No doubt this is a function of my chosen employment, but for as far back as I can recall, I've been fortunate enough to be surrounded by civil, polite coworkers. We may have disagreements over this architectural issue or that, but after stepping out of a heated meeting, we're just coworkers again—hey, let's get lunch. From a work perspective, it's good to be participating in a group of fair minded individuals that are capable of separating the task at hand from their personal feelings. From a personal growth perspective, it's good to be emersed in an environment of varying expertise and opinion.

Varying opinions are important

The way I see it, there are three main contributing factors to accelerated personal growth:

1. exploration and experimentation,
2. education through reading (books, magazines, blogs, etc.) and exposure to other's work in your field, and
3. engaging in dialog and receiving constructive criticism

Presently, I'll focus on that last point. People respond to criticism in a variety of ways. But without it, you're left to wonder "is my work truly good, or are those people just saying nice things to be nice?" I suppose it comes down to ego—maybe I should have gone into psychology. You can choose to believe

1. they are being honest and you actually do rock,
2. they sort of like it, but don't know what would make it better,
3. they don't really care one way or the other and are just saying something nice because that's the shortest path to a new topic of conversation, or
4. they don't hate it enough to chance the drama involved with an emotional reaction to criticism.

You can contrast your work to what you've seen and/or read about, but after you've put the Legos™ together, have you created a monster or masterpiece? Beauty being in the eye of the beholder and all, it's particularly important to have beholders that are honest and unafraid of stirring things up. Which leads me to my next point.

Criticism can be good or bad

Criticism being a human interaction, is a road fraught with complication and trepidation. It can be given well, or very very poorly. There are a multitude of pages devoted to tips on how properly to give and receive criticism, and innumerable books dedicated to the subject. But because it is a person to person thing, we're dealing with psychological borscht on both sides of the equation. But the point that has interested me of late is more germane to the receiving end.

The receiver must believe the critic is qualified

It's one thing to follow all the rules about giving criticism, but if the person you're giving criticism to thinks you're about as qualified as the rutabaga in the garden to comment on it, your feedback may cement their choices despite your opinion. Conversely, receiving criticism from someone you feel doesn't have the appropriate credentials to support their stated opinion makes it harder to accept their feedback. Of course, the key thing to remember is that everybody's opinion is valid, even if their suggestions may not be informed—supposing they have suggestions and don't just say "It sucks. I hate it." They may, in fact, have no idea what they're talking about, but at this point, it's up to your ego to sort out. But let's not digress into self-help here.

Wanted: anal retentive design critic with a penchant for typography

On a more personal note, I have had the benefit of working in groups in which I can openly exchange feedback, both complimentary and critical. However, as each of us grows professionally, our paths deviate and our capacity to give informed critical opinions diminishes. That's not to say that I don't value the feedback of my coworkers, but rather that I'm increasingly looking for more focused feedback that I feel they may not be qualified to give (of course, I still ask). I'm finding a growing need to search for mentors and peers that I can interact with in the areas that I have chosen to pursue; to broaden my audience. Fortunately for me, most of these people live in the same place: the web.