Some job candidates seem to be doing well only to fall flat in one venue: They ace the teaching demo and the dinner meeting, but stumble during the research talk. Perhaps the candidate was disorganized, too strident, or just long-winded and boring. Whatever the cause, the outcome is a strong negative ding when it comes time to vote on the hire. Besides not being hired, the budding scholar is denied a candid and useful critique and so, presumably, repeats the same errors. Everyone who spends some time in academe experiences both sides of that unhappy dyad. Getting good feedback--that is, astute, useful criticism--is harder than most people think, whether it is for a journal manuscript or a job presentation. Certainly the laws, rules, and protocols of the business, as well as fear of lawsuits, have suppressed the opportunities for, and quality of, good critiques. In this article, the author offers his sound advice: (1) Accept that pointed criticism is good for you; (2) Learn to weigh, compare, and contrast criticism; (3) Reward the good kind of criticism; (4) Avoid the selectivity bias; (5) Start early; and (6) Give as well as get.