2010 San Francisco Writers Conference session offers tips for creating successful critique groups

Many well-known authors attribute their success to a writers critique group that provided valuable feedback, support, and encouragement. The 2010 San Francisco Writer's Conference, co-founded by  Michael Larsen and Elizabeth Pomada, was held at the Mark Hopkins Hotel. For the first time, the annual three-day event included a  session on the topic of writers critique groups:

Feedback is the Breakfast of Champions: How to join, start, and participate in a writers critique group.

The speakers on the panel,  Marcia Naomi Berger, Victoria Hudson and Cindy Pavlinac, agreed at their February 14th presentation that several key factors contribute to the success of a critique group:

• compatibility of group members
• clear guidelines for how members give feedback
• an agreed upon structure for meetings
• members' commitment to respond constructively to challenging issues that arise.

Marcia Naomi Berger, a psychotherapist, said that even in very compatible critique groups, challenging issues will occur. Each person is unique, so differences are bound to exist. "One likes chocolate and one likes vanilla," she added, emphasizing these points:

1. Conflict is normal in any relationship; dealing with it constructively is growth producing.
2. Be aware when conflict occurs and how members are handling disagreement.
3. Use positive, congruent communication.
4. Most communication is nonverbal: pay attention to voice tone and body language.

Congruent communication respects both speaker and listener

Berger then defined congruent communication within the context of the five ways people communicate when they disagree, as formulated by family therapist, Virginia Satir:

1. Congruent. Clear, direct communication that respects oneself and the other person. “I feel.... (states feeling),” “I want....,” “I would like....”  Think I-statements. Speaker takes personal responsibility for own feelings, wants, and needs. Respects self and other person. For example, a critique member who has just received only negative feedback on his or her submission might say, "I want to hear what's working well in my writing too."
2. Blaming. Attempts to dominate other, uses You-statements,” such as: “You should/shouldn’t....,” “You always/never....,” “I’m right; you’re wrong” attitude. Example: A critique group member routinely exceeds the agreed on time for her turn. She accuses a member who complains of being petty.
3. Placating. Negates self, tries to avoid conflict; “Whatever you say....” Example: Group members  who tolerate lateness from a writer, with no shortening of late person's time for his or her time for receiving a critique, because they want to be "nice."
4. Reasonable. Does not validate feelings; Ignores them instead. Focuses on logic, wants everything to make sense.
5. Irrelevant. Avoids relating; responds with non sequitur, changes the subject, tells joke.

Watch out for disguised You-statements

Sometimes people try to make an I-statement but it is really a disguised You-statement; as in these examples: “I feel that you are wrong” and “I think you should.”  The receiver of such a message is likely to feel judged or even bullied by the speaker. 

“I disagree with you;” “I have a different opinion;” “I would like you to;” and “I prefer” are true I-statements.

An I-Statement is free from expectations; it is a clear expressions of how it is from the speaker's point of view, regarding feelings, beliefs, thoughts, wants, and needs.

Foster a critique group's success and personal growth by using positive communication skills

Berger stressed that when group members communicate congruently, trust and a desire to support each others writing careers will be fostered.  Speaking up rather than allowing issues to fester contributes to an effective group process. When members commit to communicating constructively, they will grow personally and enjoy the rewards of a successful critique group.