Stop calling people toxic

Calling someone toxic is unproductive, and so is calling someone great. Don’t let your vocabulary undermine your power.

There are 3 levels of filler words — and all of them negate your power:

Category 1 fillers: Um/uhh/like/you know

It’s widely accepted that filler words make you less effective. The first category of filler words is um, uhhh, like, you know. The overuse of these words suggests an uncertainty in what you are communicating. They diminish your power and break the flow of your words, disrupting the focus of your listener. I recently talked about how I stopped using um through the painstaking process of editing my own podcasts, a tried-and-true technique for anyone who wants to kick the habit.

Category 2 fillers: Just/should

Less obvious are the words that make you less powerful: just/should. These words rob you of agency and offer your words as a suggestion rather than a directive, or position you as someone who kinda knows what they’re talking about—not an expert.

Category 3 filler: That’s interesting/she’s toxic/he’s great

Don’t tell people they are the best. Don’t tell people they are toxic. Both descriptions are emotions cloaked as feedback, but neither identifies a root cause or strength—nor do they highlight your ability to think strategically. Be specific.

Let’s dive into it.

Calling someone toxic focuses on the person, not the behavior

In the workplace, we often communicate to learn, teach, or influence. Personal attacks hinder any of the three goals, even with someone who isn’t a team player. Once we have addressed someone’s bad behavior, we either want to:

1. Learn why it is happening.

2. Teach better approaches.

3. Influence an alternative route for the person.

But when things get personal and someone becomes defensive, solutions become harder. Rather than saying, “Amir is toxic,” focus on Amir’s behavior:

• “Amir talks over me in meetings, and it is dismissive.”

If someone is toxic, was it a bad incident, an unproductive attitude, or a lack of accountability for the tools/knowledge/skills/discipline required for progress?

Calling someone toxic reduces accountability

Calling someone toxic reduces your accountability and theirs.

“Mona is toxic” or “Abdullah’s session was bad” does not communicate your ability to lead. Either description is lazy. Rather, think through the root of the issue:

• Mona did not take accountability for her missed deadline and showed up to the client meeting unprepared, reflecting poorly on our team.
• Abdullah’s session was frenzied and unclear; a goal and desired outcome could have prevented the team from checking out.

In both of these statements, a loose version of the STAR method is used (Situation, Task, Action, Result). The situation is described, followed by the action, and then the impact. Calling the sequence of events “bad” or “toxic” obscures valuable insights that could set you apart.

The inverse also holds true. When you say, “Mona is the best,” or “Abdullah’s session was good,” consider:

• Mona is reliable; I know I can trust her with deadlines.
• Abdullah has an ability to communicate with precision and concision, making his session a productive way to train our sales team.

Both of these statements align a team or conversation. Reliability is important. Training the sales team is a valuable use of time because they impact a higher goal.

Calling someone toxic muddies an issue that needs to be solved

Jumping to a catch-all term like “toxic” ignores the root cause of the problem and does not bring you closer to a solution. It avoids introspection. I have previously spoken about the difference between a complainer and a problem solver, and stopping at “toxic” when describing someone makes you a complainer, not a problem solver.

Why does language matter in relationships?

Precision aligns intentions. And alignment is crucial for leaders. Hard work without alignment is not effective.

You need to be able to solve problems, not emotions. Stick with the plan, not your emotions.

The more precise you are in your language, the faster you will develop trust. And trust is the foundation for influence. Influence is the foundation for leadership. Leadership is the foundation for power.

Are you toxic?

Chances are, you don’t know if others consider you toxic. Have you ever reflected and thought, “Man, I am super toxic”? Probably not. And sometimes, the behavior that earns you a label may not be justified. But people may consider you toxic if you:

• Aren’t straightforward, which leads to folks not knowing your opinion, and work through decisions behind closed doors. In reality, you may be shy or feel like you aren’t powerful, but it may be received as manipulation.
• Are negative/critical. Many negative people are unaware that they are much more negative than those around them. This is hard to assess, but it generates discomfort quickly.
• Lack empathy. Many unempathetic people may not pick up on it. I am often transactional and can be perceived as not empathetic. It’s something to know and work through.
• Are verbally abrasive/foul. Like negative people, folks who are verbally abrasive may consider their communication style as personal.
• Consider yourself before the greater needs of the company. Read last week’s piece on being a hero. Heroes can be toxic in this way.
• Escalate conflict/emotions.
• Cross boundaries in communication or time that people are not comfortable with.

It’s hard to determine which criticisms are valid and which are not. It could be helpful to ask for feedback proactively and take responsibility when it is due.

Here is a visual recap, lmk what you think.

Subscribe for weekly posts

Connect with me

• Are you new here? Subscribe for free
• Follow me on LinkedIn for more professional posts
• Follow me on IG for insights on how to step into leadership