A Reader asks "Can being right be wrong?"

 

:

Hi Ms. Usher,

My girlfriend reads your blog and suggested I write you for some advice about a situation at my job. I work in an office with a bunch of guys and it's pretty laid back. There's a  guy on our team who seems to go out of his way to piss some of  us off. Whenever we talk about stuff, he has to find a way to make himself the top dog in the discussion and the rest of us look like idiots.  If one of us  says a basketball player missed about 18,000 shots in his career, he will jump in the conversation and ,say "this basketball player actually missed 17,285 shots 5,253 of which were  free throw misses." He does this all the time to the point of arguing like there is a prize if he wins, but one situation had us all ready to let this guy have it. One of the ladies in our IT department just came back from her honeymoon in Hawaii. She was showing pictures  to everyone and he started in on her about how Maui is a popular honeymoon location, what's the big deal, people go there all the time, it is not really an exotic place. He really upset her with all of his "stats" about her honeymoon destination. Do you have any advice on how to deal with this guy? We have to work with him everyday and he does his job but this one thing makes us want to take him outside and pound him. We are not always right (no one is) but we are not stupid either and we are really tired of his bulls***.

Ty

Dear Ty,

Thank you for your question,  I understand people wanting to set the record straight , but when a person is always in the mode of correcting people or having to prove they are "right", it can do more harm than good sometimes. I am not sure what your co-workers motive is perhaps he just wants to feel important and knowledgeable, unfortunately it is at the expense of others  and he  has no idea he is isolating people. I agree with you, nobody likes to be made to feel like a prized idiot by a self appointed know-it-all. My suggestion would be to acknowledge his contribution but do not argue  or debate with him. Some suggested responses are as follows:

"Thanks I will keep that in mind."
"That's interesting."

"I see."

"Oh, OK"
"Thanks  for sharing that."

These responses offer no agreement with  him but it is a polite way of recognizing what he said and you can redirect the conversation back on course. (though you may want to still pound him). 

I hope that your co-worker will see how counterproductive his behavior is and stop doing it and hopefully the suggestions I made  will be a helpful aid in doing so.

Best of luck,

Demita

To my blog readers:

There is nothing wrong with bringing correction where there is error. However, a person should ask themselves three questions, "Is this the right time?" , "What will be gained by me saying something?" and "Is it really about me wining or expanding understanding?"
 
Dale Carnegie, the author of the classic book, "How to win friends and influence people" Shares a story in his book that for me drives the point home:

I was attending a banquet on night given in Sir Ross’s honor; and during the dinner, the man sitting next to me told a humorous story which hinged on the quotation “There’s a divinity that shapes our ends, rough-hew them how we will.”The raconteur mentioned that the quotation was from the Bible.  He was wrong.  I knew that. I knew it positively.  There couldn’t be the slightest doubt about it.  And so, to get a feeling of importance and display my superiority, I appointed myself as an unsolicited and unwelcome committee of one to correct him.  He stuck to his guns.  What?  From Shakespeare?  Impossible! Absurd! That quotation was from the Bible. And he knew it.The storyteller was sitting on my right; and Frank Gammond, an old friend of mine, was seated at my left. Mr. Gammond had devoted years to the study of Shakespeare.  So the storyteller and I agreed to submit the question to Mr. Gammond.  Mr. Gammond listened,  kicked me under the table, and then said: “Dale, you are wrong. The gentleman is right it is from the Bible” On the way home that night, I said to Mr. Gammond:  “Frank, you knew that quotation was from Shakespeare.”“Yes, of course,” he replied, “Hamlet, Act Five, Scene Two.  But we were guests at a festive occasion my dear Dale.  Why prove to a man he is wrong?  Is that going to make him like you?  Why not let him save his face?  He didn’t ask for your opinion.  He didn’t want it. Why argue with him? (Pgs. 115,116)

 

 Though it was wrong for Mr. Gammond to agree with an error and even though Dale Carnegie was right, what could he have gained by winning? Nothing of importance and Mr. Gammond knew that.  His need to be right would have embarrassed the man in front of other guests, the man would have been humiliated, felt foolish the rest of the evening and what would always remain fresh in his mind would not be the correct information, but that Dale rebuked him in the presence of others by exposing his ignorance and making him fell small.

When we are "right", if the motive is not to bring out the best in others, then it can be for all intents and purposes be "wrong" This does not mean we co-sign with a clear error or lie, but how we present  the truth can make a difference in how it is perceived and received. I have a dear friend who is truly a man of few words. In group conversations, he quietly listened and would every so often share something that made us think and consider and sometimes his humble suggestion brought "correction".

To appear well informed, I am sad to say I have made the mistake of being more motivated to be right than to share out of humility and sincereity. I have learned to use the phrases I shared with Ty more often, especially if it is not the right time or place to discuss it further or the person is not open to  what I have to say. I have come to realize that I  gain nothing by making the other person feel foolish even if I am "right".

Respectable Disagreements: Can we agree to disagree?

Many people criticize the president harshly. They criticize from every side, but most of the people who criticize don't even participate fully in the political process. And almost nobody realizes how difficult it is to negotiate with people who have a hundreds of conflicting demands that all represent AMERICA. WE are AMERICA. Only we can make the changes that we seek. No president can or ever has been able to make changes on completely his own. Its never possible to please all the people all the time. If we disagree with our president, it should be done with respect, the same respect that we hope to receive ourselves, no matter what our particular views happen to be.

-Gabriel Angelo, Age 14

Gabriel With President Obama

The statement above was expressed by a talented young musician who has met the President in person and had the opportunity to perform for him. There were those who chalked up his statement to his being young, idealistic and not of age to vote to really understand what politics are really about. You do not have to be an adult with tons of votes under your belt to recognize the importance of respecting one another, even when you do not agree. I found Gabriel's statement well expressed and expressed with a wisdom and insight well beyond his years, a mature viewpoint I do not see in many adults these days.



This post is not in favor of or against the President, leader or any political affiliation, but to address the importance to respect people in positions of leadership. Respect does not mean  agreement, it simply means  we respect the position they hold while we do not adhere to their views or convictions. Any of us who have held or holds a position of influence be it as a parent, teacher, pastor, office manager, congressman, etc. knows it is not easy to lead and make decisions that will benefit people at large. To be under the constant scrutiny of people criticizing every move you make, leveling insults and put downs are never considering the impact of their words and/or actions.

Another colleague of mine mentioned that leaders set the example by the way they treat other leaders and I could not agree more. When you are in a position of influence, people are watching you, they will many times follow your lead and any action or deed can be taken out of context and grossly mis-understood. I recall the photograph of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer that went viral of her pointed finger in the face of the President. To this day it was not made clear what the exchange was really about in that moment though there has been much speculation, but once the photo went viral,  there were some people all too happy to "high five" the governor for what they perceived to be her "putting him in his place". Some also expressed disappointment at the gesture and did not support it at all. Gov Brewer has stressed over and over that she would never disrespect the office of the President, but the body language captured in that photo seemed to give a different impression and some people the permission to support their perceived sentiment whether it was true or not whether it was right or not.

Our body language speaks louder than our words!

I am appalled at the horrible treatment I see people give those in leadership local, national, or global and those who do not agree with their views. Social media has become a cheap way for people  to do expensive damage to people's name and reputation all  in the name of free speech. I do not believe that freedom of speech was implemented to that we could attack and slander people we do dislike or disagree with. It was platform by which people were given the privilege to speak  and to disagree respectfully without fear of retaliation or punishment. Sadly many have set themselves up as judge,jury, and executioner in the court of public opinion to do it to others and the ramifications are far reaching way beyond the printed page of old. Now it is around the world in a matter of seconds thanks to the internet!

.

Gabriel made a profound statement, "We are all America" in that all inclusive statement, that means we all have different views and experiences. The child raised in a single parent home is going to see life differently than the child raised in a two parent home. The man who has lived a life of advantage  and privilege will see the world differently than a man who has to work 60 hour weeks just to make rent and bills for his family. A Black , White, Asian, Hispanic, Middle Eastern, etc. all see life from a different perspective so of course what is important to us is going to vary yet we expect those in charge to view the world from our unique standpoint, it does not work that way. We have to leave room for other people to see things differently, (this does not include the clear boundaries of right and wrong  such as lying,stealing, cheating,  killing, etc.) and respect their perspective on matters of importance.

 If we disagree with our president, it should be done with respect, the same respect that we hope to receive ourselves, no matter what our particular views happen to be.

The final part of Gabriel's statement voices the very essence of what etiquette and social graces should be about and that is  the golden rule, treating others as we would want to be treated. He also drew attention to the fact that if we want to see change, we have to take responsibility and  work together respectfully to obtain it.  We all want respect  even if others do not  always agree with us, should we not afford others the same privilege without insult, ridicule or disrespect where it is rightfully merited?