It seems to me that hardest feedback to get from someone is either an apology or an accolade. This could be because generally we have not made an explicit agreement on how these are given and received.
Recently my brother and I have made such an agreement on how these are executed. We call it the Expert Agreement and it goes like this:
After or during a conversation or discussion on an issue, one of us can execute the expert agreement based on their knowledge, research, gut feeling or rules of thumb. This means that they are willing to take on the responsibility for the execution of an idea. ie that if it comes off then they get the accolade or if it fails then they are willing to give an acceptable apology.
At the same time the other person can make a counter expert agreement if they felt strongly about their idea. The main thing is that we have agreed to allow and encourage the idea and therefore encourage each other to step up and ultimately execute the the idea, but at the same time be willing to take the responsibility for such execution of an idea. That is, we don’t have to be responsible or accountable for the idea only the execution of them.
This is so much different, in my view than a consensus or compromise, as it leaves the person executing the idea responsible and accountable for making it happen. In the other two cases, when a decision is made it ultimately is everyone’s responsibility and therefore no one’s.