Cynicism vs. Skepticism: It’s about Discernment – Part 2

by Zach Shelley

In the minds of many people, leadership is about power, influence or control. I would argue that true leadership is about cultivation and stewardship. In either case, leaders are very often tasked with making difficult decisions. 

Any agricultural cultivator worth their salt will tell you that there needs to be some pruning, weeding and effort that will remove unwanted factors from their specific crops growth process.  When “growing” an organization, a community, a team or a department, this kind of “pairing down” will need to happen at some point.

In these circumstances, we may find ourselves looking very deeply at situations, opportunities and choices as we attempt to derive the appropriate course of action. The most effective leaders work in and around teams.  This will mean that we will come into contact with many different opinions, ideas and options.  While navigating such environments communication is key and can set a tone for the entirety of the contract, project or department.

On Monday, we began looking at the “Cynic”. It is not a positive designation.  Recently, I had been labeled as such and took it upon myself to find out why and how to remove such labels from myself. By looking at its definitions and applications we can see how damaging it could be to a group of coworkers or team members.

In my experience, leaders may find themselves being label cynics for several reasons. Communicating realism or realistic outcomes can sometimes feel cynical. Planning for worst case scenarios can be misconstrued as cynical. The perception of decision making can be a difficult road to navigate. However, leaders must be discerning in their decisions making and neither of the previous examples were negative pursuits.

How then do leaders make tough decisions, communicate realism and develop effective contingency plans without appearing cynical or damaging the motivation of their direct community?

Firstly, I want you to think back to childhood.  How many of us can remember experiences wherein instruction was explained with a “because I said so.” I don’t believe I was ever fully satisfied with that answer and I doubt any of you were. As leaders, we can appear very cynical indeed by requiring any member of a team to do anything (or not to do something) based on just our platitudinal designations. 

If a team lead or other member approaches a leader with a new marketing plan that for some reason isn’t worth developing, a leader can immediately alienate himself by shooting the idea down and following it by a “because I said no”. This experience may quell any creativity that had been put into the marketing plan and communicate to the team member that their ideas were unacceptable as a whole. These actions are definitely in accord with the definition of cynical we examined on Monday.

By taking the time to describe the projects benefits as well as problems, a team member may find a more defined target to shoot for in the future, thus refining their work and producing a better product or offering for the team.  This is a cultivating attitude and avoids any cynical action. Although it may take a little more time, it could reap a much better end result for the project and employee.

In similar situations, imagine that a team member suggests an unrealistic solution for a problem that your department faces. It may seem obvious to others, including one’s self, that this suggestion has no possible means of working. However, a response of “that’s unrealistic. Anyone else?” may communicate a cynical attitude. The lack of time spent explaining such a statement may be construed as dismissive.  Even if the suggestion seems obviously impossible by you, the group may not know the factors informing such an understanding.  By calling out the high points of such suggestions, and communicating the unattainable pieces of the statement, it better frames the problem for the group as a whole. This in turn can develop more beneficial outcomes as well as more suitable results.

By communicating our thought process’ and situational motivations, leaders can avoid a myriad of negative social designations, like “cynic”. By using moments such as these examples are teaching or refining moments, team growth and understanding is cultivated rather than annoyed resentment.  Keep these ideas in mind as you work with socially based teams.

As promised, we will finish this post by listing several questions that can help associates see your point of view.  If you help team members arrive at the same conclusion as you have by leading them through your thought process while allowing them to see the steps you took to get there, you’ll avoid any “cynical” denouncements and help cultivate a better approach to discernment. Think about these questions the next time you are adding critiques or refinement to a project:

1. Will the implementation of this benefit the team as a whole?
2. Is this project worth the time investment?
3. Do you feel assured of the success of this project?
4. What are your main critiques of this process?
5. How long will this project take to deliver beneficial results?
6. Does the team believe in this course of action?
7. Have you researched the potential results?
8. Will this create more or less work for the team?
9. Will this benefit us long term?
10. Are there more productive options?

By helping others think through the questions that you ask yourself when discerning the pursuit of beneficial outcomes, team members will be able to have a better understanding of what is helpful for the team, company of community as a whole. More refined and well thought through conversations will always help develop successful personal and professional relationships while avoiding negative social designations.

On Friday, we will spend more time discussing vocabulary and how better to develop cultivating over critical language.