Sometimes you may want to be an asshole. That’s fine when it’s part of your strategy. But too often, people are assholes without meaning to be. And when you’re accidentally an asshole to your boss or client? Uh-oh!
This is twice as important in tense moments. That’s when it’s harder to control what you say.
And in such moments—and for some people, in other moments—there is one grammatical usage that often implies to the other person “you’re an asshole” whether you mean it or not. And that’s using the verb “to be” in all its conjugations.
Whenever you say to someone else, “You are…” you are describing the essence of that person. You are nice, you are generous, you are fun, you are great to talk to.
Note there is another sense of “to be” that is temporary (“you angry this very second”) but that’s a separate way of using “to be” from what I’m discussing here; my argument here is only about the sense to be” that refers to someone’s essence or unchanging characteristics: “you are an angry person.” Think about the Spanish “ser” vs “estar” variations of “to be,” and here we’re focusing on the “ser”/permanent sense of “to be,” not the “estar”/temporary sense. It’s perfectly natural and low-risk to describe people in temporary characteristics. “That was a stupid mistake” isn’t 1% as anger-inducing as “you are stupid.” Especially when “that was a stupid mistake” is said with a smile, and after strings of well-deserved compliments over the previous months.
But the problem comes when you describe someone’s essence in a way that they wouldn’t describe themselves, at least if there could be a negative implication in their mind. Examples could include:
- You’re careless
- You’re not trying hard enough
- You always postpone work until the last moment (and thus you make so many careless errors)
Note that the wording makes a difference because these examples describe a permanent essence. It’s okay to criticize people temporarily, but not permanently. It’s okay to say, “you were careless, on this one particular assignment, this one particular time” but that’s very different from “you are careless.”
This is an asshole move because, from the eyes of the other person, you are reading into their soul. And what if they don’t see themselves as careless? And who are you to read into their soul? You’re not God!
The way around this is to talk about the one specific incident (“you were careless this one time”) and then to talk about patterns, and the impression the patterns give off, “on the last few projects, you were careless, and being careless over a few projects gives off the impression that you’ve lost interest in our work.” Do you see how I qualified the carelessness over the “last few projects,” and I don’t say “you’ve lost interest.” I can’t read their soul, but “you give off the impression”? This is how you achieve the same message clearly, without the asshole factor.
Three notes on this:
First, this applies not just to the word “to be” but to any adjective or description that could be attributed to their permanent essence of the person. Like in the third example above, “you always postpone…” that phrase technically didn’t use the verb “to be” but it got at the same point. This point is really about your claim you can read into someone’s heart.
Second, this technique works very well managing up, but also managing down and with all human beings. I’ve personally internalized this so much that over these last years, this is how I basically communicate to everyone, all the time. Or at least try to. It’s subtle but I think people notice.
Third, there is definitely a time and place to be an asshole and make strong definitive judgments about them. But that’s playing with fire, and be careful when you do; above all, make sure you do it strategically, on purpose, because you expect them to react in a certain way.
