Sympathy considered harmful

ou start chatting with Adam by the water cooler. He begins complaining about Brett. Your first instinct is to sympathize — and if Brett is Adam’s significant other, that might be exactly the right thing to do.

But if Adam and Brett are co-workers, and it's important that they work well together, you might want to take a different approach. In this case, consider stating the obvious: the best way for Adam to resolve his communication issues with Brett is to actually talk to Brett. (If you dig deep enough, you’ll often find that most problems are, at their core, communication problems.)

It’s surprising how often people try to fix a lack of communication by talking to everyone except the person involved.

There are times when taking an indirect approach is justified. If you’ve hit a roadblock with someone and progress seems impossible, involving a trusted third party might help build a bridge between you. But usually, that’s not what’s happening. Most of the time, Adam is just looking for sympathy — not a solution.

Worse, he might be trying to form an alliance against Brett. But creating an “us vs. them” dynamic rarely helps teamwork or cooperation.

If you ask Adam whether he’s discussed the issue directly with Brett, he might say yes. But if you dig deeper, you'll often find that he’s only dropped hints rather than addressing the matter openly. You’ll start to hear the word “should” a lot: “He should have realized,” or “She should understand.” The word “should” can be dangerous — people should do many things, but often don’t.

Personally, I prefer to focus on people’s actual behavior and on how I can encourage actions that lead to better outcomes — rather than indulging in righteous indignation.

Next time you find yourself in this situation, consider becoming an active part of the solution rather than a passive part of the problem. I know it’s hard to remember this when a friend needs a sympathetic ear, but it can lead to a more peaceful and productive environment.

Dear Reader,
What’s your opinion? Would you simply sympathize and leave it at that, or would you encourage Adam to talk directly with Brett to try and resolve the issue?

Update

I later discovered that this kind of behavior is part of what's known as the drama triangle. In it, the "Victim" seeks help from a "Rescuer." But while this might offer temporary relief, it doesn’t address the root of the problem — and so nothing truly gets resolved.

Related Posts

• Dangers of Heroism

Blogs for Marketing purposes

or a while I have been advocating making companies' Internet presences more interactive by the use of blogs, wiki and forums. Marketing staff are always receptive but management are often resistant. The topic has come up so often that I now have a standard spiel.
Web sites that publish reader’s comments increase customer engagement. As do sites that communicate in a more personal style (e.g. in the form of a blog).These more interactive sites can be used to

• Gather customer preferences and needs
• Rehabilitate a reputation of arrogance and ignoring customer’s preferences
• Create a more personal two way dialog with customers instead of a breakdown into impersonal gathering and disseminating information.
• Build community
• Create customer buy in
  • Customer’s criticisms will be more constructive and their attitude more positive if they believe they are part of the process

There is often resistance to these ideas usually centered on losing control of the process. But losing control of the process is not the worst thing that could happen. The worst thing is to be totally ignored.

There is a misconception about where the power is in a conversation. The power is with the listener not the speaker. If the listener is thinking about the shopping list or what they are going to say next then the speaker is raising the air temperature of the room and little more. It follows that trying to keep control of the situation by keeping an iron grip on what is said is a foolhardy exercise. You increase your comfort as you speed your way to disaster. Your ears are soothed by the sound of your own voice as it echoes in an empty room.

The company that has a one way presence on the net has no user comments on their blog (because they have no blog). No user additions to their FAQ (because it is not Wikified). No discussion threads in their forum (because their customers are too busy talking behind their backs where they can not hear them). If someone posts some vitriol in a comment on their blog at least they have the commenter's attention and the beginnings of a discussion. This is better than the 'chirp chirp' sound of silence.