Redefining Respect for People: Disagree to Agree

Almost any discussion in the Lean community eventually leads to the important concept of Respect for People. I discuss the importance of it with my trainees frequently when coaching, no matter what industry they are in. It is an essential element for developing and sustaining organizational transformation as illustrated by the “TPS House”. Some people try to define it in short, simplistic slogans, while others avoid the subject by saying that each person develops their own definition of respect. Respect is a big word. Like any big word, it opens up a lot of room for interpretation. While most people in leadership positions agree that Respect for People is important, most have a hard time defining what “respect” really means. If you really believe that respect is important, this is a big problem. In order to show respect, you must be able to define it. If you can’t define it, your attempts at showing respect will come across as insincere, or worse, disrespectful. While it may not be possible to create a simple universal definition of respect, we must try to define at least a few specific characteristics that contribute to creating a respectful culture for leaders, employees, customers and all other stakeholders.

Respect for People is the foundation and needs to be defined. 

Respect is a buzzword right now, but it has always been a topic of debate in cultures around the world. With any social topic, we must acknowledge the influences that structure our beliefs. For that reason, I’m going to start with a bit of history, and use this as a springboard to discuss my definition of respect. In Japanese culture, “Wa”(Harmony) is an important concept, yet even in Japan, we don’t always think deeply about what it really means. The concept of Wa was defined in The Constitution of Prince Shotoku in the year 604 AD. It was written for feudal leaders to help them overcome their egos. The constitution showed them how to move past political bickering in order to ensure that the people they served remained engaged and honest as well. To put this into perspective, Prince Shotoku was featured on Japan’s 10,000 yen note for many years, so you can think of him as Japan’s Benjamin Franklin (10,000 yen is roughly 100 US dollars). Like any 7th century document, many of the concepts as well as the language in Shotoku’s constitution might turn off the modern reader. Talk of superiors, inferiors, sovereigns, and vassals paints a picture of a society much different than what most of us are accustomed too. But this makes the pieces that are still relevant of great value. Longevity lends credibility. Such is the case with Prince Shotoku’s definition of Harmony, and I think this is helpful in understanding what respect for people really means.

Prince Shotoku teaching the lesson of harmony to his feudal lords

The first article of Shotoku’s Constitution states, “Harmony should be valued and quarrels avoided. Everyone has his biases, and few men are far sighted.”  This is close to how we view Harmony in contemporary Japanese society. We believe that we should be humble, and many Japanese people today think this means avoiding conflict. However, I don't think this fully explains what Shotoku was trying to say, nor does it give any definition of respect that can be put into action. From here the article goes into some dated language, but if we translate it into a modern context, it still has relevance. Shotoku says, “Therefore some disobey their lords and fathers and keep up feuds with their neighbors. But when superiors are in harmony with each other and inferiors are friendly, then affairs are discussed quietly and the right view of matters prevails.” If you can look past the classism and patriarchy for a moment, in a modern context this might mean, “When people at all levels of a hierarchy set aside their egos, they can debate their opposing views in open minded humility, and they will collectively discover solutions to problems.” In other words, when leaders are acting based on what is best for the community they serve, rather than promoting their personal agendas, people will see that and start communicating the truth. This will lead them to the best conclusion for the nation (organization). Also of importance is a passage in article 6, which states, “Do not hide the good qualities of others or fail to correct what is wrong when you see it.” I think this is what respect for people is all about: being honest with people in order to help them develop. To do this harmoniously requires humility on both sides. Do the right thing by removing your personal biases and agendas to do what is best for others and society. This is the only way for everyone to become empowered to improve.

Far too often, we look at empowerment as something that is passed down. We say, “As a leader, you must empower your team.” Isn’t this a little bit condescending? Ironically, if your team needs you to endow them with power, they are actually more dependent. The trick to empowering your team is not just about building them up; it requires you, as a leader, to humble yourself. When people have a disagreement, each naturally assumes that his or her point of view is correct. Logically, we know that we might be wrong, but emotionally and subconsciously we don't. This needn’t disrupt harmony, nor should it hold back constructive criticism. When people believe they are correct, they naturally want to convince others. If we “agree to disagree” we cannot discover the truth of the situation. Instead, we need to “disagree to agree.” Consensus can only be reached when all parties are willing to put their ideas to the test. Only then, can we discover the best solution. Respect is about defending your ideas, but it is also about being able to admit when you’ve made a mistake. There is no shame in being wrong sometimes. Therefore, pointing out when someone else is wrong is not disrespectful. In the right context, it is the most respectful thing you can do.

 The difference here is between short-term goals, and long-term goals. As Shotoku said, “few men are far sighted.” Avoiding conflict can seem like the respectful thing to do in the short term, but if this means missing an opportunity to help people develop themselves, it is hardly respectful at all. Let’s say you notice that a colleague keeps a frequently used tool in a hard to reach location. In the moment, it might seem respectful to let him do this his own way. He thinks he’s doing a great job, and telling him otherwise might make him defensive and angry. It is in your personal best interest to be liked by your colleague, so it is tempting to keep your observations to yourself. However, this is highly disrespectful in the long run, both to your colleague and the organization as a whole. What if, later on, your colleague struggles to keep up with demand? What if he injures himself while in a rush to grab the tool from its awkward location? If you truly respect and care for the wellbeing of your colleague and your organization, it is better to point out problems, even if this temporarily disrupts harmony. You can also look at this from the other side: When someone comes to you with criticism, it is not necessarily a sign of disrespect. Instead, criticism can be a way to show people that you are putting the long-term needs of everyone before your own short-term needs. In this way, constructive criticism is a way for both sides to admit that the collective needs of the organization are what matters, regardless of who is right and who is wrong in a given moment. Both sides have to admit that they are not perfect in order to prove that they care. I think this is the ultimate way to show respect. Of course there are other ways as well. People have been trying to define respect for the entire history of civilization. It cannot fit into one article, one book, or the entire Internet for that matter. But, that doesn’t mean we should avoid the topic. It is all the more reason to express our viewpoints and quantify what we can of this very complicated subject.

Therefore, here is my definition of respect: “To do what is right for the wellbeing of those who depend on you in the long run, even if this causes mutual discomfort or conflict in the present moment.” Your definition of respect might be different, but it is important for leaders to passionately and persistently communicate their visions and dreams until people understand their true intent and share the same ultimate goals. Once we achieve this unified mindset, and show respect, we will soon understand that all the discomfort, resentment, and politics are irrelevant. I believe that this definition can help people, so it would not be very respectful for me to keep it to myself. This might be in conflict with other people’s views, but the short-term disagreement for us as individuals is worth it if it leads to dialog and helps further refine how we practice Respect for People.

by Jun Nakamuro (profile)