Skin in the Game

“When it comes to feedback from others, I can be thick hearted towards their views and thin skinned with my personal feelings. I am trying to flip that to be thin hearted towards the feelings of others and thick skinned with my own ego.”

That wise perspective from a mentor has stuck with me because I grew up in a family of deflectors, defenders, deniers, and disclaimers. You never did anything wrong, you were just a victim of circumstances. If there was misbehavior it was justified as a necessary reaction to the flaws or faults of other’s actions. An inappropriate reaction or verbal outburst should be excused as misunderstood intentions.

Receiving critical feedback constructively — without defensiveness, emotional escalation, or withdrawal — is foundational to professional growth. It is also among the most frequently reported breakdowns between Gen Z employees and their managers. Multiple managers describe reactions to criticism as disproportionate, including "tantrums" and "bullying" in response to corrective feedback.

Relationship Management is the EQ domain most underdeveloped in Gen Z. The consequence is a generation that struggles to navigate disagreement productively, tends toward avoidance or escalation rather than resolution, and requires more manager bandwidth per interaction than their predecessors. They favor anonymous or emotionally infused digital feedback channels, which can create emotional misreads and tension when professional norms expect direct, in-person communication.

Working as an in-house CoreClarity facilitator 15 years ago, we introduced the CliftonStrengths language into our office culture. One of the immediate values we saw was that approaching a colleague on the impact of their strengths rather than from a personal level made for a softer landing of corrective feedback. Saying “I love how your Achiever gets things done but right now it’s dragging some of us across the finish line,” was much more palatable than, “You are driving the rest of the team to burn-out.” Both statements are true, one is less of a personal affront and focuses more on the behavior than the person. It also sets the table for corrective actions that could be received and applied.

In our Inpowering Leadership program we have developed tools that can give positive feedback around one’s talents as well as bring awareness when the Kryptonite tendencies appear. When done alongside others they work with it not only diffuses the emotional escalation but brings a forum to expose blind spots that leads to deeper self-awareness. Half of the exercise is feedback between teammates on the Best Self characteristics observed – positive feedback. This is followed by a “Kryptonite Feedback” exercise, using Strength-based observations to discuss the Kryptonite tendencies teammates saw in their co-workers. To our surprise, more of the participants found greater value in hearing the Kryptonite Feedback than the Best Self input as they could now improve unhealthy habits or patterns they were already suspicious of, but now had the affirmation of others to address.

Clifton’s formula for turning talents into strengths again drives a solution for equipping the next generation of leaders. Taking their natural talents, then infusing them with new people skills, deeper layers of self-knowledge, and experiencing it in a safe but authentic environment can produce Strengths-based leaders who value a culture of feedback with thick skin and a thin heart.