Putting yourself in someone else's shoes

Notably, on Thursday afternoon, we attended a conference entitled "Making your team perform: simpler than you think". I went to the conference without great expectations, since the very concept of "high-performance team" can mean a thousand and one different things.

In short, I walked into a crowded room, with a coffee in hand and an open mind, ready to hear what a web developer thinks about team performance. He points to an important study conducted by Google to identify the characteristics of well-functioning teams. One thing leading to another, he leads us to explore the subject through short team workshops. The approach is interesting, and the conclusion is even more interesting: the performance of a team is correlated with the level of empathy among team members.

It is then that a light comes out in me (I'm hardly exaggerating). Hallelujah! The awakening. I knew it, but I didn't know it. Hearing these words, it's as if it was something I had never noticed before: empathy is necessary in a functional team. It's such a simple statement, but it makes so much sense.

But what exactly is empathy?

The term empathy was first used by Robert Vischer in 1873 to refer to "aesthetic empathy", which is described as "the way a subject relates to a work of art in order to gain access to its meaning". This is very interesting, but I am more interested in the more contemporary definition of Suchman and his collaborators (1997). These authors present empathy in two dimensions:

1. The cognitive dimension refers to the ability to recognize and understand the emotions of others.

2. The behavioral dimension refers to the ability to clearly convey this understanding of one's emotions to the other.

   (La communication professionnelle en Santé, 2e Éd., Lussier et Richard)

Empathy is therefore a cognitive process and must be distinguished from an emotion. Therefore, it is different from compassion, caring or altruism. However, empathy can trigger and be the source of these emotions. And the best news is that any cognitive and behavioral process can be learnt!

But while empathy can be learned, the phenomenon of empathy is much more difficult to master and to integrate than we think. In fact, a number of obstacles can emerge and interfere with the process.

For example, Bertrand, a very experienced web developer, is unfortunately not very confident at work. He is very sensitive in situations where he feels vulnerable, especially when the team is facing a delay in the scheduled delivery schedule. In this situation, Bertrand always imagines the worst, namely that Julie, the project manager, believes him to be incompetent. Julie, on the other hand, responds to the situation by appearing a little sullen. At this point, it seemed obvious to Bertrand that it was all because of him. These intrusive thoughts add to his stress, interfere with his work and even make him suspicious of Julie. It's a terrible vicious circle.

This example shows just how dysfunctional some teams can be at times. Here, we can see that Bertrand has an ego problem. His lack of confidence is clouding his mind. He has difficulty taking an emotional distance from the situation and understanding Julie's perspective. His perception of the situation is somewhat distorted. For her part, Julie seems to be experiencing relational discomfort; she doesn't know how to react to Bertrand's emotions. These two elements are just one example of how the empathetic process can be hindered.

What would the situation look like if Bertrand and Julie were to be empathetic?

First of all, Bertrand would not put his own emotions at the center of the situation. Instead, he would initiate a cognitive process in order to understand what emotion Julie seems to be experiencing. Is she anxious about the situation? Is she discouraged? Worried? More than that, Bertrand would also initiate a behavioral process to show Julie that he perceives her emotion, that he can see that she is concerned. And he would try to understand why.

And you know what he would do? That's when the magic would happen. That's when Julie would express her discomfort: it's not that she's discouraged that her team is late, but that the emotions of others make her very uncomfortable and she doesn't know how to react. The magic of empathy would have helped to establish a dialogue and a bond of trust between Julie and Bertrand.

Then Bertrand would no longer feel that Julie finds him incompetent and Julie would be less afraid of being a bad manager. This feeling of security would set the stage for a constructive discussion, as a team, on the problem of delayed delivery.

Now back to teamwork. Why is empathy so necessary? What is the link between people's empathy and team effectiveness? Here is the theory (!) that Mathieu and I established after some great discussions!

1. Other people's empathy with us and our empathy with others promotes a collective sense of trust and safety, which the Google researchers referred to as "psychological safety".
2. Members feel supported and backed by their colleagues when challenges arise, whether shared by all or not. There is team cohesion.
3. Each member feels confident enough to put forward his or her ideas and does not feel attacked if his or her ideas are not accepted. The team's potential for action is then maximized.

This reflection on teamwork can also be applied to the health field: if all health professionals tried to understand the reality of other professionals, would dialogue be more effective?

The human being is a social being and teamwork has always been part of his or her life. So why isn't this process of empathy innate? Is it because our survival instinct constantly brings us back to that primitive need to prioritize our own needs and emotions before those of others?