âAdmitting oneâs own mistakesâeven when one hasnât corrected themâcan help convince the other person to change their behavior.â â Dale Carnegie
There is an enormous psychological difference between being criticized by someone who presents themselves as perfect and being criticized by someone who acknowledges their own fallibility. The first kind of criticism feels like judgment from a superiorâand triggers resentment. The second kind feels like honest counsel from someone who has made the same mistakes and understands.
Carnegieâs twenty-fourth principle is simple: before criticizing others, talk about your own mistakes first. This disarms the criticism, makes it feel collaborative rather than judgmental, andâcruciallyâit models the honesty and self-awareness you are asking the other person to demonstrate.
The most personal story Carnegie tells in the book is about his niece, Josephine Carnegie, who came to work as his secretary. She was young and made many mistakes. Carnegie, who at first felt the urge to point out every error, instead tried a different approach.
When he needed to correct Josephine, he would begin by saying something like: âJosephine, youâve made a mistakeâbut goodness knows itâs no worse than many Iâve made. I certainly wasnât born knowing how to do this either. It took me a lot of experience to learn. But I wonder if it might be more efficient if we tried it this wayâŠâ
The effect was immediate: Josephine received the correction without defensiveness. She didnât feel judged. She felt like an apprentice being helped by a mentor who had been through the same learning curve. The relationship remained warm. The corrections stuck.
When you acknowledge your own mistakes before criticizing:
The person who can say âI made this same mistakeâ or âIâve struggled with this tooâ is far easier to hear than the person who implies, through their tone or manner, that they have never erred.
Carnegie notes that self-admittance âtakes the sting out of criticism.â When a seasoned manager says to a new employee, âI made this exact mistake for the first six months of my careerâhereâs what helped me,â the correction becomes a gift rather than an indictment. The new employee feels guided rather than condemned.
This is particularly important in hierarchical relationshipsâparents and children, managers and employees, teachers and students. The person with more authority has more ability to wound and more responsibility to handle that power carefully. Acknowledging your own past failures is the most powerful way to use authority without abusing it.
Carnegie tells the story of a man who needed to correct his adult son about a habit the son had acquiredâa habit the father had once shared. Rather than lecturing about the flaw, the father told a story about his own pastâthe consequences it had had for him, the moment he had recognized the problem, and how he had eventually overcome it.
The son listened in a way he never would have to a lecture. He heard in his fatherâs story not condemnation but the gift of hard-won experience freely shared. The correction worked not because it was delivered well but because it was delivered from a place of genuine humility.
Carnegie makes a quietly radical point: the self-admission works even when you have not yet fully corrected the flaw yourself. You donât have to be the finished article to speak honestly about your struggles. âIâm still working on this myself, but hereâs what Iâve learned so farâŠâ is both honest and effective.
This matters because many people withhold advice and feedback because they feel they have no moral standingâthey have the same flaw theyâre trying to address in someone else. Carnegie says: that is no excuse for silence. Your ongoing struggle is not disqualifying; it is humanizing. Share it.
Before any correction or feedback session:
For the next month, whenever you need to correct or advise someone:
Is there someone you need to correct or advise but have been putting off because you feel you have no moral standingâbecause youâve made similar mistakes yourself? What would it look like to use that imperfection as the beginning of the conversation rather than as a disqualification?