Why is showing false kindness so draining?

[uuu]

At work, I sometimes have to exchange pleasantries with people who I don't really like, e.g. because they are bad at their job in a way that makes mine more difficult or because they ask too many uncomfortable questions about my personal life.

I have learned to handle these interactions by saying a few canned kind phrases and ending the conversation. But I realized that showing this kind of false empathy is really draining. Do you have any thoughts on why this is?

It isn't difficult for me to smile and say "That's so exciting!" when someone I like shares good news. But the same exact gesture and phrase is exhausting when I don't really care for the person.

Sometimes I wish I could just sort of disassociate and play these "programmed" nice scripts without attending to the emotional authenticity aspect.

 

[TomasM]

I've had the same problem at various times across the course of my career and can honestly say I've shared your feelings about these types of scenarios. I mean there are good reasons for not liking someone and intuition tells us that associating with some people can produce outcomes that are detrimental to our own efforts and existence.

With that in mind, over time I have found that if I don't like someone then there is likely a reason for not liking that person. This generally leads me to ask myself if I don't like them because of some unconscious struggle (from childhood or another bad experience) I have within myself. After a good bit of soul searching, while also reflecting on why that person was selected for their role within the organization, I often find that I do have some hang-up AND that they do have value. This exercise has helped me find some of the best synergies with coworkers and even establish some good friends. Even in the situations where I find that the person is truly abhorrent and has almost no value to me or the organization, I have found that:

I learn something about myself that I needed to learn.
Other people in the organization recognized that I could be a team player even when it involves difficult situations.
I found ways that I could protect myself and the organization from a bad outcome. These are good life lessons.

The bottom line is that work is about work, and the success of the organization depends on the harmony of those within the organization. So, I harmonize and try to make a positive outcome out of a difficult situation.

 

[Wyote]

I like what you're sayin @TomasM but also it doesn't answer the specific question about why false kindness/empathy is draining.

But I also think it's kind of an obvious answer.
Being in alignment with your true self is going to be the least taxing way to function.
So when we have to deviate from that in some way, even minor ones, it will disrupt our own flow.
It just comes down to how you perceive/value your coworkers and how committed you are to being authentic.
Like @TomasM outlined, there are some decent strategies for bringing those two things into alignment.
Sometimes it works out, sometimes you have to learn to adapt.

 

[TomasM]

I like what you're sayin @TomasM but also it doesn't answer the specific question about why false kindness/empathy is draining.

But I also think it's kind of an obvious answer.
Being in alignment with your true self is going to be the least taxing way to function.
So when we have to deviate from that in some way, even minor ones, it will disrupt our own flow.
It just comes down to how you perceive/value your coworkers and how committed you are to being authentic.
Like @TomasM outlined, there are some decent strategies for bringing those two things into alignment.
Sometimes it works out, sometimes you have to learn to adapt.

I started the conversation with the reason why but I didn't complete the thought by tying everything together. If there is an unconscious hang-up then it will exhaust and trying to be kind or empathetic without doing the other things I mentioned (at work) could very easily make this dis-ease increasingly uncomfortable. I'm not suggesting this is the only approach, only what has worked for me over time.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention and affording me the opportunity to be more clear in my communication.

 

[Wyote]

I started the conversation with the reason why but I didn't complete the thought by tying everything together

Classic INFJ move, though we enjoy tying things together.
Doesn't always happen in convos rofl.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention and affording me the opportunity to be more clear in my communication.

Didn't mean to call you out exactly, just figured you'd have very good input on it, which you did
Increasing discomfort is also a good consideration.

 

[aeon]

What @Wyote said.

It takes a tremendous amount of energy to create a purposeful state of ego dystonia, which is what is required in order to engage with others from a place of inauthenticity.

Sustained ego dystonia preceding integration of the self as part of healing and growth is tremendously taxing, and often presents as depression, anxiety, and numbing/oblivion escapist behaviors.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[Wyote]

ego dystonia

Thanks for the term, and also it made me think about how today's zeitgeist is largely leaning in the direction of
accepting and even promoting ego dystonia.
Wild times.

Egosyntonic and egodystonic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[TomasM]

Thanks for the term, and also it made me think about how today's zeitgeist is largely leaning in the direction of
accepting and even promoting ego dystonia.
Wild times.

Egosyntonic and egodystonic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I had to look at the Wikipedia page because, like so many times, @aeon 's vocabulary was ahead of me. After reading the first paragraph it reminded me of Freud - and then there was a paragraph on the "Freudian heritage." It also reminded me of a picture that is common to this Freudian concept.



It does seem like the zeitgeist is leaning more towards one side of this conflict over the last decade, BUT with every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Watch out for the zeitgeist whiplash everyone.

 

[Wyote]

Watch out for the zeitgeist whiplash everyone.

 

[Roses In The Vineyard]

Yeah crap like this has had me wanting to uninstall from the human experience more than I would like to admit and having to deal with society these days doesn't make it easy. This world is made for those who don't think and even more so for those who don't feel.

 

[TomasM]

This world is made for those who don't think and even more so for those who don't feel.

I completely agree and disagree with this statement simultaneously. The world rewards those that think and / or feel as the world demands. It also rejects and sometimes punishes those that think and feel things that are counter to those demands.

As INFJ's we don't think or feel in a way that is aligned with the world, but often step outside of that fishbowl and recognize why things are happening. This can put us in a position of being rejected by "the world;" however, I have noticed when people reach their breaking point(s) they often value and elevate us to high status. Life isn't fair and that's why the island of misfit toys is a beautiful place.

I feel your pain and can relate.

 

[uuu]

After a good bit of soul searching, while also reflecting on why that person was selected for their role within the organization, I often find that I do have some hang-up AND that they do have value.

I think you and I are in different places in our journeys.

Historically, my problem has been that in every uncomfortable interaction, I tried too hard to see the good in the other, and blamed too much of the discomfort on myself (e.g. that I was too judgmental or prideful). This is a habit I picked up in the evangelical church that has gotten me in a lot of trouble where I failed to set boundaries with someone who truly did not have my best interests at heart, or even convinced myself that I should spent more time with them as a way to learn to see their value. In the past few years, I've been on a journey of learning to open up more slowly and recognize when someone isn't worthy of my trust.

But these judgments of character aren't really the problem I was thinking about in the original post. In the interaction I had today that sparked the post, I have never thought that the guy I was talking to doesn't have value or worth as a person. He's merely a "difficult colleague" who enthusiastically volunteers for tasks that he lacks the skills to complete, and I have seen him rotate from team to team by selling managers on his enthusiasm and then ultimately disappointing them when given a concrete assignment.

He often wants to chit-chat with me about ongoing projects and angle for new opportunities, and I have to shut him down politely. I find it very taxing to do this because although I do not have the bandwidth to support him in his professional objectives, he is basically a nice guy.

I think the "egodystonic" phrase is a good description of what I'm dealing with. I would like to see myself as a well-intentioned, helpful, and approachable person, and in general, I think I live up to this. But I have a limited number of hours in the day, and in a professional context, if I am going to mentor or manage someone, I have to give preference to those who actually have the motivation and ability to earn something from the mentorship.

 

[TomasM]

different places in our journeys

Probably, most people are.

when I don't really care for the person.

"difficult colleague"

ultimately disappointing

AND

basically a nice guy.

I'm hearing mixed signals. If you don't care for him, he's a difficult colleague, and ultimately disappointing, then why engage with him? It sounds like you are in an elevated position within the organization such that you would be a mentor or superior, so why would he have a need to engage you constantly?

It sounds like he's trying to get information from you about projects and the way you explain it, it doesn't seem like a good intention. This is especially true when you have to, "shut him down politely."

What makes him a nice guy?

It isn't difficult for me to smile and say "That's so exciting!" when someone I like shares good news. But the same exact gesture and phrase is exhausting when I don't really care for the person.

It sounds like you have no problem with the kindness towards some people but this specific person has you quite irritated even though he's, "basically a nice guy?" I ask because some of these statements are conflicting and make it difficult to respond effectively.

Do you only have an issue with this guy making you feel drained [when exhibiting kindness] or do you feel like this regularly with many people in your office?

 

[John K]

I think you and I are in different places in our journeys.

Historically, my problem has been that in every uncomfortable interaction, I tried too hard to see the good in the other, and blamed too much of the discomfort on myself (e.g. that I was too judgmental or prideful). This is a habit I picked up in the evangelical church that has gotten me in a lot of trouble where I failed to set boundaries with someone who truly did not have my best interests at heart, or even convinced myself that I should spent more time with them as a way to learn to see their value. In the past few years, I've been on a journey of learning to open up more slowly and recognize when someone isn't worthy of my trust.

But these judgments of character aren't really the problem I was thinking about in the original post. In the interaction I had today that sparked the post, I have never thought that the guy I was talking to doesn't have value or worth as a person. He's merely a "difficult colleague" who enthusiastically volunteers for tasks that he lacks the skills to complete, and I have seen him rotate from team to team by selling managers on his enthusiasm and then ultimately disappointing them when given a concrete assignment.

He often wants to chit-chat with me about ongoing projects and angle for new opportunities, and I have to shut him down politely. I find it very taxing to do this because although I do not have the bandwidth to support him in his professional objectives, he is basically a nice guy.

I think the "egodystonic" phrase is a good description of what I'm dealing with. I would like to see myself as a well-intentioned, helpful, and approachable person, and in general, I think I live up to this. But I have a limited number of hours in the day, and in a professional context, if I am going to mentor or manage someone, I have to give preference to those who actually have the motivation and ability to earn something from the mentorship.

I wonder if this is the same sort of problem that I used to have sometimes as a manager - in MBTI terms it was a conflict between Ni and Fe. On the one hand you want to be ok with the other person because they are ok socially - on the other hand it’s dead obvious to us that they have a false vision of themselves which acts as their compass all the time and drives them in the wrong direction.

It’s a tricky one for us INFJ types because our instincts are to be affirmative in public with individuals. A risk for us is that the type of person I’m thinking of treats this as support for their false beliefs and we become part of them. It’s like we can to our surprise get caught up into romantic relationships without intending to because sone people interpret our empathy in a way we never intended. But this happens with all sorts of other relationships too.

At its worst these folks become parasitic on us and drain us of energy. I’m afraid the solutions need more of our nervous energy up front in order to reduce it in the future. One solution is the classic avoidance / door slam of course, but that may not be a healthy way forward in many cases and isn’t always possible in the workplace. A better way forward is to put the relationship on a more ‘honest’ footing - one that reconciles your Ni with your Fe. That means exposing the other person assertively to what you really think about them in a given context.

There are types who can do this almost without blinking - my INTJ partner has no qualms about it for example. She’s very ethical about how she does it but couldn’t care less about upsetting someone if she finds it necessary. We aren’t like that, but Fe isn’t just there to be nice to others. For example, it’s invaluable in the hands of a good parent or teacher in helping kids develop their characters, even when this can be uncomfortable. A great gift of INFJs is an ability to do this in the gentlest way possible while still being effective.

Now this takes more energy up front than just going with the flow, but it brings you into a greater inner harmony, avoids a relationship with a colleague based on their false self-image and saves energy in the long run.

One other angle to explore is what the other person’s type might be. If they are of a type that clashes with yours you may well drain each other of energy. For example, it’s quite hard for S types and Fi users to relate to Ni, and Fe and Te can be hard to reconcile. You may find your inner chameleon trying to mimic these functions when interacting with colleagues.

 

[Asa]

Instead of attaching empathy, just maintain a polite demeanor. Being polite is about your own integrity and you're not obligated to emotionally engage.

Try not to use open-ended phrasing when you reply, too, so you can keep conversations short. You don't have to extend your empathy when you say things like, "That sounds exciting for you!" I mean, it does sound exciting for them...you're not involved. "That sounds exciting for you. Congrats. Have a good morning." <Exit scene. Byeeeee.)

Unfortunately, work relationships can be draining and there is no way to win without staying cordial and polite. If you plan to work in the same industry for a long time, it pays off to be polite to everyone because you never know who will hold the key to an opportunity. If they think of you as impolite, it will hurt your chances.

 

[uuu]

I'm hearing mixed signals. If you don't care for him, he's a difficult colleague, and ultimately disappointing, then why engage with him? It sounds like you are in an elevated position within the organization such that you would be a mentor or superior, so why would he have a need to engage you constantly?

What makes him a nice guy?

I don't see the inconsistency in my description of him—surely you agree that being a good or nice person is not the same as being smart or good at business. Basically, he is a kind and sociable person, he just lacks the skills to do his job, and is in denial about this and often volunteers for tasks that I (now) know he will never complete.

What @John K resonates. The guy makes me uncomfortable specifically because our informal workplace culture requires me to "evaluate" everyone on at least two rubrics: First, is this person a nice person who I would like to spend my day working with, who brings positive energy into the room, who isn't an asshole? And second, is this person capable of completing the sorts of technical tasks that I need them to do? For many of the people I work with, the answer is "yes" on both rubrics, but this guy is a strong "yes" on the first and "no" on the second, and that creates a difficult ambiguity in how much respect/kindness I owe him and in what contexts (e.g. small talk vs. him angling for a project).

Technically, I am slightly superior to this guy in the organizational hierarchy and served as his informal manager, but the distance is slight enough that there could (hypothetically) be another project where he takes more of the lead and I have a more supporting role. However, I think that our shared manager is aware of his deficits and wouldn't assign him to such a role anytime soon.

Being polite is about your own integrity

Thank you, this helps. I think I can make more of a game of it if I think of it this way.

Today, I was giving a presentation and one of the academic types in the audience tried to pin me down on a difficult methodological point, but her question had a false premise that was difficult to correct gently, so I had to sort of just acknowledge her question and move on rather than "defend" my approach. I am worried this will become one of those "l'esprit d'escalier" type situations, but perhaps if I tell myself that I "won" by being polite instead of going down a rabbit hole, I can fend off that rumination.

 

[Wyote]

I "won" by being polite instead of going down a rabbit hole

It doesn't always feel like it but with long term accumulation this is always the winning strat.
You either win by group perception or self perception. Ideally both, but not always.

 

[TomasM]

Technically, I am slightly superior to this guy in the organizational hierarchy and served as his informal manager, but the distance is slight enough that there could (hypothetically) be another project where he takes more of the lead and I have a more supporting role. However, I think that our shared manager is aware of his deficits and wouldn't assign him to such a role anytime soon.

Good, we’re making progress.

It sounds like the inter-workings of cross-functional and functional teams.

So, you have to be nice because the 360 rating system requires you to be nice within your employee evaluation(s). Even if he is not rating you, your superiors will review your feedback and could potentially judge you based on their perception of his, “nice” qualities. You also have to be nice if you want to be rated “Yes” by your peers (it sounds like he is included in this group.)

I believe it would be wise to project cooperation and harmony in the working environment. If you have issues with his work ability and work ethic then you could bring it up but prudence is advised. Ultimately, it will be on your manager to deal with this effectively. Sometimes this is a crapshoot but a good manager will see it.

surely you agree that being a good or nice person is not the same as being smart or good at business.

Yes, I am very well aware of the difference through both formal education and a long history of work experience at some highly reputable companies. Still, there were missing pieces to this puzzle and that’s why I asked. I was attempting to fill in the gaps by gathering omitted information. Thank you for providing it.

I hope it all works out for you. This sounds like a difficult situation.

 

[uuu]

Eh, I like to think I am not so superficial as to condition my being mean or nice to him on whether or not he has a role to play in my performance evaluation. (FWIW, our work doesn't really do the "peer eval" thing except for more senior management.) There is a certain baseline kindness I try to extend to everyone unless they do something to make me feel deeply uncomfortable or threatened (that's not the case here).

 

[TomasM]

I'm going to say one more thing because I feel a certain degree of empathy for your situation and if I were in a similar situation I would want to hear this. You may already know this and if you do then perhaps it is just confirmation of what you already know.

I've worked in some highly complex IT environments with a large number of extremely intelligent people. In those environments, technical skills were paramount to gaining and maintaining employment but the soft skills could very easily produce a bad outcome. Unless a person has an elite level skillset then they can be replaced with someone else that can do the job that has the soft skills that most managers desire. If the team is not in harmony and working together it could easily be attributed to the relationship between two people. Managers also hire some employees that have more soft skills at the expense of intellect because it brings a different kind of value to the team and it generally costs less. What I'm saying is that the way each of you is evaluated won't likely be the same and this is especially true if you have a higher title (as you've suggested), intellect, and pay.

Eh, I like to think I am not so superficial as to condition my being mean or nice to him on whether or not he has a role to play in my performance evaluation.

I don't think this is related to being superficial. You didn't appear to want to disclose the issue with him and you even posed the question as something more generalized than specific. You're feelings about him seem intense and that shouldn't be overlooked - you seem to see him as inferior, incapable, and unworthy. I've also looked at OCD and how that may play into this.

I'm not trying to be intrusive but I do believe you would benefit from stepping back and looking at everything abstractly. Evaluate yourself, him, management, and how all of them would potentially view the others. If you come to some conclusions or feel emotional about any of the issues or people involved, then put the information aside and evaluate it after a given period of time that seems suitable to measure if the problem is continuous and / or the emotions are not a factor.

Finally, always evaluate the cost-benefit relationship before taking action.

Good luck.