L ife can be pretty frustrating when it fails to deliver what we think it should. When our new computer software doesn’t work quite the way it was supposed to, when the waiter brings our sandwich with mayonnaise when we asked for mustard, or when the new phone service doesn’t completely deliver what we thought it promised, we may feel it is time to fight for “what we deserve!” The personal loss or the inconvenience may be relatively minor but “it’s the principle of the thing!” Inevitably, though, there is cost in terms of time, effort, and unhealthy stress from waging the battle.
At these times it’s a good idea to ask the wise question “do I want to be right or to be happy?” Sometimes being right is worth the fight—if you’re allergic to the mayonnaise you need to send the sandwich back, even if it temporarily puts a damper on the lunch atmosphere for your party. Standing up for what you think is right may provide a significant opportunity to share perspectives, learn, and come to a win/win solution that benefits all involved. But often, if you’re honest with yourself, you will be happier and healthier if you simply make the best of the situation. Sometimes accepting a failure to get what we feel we rightfully deserve in specific circumstances can help us live more successfully overall.
Imagine the following situation involving two peers who work together. Katlyn has a significant difference of opinion with Melissa about how department meetings should be handled. Melissa prefers that a specific agenda be established ahead of time and one person be designated timekeeper to monitor progress to assure that each meeting adheres to a preset schedule. Katlyn prefers a more relaxed approach that relies on a loose agenda but allows for meetings to drift to different topics as interest and insights arise from the group and for the time allotted to each issue to naturally adjust as the meeting unfolds.
Recently, meetings have been conducted based on the model Melissa supports, but on this particular day Katlyn decided to raise the issue with her privately. Melissa’s response was immediate and strong, “If we try your approach, we’ll never get anything done and our meetings will last forever. I’m sorry, Katlyn, but I just think it’s a very bad idea.”
Katlyn made a quick assessment of the situation. She realized that Melissa had a great deal of passion about this issue since she had spent a lot of time and effort in researching the literature on effective meetings and designed the current format being used in the department. Katlyn also recognized that Melissa was a good colleague who worked hard and was usually very supportive of others. She also did feel that department meetings were generally effective.
Her biggest concern was that the emphasis on meeting structure tended to discourage creativity and innovation. But she also recognized that many impromptu meetings sprang up all the time that resulted in creative and innovative efforts. Rationally she concluded that letting Melissa be “right” this time and retaining the current meeting approach was not really that much of a problem. In fact, it was probably helpful in many ways. After all, they had a pretty demanding workload and efficient meetings helped free up time to keep up with the demands.
Nevertheless, Melissa’s direct criticism was quite ego bruising and stirred up hurt and angry feelings in Katlyn. And Katlyn, despite being a generally cooperative person open to different ideas, also felt she had a good sense of how people worked well together and she usually wasn’t shy about asserting her opinion. Also, she did feel she was right about her viewpoint in this case.
Ultimately, she decided that confronting Melissa further would only encourage a battle of egos that could cause tension between them for days. She still felt her position was right, but once she got beyond her ego she recognized that Melissa was right too. In the end she decided to drop the issue.
In this case trying to convince Melissa that she was “right” just wasn’t worth the cost. Nor did she believe the additional learning that might result from further discussion of the issue would compensate for the relationship difficulties it would stir up. Many other issues represented better opportunities to assert herself with greater potential benefits.
These kinds of situations provide us with valuable occasions to accept that the world and the imperfect people in it often don’t fit neatly with our preferences but that we can positively deal with this reality. After all, what good is it to prove yourself right and to succeed at getting “what you deserve” if it only makes you unhappy? Make a commitment to yourself to choose being happy often, even when you have to forgo “being right.” When you realize how much frustration and stress it eliminates, you will in fact find that it is the right thing to do.
When you find yourself in a battle of egos, learn to ask:“Do I want to be happy or to be right?”
🚣🚣🚣🚣🚣🚣🚣🚣🚣🕓🕓🕓
