Is empathy a scam and a compromise of one’s authenticity?
Empathy is arguably the first thing that comes to mind when you ask any 4Citizen — as we call ourselves at FourthCanvas — about our core values. Yet it is one that we discuss, question, debate and seek to understand the most. Our most recent conversations on Core Values, hosted off-site (in my house, alongside prawn crackers, peppered rice and Chivita to be specific), went smoothly across PURPOSE, OPENNESS and POTENTIAL, with 80% of the time spent on the Q&A, or say, Q&A&AQ&a&qAQ on EMPATHY.
In response to our belief statement that underlines EMPATHY, one of us had a question.
“The thing about this empathy I want to be clear on ehn is… are we supposed to subject our sincerity and authenticity all in the name of making someone feel good?”
The belief itself reads:
“The other person matters, indeed. Truly great work is underlined by understanding and empathy. We respect that we can be wrong in the assumptions we make of and for other people. Hence we prioritize and seek continuous understanding, of the people we work with, within and without (clients, as well the people we help them reach). How people feel, where they are coming from, what’s peculiar about them and more all matter to us. We seek collective fulfilment above individual satisfaction.”
I should add that the question above and several others on empathy were also directly influenced by our discussion on POTENTIAL, being one other value that seems to come from the same family of thoughts, which is based on a belief that “Every human — each and every human — carries the potential for greatness”.
The following 90 minutes was devoted to several valid what-ifs meeting varying opinions, analogies, examples, perspectives and thoughts. While empathy as a core value for us refers to both inter-personal relations and our approach to understanding clients on projects, the constructive debating this particular evening was more on the former. As in our usual love for constructive debate, it was a beauty to experience, as always. If we are debating it, we are understanding it better. Silence and “yes, great” can be deceptive layers of disconnect. In the end, we had all contributed several key thoughts worth sharing. To begin with, the idea of the need to “apply empathy with balance”.
Empathy is rather the most accurate version of the truth
One of us suggested that in giving negative feedback to people who really have done badly, we had to find a balance between being empathetic and being sincere. At the end of further investigation of this line of thought, we realised that instead of the supposed need to find a balance with truth, empathy is in itself the truest version of the truth, given that it usually involves communicating the failing in its actual form, without the usual accompanying words, body language and tone that suggests that the other person is a complete failure. If empathy would have you praise someone first for the good they have done before going to mention what they didn’t do well and helping them to focus on the failure on its own and not on themselves as failures, that is indeed the real truth — that they did some things right, some wrong and these do not mean they are failures, they simply failed on something. How can pouring out our emotions, laced with our other judgements and assumptions of them, while screaming down their failures be truer? Our approach to criticising people as we currently do it is what is more likely false, as we add in more layers of our temperament and loads of our judgement of other people.
Focus more on the purpose than, well, ‘who you are’
There was the conversation on temperament and being true to yourself by saying your mind and expressing yourself, not only in words but in how you feel like delivering it in that very moment, which would usually be about ‘who you are’ and why should you deny that? On this, we discussed the need to consider that maybe a bigger thing to stay true to is what you want to achieve in the first place. For example, if you are correcting someone or communicating negative feedback, the goal is change — to have the other person not repeat the wrong they have done and do better next time. If staying true to our temperaments would stay in the way of us seeing the change we need to see, the choice between the two seems easier, especially if we are looking at the big picture. If we will lead or relate with people well, it comes with some sacrifice for the greater good, which in this case can be a subjection of one’s tendencies for the goal of seeing change which is more likely when we communicate the message while helping to keep the other person’s dignity and encourage them. For further emphasis, I would add that it’s like how being a good father or husband (assume I am one at your own… should I say peril?) could sometimes mean missing a hangout with friends to catch a Champions League knockout match. ‘Who you are’ wants to see a game with your friends but the bigger purpose of being present to spend more time with your daughter matters more. We may have to accept some sacrifice, for empathy. Sacrifice, not compromise.
Being clear “I don’t take rubbish” is not as effective as we love to think
We were looking at a far-fetched scenario of a local tailor correcting his apprentice and how in some cases similar to that, the harsh fearful and condemning approach seems to get people to sit up. On this, we considered if short term immediate results may be rather misguiding, especially when you compare with lasting results inspired by a leadership that is more considerate and willing to sit down, seek understanding and correct constructively. While we agree that more menial jobs may get away with exploitations — or to put it rightly, manipulations — we live and work in a largely knowledge-based and creative economy where the difference between good and great work can mean a huge difference, one that cannot be closed by the quick fix of scolding to ‘motivate’ change. At this level, the goal is to inspire people to choose to give their best and that bossy “they know I don’t take rubbish” attitude can never be more effective than its alternative — empathy.
I will recommend The 8th Habit by Steven Covey for anyone looking to learn more about the alternative way to being a boss, team lead or colleague and seeks to understand empathy as a more fulfilling way to inspiring change in organisations. It still ranks as the most important At FourthCanvas, we are constantly ‘learning on the job’ of practising empathy, within and without.
