Learning To Separate People And Their Ideas

I'm sure we have all been in this position - you are in a meeting where ideas are being shared. Someone puts forward an idea and someone raises an objection. The raiser of the idea reacts as if they have just been punched in the face - angry, defensive, aggressive. Or sullen, withdrawn, silent. Fight or flight. And all because someone raised an objection to their idea. People tend to hold their ideas very tightly. They identify with them. They are their idea. So an attack on their idea is very literally an attack on them.

Or what about this one - you were just in a meeting and someone says to you "that was a pretty bad idea they raised.. what a fool they must be". In this case we are associating the idea with the character of the person who raised it. The idea was bad so therefore, by extension, they must be bad. We see both of these situations all the time. Both associating strongly with your own ideas, and conflating the quality of an idea with the attributes or character of the person who raised it, are things most of us do all the time, and they are both extremely unhelpful.

In the first case, by holding onto and defending our ideas as if we were defending an attack on our own body, we close our minds to alternatives - "my idea is under attack, I must defend my idea", rather than "there have been many ideas presented here, let's pick the best bits out of all of them, including mine". It becomes about winning the argument, to defend our own honour, rather than reaching the best solution.

In the second case, we risk dismissing further ideas from that person because we have labelled them as a fool for their first bad idea. Or equally problematic, if their first idea was good we may assume that they are extremely smart or talented and therefore all their ideas are good.

So what can we do about it? We must learn to hold our own ideas more loosely. Rather than going in with the assumption that our idea is right and perfect (as we often do), try going in with a more open mind - "this idea is the best I can come up with given the information and time I have available. Others will have different information and will have different ideas". By going in with a more open mind, we allow our idea to sit alongside other, equally valid ideas, and to have its relative merits assessed. We don't need to defend our idea because our idea is just one of many. It may have good points, but it will also have bad points and the best solution will probably come from a combination of many ideas. My idea and I are separate. To criticise one is not to criticise the other.

We must also learn to do the same for the ideas of others. Rather than assuming that because the idea is bad, they are bad, instead we need to tell ourselves a similar story - "the idea was the best they could come up with given the time and information they had available". Why was their idea bad? Not because they are bad, but because they had bad information, or lacked the time to fully think through the situation, or they may lack the skill or experience to see some of the obstacles. The idea and the person are separate. To criticise one is not to criticise the other.

This isn't an easy thing to do by the way. Most of us have our brains wired very early in life to hold our ideas tightly and assume that bad ideas come from bad people. We need to make a serious, deliberate, conscious effort to change this. We need to go in and deliberately think those thoughts to make sure we don't fall into our old habits.

Now supposing we have managed to do that and we are sitting in the meeting with a completely open mind, discussing ideas on their merits when we make an observation and the person who's idea we have just criticised reacts with fight or flight? Not everyone will have the same open mind as you do. How do we help others to see the way we see?

Framing the meeting or discussion correctly is a good start. Make it clear from the outset that all ideas raised will have good and bad points, and we are here to combine the best of all of them. Make it clear that we critique ideas, not people.

Show openness and curiosity towards all ideas. Rather than just coming out and saying that you think their assumption is wrong, show curiosity by asking "could you step me through how you came to that conclusion?" or "I'd like to dig into your assumptions a little, can you talk me through where this assumption came from?". By asking in a way that suggests curiosity you invite them to explain their reasoning rather than defend their idea. You draw them into the discussion. By showing curiosity you show openness. You aren't saying they are wrong, you are inviting a discussion into how they could be right.

Highlight the good points in the idea as well as pointing out the flaws - "I love the way you have articulated the strategy...but I'm wondering about the assumption you have made here.. can you talk us through that?" 

This will not work all the time. It will not work with all people. Some people hold their ideas more tightly than others. Sometimes an idea is very precious to us and we hold it particularly tightly. In these cases you will often get a fight or flight reaction no matter how careful you are. If you know someone is likely to react badly, maybe have an informal chat with them beforehand. In an informal situation, rather than the pressure of a big meeting, people can often be more receptive. if you know you are likely to react badly because this is a special idea to you, make sure you are prepared and can catch your reaction before it gets out of hand.

If it's an ongoing issue that is causing issues for you or your organisation, consider bringing in a coach. A coach can help establish new patterns of thinking and introduce new techniques that can help get ideas flowing freely.