Why assuming positive intent can only benefit you

Indra Nooyi is one of the most inspirational CEOs of the 21st century and probably the most vocal champion of the notion of assuming positive intent, saying: “Whatever anybody says or does, assume positive intent. You will be amazed at how your whole approach to a person or problem becomes very different”.

In philosophy, the principle of charity has long been emphasized as the need to interpret others’ statements in the most rational way possible and seek the strongest interpretation. A cruder aphorism known as Hanlon’s Razor says never to attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity. Replace stupidity with many less disdainful nouns (anxiety, confusion, busyness etc.)

This advice is difficult to heed when we are even slightly distrustful and, in most environments our customary mode is more than slightly distrustful. We live in a world of intensifying identity politics and growing tribalism in which it’s increasingly difficult not to take sides or switch the focus from what we believe is right to what is wrong in opposing views. Technology has totally altered the way we communicate with each other and many people have lost the skill of communicating well, or at least politely and considerately. Interactions are more assertive and impatient because we are all bombarded by messages and micro tasks and defer on anything which doesn’t release immediate dopamine. Civility is just too time consuming. 

On the receiving side, our instincts (or what Daniel Kahneman and other behavioural psychologists refer to as “system one”) easily mislead us to attribute negative (and even hostile) intentions to the statements and actions of others (also referred to in behavioural psychology as Hostile Attribution Bias). Our pride kicks in. Where we interpret aggression, we may reciprocate in kind and a vicious cycle will ensue. Some of us prefer to avoid conflict but in escaping it we end up feeling resentful or helpless.

When talking about assuming positive intent, perhaps the most important item is therefore the avoidance of negative assumptions, which require us to slow down, activate “system two” and remind ourselves how often such negative assumptions are wrong. Sheila Heen is one of the leaders of the Harvard Negotiation Project, and a renowned expert on conflict mediation and co-author of Difficult Conversations. In a recent podcast by Adam Grant, she suggested to replace assuming positive intent with something which is perhaps easier to follow – assuming you don’t know.

Here is a simple exercise. Adam calls Noah to ask for a favour. On his way, if time permits, can he make a small detour and pick up something for him. Noah seems to accept, and some short time later Adam hears him park his car and he is walking towards him empty handed.

Now let’s compare two scenarios. In the first Noah is Adam’s boss and what he asked him to pick up is work related and the setting is in the office – and it’s just 1 minute before a morning standing meeting. In the second, Noah is Adam’s best friend of many years, the favour is personal, and the setting is social.

How likely is Adam to assume positive intent in each scenario? Rather obvious, right? Trust and intimacy make it easy to assume positive intent, and assuming positive intent helps to build trust.

In the professional scenario what assumption is Adam most likely to make? That Noah never intended to help him or that there was too much traffic or that something distracted Noah, and he left the item in the car? And how about Noah’s state of mind - that he is irritated that Adam dared to ask or that he is sorry that he couldn’t help or that he might be too engrossed with some other work thoughts?

Because so much of our communication is non-verbal (it’s been claimed by some controversial calculation that it is as much as 93% of communication), the seemingly passive act of making quick assumptions may have an enduring effect on their relationship – Adam’s initial motions, Noah’s interpretations of them and his further mirroring and so on.

From a game theorist point of view, assuming positive intent is certain to lead to a better outcome. Even when wrong, i.e., even if the most negative sentiment is true and Noah did not want to help and was indeed irritated by the request, Noah may be further defensive or upset if he interprets criticism in Adam’s welcome. Wrongly assuming positive intent and providing a warm welcome may disarm and improve their relationship or it will just make no difference.

Assuming you don’t know is almost as good as assuming positive and could also thwart unwanted conflict or other forms of awkwardness.          

***********************

In our everyday interactions, there are countless opportunities to apply a more charitable interpretation of behaviours around us. We need to activate “system two” and retrain “system one” to succeed in that. While evolution probably had good reasons to reward our susceptibilities in this area, most of these reasons aren’t relevant in the modern world and our tendency to make negative assumptions is particularly harmful in the digital age when much of this is happening simply by misreading written messages which are rarely carefully crafted.

The more we stop to ask and listen to why he or she said or acted in a way that instinctively offended us, the faster we stop being offended altogether. We can be better team members and better leaders and boost our overall happiness.