No one likes being challenged–but not being challenged can be incredibly dangerous.
- Research is showing that the trend towards celebrity status CEO’s of companies can potentially lead to their downfall. As a CEO become a celebrity and an increasingly powerful head of the organization, the realtionship with the Human Resources department changes–the amount of discretion they have in making decisions increases. The people who surround this head of the company, anxious to stick around in a company that is controlled more and more by this one person, become “Yes people”, who nod and smile at the CEO’s ideas. This lack of accountability at the chief executive level has led to major collapses of corporations.
- Michael Jackson’s death has just been ruled a homocide. Apparently, he was provided with a drug that should not be administered outside of a hospital, and there was wide array of powerful medication that were used to control pain, anxiety, depression and so on. Charges are being considered against his doctor. The physician was providing medication to the King of Pop that he had no business providing. It seems it was very difficult to say “no” to Michael Jackson. My guess is that if one tried, another would quickly be found that would provide to Michael what he felt he needed, regardless of the ethics. Michael Jackson was a powerful figure and a cultural icon…the motivation to make him happy was powerful…and incredibly dangerous. By demanding medication and having people around him who gave in to him, he created a lethal combination of factors.
I’ve been pondering this “truth” thing following reading a chapter in Their Finest Hour: Master Therapists Share Their Greatest Success Stories where Terry Real, a therapist who is the author of several books, and works with family therapy using “relational recovery therapy” that is particularly response to men’s issues. A short excerpt from the chapter:
Real admitted that he breaks a cardinal rule of therapy in his work: Thou shalt not take sides….He reverses the usual procedure whereby usually first we win the man’s trust and then we deal with the difficult truths. [The difficult truth, for example, that wives want their husbands to be more men relational, connected and interpersonally skilled. He would say that this is not a criticism, simply a reality: that this is a product of how our culture raises men and women differently.] In Real’s approach, the way he attempts to win the man’s trust is by dealing with the difficult truths from the beginning.
Telling the truth….Real emphasizes the importance of being totally honest and upfront. He models this in the ways that he confronts couples with the obvious facets of their relationship that they have been ignoring. “I form an alliance with both parties through the truth.”
(page 243) italics mine.
Real goes on to describe a case where Bill, a man who is shut down emotionally (having legitimate reasons for being so) is challenged by the therapist. “He imagined that perhaps if he ever did point out limitations in this honest and direct way that perhaps people would go screaming out of the room, or have some kind of psychotic breakdown, or rip his throat out. But none of those things happened…Bill sensed that Real was rooting for him. Even though this encounter was nothing like anything he had ever expected would happen in therapy (Weren’t therapists supposed to be gentle and supportive and nurturing?), he could still feel the cring that was offered. From where Real was sitting, it looked like Bill began to melt…His face relaxed.” (page 250)
These stories have come together in my thoughts recently, reminding me to have gratitude for friends who care enough to tell me when they see me going off course. They have the courage and belief in themselves to risk telling me stuff that will be difficult to discuss (even it it would be good for me to hear). Friends like that have confidence in the relationship and in my commitment to them, that our friendship can handle me hearing some “tough stuff” and that we can come out on top. I have the privilege of knowing I have friends who place their caring for my well being above their own comfort. That’s a humbling but awesome thought. And I am the richer for it.
Do you have people in your life that you allow to care for you in a way that allows them to be candid with you? That if you’re going off the rails, they’ll let you know? That if they see you doing something dangerous to body or soul, they’ll call you on it? Then you are rich indeed.
Will you allow someone–a friend, priest or rabbi, therapist–to hear about stuff you are confused about and wrestling with, and do you dare to allow candid and honest conversation to happen to allow for life-changing growth? Can you give at least one person the ability to provide an outside perspective to you that will potentially prevent personal disaster? Can you allow yourself to not be surrounded by “yes people”?
What I’m suggesting is not easy, and requires someone who can challenge you with gentleness, tact and understanding. The candid truth needs to come from someone who genuinely cares, and wants the truth to be discussed in a way that will make you a better person. The truth needs to be heard with a measure of grace–it doesn’t always come out perfectly, and an appreciation for the reasons behind the truth-telling is helpful to process what is heard. Most times the conversation needs to occur over more than one occasion–to process responses, to ask questions that arise, to allow for cooling off if anger is the initial response allowing for other feelings to surface.
When someone disagrees with you on your actions it can be tempting to see it as harsh judgement or rejection when often it is quite the opposite–the willingness to engage in difficult conversations is itself a commitment to a person and the relationship.
Write a Comment