By nature of our work, VIM Executive Coaching must often cut through the clutter of anger many of our newer clients bring to coaching sessions.
“I’m really angry today,” the conversations often start. “Did you hear what so and so said over the weekend?”
The clients then let loose on something they heard on cable news or social media. It is generally political and rephrases not so much what a politician or CEO or athlete expressed, but the interpretation of what was said through the lens of on-air talent (usually panels of on-air talent). The echoes of these personalities push and prod one another until the perceived indignity and outrage, the smug looks and judgment reach a fever pitch and then…
Let’s cut to a commercial
We often wonder what those esteemed, anger-invoking panelists talk about during their breaks. Do they talk about their golf games, gossip, complain about their contracts or shades of on-camera make-up? Do they talk about their kids, stomach cramps, the parking lot attendant or a killer meal they ate at a new French restaurant? Do they talk at all, or are they so sick and tired of one another as in many workplace situations?
Whatever the conversation, it is a pretty good guess that the anger and outrage they expressed in the seconds prior to the commercial break are somewhat dialed-back to accommodate sanity. For in reality, their act, if you will, is to elicit reaction in others. It is the nature of what they do. Walter Cronkite and Barbara are long gone, and replaced with “characters” and actors paid to stir the pot. The higher the stakes and the more contentious the story, the bigger the pot.
The problem, of course, is that the viewer is left with a residue of anger. The core issue of those panels and major social media platforms, no matter the station or moderator or “experts,” is that the dialog is based on contention and not communication.
Are all sides of the issue discussed? Is there a balance given to viewpoints? Are there “spaces” in the discussion to weigh the information, to consider there may be both right and wrong, to allow for successes as well as failures?
Unfortunately, in this age where we have been convinced by our favorite cable news personalities “we” are always right and “they’ are always wrong on every issue, there is no longer room for response, only for reaction.
The opposite of mindfulness
Reaction to issues is generally the enemy of mindfulness. Constant reaction is the surest path to perpetual anger and bias. Think about it. Unfortunately, executive leaders bring those biases and anger into workplace interaction no matter the viewpoint. In fact, it is not unusual for people to model their positions and reactions as echoes of what cable news or social media have told them to do or say. It is scary and also, sad.
The mindful executive leader should strive to remove filters of reaction and instead, weigh proper response to subordinates, peers and those above them in organizations. If bias, rather than honest introspection is employed to all situations and interactions, what is being gained?
Mindfulness meditation and learning to be mindful, cut through the noise of reaction that constantly inundate us with their messaging. Yes, an entire news industry has been created to get us to react. Often the reaction is downright unhealthy. In the least, and whatever the messaging, bias should not enter into a mindful response. Our response must settle on what is truthful and considered, not on what an on-air personality tells us what to think.