The Whole Truth

Discerning the whole truth is becoming more and more challenging these days. We have become a nation of headline readers with incredibly short attention spans. With no standards or barriers with regard to what gets published, the responsibility of the information consumer was risen to a new level.  

Following is an excerpt from an AP news article that appeared in a local paper I read on November 17, 2009.   

GM confident after $1.2 billion loss

Company plans to repay government loans

Detroit – General Motors Co. said Monday that it lost $1.2 billion from the time it left bankruptcy protection through Sept. 30, far better than it has reported in previous quarters and a sign that the auto giant is starting to turn around its business.

The company also said it will begin repaying $6.7 billion in U.S. government loans with a $1.2 billion payment in December. It plans to repay the debt over the next eight quarters, but could pay it back as early as next year. But the money will come from funds loaned by the government.

I was both puzzled and irritated after reading this article. Puzzlement was my intellectual response – “How could this be true?” Irritation was my emotional response – “Wait a minute. They are planning to repay the tax payers using tax payer money? No way!”  

Here is where the lesson begins. The absurdity of this matter should be a signal for us to slow down and check the facts. This is challenging because our emotions do not require facts. But consider that there may be a perfectly reasonable, financially sound explanation for what GM is planning to do. Few people know all the details of the government bailout plan or are experts in corporate finance. Also, we need to acknowledge that news stories often lack critical details. The AP may be grossly over simplifying a very complex issue.

As difficult as it may be for me to keep an open mind about matters like this one, that is exactly what I need to do. You do too. We need more information, and better information, before drawing conclusions. We may have formed certain assumptions but it is critical that we test them. Many people, however, will not bother to do this. Those who decry “big business” they will quickly conclude that GM is run by a bunch of greedy, irresponsible executives who are not required to play by the same rules as the rest of us. Those who fear “big government” will conclude that Washington is selling out the country to prop up a company that has not always acted in the best interests of the public. There is just enough partial truth out there to give a heartbeat to both of these conclusions. The problem is that few people will take the time to thoroughly vet the whole truth. As an example, just consider the millions of Americans who were taking firmly entrenched positions on healthcare reform before reading a word of the proposed legislation.

Outside of a court of law, most people will settle for something far short of “the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” They settle for simple answers because critical thinking is difficult. Objectivity does not come easily. It takes extra time and requires restraint. Examining our assumptions may reveal that we are in error. It is much more expedient to do a “quick draw” of our conclusions, shoot off our opinions and ask questions later. It amazes me how little fact finding and real dialogue occurs regarding matters of jugular importance.

As organizational leaders, we need to wake up and realize that the world has changed. Anybody and everybody can publish headlines and promulgate their interpretation of the truth through an expanding array of media. Misinformation abounds. Shreds of partial truth are hanging everywhere. As a result, we have to become very wise consumers of information. We need to be very selective of what we attend to but not so selective that we choose only the information that supports our biases and assumptions. We also need to work diligently to share the whole truth within our own areas of influence and control when we are the publishers of information. This may mean that we need to spend more time educating our stakeholders to properly handle the truth. Admittedly, this is hard stuff, but it is what thinking people and responsible leaders do.