's a hard pill to swallow. For me, it's much easier to take valid criticism from someone above me or below me on the org chart rather than a peer.

People above me on the org chart are usually coming from a broader picture and, at worst, in the back of my mind I can tell myself "this is just marching orders". For people below me on the org chart I usually have the mindset of I'm just an old fart and this is an opportunity to maybe learn something new or communicate better.

I have to really work to not end up in a confrontation when a peer criticizes my work. My usual mental reaction is "who the eff are you to say anything about anything!". How I cope is I wait 24hrs before responding, usually I'm way less emotional after some time. 9 times out of 10 the criticism is not something warranting a fight and i come away from the experience having learned something.

In my business peers are competition though so having such a hostile reaction to peer criticism may not be typical.

I design products, sometimes for others and sometimes for myself. A lot of that process is visual design. Everyone has an opinion when it comes to visual design. I stopped letting criticisms bother me because they had one of a few outcomes. 1 - it created an improvement of the product. Great! and I got to learn something 2 - someone had an opinion. None of these things warrant having your feelings hurt.

It is important when a team works with PRs that it is clearly agreed upon what should be reviewed during PRs. PRs is not the place to discuss solutions. If that is your problem then solve it before you start coding.

I view PRs as a kind of luxury. At many corps the deadline is yesterday and any single mistake you make ends up in production without reviewing or testing.

All feedback is a gift. And like gifts, some are good and some are bad. No matter how bad the gift, say thanks, and then later on you can ignore or throw away that gift.

In the context of something like a PR, a comment that suggests something but you disagree with, you simply tell them that with a bit of supporting evidence. If you do agree with their suggestion then that's an awesome gift they've given you!

I can't speak specifically to development/programming, but in a more general technical sense I have noticed that I take pride in my own work and knowledge. When that is criticized, I take it personally regardless of how innocuous the comment might be. Anything negative or critical about it is (to varying degrees) offensive to me. I realize it's stupid and irrational, but it is the gut response I have. My temperance comes from identifying this character flaw within myself.

I think the core problem therein is specifically the word "pride". That is to say, a lack of humility. It is a raising of my own abilities above some set standard. It is to find some "special" value in my own actions and ability. It is a desire to be recognized for my work.

Humility then, is what I need. Humiliation is the means in which I learn humility - to be frustrated and upset with the response from others, but to not respond with those feelings and instead absorb the information as best I can.

To put it clearly: You don't stop being offended by criticism, but learn to process it more productive ways.

You learn to deal with people pointing out your shortcomings by examining the shortcomings that they point out. It then is a matter of realizing that those are shortcomings. After realization, with time, comes acceptance. After acceptance, (hopefully) a motivation to do better. This is a process that in my own experience takes years to accomplish. This isn't to say that, even if you were to do this you would somehow become the most humble person ever, but simply a slightly less prideful one. To work as hard as before, but a slightly softer head.

You will still have many areas you might be extremely touchy about - maybe even retreading old areas you thought you had overcome. (Been there!) I don't think that there is some "magic cure" to this kind of sensation. I simply think that you start to identify the process of dealing with it in a more constructive manner over time. Part of that requires learning more about yourself, and identifying patterns of behavior others bring up.

Arrogance (pride) is an absolutely huge part of my own life. Trying to tame that requires feeling a sense of humiliation on a routine basis. I don't think I'll ever become "numb" to it, but simply be able to process the repercussions more quickly than I had previously.

Chill out, realize that if you hold to a higher standard, then everyone else will have to adhere as well.

If someone is asking for changes, that implicitly means they're willing to review those changes as well. If it's good feedback just comply. Realize that if that person is holding you to a high standard, they're probably holding others to the same standard, so your life will be easier.

Focus on the opportunity being presented to you to improve your work. It's a gift. Embrace the fact that ultimately your work can only improve thanks to feedback. Realize that by taking feedback personally, you're actually discouraging future feedback and indirectly you are actively decreasing the quality of your work.

Changing your perspective can make it easier to take feedback non-personally in the future.

Two things that helps me a lot:

- Take a time to think about that criticism. Don't answer immediately.

- Realizing that someone make and effort to make constructive criticism shows common interest in the issue. Without it, nothing valuable is build.

I personally value more constructive criticism in my work than compliments. I'm not saying that compliments are useless, but the prevalence of compliments could make criticism personal.

If somebody tells me "you are wrong" i take it personally. If they tell me "this looks wrong" and explains why, they are not criticising me but my work, which might truly have been wrong. It's the difference between "you" and "it" being wrong, where only one of those is objective.

Another nice example:

"I'm so sorry, but this looks stupid"

Vs.

"I'm so sorry, but you're being stupid"

I find it very hard to not take criticism seriously, if I’ve invested a lot of effort and especially if the criticism coming out of left field.

Here’s my story: Just over a year ago, I was working at a FAANG co and got head hunted by a recruiter for a promising growth stage startup. Everything was great, until they hired a non-technical director for engineering, and the founders handed the reins of engineering to this guy and mentally checked out from all things engineering. A few months later, he goes on to hire a pseudo technical slacker who cannot code without CoPilot/ChatGPT as my team lead(hard to believe, I know). I kept asking to switch teams, but it fell on deaf ears. Finally after getting a stellar 6 month performance review, my non-technical manager gave me a needs improvement rating for the 2nd year end perf. And this was in spite of being the most prolific engineer in the whole company, with ~20 engineers. It turns out that my manager always wanted me out, and had been building a fictional narrative behind my back, out of my requests to switch teams for months. Needless to say, I wanted to leave at that very instant, but resigned served the notice period and left soon thereafter.

Now, I’m working on my own startup for over a month now. I’m working super hard and I haven’t been this happy in a long time. Life IMO, is too short to put up with toxic BS like what my manager put me through.

Recognition is the first step. It’s important to realize that it is normal to be defensive about criticism. I’d argue that’s the default human condition and most people don’t even realize they do that.

Being able to absorb criticism without personalizing it is a skill that needs to be learned and practiced. And you will not always get it right even when you get pretty good at it.

Anyone who dishes out criticism should be able to take yours seriously and change his own code. That means you're partners in helping each other get better. Anyone of your peers who thinks his $%^& smells like roses and everyone else's stinks should be avoided, passive-aggressively if needed (not talking managers who should tell you what to do).

One technique can be listening to the self-discovery of others. This is germane to your concern: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTREgGosr/

This individual explains how their process of sharing feelings on something is often perceived as an accusation by others.

Imagine yourself giving someone else constructive criticism. Now how you would feel if that person got upset/defensive/snarky. Keep that in mind next time you receive a constructive criticism and ask yourself "Is this something I would have done exactly the way this person did and is it fair" ? If the answer is Yes, then don't be snarky.

Leaving a snarky comment isn't constructive, it's just toxic. To answer your question: Try not to identify with the code you write and be grateful for any useful tips and pointers. Looking back your code from 6 months ago will almost always be shit. When it isn't you might've hit a plateau and should start worrying about that.

You are judging yourself and others in the wrong way and have bought into the falsehood that people are good or bad based on performance. You therefore take criticism as a threat to your virtue. Don’t judge yourself or others by performance. Once you’ve fixed that problem with the way you view others, it will also fix your own self esteem problems.

Being able to look at your own code and notice what's wrong with it is the first step.

There are always at least trade-offs made between conflicting quality goals. Understand that others will value trade-offs differently. In a team, their preferences count as much as yours.

You wrote the code, but it is not you. Critique of the code is not critique of you.

You develop thicker skin as you get more push back. Also don’t think your code is the best way, which comes from being open minded. If there is an asshole that really rub it in and call names, sure you let them know but mostly they won’t. In other words practice the above and you will be able to take criticism like a good team player

I find that it’s important to be objective with respect to these things. Some people are very good at this, have great ideas and you should listen to them. Most are not, do not and you probably shouldn’t.

In other words, criticism from someone you rightly respect is to be seen as a gift.. a learning opportunity. The rest (vast majority) can be ignored.

Never forget it's just some person's opinion. You can accept or reject it.

I used to get a lot of negative feedback from my boss, every week it was something else. Turns out he was going through a bad period. I switched bosses and everything was fine. It sucks when it's your boss, but it's still only a personal opinion of one person.

Become your own worst critic, particularly of all your old code, while at the same time understanding that everything is imperfect and you need to get work done today. Helps if you stick around in a codebase for multiple years, so you start seeing all your old bugs, layered on top of all the previous authors bugs.

If you are improving every day, look back at your work from 5 years ago and how it isn’t your best and didn’t define you to improve to today.

In sums ways you’d hope todays work wasn’t don’t improving or you would end up having pages.

Criticism is that if it’s not improved upon.

The operation who gets to learn, grow and improve is the winter compared to the person pointing it out.

Park your ego at the door when you get to work.

Base your ego on the success of your relationships (mom, dad, siblings, wife, kids, gf, friends whatever you have today).

It will take investment, self awareness and ability to forgive and forget.

You could direct this investment to work relationships BUT more than likely none of those folks will be at your funeral.

Ask for feedback early.

Nothing sucks more than working alone several weeks on a PR and then getting reviews about the whole approach being wrong. This applies to both for the reviewer and the recipient.

Better work in tandem together with someone and share the ownership of the design.

I distance myself from my work. My goal is to fulfill requirements to and build the best product. That requires taking consensus into account (even though it is sometimes correct to ignore it). Everything should come down to reason, not ego. Your team is there to make you and the code/product better.

1. That feeling needs to go away. Accept the intent of the criticism; fix the problem and move on. 2. I know I'm not perfect and do miss things or make mistakes. 3. As an engineer, any code I write I own it only for a short while before I move on and someone else owns.

Because no matter what you do... if you come back to it with hindsight there is always some improvement you can think of. Someone coming in after the fact and telling you where you could have done better is hindsight.

Take it as a gift. If someone didn't care about you and your work you would never hear a word.

My mentor pointed out my defensive nature a long time ago and quizzed me on it. My response was that the product of my work was like a baby. Very quickly he replied « you’ve got an ugly baby - so what. Make sure it grows up beautifully » that stuck with me for sure and helps me look at issues objectively.

I take it personally, as it is. It is not generic feedback for everyone, it is personal feedback towards me.

In order not to get upset or bogged down by feedback i start with saying: thank you. Then I try to remind myself of how careful I try to be when providing feedback to others and/or how hard it can be at times.

Personally I never cared about it. The only goal I have is whether it's right on pointing to the direction of work better(which in turn makes more money for me).

If it's point out something that can be done better. I can take it regardless how it's phrased. That is the only thing on my mind when I am working

Stop acting with ego in real life and it will just naturally trickle down to code.

Just because you made it doesn't mean it is great, applies to code, things and kids equally.

And vice versa just because someone didn't like it doesn't mean it is bad or have problems. But if most people did, well, maybe it does.

By seeking a true understanding of someone else's perspective. It's a mistake to think that experienced/senior/whatever means "usually correct". No, it means "knows how to resolve conflict and misunderstanding"

The author is dead, the work is the work, and process creates the work.

If there's problems with the work, you can look for improvements to the process that made it.

If you're criticizing yourself or beating yourself up, you won't find what things could be done differently because you're too busy saying woe is me

A big development for me with this was realizing that good engineering is not about constant perfection, but about making pragmatic improvements and adapting to constantly changing circumstances. Seek the 20% effort solution which solves 80% of the problem and let day-to-day disagreements slide.

Most things I do suck when I look at 6 months later. If that wasn't the case you are not really improving.

For better or for worse, getting bullied a lot and being the most university hated kid in my middle school prepared me for a lifetime of antagonistic emails and snarky internet arguments so that nothing that people say online or at work will produce an emotional response from me.

Accept it. Let it hurt for a moment, think about it, own the mistake and then fix it.

The good news is that pain is what's going to help you learn, we form memories better when we experience an emotion than when we feel detached.

You'll feel good about it the next time when you get to apply the learning!

Perhaps it helps you to see a PR for what it can be instead:

As the point we're you are allowed to get good feedback.

Next time press the button for opening a PR and think 'ha I'm curious what I learn today!'

Don't open a PR and assume you will be merging it soon, open it to be able to work on your fine-tune process

Separate your sense of identity and self worth from your work. Find those things outside of work, and criticisms and failings won't feel so personal. Also remember literally everyone makes mistakes and gets things wrong. The thing not everyone does is handle those instances well.

In my opinion, it always helps if you get to know the people reviewing your work personally. Sometimes, this happens naturally. You don't have to be buddies; however, if you understand a person's background, biases, and experience, it adds a lot of context to anything they say.

Some people live off of cynicism and showing the world they are right at opportune moments.

There is a difference of valid criticism and cynicism though. The people who criticize because they want you to do better are those to keep open ears for. Those who are just cynics can be largely ignored.

In a way, it's easy (I'm being deliberately flippant here, I know it's not easy) - if continual learning and growth is one of your goals, the worst thing that could happen is never getting feedback. Getting feedback means you have information to process and improve.

Basically, it gets easier with time. You are not your work. The things you work on can and will fail. Focus on fixing the systems that lead to things being broken rather than feeling bad about it.

It's worse with neurodivergence in the equation. It gets easier. A therapist can help.

I do not personally identify with my job. Simple as. Couple things I've internalized:

1. I am not my job.

2. I, like my coworkers, like most moderns, have Bullshit Jobs, and I don't fool myself otherwise.

By these tenets, it becomes very difficult to take personally something that you do not personally identify with.

It's kind of cultural in my own experience.

I'm very careful to be constructive and refrain from being offensive in my tone during code reviews. I do this to my coworkers, and some of reflect this back at me, which means that it is possible but not everyone does it.

I took project management lessons, it made me realized that a lot of things that goes wrong is systemic (knowledge transfer not done correctly, review processes not implemented correctly, timelines not well managed that leads almost mechanically to more bugs,... etc).

Your perspective should be that you are on the same team trying to achieve a common goal.

Do you get upset when you’re playing soccer and a teammate calls out for a pass? Or when you’re playing a video game and a teammate calls out an enemy approaching you from your blind spot?

If you want to progress in your career, your goal should be to find rooms full of people smarter than you, and then learn as much as you can from those people.

If you're not getting constructive criticism, it's probably time to move on or improve hiring in your team.

I'm an organic blob that evolved to have biases and the brain isnt perfect, it will make mistakes

Of course I'll be wrong. But its best to learn where I'm wrong so I'll be aware for next time. Learning why I'm wrong is the take away, not that I was bad.

Yea that is a hard one, one data-point (not a real answer) is I noticed when a code review was done by a friend or someone I trust (and or get along with), they can almost be as harsh as they want. I won't take it personally. Seems it's like a trust issue.

I don't see what I do as "my work" and I assume my team is just earnestly trying to get our projects done. I'm not naive - I know some personalities like jockeying for career capital and all that but it's not constructive to dwell on.

Develop interests outside of your work.

If the only significant thing in your life is your job, then your identity will be inextricably tied to your work. So criticism of your work will be an attack on your identity.

Become a well rounded person and your ego will naturally shift its locus.

I take it as an opportunity to learn or discuss.

People "criticizing" might be wrong or right, but it points me to reflect and understand my choices. If I'm wrong I learned something, if I'm right I can test my skills to argument cleanly.

I’ve assumed the mindset that I’m not an expert in anything and that any comment on my capabilities should be looked into because, well, as a non-expert, I can surely get things wrong.

Embracing this “forever noob” mindset has been great for learning

I recognize that I am not at the finish line.

I can keep moving forward on my own, but criticism helps me go in the right direction.

I want constructive criticism. I want it raw and direct. I want it from a friend who can hear my own criticism of them.

The last code I wrote is both the best and the worst. All code is just sitting in prod to become tech debt.

I'm always learning how to do it better.

Just get older. At least for me, I reached a certain point where I just didn’t care anymore. That is, I care about my work, but I don’t care what people think of me. Maybe it is just old man cynicism setting in.

Don't think of it as criticism. Instead it's a free mentoring\class\lesson received in the context of your specific domain. Use it. Embrace it. Take from it what you agree with and drop what you don't.

If the criticism isn’t personal then it shouldn’t be a problem. But, if it is (I’ve encountered this with 1 coworker and 1 manager in 20 years), then figure out a way to never work with that person again asap.

Accept that in very short order your work is going to become obsolete, useless, and only extant on a tape backup in a mislabeled box.

After that, it's easy to graduate to the next level: _memento mori_.

Perspective heals many wounds.

Have a read of Manuel Smith's "When I say no, I feel guilty".

The tools there are astonishingly effective at reframing one's relationship with criticism (reasonable or otherwise). Highly recommend.

I will try to keep it short and hopefully sweet.

Someone took the trouble and spent (maybe) even a little time to comment. Maybe you should be thankful of that.

Glass could be half full or half empty, depending on your perspective.

Unpopular opinion: there's nothing wrong with taking criticism of your work personally. "Do not take things personally" is typical junior level advice from "leadership".

There are people from whom I accept any criticism with full readiness to work my arse off on fixing the mistakes, and there are people who annoy me, make me want to throw a fit and break something.

I found the suggestions here pretty useful: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36069151

quote "don't give advice unless asked"

it is not you! i think most of the people feel the same way. at least i do

i suspect that in your case a review is mandatory as well as fixing its comments.

from my perspective a review should be optional. You should ask for a review if needed and ask whomever you consider worth making it. You should be responsible for your code and have authority to change it without any PRs.

Does anyone really have enough information to judge you in a comprehensive way? I assert they do not. Take it on board, but know it comes from someone lacking the full set of information.

Get older and more experienced. After enough time, criticism (especially when unwarranted) stings a lot less.

You also learn that you are usually not the smartest person in the room, nor the dumbest.

I have no ego about my code. As long as you're not being a "jerk" about it, I'm all for any opportunity to improve it. Constructive criticism is always welcome.

Congratulations, you have discovered the super power to doing anything really well. Here’s the trick - “don’t care because it’s not about you it’s about making yourself better.”

Just remember: It's just business.

I find it helps to imagine a scene from a mafia film where a hit man tells his victim that it isn't personal and "just business".

Look at the data behind the criticism and not the way it is delivered to you. If the data is valid - then accept the data. If not ask for data politely

Add humor wherever possible.

First make sure that they aren't actually meant personally. E.g. if the same person always is unprofessionally snarky to you, there might be something to talk about...

Once I write code, my relationship with it is over. Throw it out, rewrite it, build a SaaS with it, idc. All I care about is the exchange of labor for currency.

If someone doesn't take it personal, isn't that a sign that he/she doesn't care too much?

Speaking for myself: I wouldn't desire to be disinterested in my work.

The big thing it to realize it’s about the work not the person. If you feel like you could be blamed for mistakes then it’s impossible to not take it personally.

Try quitting caffeine.

Seriously. Once I completely quit over 6 months ago, I am much better at "water off a duck's back" in many areas of my life, including this one.

You are not your code.

That's a saying that helped me, and stuck with me, when I was figuring this out. I see someone else commented the same. I'm gonna leave mine too.

If im wrong, i want to know that im wrong as soon as possible. Criticism is the most direct way to learn that im wrong. What's not to love about that

by recognizing that

1. i am human 2. humans are all fallible 3. we all make mistakes 4. i am not my work

I also fully believe that every time someone points out something i've misunderstood, or a way I could have done things "better" it's a gift that teaches me how to get better at what i do. "Stupid" mistakes like, typos or forgetting to do something you know all about are just part of being a falliable human.

Be there first. Look at your old code and realize how crap it was. And then feel compassion for yourself. Because coding is damn hard. And learn from it.

Stop thinking about your outputs as assets - think of them as liabilities which you really don’t want to own. The rest should neatly fall into place.

If it's constructive, bite your lip and take it, they only want to help you and your work.

If it's not, they're being an ass and their input is worthless.

Byron Katie's work helps me to figure out what I believe. Beliefs are usually what's triggering the upset, which then triggers the dumb talking

You are not your code.

People who criticize people vs critique code are wrong.

This applies also more generally in life: you are not you mistakes/ past / action / thoughts.

not everything is on you, the observation may be valid, but there is always a way to word it such that it is more akin to "brainstorming", realize that some people are just socially inept, even more so in the tech sector, play the game of "this is a stupid response, what is the gist of it, and how could i have worded it were it my observation" (and also fix the mistake if valid)

By recognizing that the alternative is being ignored. So be genuinely happy someone cares enough to actually look at your work and give you feedback.

Take it as a learning opportunity and ask the critiquer how to improve, avoid mistakes or get to a better solution. Also, now it's on them :)

For anything work related in your entire life, just focus on what makes money and what doesn’t. Everything else stems from this tenet.

I just ignore them. Most of the feedbacks are insults or are the shortcomings of the reviewer.

To grow seek people whom you really think know stuff.

Come work for Amazon and write a few design docs and get them reviewed by the PEs. You will solve this issue in 90 days flat.

I find i tend to be a bigger critic of my own work then anyone else is. 99% of the time just find it of a way of improving

https://youtu.be/pWdd6_ZxX8c ;-)

Good advice overall. I face this issue at work, where any feedback I take personally and feel that I suck at my work.

I believe that the answer lies in the question itself. It's a "criticism of your work", not you.

I have alienated from myself and my work to the point where I spectate these concepts with total disregard for self.

I was in the same boat as you

Best piece of inspo: have a goldfish memory when it comes to criticism and failure

That is, forget after 3 seconds

I usually try to replay the comments in the voice of my mentor and it somehow diffuses the feelings aspect of it

I welcome it as an opportunity to improve. Nobody knows everything and collective knowledge is powerful.

I used to work in nuclear power which had probably the best culture of not taking things personally I have ever been a part of. The workers were mostly aligned with the idea that our job was primarily to be safe and secondarily to perform work. If something wasn't safe you were obligated, but also supported, to do so. The concept of making mistakes was reframed as a problem with process and not a personal failing of the person.

Process, not people. That concept has been a central driver of the culture I carry forward. If things are going wrong it is infinitely more productive to assume people want to succeed, but the process we have has prevented the outcome we want somehow. Even if sn individual made a mistake it is still possible to point to training, procedure, or even culture as being the real issue. This doesn't apply in cases of ignoring process or intentional incompetence, but that was very rare.

When people criticize me I am quick to try and focus on what could have been different about the process to lead to a better outcome or how I could have better managed expectations to reduce confusion. Of course I am in product management so managing expectations is what I do. So often disappointment and frustration come from a place of confusion. The more transparency someone has into why things happened the better they usually feel about the outcome.

TL;DR Focus not on yourself but the process that lead to the outcome. Mistakes are inevitable. Bad outcomes from mistakes only happen in poorly designed systems and processes.

you probably don’t need the help of strangers on the internet for this. you’re looking at the important things. it is a process.

seeking your own counsel may prove more useful than seeking the counsel of others.

maybe someone will say something helpful, maybe not, in either case it might give you some ideas.

Clearly, people that don’t appreciate my work must be misguided. I feel sorry for them more than anything…

Remember to thank people for taking time to give you feedback! And let them know if it was also useful.

Understand that you are all working together to make the best product possible. That's teamwork.

I have a lightning talk (each person takes turns giving a ~5 minute lecture on something useful) I sometimes give when the opportunity arises, jokingly titled “How to be Sincerely Grateful for any Criticism”, it might be helpful for you here.

It goes like this: When you notice that you’re receiving criticism, pay attention to your emotions. You’re looking for defensiveness, anger, etc. When you notice that feeling, briefly imagine a future situation in which the person who made the criticism actually implemented those changes; it can be helpful to make it slightly absurd (the example I usually use is their criticism is about my long-hair hairstyle, and I imagine they forcefully cut my hair into a different hairstyle - for your case, maybe imagine they edited your code and approved the edited version without asking you).

Now try to imagine a hypothetical future situation occurring where that change saved your ass (for my hair example I offer ‘a date goes really well, and then she offhandedly mentions how much she hates long hair on guys’ - for your case, maybe imagine your company picks up a big contract with a new client and their use case would have crashed production with your code but it holds up with the changed code). Focus on the relief you feel that the forced change ended up saving your ass. (If you have the introspection skill, try to consciously transfer that relief away from “absurd forced change” and associate it instead with merely hearing the criticism - but if that mental operation doesn’t make sense to you, don’t worry, as long as you feel that palpable relief, the technique is working.)

People have described this to me as janky and “a weird hack that shouldn’t work”, and I agree it has that feeling to it, but it’s also worked incredibly well for me and many people I’ve told it to. Over time and with practice it becomes a more fluid mental operation: eventually when you get criticism, a way in which this critique saves you some future pain will jump into your head spontaneously. Early on this will only be applicable to asynchronous situations like internet comments; as it becomes more automatic you will be able to apply it in real-time conversation too.

Try it out! The best metaphor for why it works that I’ve ever heard came from someone who took me aside a week after one such lecture and told me she’d been applying it. She said that it feels like criticism starts an “anger”-fire in her head and this technique is like imagining a firehose into existence so she can spray “relief”-water onto the blaze - essentially, that it’s a way of generating a counter-acting emotion to fight the existing emotion with.

Obviously, only use this when you want to accept the criticism gratefully. Some criticism is mean-spirited and not useful; less than you are tempted to think, but non-zero.

You do take it personally, a few times. Then you get used to it and stop worrying about it.

Expose yourself to a lot of criticism in a safe environment until you get desensitized.

you’ve already overcome the first major hurdle, being aware of it! congrats. now it’s “just” time :)

if you can somehow find a way to make it fun and enjoy the process (knowing you’ll get a better result, quicker) then you’ll know you’ve won!

I don't and i focus entirely on solo projects, most likely to my own detriment.

Easy: “Tomorrow, I’ll be better. The day after, even better than that.”

I actually sometimes do, but then I just remember that I am not my work.

Get a side-gig or a hobby in design, that will cure you.

First, try to convince yourself that nobody is against you and that if they come out as too harsh, it is not intentionally. Twice so if you are dealing with people from cultures where communication is more direct or confrontation (not in the bad sense) is normal.

Then, if you are an employee, it helps to think that you already have been paid for the work being criticized. Sounds unrelated to the original problem, but for me it helps to dismiss a potential source of stress. Also related to the fact that you are not your work and it is not good to identify with it.

Also, think of the times when you might have come out as too abrasive to a colleague. Think how you would like you comments not to have been taken so harshly. Do the same with other's comments.

How do you go with pair programming? Might be worth trying

I’ve accepted I’m not great at it, now it’s much easier.

Keep listening but be ignorant is also a solution.

TL;DR - it helps to learn about patterns of thinking, particularly cognitive biases

Long version: Plenty of good advice here, but I wanted to add something that helped me in this regard. I grew up in a household where everything was criticized for any and all reasons, most of which could be boiled down to "I feel bad and in order to make myself feel better, I'm going to do something that makes you feel worse than me." Being born into that kind of atmosphere makes it very difficult to understand that a) it's not normal, and b) criticism (when used appropriately) isn't about making a person feel bad, it's about trying to improve something. It was just never used appropriately in my household growing up.

So many (way too many) years later, I started getting into the skeptical movement. What initially attracted me was that it was about tearing apart stupid ideas (so pretty similar to what I grew up in). Someone would claim to have a photograph of Sasquatch or a UFO, and people would show how the photo wasn't what it claimed. But it was a lot deeper than that. There were doctors debunking bogus medical cures, and people pointing out that businesses were scams, etc.

That was all well and good, but as I read more and more about how to get better at spotting these sorts of things I read a lot about cognitive biases and logical fallacies. Something soaked in because I found as I understood my own thinking better, I had a better understanding of what could and likely couldn't be other people's motivations for saying the things they said. Whereas before I might think, "Oh that person's just saying x because they dislike me," or "because they're jealous that I have y," or whatever, these days I'm better at saying, "Well, they might just be saying that because they don't like me, or it could be they don't have the same experience as me, and don't understand my motivation for why I think like this. I can try explaining my motivation and see if they understand or not. And maybe they'll understand or maybe they'll explain something to me to help me understand their point of view." (It's more complicated than that, but it's hard to explain in a comment.) Anyway, a lot of the pain of getting criticized evaporated when I could reason better about other people's motivations.

Stop expecting so much of yourself. Everyone makes mistakes. What defines us is how we react to them. Don't feel bad. Feeling bad is 100% pointless. I don't mean 'psychopath level' of not feeling bad, but beating yourself up is wasted effort.

Instead, do something about it. Don't react right away. Identify why you failed, what could be done next time, and then try not to make the same mistake again. Thank your colleagues for pointing it out, and move forward.

View yourself as always learning.

By not taking it personally.

I do take it personally, how can you not.

But take it as an opportunity to become better. Nobody became good at first try.

Go through art school

I am not my work.

Be humble, and view others as superior to you.

Your work is not who you are.

Your work is not who you are.

Your work is not who you are.

Really internalizing that is step one.

You are smart enough.

This one is a lot more subtle but worth a ton if you can internalize the implications of it. The fact is others are smarter than you, some aren't as smart as you, and the truth is you really shouldn't care.

What you do need to realize is that for all of us it boils down to the amount of work we need to do in order to accomplish something. And everyone varies widely in this.

Here is a thought experiment for you: say you take a person of below average intelligence, but they are raised among Geniuses basically. And these geniuses, being the chairing smart people that they are, never really let on that the person of below average intelligence is below average.

Now take that same scenario only this time the person is around not so good people they're not so smart they're not so caring.

Secret to getting your ego out of all of this is to compare and contrast those two scenarios and what they're going to mean mental health confidence of the person in question.

In the former scenario, that below average person is going to learn a ton of smart ways to do things. And they'll be confident in the doing them. Others may not even know how smart or lack of smart they are.

In the latter scenario the person is acutely aware of their deficiencies, and there's a whole bunch of negativity that comes with that, along with a lot of work because they didn't get to learn a lot of smart ways to do things and so they struggle. And they're not confident.

Rather than value your work as some reflection of your identity and how smart you are or some other attribute that you value it could be anything. Rather than do that, value outcomes and other people.

A very large part of who we are depends on who we hang with, and how we handle that.

I used to play it much differently, like some kind of competition, and criticism of my work had a high impact.

Today I seek people that are better than me in areas that I need to improve, and I share what I'm good at with others who want to improve.

And the outcome is we're getting shit done, it's done right, and we feel good about that which is done.

Let's take something simple like a presentation, or a chunk of code that has to perform a task.

What is more important?

Is it that your contributions are the very best?

Or, is the most important thing that that presentation or volume code nailed the task at hand?

Answering in the latter case allows you to take criticism of your work because it's all intended to achieve more important goal. The more we achieve those important goals more successful we are as people, teams, companies.

Here's one last thing comma and it's simple it's a phrase comma but it really helped me:

"Nice catch"

I was working with someone once was on a standard body and they have to do lots of detailed work and it gets revised many times and it has to be right it's right as people can get.

They used that phrase all the time when inconsistencies errors improvements were found.

And it took me a while, but I realized what that phrase meant. And it's about being one of a body of Skeptics being skeptical together to make it better whatever it is.

So give to get benefit of the doubt, give yourself a personal out so you don't have to take it personally and worry over every little thing or criticism that you may see.

Instead, think or say nice catch!

That really helped me make a big mental shift and a ton of things are so much easier today with you worries. Good luck and take care.

Meta: I use the Google voice input on this one, and hope to catch it in my edit window, until then please forgive typos and cats.

First of all, many people take criticism personally. It’s a very natural thing to do. So there’s nothing wrong with you! And it’s not a flaw. It’s a naturally occurring phenomenon, so if it occurs, there’s really nothing you need to do about it - it will pass on its own, and it’s not an indication that there’s any problem with you whatsoever.

That said, it of course can feel unpleasant! And if it interferes with how you function in the workplace, perhaps it’s not useful to you. So for instance, if it causes to lash out at your coworkers for their feedback, then it would be important for your relationship with them to not do that. But based on your description it already sounds like you aren’t doing that, so it sounds like mostly an issue that’s internal to you, right?

If that’s the case, and really the main concern is for your emotional and mental well being, then there are kind of two different dimensions on which to address this.

First, as I said before, if you receive criticism and take it personally (whatever that might mean for you - sadness, anger, various thoughts arising), the way you’re feeling at that moment is exactly how you’re feeling at that moment and it is a completely natural phenomenon. You can’t undo how you’re feeling, or go back and react differently. So if you can see your feelings as naturally occurring and not indicative of some fundamental flaw, over time, even if these “taking it personally” reactions occur, they won’t bother you quite so much. This is the dimension I might refer to as “how you relate to the content of your experience”. IMO this is the more important dimension because it’s really in our control and is universal to all aspects of our experience!

Second, there might be ways to consider and address what’s causing you to react the way you’re reacting, but that’s a bit harder without being able to ask some more questions about what you specifically mean by “taking it personally”. Is it anger? Sadness? Guilt? Is it fear that people will think you’re bad at your job? Do you feel bad yourself for having made a “mistake”? Investigating what specific assumptions are going into this (maybe with the help of a therapist or some other trusted party) might help uncover what’s leading you to feel bad when receiving criticism, and then perhaps address that directly. This is the dimension I might refer to as “addressing the content of experience”.

Without talking to you more I can’t help much with this second dimension, but I can say a few generic things to take a stab at it:

One thing I might point out is that you used the word mistake several times - so it sounds like you think there was a right way and a wrong way for you to have done the task, and you did it the wrong way, and that’s a Bad Thing, and these comments are pointing that out, and maybe you’re afraid that means YOU are bad (or that others think that). In reality, while yes, the first code you put up might have had a bug, that is not some kind of absolute failure on your part. The whole reason code review exists in the first place is people will always be writing bugs and bad comments! It’s a learning experience. Substantive patches are rarely approved the first time without comments. (You did even said they were “honest mistakes”, so it seems like you know it’s natural for them to occur - so maybe my comments here are off base with what you’re dealing with.)

On the other hand if you feel like other people don’t know it was an honest mistake, and you’re worried about how they perceive you, the thing that helped me with that concern was realizing that I’m exactly as good at my job as I am, and no matter how much I try to control the way I’m perceived, over time people will recognize if I’m bad at my job or will recognize I’m good at my job, and that’s just how it is.* So all I can do is try to do a good job and learn from my experience, and other’s perceptions of me will play out accordingly.

Again I don’t know if these last two parts help or address your particular concern without talking to you more but am including it just in case.

Also just in case, I want to say it’s possible that the team you’re on is not following best practices for code reviews and that their criticism is coming off as overly harsh for that reason. So it might also be worth looking online for some code review guidelines to see if people are acting accordingly or if they’re saying things like “Lol I can’t believe you forgot a semicolon here, jeez, what are you, a noob?” (Being silly on purpose here but there are more subtle versions of this that can make people feel not so great.) Even if that’s true all of the above still applies I think, but it might be good to know or address if people are commenting in inconsiderate or mean spirited ways.

Anyway best of luck!

* ignoring cases here of people who are somehow extremely manipulative to hide their incompetence, which I’ve fortunately never witnessed, and I assume most people don’t want to be like that anyway so I’m not addressing that

I wish you luck in your endeavors, and suggest that it will probably improve.

I have made (and continue to make) many mistakes. Some, are used as leverage by others, to attack me. Most, I find them, myself, and feel like a jackass, but the problem gets fixed (sometimes, in both cases, but always, in the second case), and the lesson gets learned (in both cases).

I'm generally my own harshest critic. I expect a lot from myself, and don't cut myself much slack.

I've come to learn that having a critical and unvarnished self-awareness, takes the teeth out of whatever anyone else thinks of me.

Call it a "fearless and searching self-inventory." I know myself, quite well. There's a bunch of stuff that I'm really good at -way above average-, but there's ten times as much stuff I'm not good at -some, embarrassingly bad. I need to have a clear and unbiased awareness of this.

I don't hide what I'm good at -and that often ends up with people calling me "arrogant," but I also don't claim expertise in stuff I'm not good at, I welcome valid criticism, and self-correct, when necessary.

I now believe and do stuff that, once upon a time, I scoffed at.

"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment."

When it comes to criticism of my work, it's often context-sensitive. For example, thread-studly code can look quite primitive, because we aren't doing fancy stuff in a long line, but doing simple stuff in small chunks, and being careful where we get it, and where we put it, or we don't DRY, because we don't want to break cache or pipelines. We may also write code that is designed to be maintained by less-skilled engineers, so claims of "overengineering" may have merit, whereas, if we are writing code that we, or a skilled engineer, will maintain, then getting fancy is fine.

Much criticism actually comes from personal insecurity. We may feel bad, but the person delivering the criticism may feel worse. If I'm on a team with them, then it might be a good idea for me to be empathetic, polite and forgiving, as opposed to telling them to go piss up a rope, or sawing on my wrist with a butterknife over it. Maybe simply explaining why we are doing things the way we are, could actually teach them, or reacting politely, when they are deliberately trying to goad us, may help teach them to be better team members.

The lessons aren't always technical, and they can go both ways.

Also, I am often wrong, and become right, by admitting that -even if it is humbling and embarrassing. Just because someone else is delivering their criticism like a jerk, doesn't mean they are wrong.

I adopted a philosophy in life that helped me a lot in this regard. I started to see life as a series of 'games' played by 'roles'. My mission in life is to play my 'games' in the best way possible for my 'roles'. A game can be anything from being a good student, to being a father, to making sound financial decisions, to leading a project, to supporting a project as individual contributor, to making a house renovation, etc.

Once I started to see my work as a 'game' played by a 'role', a lot of stress was taken off of my back. I started to see situations in a neutral light regardless of who were the actors (including myself).

It doesn't matter if it's me receiving or giving constructive feedback, having a difficult conversation or managing a stressful situation. Through this perspective I'm able to abstract from people, power dynamics, etc. and see what's helpful, that's the best way forward, etc.

At first this approach only existed in my mind. I didn't dare to externalize it because I was wary people might see it as odd or disrespectful. As I fully implemented this philosophy in life and at work, I dared to socialize it with good results.

For example, instead of saying "John's performance was poor" I would say "this role's mission is to add value to XYZ, I think we can do better in that area. What support do we need to achieve better results?". And people react really well to that way of framing things. This language adaptation can work well in OP's case. Maybe the manager said "you sucked when doing XYZ because you missed an important thing". You can translate that as... "I don't suck at anything and that's a bad way of framing things. But in the future when my role is in a similar situation, I should do XYZ to have the right insight to do my job". Another tool to manage feedback is to imagine it's not about you but about someone else. Imagine is a friend telling another friend about a situation at work. Would you still think "there's no way person X could have known about that"? If so, a good answer in a PR is... 'if the same situation happened tomorrow, how could I get better insight, or know who to talk to, to achieve better results'?

Something to highlight here is that there's always two sides of a coin: it's great that you want to learn to take constructive feedback as a growth opportunity and not as a personal attack. But maybe if your gut feel gets constantly irritated is because you have found a genuine case of toxic work environment. "Snarky comments in a PR" raises a red flag to me. To be professional means to treat others with dignity. If that's not happening is time to consider jumping ships.

So, OP: well done in keeping yourself in check. It's hard to take constructive feedback well, but it can be done with tools like the above and others. While doing so, make sure you're not surrounded by toxic colleagues and leaders and when that's the case, run fast and far and don't look back.

improvement

Once you are self aware of it, then basically don't act on it because you recognize it as personal. Then it's an emotional thing you can deal with. Just move on man, there's so much to do, more important things to worry about.

Not being female helps a lot in this regard. I have no other tip for you.