The nature of my job means that I work with folks in pretty much every college, unit, and department on campus. I love the opportunity I have to interact with so many interesting, motivated, and passionate people and to learn so much about their disciplines along the way. I'm also typically interacting with them around a very specific set of topics and in sometimes very unique situations. This ultimately means my impression of them is someone limited. I don't get the opportunity to observe them in the classroom, or watch them run weekly staff meetings. Luckily, the context in which I do get to observe them is more often than not very positive, but that is not the case for everyone.
We all work with folks whom we see on a limited basis or in limited situations, which means the opinions we form of them are often based on an incomplete set of information. In practice, this means that when something goes wrong, our assessment of them is going to be strongly influenced by the limited information we have about them, regardless of their character as a whole or the facts of the situation. By contrast, we rarely form those same opinions about ourselves when similar situations arise, and instead attribute them to external factors that were out of our control. This phenomenon is called the fundamental attribution error.
Consider a major report that you are working on as part of a team. Your colleague fails to get their portion of the report to you on time. You don't know why they weren't able to submit it on time, but you've observed them in one other situation not submit something on time. Your brain tells you they are unreliable and you find yourself avoiding working with them in the future. Now juxtapose this with your own failure to get your work submitted on time. It's clearly because you were staying up all night with a sick child, or dealing with an unexpected emergency home repair. Most of us are not going to tell ourselves we shouldn't have waited so long to work on it in the first place. We cut ourselves some slack, but we don't do that for our colleague, even though the same scenarios could have been going on in their life.
the FAE can obviously wreak havoc on organizational relationships, levels of trust, and overall climate. The more we form opinions of others based on limited information, the more those opinions stick, even when we are presented with contrary information. This can have a significant impact on our ability to work effectively with others, and can often lead us to avoid forming deeper relationships with those individuals if we perceive them to possess qualities we don't like or respect.
When we find ourselves drawing these conclusions based on limited knowledge, it is important to take a step back. We can ask ourselves what we actually know about the situation, and what possible explanations might exist aside from an inherent character flaw. We can also reflect on times in which we found ourselves in the same situation. What caused us to do the same thing? Pushing back against those negative opinions can also be easier if we stop to consider positive attributes the person possesses. Lastly, simply prioritizing getting to know people better and form stronger relationships can change the way our FAE kicks in. The more I know about you, the more likely I am to give you the benefit of the doubt!
