“Good Guys” and “Bad Guys”
Can you disagree with someone and still benefit from the relationship? Or can you read a book that has some points you disagree with yet still glean some of the good stuff? Can you not be in total agreement yet remain in an organization? In the old western films, the good guys always wore white hats and the bad guys black hats. These days the tendency is to label someone or something rather quickly as either good or bad. Sometimes we initially see people as “good guys” but get offended or disagree with them about something along the way and shift them to the “bad guys” category. Rarely do we label people as “bad” then when we realize we have misjudged them extend enough grace to flip them to the “good” status.
Think Together
In psychology this is called “splitting” which is a type of cognitive distortion where we see people or situations in only black and white terms with no gray area in between. For example, you might idolize a new friend for a while but when the inevitable disagreement happens you throw the whole relationship away because you determine he or she is a bad person. We do this with organizations as well. When we disagree with something, we pick up our ball and go home rather than stick around long enough to fully understand the situation. Even when we completely understand what is going on why not hang on to engage and provide our perspective? Groups grow in their impact when there is room for diverse perspectives. I recently heard Jimmy Rollins say on a podcast, “The goal is not to think alike but to think together.” He was referring to marriage, but this applies to leadership teams and organizations as well.
Spit Out The Seeds
When we throw the baby out with the bath water, it makes for some lonely people because usually nothing and no one is completely good or bad all the time. At times, we all fall short and let each other down. I love the phrase “chew up the grapes and spit out the seeds.” We need to do this with the people and organizations we have chosen to invest our time. Don’t miss out on the good stuff just because there is not 100% agreement.
Why We Do This
I think there are at least four reasons (add more in the comments):
- Laziness: labeling someone or something as bad reduces the need to think going forward
- Survival: we don’t like pain, so this is an easy way to avoid conflict
- Offendable: looking for reasons to be offended has almost become sport for some (see What to Do When Tempted to Be Offended)
- Weak Commitments: we live in an entertainment culture with lots of choices and opportunities to switch to something else…even the NCAA Transfer Portal encourages lack of commitment to a team
Stay Curious
I think we need to stay curious longer. Ask more questions to clarify what is going on. Look for where there is agreement and focus on that. Affirm the common ground. When there is something contrary, stay in there and engage without taking what is going on personally. For clients who struggle with this, I encourage them to keep a Q-Tip handy as a visual reminder to “Quit Taking It Personally.”
Character
Character is built within people and teams when there is opportunity to be challenged and refined by the fire of adversity. Try to get comfortable being uncomfortable. When we bail too quickly growth is stunted and we miss out on some pretty good stuff along the way. A friend once told me, “You can’t have a comeback unless you have a setback.”
How have you seen this play out in your career?
