On Correction, Intention, and Safety

There are different intentions behind correcting someone — and they don’t feel the same.

I’ve been on both sides of it.Corrected in ways that made me shrink.And guided in ways that opened something inside me.

Sometimes we correct because we feel uncomfortable.Because a mistake triggers our insecurity, our need to feel right, our desire to regain control. In those moments, correction becomes less about the other person and more about soothing something in ourselves. Even if the words are technically correct, the impact can be heavy. The body tightens. Confidence drops. The space no longer feels safe.

And then there is another kind of correction.

The kind that comes from care.From genuinely wanting the other person to feel more confident, clearer, more at ease. This kind of correction is attentive. It listens first. It considers timing, context, and the emotional state of the person in front of us. It doesn’t interrupt the process — it supports it.

This difference becomes especially visible in spaces that require vulnerability: rehearsal rooms, classrooms, language learning, creative collaboration, leadership. In these environments, mistakes are not failures. They are signs of risk. And risk is where growth happens.

Not every mistake needs to be corrected.Not every moment is the right moment.Sometimes letting someone finish is more generous than fixing them mid-sentence. Sometimes a private note is more respectful than a public one. Often, how someone feels after being corrected matters more than the correction itself.

Good teachers and good leaders understand this intuitively. They know their role isn’t to eliminate mistakes, but to protect the conditions in which learning and creativity are possible. They don’t use correction to assert authority. They use it to build trust.

The real question is rarely what needs correcting.

It’s why, when, and how we do it.

And whether the person walking away feels more connected to themselves — or a little further away.