Results or Kindness: The False Choice Trap
In a scene from the movie Patch Adams, medical students Hunter “Patch” Adams (played by Robin Williams) and Mitch Roman (played by Philip Seymour Hoffman) have a confrontation about each other's approach to patient care. Mitch chastises Patch for his inappropriately comic approach to patient treatment. Mitch says, “You ask the average person when death comes to their door whether they want a prick on their side…because when that day comes, I will want the prick. And so will you.”
And for many of us, that’s how we would assess that same situation. Effectiveness over kindness; results over compassion. And therein lies the problem: these appear as mutually-exclusive choices. Choose one or the other. If you want results or success–we tell ourselves–we must accept the painful, awkward, or even toxic approach that the doctor, boss, friend, spouse, or co-worker wields. That is, the choice should always be “results,” not kindness or fairness or any other “soft” emotional approach. But here’s the thing: it’s a false choice. Delivering results and being kind are not mutually-exclusive options. Both can exist simultaneously. In fact, lots of research (see notes) and even more personal and anecdotal experience clearly supports that being kind more often leads to success. Yet this false choice is deeply ingrained in our interactions. Here are a couple common instances:
At the organizational level. In this instance management allows behavior that is otherwise inappropriate or even toxic because the perpetrator is “delivering results.” This is couched as, “He is successful. Let’s tolerate it.” Or, “That’s her style.” It’s viewed as “either or” rather than what it really is: easier to avoid addressing the toxic behavior. To be fair, not all organizations are this ignorant of jerk behavior. But it does require action or the behavior will continue. One example where it wasn’t (finally) tolerated: the Better.com Zoom termination debacle (see notes). Although action was a bit late.
At the individual level. For some, the choice to be a jerk is a habit that was never called out (this is where executive coaching can be extremely valuable–it is possible that the individual is not even aware of the behavior). The more troublesome situation is when those who are successful believe it is because of their jerk-like approach. Here again is the false choice. Let’s be honest: there are successful jerks. I’ve worked with some and so have you. But here’s the thing: they are not successful because they are a jerk. They are successful DESPITE being a jerk. Just imagine the success they could generate (and the collateral damage the organization could avoid) if they made a different choice (or even knew they had one).
The main fallacy embedded with the “false choice” is that kindness is the anathema of accountability, directness, or consequences–all tools used without care by jerks. But that reasoning is deeply flawed. Holding people accountable need not be mean; being direct does not equal hostility; creating consequences for missed results should not be tortuous.
Instead of accepting the false eventuality of results over kindness, stop and ask yourself: is this really the choice? In practice it never is. Results AND kindness work together. And as Patch responded to Mitch, “You think you have to be a prick to get things done? You actually think that’s a new idea?” Nope. Not only “not new” but not necessary.
Notes:
Patch Adams “Prick” Scene
Some insights supporting not being a jerk:
Find more insights on the Forty-Two Consulting “Thinking Out Loud” blog.
