A colleague offers an idea and my mind immediately tests it. I see the missing dependency, the cost or the reason it failed before. My analysis may be correct, but if it becomes my first response, the colleague may experience only the rejection.
Evaluation often arrives before acknowledgement
In transformation work, critical thinking is necessary. I do not want a team to accept a weak design because everyone is trying to be positive. I also do not want useful ideas to disappear because the first response names only what is wrong.
Acknowledgement creates a small separation. It recognises that another person took the risk of contributing and that their offer has entered the shared work. Evaluation can still follow.
This distinction is especially important when seniority, language confidence or specialist vocabulary already make contribution uneven. A visible acknowledgement tells the room that an idea can be received before it is judged.
Acknowledging an idea does not promise to use it. It promises to treat the contribution as real.
The exercise and its sources
The Thank You exercise appears in Yes, And by Kelly Leonard and Tom Yorton on print page 197. Partners hold a conversation, but each person must say thank you for the previous contribution before responding.
The phrase can feel artificial. That is part of its value. The rule makes the missing acknowledgement impossible to hide inside good intentions.
On pages 4 and 5 of Practiced Spontaneity: Resources, Theory and Supplemental Information, Izzy Gesell describes acknowledgement as a component of full body listening. Gesell connects it with recognition, empathy, encouragement and visible involvement in the conversation. I use that frame to move the exercise beyond polite wording.
Thank you is not the same as yes
A team should not use gratitude to silence a legitimate objection. Thank you does not mean the idea is correct, affordable or safe. It means I received something before I decided what to do with it.
A natural workplace version might be: thank you, the customer impact in that example is important. I see a data risk we need to resolve before we can use the approach. The concern remains clear, but the response shows which part of the offer was received.
The discipline is specificity. A general thank you can become a verbal habit. Naming the useful part proves that attention connected.
Where the pause helps most
I find the principle useful in design reviews, learning discussions after a mistake and conversations where a vendor or another function brings difficult news.
The pause is also useful when I disagree. It gives me time to separate the person’s contribution from my decision about it. That can reduce defensiveness without weakening the standard.
After the exercise, I ask participants to choose language they could genuinely use. The exact words matter less than the sequence: receive, acknowledge, then add or evaluate.
Sources used
- Yes, And by Kelly Leonard and Tom Yorton. The Thank You exercise and its listening purpose on print page 197.
- Practiced Spontaneity: Resources, Theory and Supplemental Information by Izzy Gesell. Pages 4 and 5, on presence, connection and acknowledgement as components of full body listening.
Max Grillo is an applied improvisation facilitator. He manages and hosts Rice Cookie Improv, is cofounder of Monday Flow Improv and is a member of the Applied Improvisation Network. He combines workshop practice with more than 25 years of experience in technology and transformation.
More about Max