I wonder if this theory led to the development of the sandwich method of giving constructive criticism?
If so, the theory is misapplied. Both positive and negative evaluation—including self-evaluation—activates the NEA.
The driver of intentional change is the ideal self (i.e., vision), so the primary focus should be on that.
A couple more papers by Boyatzis et al. for further information:
PEA–NEA theoryThe ideal self as the driver of intentional changeIt is important to add that there exists a conflict of interest. Richard Boyatzis is a partner of Hay Group (
http://www.haygroup.com/en/), a coaching firm that applies both his work on intentional change theory, and his and Daniel Goleman's work on social-emotional intelligence.
I personally choose to trust in his publications, and his expertise in the email correspondences we have had; I have also participated in an online course on Coursera that he teaches, and which I have found to be effective and practically useful; nonetheless I remain cautious due to this conflict of interest.
Regarding the “sandwich method” (a terrible name), I have personally never seen any mention of it in academic papers, and am suspicious of its validity and reliability. Can anyone provide information on its origin?
Welcome! Yes, the moderation ends after a few initial posts.
Thank you very much, and thank you very much!
