Avoiding "Them"

In training new managers, I am always careful to make the point that the transition into leadership involves not only the assumption of new responsibilities and the acquisition and use of new skills, but also a fundamental paradigm shift. I introduce this shift by saying, “As a leader, you have now entered the realm of They. In other words, many people out there in your organization now consider you part of Them. And I don’t mean their them, but the capital Them – the dehumanized collective of ‘Suits,’ as They are referred to in some companies.”

Confused? Don’t be. They and Them simply constitute anyone who is not considered part of "We" or “Us.” Does that clear it up? In an organization, one of the typical “Us vs. Them” distinctions centers on the roles of leaders. Often, the language and feelings that characterize the distinction are not flattering. Employees need to feel that they are in reasonable control of their work lives. When this control is threatened or absent, it is natural to assume that leaders hold all the cards, make all of the decisions and are responsible for all organizational consequences, especially the bad ones. The rhetoric is unmistakable: 

• "They don’t have a clue about how hard we work.”
• "They could fix this problem if they really wanted to. We are not a priority for them.”
• “They are only concerned about their bonuses. They could care less about us peons.”
• “They have a plan; they just don’t want to share it with us.”

We all use this “Us vs. Them” convention. It’s a shorthand way of separating people into distinct groups or opposing sides. We use this shorthand because it seems to make our complicated world a little more manageable. We unconsciously feel that if we can just neatly define and categorize people we can maintain better control of our lives. It’s a no-brainer exercise – that is, we typically don’t bother to engage our brain. We quickly attribute intent by making general assumptions about the interests, motives, values, and character of others. Unfortunately, this can be an extremely dangerous practice when not accompanied by wisdom and a genuine regard for the differences in people and in the roles they play.

To help illustrate, my wife and I recently returned from a trip to New York City. We drove about 1,500 miles over the span of five days and were exposed to a lot of different people and behavior.The most interesting behavior I took note of occurred on the roadways. For those of you who hail from the south, you probably have some images coming to your mind right now. It would be easy for me to describe Them New Yorkers as a bunch of ill-mannered, short-tempered, impatient, self-centered, crude-talking, lane-changing maniacs. That’s the problem; it would be easy, but it would not be an accurate description of all New Yorkers. The fact is that New York City is a densely populated place where people are literally stacked on top of each other in high-rises. There is fierce competition for space. The highways and other means of transportation are glutted with people. In NYC, getting from Point A to Point B is measured in time, not distance. The system is completely overwhelmed and people try to cope with it as best they can. What I observed was probably not so much intentionally bad behavior as it was survival of the fittest. To be sure, there was some abhorrent behavior, but probably no more than in Raleigh-Durham, if computed on a per capita basis. After 24-hours, I even found myself adapting to the environment. I quickly learned that my best offensive and defensive weapons were the same – my gas pedal and my horn. I didn't really needbrakes or hand gestures, since both braking and one finger solutes could get you killed.

There is a lot that can be derived from a discussion about our penchant for using “They” and “Them” as a broad classification of people. Learning to understand, appreciate and value differences is certainly the first thing that comes to mind. We need to catch ourselves anytime that we are tempted to use our “no-brainer shorthand” to swiftly describe, explain or box-up people. Leaders need to set the example by constantly striving to become masters of communication, champions of diversity and promoters of life-long learning. Put these things together and you get open-mindedness and genuine curiosity – two qualities that serve to defy use of the Them label.

In organizations, leaders can also do much to avoid being classified and dismissed as part of Them. The most tried and true method is to get to know other people on a personal level. Again, this is where genuine curiosity comes in handy, mixed with a little personal warmth. While it is important to maintain some degree of "separation" between leaders and those being led, this separation should be confined to distinctions in authority, responsibilities and expectations. In order words, separation that is created for the sake of organizational propriety should not be exaggerated to the point that it creates relational distance.

The only way I know how to break down “Us-Them” barriers is through face time. Leaders have to get to know people and to let themselves be known as well. The moniker Them disappears when genuine relationships are formed. As for myself, I didn’t exactly get know any of the drivers I encountered on my trip to New York City, but I did begin the process of breaking down some of my mental barriers by engaging my brain and attempting to show a little understanding.