In many workplaces today, and especially on LinkedIn, the word narcissist gets tossed around like confetti. It seems that everyone has an opinion on fellow team members' mental health now. A teammate pushes back on an idea? “Classic narcissist.” A manager insists on a deadline? “Total narcissist.” Most of these snap judgements aren’t clinical insight, they’re armchair diagnoses. And once that label is out there, the conversation stops being about what actually happened. It becomes personal, polarizing, and unfair, playing the man and not the ball.
When “Practical” Advice Isn’t So Practical After All
My response to Adam’s post: “With regards feedback Grant, I believe there is either fairly delivered feedback or unfairly delivered feedback. I will accept the content of fairly delivered feedback even if I disagree with the content. I will object, however, to unfairly delivered feedback, no matter if I agree with the content or not. Feedback can be split into two parts, in my book: the content and the delivery. Personally, I think the delivery of feedback is more telling and interesting than the content.”
Conflict Resolution Vs Dynamic Collaboration
Picture two work colleagues locked in a simmering disagreement. Their spat drags on for weeks, finally reaching HR and senior management. Meetings are scheduled, statements are taken, emotions harden. By the time the official “resolution” arrives, the energy that once drove their work is long gone, trust has eroded, and collaboration has been compromised.
Helping Turn Team Spats into Dynamic Collaboration On-the-Fly
Imagine there was a clear, visible rule of engagement in every adult team conversation: if someone spoke up “too often” or said the “wrong” thing, anyone and everyone could issue a simple verbal caution in real-time....
Steve Jobs and the Cost of Dogma
Steve Jobs was brilliant. Few would deny that. His vision reshaped entire industries, and his insistence on excellence pushed teams to do what seemed impossible. But brilliance came at a cost. Jobs’s emotional dogma, his relentless belief that he was right, meant he burned the candle at both ends....
Free Speech vs Psychological Safety: What Really Protects People?
Psychological safety: Has been talked about since the 1965 by Schein and Bennis, which included "an atmosphere where one can take chances (which experimentalism implies) without fear and with sufficient protection." in its definition and later popularized (and diluted in my opinion) by Amy Edmondson.
Why Do Workplace Teams Need to Resolve Their Minor Spats?
In creative and collaborative teams, disagreements are inevitable. But what turns a team that falters into one that flourishes isn’t if minor conflicts happen, it’s how those “micro-conflicts” are handled....
Every Workplace Conflict Started Out as a Minor Spat
Serious workplace conflicts rarely, if every appear out of nowhere. The shouting match in the boardroom, the feud between departments, the HR complaints about “toxic culture”, they didn’t just happen. They all began as something much smaller: a raised eyebrow, an offhand remark, a piece of feedback delivered poorly, or a single unfair or minor disrespectful infringement. In other words, a minor spat.
Respect Is Like Air — Accountability Keeps It Flowing
Imagine scrolling LinkedIn and reading just about any post on teamwork. Chances are, it’s about the need for a “respectful culture,” “psychological safety,” and “nurturing it” as an imperative. But really, who doesn’t already believe that respect and feeling psychologically safe are essential? No one, I’d say.
Objective Reality vs Objectionable Behavior
Philosophers have chased the holy grail of objective reality for centuries. Some treat it as the ultimate goal truth independent of any mind, pure and eternal. Others dismiss it as a mirage, forever out of reach. And a third way sees its value not in capturing “the truth” outright, but in continually reducing what is objectionable, the claims, dogmas, and illusions that collapse under scrutiny.
Object123 