It isn’t always so clear how our thinking drives our behavior.
Some time ago I found myself working with a leadership client who I’ll give the fictitious name, Michael. I asked him during one of our conversations:
“Michael, how do you feel about working with your colleague, Jeff?”
“Oh, Jeff’s okay,” he said to me, but he’s like a lot of people here. They are just out for themselves.”
“You think he’s mostly self-interested.”
“Yes, if he thinks he can get me to do something for him, he’ll try to work an angle on me. That’s how he is, but to be fair that’s how most people are in this department.”
“Have you ever shared this perspective with others here?” I asked. “Have you ever shared it with Jeff?”
“Oh no, I’m telling you this in confidence. I’d never be that blunt in person, but that is the way he is.”
“So you don’t think Jeff or others might pick up on how you actually feel.”
“Well, like I said, I’m being blunt with you.”
So the question here is how well can Michael — or pretty much any of us — actually hide what we’re feeling. I think we’d all like to believe we can be private and we can prevaricate effectively when we need to as a useful social skill. But you have to wonder if that’s an accurate assessment given the complexity of communication, both verbal and non-verbal, and you also might wonder about the cost of the intended cover up.
I do think some people can be especially good at the faking it part, at least initially. But I also sense colleagues are typically smart enough to figure it out over time. We leak our perceptions. We leak our annoyances and frustrations, and more than we’d like to think — insofar as we possess them — we leak our negative assumptions about others motives and personality. Even if we are pretty skilled in covering up our opinions and our feelings, we’re generally not so mastered control that no one else will ever know. We deceive ourselves, hanging on to the illusion that we can fully disconnect the truth of what we are thinking or feeling from our behavior, as if these two worlds (thinking/feeling and behavior) were completely separate from one another.
I don’t believe they are not so separate as we might imagine. In Michael’s case, I’d just completed some feedback gathering that suggested that many of his colleagues clearly saw him as a jaded, even manipulative character who’d learned to play a company game of accountability avoidance. Few actually saw him as a sincere collaborator or as someone who’d willingly pitch in when someone else was overwhelmed and needed help. What I found remarkable was the gap between his belief that he was good at hiding his true sentiments and his actual reputation for communicating them.
“So, Michael,” I said, “you are seeing yourself as avoiding getting used by colleagues who are trying to work an angle on you while your colleagues are seeing you as someone unwilling to help out when you’re needed. You don’t seem to be giving them accurate feedback and they don’t seem to be giving accurate feedback to you either. How do you feel about that?”
He shifted in his seat. “Well, of course that’s what they would say.”
The problem isn’t that we leak. Leaking is inevitable at a certain point. Leaking is human. The challenge is what leaks — especially when it involves untested negative assumptions that ultimately form protective walls and interpersonal moats. Our self-deception is that no one else can see what’s happening. Because we think we can entirely disconnect thoughts and feelings from our own behavior, it’s the other people who indeed must be the problem.
And so what? What is the cost of all that? The answer is very simple, I think, and can be summed up in the word mistrust.
I’ll leave you to figure out that cost and decide for yourself whether you think it is too high. What I believe is that we need to acknowledge that how we think and how we feel is almost exactly our behavior, even when we try to hide that fact from others, even when we try to hide it from ourselves. If we can make that acknowledgement then perhaps the relationships that hold our workplaces and our communities together will begin to have an opportunity to right themselves, to become clearer and stronger and there will be a better chance at trust as we get closer to true connection.
For sure what I do not mean is that we’ll end up just blasting other people with our negative perceptions of them and being blasted in return, in the name of some graven image of what somebody says openness and honesty mean. That isn’t it at all. It’s about getting better, learning to talk about wants and needs, about listening, about the creation of understanding where there is an entirely new kind of congruence between thoughts, feelings and behavior. It’s not about reducing other people to our brutal private theories of them, as if underneath it all, we’re all just an antagonistic and hurtful thread on Twitter waiting to happen. No, that’s not it at all. That’s not who we are if we don’t choose to be.
Dan,
Different notions that tugged on my sleeve. (Another provocative post. Thank you)
“That’s how he is, but to be fair that’s how most people are in this department.” I’m curious where Michael’s defensiveness and victim-consciousness come from (hint-early developmental experiences).
““Oh no, I’m telling you this in confidence. I’d never be that blunt in person, but that is the way he is.” I’m curious why Michael chose the word blunt. There are other mature, more constructive or compassionate ways to have conversations without being blunt. I’m curious about his history in having truthful conversations with others in his past. I’m sure this one incident (being blunt) isn’t a “one-off.”
“We leak our perceptions. We leak our annoyances and frustrations, and more than we’d like to think — insofar as we possess them — we leak our negative assumptions about others motives and personality.” Exactly, through subtle cues such as body language, tone of voice, and facial expressions. Our perceptions, annoyances, and frustrations are not always consciously controlled, and they can seep out involuntarily, potentially influencing how others perceive us and impacting workplace dynamics.
“He shifted in his seat. “Well, of course that’s what they would say.” Again, the victim mentality. I’d be curious how far back this goes in his life and how he became conditioned to feel the victim, to feel others are “against” him.
“Because we think we can entirely disconnect thoughts and feelings from our own behavior, it’s the other people who indeed must be the problem.” It seems that Michael caught up in his own cognitive biases and defense mechanisms (e.g., external rather than internal locus of control – it’s them!, attribution bias, defense attributions…) all to protect his own self-esteem.
“For sure what I do not mean is that we’ll end up just blasting other people with our negative perceptions of them and being blasted in return…..” In my experience, this is directly related to positive mental health, and psychological safety in the workplace. The result of which is a workplace environment reflecting the stability, peace and serenity reflected in your photo as opposed to a choppy, belligerent waters of a monsoon or hurricane.
Thank you, Peter. Once again, you are adding valuable insights and interpretation that I think are very helpful.
I do sense that while it’s certainly possible to look at everything that’s going on in this story as being about one person, Michael, I hope he’s also viewed as a kind of cultural syndrome; that as much as the problems belong to an individual, they also depict a certain kind of environment in which many may collude. (He may not be the only “victim” in the story).
Peter, much appreciation, as always!
Dan
Human nature being what it is, I agree with you Dan. If an organizational psychologist, or just a psychologist, hung out there for a few days, a few weeks, I’m quite sure Michael is just the tip of the iceberg. The only question is how large or small the iceberg is.