The Tyranny of Pleasantness
The Tyranny of Pleasantness
One of the
chapters in my Conflict in the Workplace:
Causes and Cures is The Tyranny of Pleasantness. The general theme of the chapter (which comes
from a much longer article I wrote with Bob Finnochio) is that there is danger
in “going along to get along.”
We are so
busy not hurting anyone’s feelings, being politically correct at all times, and
never disagreeing with someone else’s decision that we fail to communicate what
we really know and believe. To tell
someone they are wrong is a guarantee to get chastised by someone in
supervision.
I was
thinking about this because something reminded me of the student trip I
accompanied to Europe a few years ago.
Although we visited some wonderful places, the way we were treated by
the tour company *(EF Tours), the accommodations offered and a host of other
things were, to be polite – sub-par. If
one of us complained to the teacher who had invited us to join her on the tour,
she took it personally. It was as though
we were insulting her – but she was as fooled by the promotional hype as were
the rest of us.
We’ve gotten
so thin-skinned that if, for example, you tell someone they have a stain on
their shirt, they react as though you were saying the shirt was hideous,
therefore their taste is hideous and you think they are evil and awful.
Why have we
reached a point where the slightest disagreement leads us to hateful reactions
and loss of goodwill? When did we stop
being real and decide the socially appropriate way to be is to always smile and
never say an unkind word about anything at any time?
My
belief: Be honest – if you have
something to say, say it – without insulting the person – mention the item, or
the behavior or the specific about which you are disappointed – without
generalizing or attacking the individual his/her self.
If we remain
euphemistic we run the serious danger of being misunderstood. Let me remind you of one horror story that
makes this point.
Many years
ago there was a man who went crazy and shot out a bunch of people at ESL. He believed that by acting as “Rambo” he
would be able to get a real date with the woman he had been “courting.” (That’s
in quotes on purpose – because he didn’t know how to court properly.) She,
never wanting to hurt his feelings was too polite in telling him she
wasn’t interested in him – and he, wrongly believed he had a chance with
her.
Now, I hasten to add before anyone
attacks me – I am not blaming the victim.
She and the others at ESL were victims of a mind gone crazy.
However, this and other similar tragedies
might have been averted had a clear and convincing statement that she was not
at all interested in dating him been communicated early in their work
relationship.
We’ve gotten
so bad at the way we handle disagreement that people with a different point of
view as ours are considered by some as evil, dangerous, stupid and other
pejorative terms – instead of a mere recognition that they hold a different
point of view. If we stopped being so
thin-skinned about it, we might learn that their point of view has validity and
we might learn something from them – and also, might teach them that our point
of view has validity.
BUT, if we
exaggerate every disagreement, because we have to be kind and euphemistic, we
will never get to learn from each other.
Labels: alternative dispute resolution, Constructive Criticism, disagreement, euphamisms, going along to get along, k resolving conflict
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home