Labels provide a convenient way to categorize people and things. Labels can be liberating, acknowledging and congratulatory or restricting and defeating.
We don't think twice when we share with a friend that our colleague is: bright, accomplished, amazing, creative, results-oriented, A+, capable or interpersonally excellent.
However, what happens when the following are attributed to our colleagues: difficult, slow, ornery, loner, slacker, needy, marginal?
We have other ways to label our colleagues - letter grades, percentile ranks, percentage of quota achievement, job classification...
And when we fail to comment, others fill in the blanks.
What about the ways we can refer to others that can have dual meanings - special, political, particular, opinionated? When appropriately supplemented with tone, inflection and reference, the meaning is clear. When absent, a person may be stuck with a label that may or may not fit.
It's convenient and helpful to give a visual characterization such as female, male, short, tall, hair color and build to allow others to identify new contacts.
Though labels are a convenient way to categorize people and things, I think we need to be aware that we may unintentionally limit our friends' acceptance among our circle if we fail to adequately explain or describe positive attributes and/or motives.
May I always remember to attribute a fair assessment of those I know, and may they attribute the same to me!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment