Tag: critics

Unhelpful people

Near the start of a book I found a curious entry among the ‘Acknowledgements’. Having named those to whom the author was grateful, he then writes: ‘On this particular volume I received no help from Josiah S. Carberry. For that too I am grateful.’

It’s a joke. Josiah S. Carberry is, in fact, a fictional character[1], the name standing for someone we might describe as a crackpot. The author I was reading, Joel Feinberg[2], is humorously saying that none of those who helped him were crazy.

However, I suspect many authors could identify people whose help would be thoroughly unhelpful. And most of us could list folk like that too.

I’ve been grateful for supportive, gifted, positive friends and colleagues, and I’ve valued their backing and input. But a few have been ‘Josiah S. Carberry’ types. Some have discouraged, some misguided, some wasted my time. They were unhelpful people.

By ‘unhelpful’ I don’t only mean ‘annoying’. We all encounter folk who annoy us:

Those who are repeatedly late. I recall someone calling such people ‘thieves’ because they stole everyone else’s time waiting for them.

Those who won’t switch off their phones during meetings (or on the golf course!). One speaker, at a very large conference, not only failed to switch off his phone, he took a call midway through his talk. That’s so bad.

Those who constantly try to impress with their successes. Their achievements usually aren’t special. Most of us have the good sense not to brag about ours.

Those who boast constantly about their children’s successes. That might be their youngsters’ progress at reading, or their older ones’ exam achievements, or their grown up kids’ careers.

Those who take 500 words to say what deserved only 50. Long-windedness is not a quality.

Taking a hint from that last sentence, I won’t list more ‘annoyances’. My point is that annoying people do no more than annoy; usually they don’t stop us doing what we need to do. But unhelpful people are a real hindrance.

I’ll describe some unhelpful people who’ve crossed my path, partly from my time as a pastor but also from when I was leading major organisations.

Those who are excessive time-consumers  Ann made an appointment to speak with me. “What’s on your mind?” I asked. “Well,” she said, “sometimes I’m just not very happy”. My inner reaction was that I wasn’t always happy either. But there might be something much deeper troubling Ann, so we talked. And another time we talked. And another time we talked. At no point did Ann describe anything as seriously wrong, other than that she wasn’t always happy. We talked about expectations, and I left things there.

Ann may have wanted to talk more. Perhaps she was lonely, and enjoyed conversation. But I couldn’t be her talk-buddy long-term. To give Ann more time would have been at the expense of other people and other tasks which were in greater need of that time. That would not be right.

Some people demand attention which takes more than our time. Gordon MacDonald describes Very Draining People – he calls them VDPs – who sap the passion of leaders. Their demands keep increasing, they take but don’t give, and leaders who indulge them pay a massive bill in inner exhaustion.[3]

People who consume an inordinate amount of our time are unhelpful.

Those in love with their own opinion  Martin accosted me. He wanted me to know that people were saying that in our church services we should return to singing traditional hymns, and have far fewer modern worship songs. I had learned to be suspicious when someone used the phrase ‘people are saying’, so I asked Martin “How many are saying that?” He answered: “Everyone I’ve spoken to”. Exactly, those he’d hand-picked to be on the receiving end of his opinion. In fact, I’d heard already that Martin was cornering certain church members, pushing his passion for traditional hymns on them, and when they nodded, he considered they agreed with him and added them to his list of ‘people are saying’. But some of them had told me what was happening, and that they didn’t agree with Martin. However, he was a forceful personality, a man who believed strongly in the rightness of his own ideas, so partly out of politeness and partly out of fear they had just nodded in order to get him to stop.

I saw the same happen with departmental heads who pushed for more funding or more prominence for their area of work, sometimes going direct to trustees to win their support. I saw it too with people who thought they knew exactly what was needed for our organisation to grow, then sowed their opinions among other staff members, but they had neither complete understanding of the facts nor the ability to bring growth about.

People in love with their own opinions are often unhelpful. 

Those who are perpetually negative  Faced with problems I’ve been reassured when someone says, “Don’t worry; every cloud has a silver lining”. I like that positivity, looking for how something bad might also turn into something good.

But Charlie never reassured me. He was near 100 per cent consistent in seeing only insurmountable problems. His gift for gloom and doom depressed everyone around him. One colleague summed up Charlie this way: “Charlie is convinced every silver lining has a cloud – and it’s a black cloud”.

The negative Charlies of this world don’t see themselves as difficult. They believe they’re helping by pointing out the hard challenges to which we have no answer. But that’s not helpful. It tempts people to give up without trying. The truth is that virtually every project has tough challenges, but often those challenges are resolved by moving forward carefully and constructively. When running a marathon, you feel pain – cramps, blisters, weariness – and finishing the race seems impossible, but careful self-management before or after that point can still get you over the finishing line. Problems are usually not reasons to give up.

Negative Charlies are unhelpful people.

Those who oppose  The Old Testament book of Nehemiah records the rebuilding of the wall of Jerusalem. Decades before, the Israelites had been transported from their own land and made slaves. While they were gone, Jerusalem fell into disrepair and was occupied by other peoples. But then Nehemiah, cup bearer to his overlord, King Artaxerxes, got permission to return with others to rebuild Jerusalem’s walls. He succeeded, and Nehemiah 12 describes a lavish dedication ceremony for the new walls.

However, what happened between permission to rebuild and celebrating the completed walls is far from a story of straightforward success. In places it reads like a thriller novel.

Right from the start the project was opposed by other tribes and peoples. As soon as Nehemiah returned to Jerusalem and surveyed the damage, Horonite and Ammonite officials spread stories that Nehemiah was rebelling against the king (chapter 2). Once work on the walls began, Samaritans – backed by a large army – ridiculed what he was doing. But Nehemiah and his fellow Jews kept building. So his opponents, who’d enlisted even more support, plotted to kill the wall builders. Nehemiah posted guards and later assigned half the men to work on the walls while the other half held weapons ready to defend them. Eventually the order became: ‘Work with one hand and hold your sword ready in the other’ (chapter 4).

Nehemiah’s enemies got more subtle. They invited him to a meeting. That sounded reasonable, even friendly, but what they intended was neither reasonable nor friendly. They wanted Nehemiah alone to murder him. He sent a reply that he was doing a great work, and had no time to meet with them. Frustrated, his foes spread more stories: ‘Nehemiah is leading a revolt, and he’s planning to install a king in Jerusalem’. It was a rumour of insurrection, which could get Nehemiah killed. But the work went on. His enemies decided enough was enough. They appointed assassins who would creep into the Jewish camp in the dead of night and dispose of Nehemiah for good. Nehemiah learned of the plot, but despite the intimidation and danger he would not be stopped, and the new wall was completed in a little over seven weeks (chapter 6).

Nehemiah’s opponents were clearly the worst of unhelpful people. Few of us work with constant life-ending threats from people who want us to fail.

But we do face challenges in ways like these:

Head on  We can experience direct opposition from senior colleagues. They may be honest – they disagree on some matter. But it’s awkward, unsettling and, even when we have the authority to press ahead anyway, their opposition leaves us distressed.

Non-cooperation  Management gurus describe the covert way staff can halt new initiatives – they simply don’t implement them. They like the culture they have, the ways of working with which they’re familiar, the colleagues they work beside, so they don’t make the changes they should.

Campaigns  Opponents seek support from others for their point of view. They enlist sympathisers, who in turn enrol more. It all builds until there are sufficient numbers to obstruct a policy change.

Leaders must listen when people hold alternative views. But often it’s right to press forward despite opposition. That’s part of the job.

Those you can never please  There’s a common saying: ‘You can’t please all the people all of the time’. I don’t agree. Here’s my saying: ‘You can’t please all the people any of the time’.

The culture in my Christian tradition is to find unanimity. “We can’t move forward until we all agree,” someone says. Now, if we’re talking about a group of less than six people, we might get total agreement, especially if the matter is a small one. But complete unity of heart and mind is rare with greater numbers and bigger issues.

In fact, a call for unanimity can be a stalling tactic. When change can’t happen until everyone agrees on every detail, at the least it’ll be a long way off or, very possibly, it will never happen. That’s an intolerable situation. It’s a case of the perfect being the enemy of the best.

Those who demand agreement from all are mostly unhelpful people.

Finally, three more – briefly!

Those who are all talk and no action  I’ve had colleagues and friends who argued powerfully for policies or positions, but did very little after getting those positions. Terry was keen to head up maintenance work, and great at listing repair and development tasks. But he didn’t do any of them, nor delegate the jobs to others. People complained about facilities not working. I encouraged Terry, and was assured matters were getting his attention. But they weren’t, and more and more people grumbled to me about uneven paths, broken equipment, peeling plaster, and much more. I went again to Terry, and was very straightforward that he wasn’t doing the job. “I guess I should resign then?” he asked. I didn’t talk him out of it. Soon after, we appointed Gary who boasted no special skills, but made sure every task brought to his attention was completed promptly. No more complaints.

Unhelpful people talk a good game, but have little to show for it.

Those who don’t keep their promises  Some failed promises are relatively minor: the student who didn’t read a set book before class; the fellow actor who didn’t learn their lines; the Board member who, before the meeting, didn’t even glance at the papers staff had slaved to prepare. Such things matter, but they’re not at the level of other forms of promise-breaking:

  • After a lengthy and expensive hiring process, Josh is offered the job and immediately accepts. One week later – after other candidates have all been told they are not being appointed – Josh sends a one sentence email saying he’s changed his mind and won’t be taking up the post.
  • After two years of marriage, Katy tells Bert she no longer loves him and she’s leaving. He pleads; others counsel; but Katy just keeps saying she doesn’t want this marriage any more.
  • Cedric has elevated himself above all his colleagues, and is rewarded with responsibility for the firm’s biggest client. There’s talk of massive amounts of new business. Cedric assures his CEO he’s working day and night on a business plan that will delight the client. The deadline agreed with the client is 20 days away. No plan yet from Cedric, but he guarantees his boss it’ll be ready in time. When it’s down to the last ten days and then five days Cedric promises he’s making the final edits. Deadline day arrives, but Cedric’s plan doesn’t. He’s been doing everything but the plan. The client is furious and withdraws all business from the firm.

I can understand that some people aren’t successful at a task they promised to do. But they tried. What I can’t understand is how people make promises – often solemn promises – and simply walk away from them. ‘Unhelpful’ is far too weak a word for them.

Those who criticise behind your back  It’s those last three words ‘behind your back’ that trouble me most. I have never minded when people raise concerns with me. We can talk, understand each other better, and often resolve issues. But if people have criticisms, and take their complaints straight to others, then two things are wrong: a) I’ve had no chance to resolve anything; b) those to whom they speak are being given only one side of a story. I wish the complainers would be asked by those they talk to: ‘Have you spoken with Alistair about this?’ and, when the answer is ‘no’, they then refused to hear any more until the grievances had been brought to me.

I do understand that people find it difficult to speak to someone in line management over them. Yet, it’s far from fair to go straight to others, without giving the subject of their complaints the chance to resolve a problem. Secret complainers are unhelpful.

Finally, then, how do you deal with unhelpful people?  I can’t give specific answers because each case is unique. However, I learned that the only way to deal with unhelpful people is by actually dealing with them.

What I mean is this. When we don’t face up to the unhelpful:

  • we let the negative person go on being negative
  • we try to sidestep the opponent
  • we tolerate the person who promises much but never delivers
  • we just wait for the critic to get fed up and shut up

But the problem with all these inaction strategies is that, almost always, the unhelpful person keeps on being unhelpful.

So, my policy has been to speak kindly but directly to those causing difficulty. That doesn’t guarantee success. Those who oppose your ideas won’t instantly change their minds. But they might tone down their efforts. And, with others, I’ve seen a realisation that they’re being difficult, and they appreciate the insight they’ve been given.

Take courage. Be gentle but speak honestly. Almost always the end result will be better than leaving unhelpful behaviour unchallenged.

[1] See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah_S._Carberry to fully understand the humour around this name.

[2] From Joel Feinberg, (1989) Harm to self, Oxford Press (p. xix).

[3] G. MacDonald, Renewing Your Spiritual Passion (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1986), pp. 69-88.

Unfair criticism

The conference speaker asked: ‘Why are the diaries, the personal calendars, of leaders so overcrowded?’ His answer: ‘When you’re constantly criticised, opposed or thwarted, the one thing that props up your self-esteem is your packed calendar because it proves you’re needed’. His message: we use busy-ness to counter criticism.

The pastor of a flourishing church told me people often talked about his harmonious, committed, and loving congregation, and how good it must be to lead that church. ‘If only that was true,’ he said with a wry smile. ‘The reality is that when a church is growing, there’s also a pastor who is hurting.’ In other words, his church wasn’t so ‘harmonious’ he didn’t have critics.

Criticism has been around for as long as people have been around. Probably one early cave dweller criticised the cooking smells from the neighbour’s cave. And the next door cave dweller criticised the rowdy children he heard squabbling through the stone wall. Criticism has always been a fact of life.

But if criticism is inevitable, there can be only one of three responses:

  1. Stop it. That’s a nice idea, and we may be able to silence specific criticisms or super-critical people. But new critics and criticisms will always emerge.
  2. Soften it. Maybe we can improve someone’s situation. Or we accept their comments and we change. But neither of those can happen when the criticism is unfair.
  3. Survive it. Usually all we can do is live with criticism. We can’t resolve every person’s issues, gripes, or preferences. We can’t satisfy everyone’s preferences or be the leader each critic would like us to be. Either we get out or we get on.

Many times I wanted to ‘get out’. I was the pastor of a lively and engaged congregation of people with great faith and gifts. They were good folk but with strong opinions about what the church should be doing. I encouraged them to share their ideas, and they didn’t hold back. ‘More evangelism’ ‘More social care in the community’ ‘More emphasis on young people’ ‘More attention on older people’ ‘More time for worship’ ‘Less time for sermons’ ‘More comfortable pews’ ‘Less money spent on the church building’. And the inevitable, ‘Better toilets’.

People had every right to express their ideas, grumbles and views. What I hadn’t expected was that they’d direct them all at me. They thought the senior pastor was responsible for everything, so they bombarded me with innumerable visions and grievances. They assumed their pastor would listen, agree, and bring about change. Well, I could listen, but I couldn’t always agree. Nor did I have the power to effect every change someone wanted. Some proposals were simply bad. Others could go ahead only by tearing up someone else’s wish list. So, not everyone got what they wanted and I got the blame.

That happens in every kind of organisation. A constant stream of disappointed or disapproving people guarantees a constant stream of criticism. It’s unfair to pile their angst and anger on leaders, but it happens. And it wears leaders down.

It wore me down. I remember joking that I knew work was going better when I considered resigning only three times a day. It used to be ten. Except that wasn’t really a joke. When your whole purpose is to serve people, it’s hard to listen to constant criticism and not be discouraged.

How did I deal with that? Honestly, not always very well. Somehow the weight of a criticism is heavier than the weight of a thank-you.

But Alison, my wife, would share wise words with me. ‘Remember,’ she’d say, ‘if you resign you don’t just leave your critics behind, you also leave the far greater number who deeply appreciate what you do and are helped by it’. Those words – spoken many times – kept me going.

Leaders can’t stop criticism happening. But criticism – especially unfair criticism – is survivable. Here are five measures that have helped me.

One  As well as assessing a criticism, consider who it’s coming from

I always thought carefully about a problem or criticism brought to me. Rejecting all complaints would imply the organisation was perfect and there couldn’t be any faults.

But I learned to think carefully about who was raising the complaint, and especially about ‘frequent flyer’ complainers.

I encountered at least five categories of constant complainers and critics.

  • Those who could never be pleased. Two church members lived together, and anytime I visited or met them they had fresh complaints about the direction the church was going and how I went about my ministry. They told me the church was at its best 55 years earlier which, it turned out, was when they joined. Changes since then were always bad.
  • Those who thought their way was the only right way. Some colleagues knew exactly how the organisation’s finances should be presented, or the publicity should be done, or which new staff positions should be created – which was remarkable since they had no qualifications in financial management, or marketing, or human resources. But lack of experience or credentials never hindered them. They believed passionately in their own opinions, and never hesitated to express them.
  • Those with a bottomless pit of opinions. Some people can think of ten ways to make a simple task complicated. They share every one of those ideas, causing confusion and slowing progress. These people aren’t arrogant or bad. It’s just that their inventive minds are in constant overdrive, and their barrage of suggestions creates cluttered thinking.
  • Those who think an opposing view should always be considered. The leaders meeting would reach a consensus, ready to vote, and then Martin would propose an alternative course of action. Martin would have said nothing earlier, but at the last moment present his different view. When working with volunteers, you can’t tell someone you won’t listen to their idea. So, back we’d go through the issue, reconsidering everything from Martin’s point of view. We’d finish back with the original proposal, I’d put it to the vote, and everyone would vote for it, including Martin. After the meeting I’d ask him why he’d brought out his alternative idea so late on, and why he’d then supported the initial proposal. His answer: ‘Well, I didn’t believe in the alternative, but I thought we should discuss it’. I kept my cool, but Martin continued making late interventions, which was infuriating for everyone. He and I talked. In Martin’s mind he wasn’t criticising, just ensuring a more complete discussion took place. I told him that was fine, but he must bring forward his ideas early on, and never right at the end. Mostly that worked.
  • Those with an insatiable need for attention. Some people need to be noticed, especially by the person ‘at the top’. And one way to get noticed is to criticise, especially if you do it in a large meeting because then everyone’s attention is on you. There are remedies for an attention-seeking child to ensure they get healthy attention. I have yet to find the complete remedy for an attention-seeking adult. But over the years I did get increasingly firm with people like that to stop them stealing time and support from people with far greater needs than theirs.

I haven’t tried to give quick-fix answers for these constant critics because there aren’t any. However, here are two suggestions:

Recognise what’s motivating them. For example, identify who can never be pleased, or who simply wants attention. Knowing why people criticise changes how you respond.

Don’t be overly gentle. In church life some people think they can criticise as harshly as they like, and the pastor and other leaders will simply absorb their rudeness. Leaders shouldn’t. Let’s be clear: unjust and harsh criticism is wrong. It’s a sin. Even done once, it’s bad. Done repeatedly, it’s unacceptable. Identify unfair criticism for what it is, and exercise discipline as appropriate in your circumstances.

Two  To cope with unfair criticism you need good friends

Strong leaders suffer two disadvantages when it comes to criticism. One is that critics assume they have to be extra forceful to ‘get through’. Unless their words are loud and harsh, they suppose leaders won’t listen. Second, critics often assume their verbal blows bounce off a strong leader, as if leaders are immune to hurt. We are not immune. Sometimes I wanted to shout ‘I bleed too!’ Unjust criticism hurts short-term and long-term.

So, how do we survive? My number one answer is that we need good friends. And they are of two types.

First, you need encouragers, people who’ll reassure you that you’re a good person doing good things, or that your faultfinder is a known critic of almost everyone and everything. Earlier, in the never pleased category, I mentioned two ‘always-critical’ church members. Their criticising was well known, including by Will. He was a delightful older church member who’d been a leader and confidant of every minister for 50 years. Will called me, named the two awkward people, and asked: ‘Are these two getting you down? Are they being difficult about your work as pastor?’ I told him I was okay, but certainly nothing I did seemed to please them. ‘Well, don’t be discouraged,’ Will said. ‘The pair of them have complained about every pastor the church has ever had. One of your predecessors told me he could wallpaper his rooms with their letters of criticism. They are the problem, not you.’ If Will hadn’t been on the phone I’d have hugged him. His concern for me meant a lot, and his ‘wallpaper’ comment has helped many times since. We need encouragers like Will.

Second, we need loving friends who are also honest friends. Friends like that care so much they won’t only tell you what you want to hear, they’ll also tell you what you don’t want to hear. But they do it lovingly. We don’t always say or do the right things. And we can be blind to our mistakes. So sometimes people are upset with us for legitimate reasons. We need a friend loving and honest enough to tell us we were wrong. And we’ll listen because the only motive that friend has is to help us. My loving and honest friends saved me many times. Sometimes I didn’t like what they said, perhaps even argued back, but in the end I had enough wisdom to listen, apologise and change.

Three  Accept that criticism goes with the territory

I used to dream of the day all problems were solved and all critics silenced, because then I could forge ahead with the real work. That day never came, and never could come. Why never? One reason is that problems, and critics, are part of the work. The second reason is that we deal with people. I’ve kept a quote by Anatole France[1] on my desk for many years. It begins ‘He who undertakes to guide men must never lose sight of the fact that they are malicious monkeys…’ There’s humour there, but France is actually making a serious point. The human race is made up of flawed people (including us), who, alongside many virtues, have weaknesses, vices, eccentricities and problems. So it was, and is, and forever shall be. Therefore there will always be criticism, including unfair criticism.

Four  Even unfair criticism comes from people with good hearts

How do we react to unfair criticism? Argue back? Get angry? Dislike our critic? Those reactions are common because our instinct is to defend ourselves. But that just hardens attitudes. A soft response is usually the better response. There’s wisdom in the biblical command to bless and not curse those who persecute you, and, as far as it depends on you, to live at peace with everyone.[2] Even if we can’t bless our critics, let’s respect them. Most critics are sincere people, perhaps misguided in what they say, but they’re not our enemy.

Five  Ultimately you are your own judge

Only you know whether a criticism is fair or unfair. And only you can decide how to react. We tend to one of two responses: a) reject the criticism; or b) condemn ourselves for our failings. Each of those can lack wisdom. Dismissing criticism is a protective, emotional reaction. It’s understandable but means we learn nothing from the experience. Self-condemnation is also understandable, but it often goes too far and lasts too long.

Instead, be your own judge and be a kind judge. You may decide there’s no truth in someone’s criticism, so don’t let their opinion hold you back. Or you may realise there is some truth in what’s been said. You got something wrong. So, learn and change, and don’t condemn yourself. Being at fault is not being a failure. After all, did you think you were perfect? Hopefully not. Now, by recognising and learning from your error, you can be a better person than before.

There is no route through life that avoids unfair criticism. It happens. But it’s not awful, and not a reason to give up. Plenty are grateful for what you do. Never forget that.

[1] French poet, journalist and novelist, winner of the 1921 Nobel prize in Literature. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatole_France

[2] Romans 12: 14, 18