Being correct and being effective and satisfied are not the same thing. We can become so invested in proving our position that we sacrifice the very relationship or outcome we care about.
In the work I do with couples, there will inevitably be a situation in which both partners are fully convinced they are right. And I would say, “Of course, they are.” They are looking at the world through their eyes, standing in their shoes, with their cultural background, experiences, values, wants, and perceptions. They are 100% correct for them, and it’s almost a certainty they’ll both be able find people who agree with them.
The problem isn’t necessarily that one of them has to be wrong. The problem begins when being right becomes more important than whatever they actually want to create together. And the challenge can be creating a space where they can both be right.
Being Right Satisfies Something
Surely, you’ve experienced the deep satisfaction of being right. Being right can be incredibly need-satisfying. It may provide Connection with people who see things the same way you do. It can satisfy Significance because you feel competent, knowledgeable, or validated. It may provide Safety & Security when knowing what’s right helps you feel protected or prepared. And it can satisfy Freedom when being right helps you resist something you don’t want.
Sometimes, we simply want reality to be accurately represented. We want the facts to matter. We want fairness or justice.
There’s nothing wrong with any of that. The question isn’t, Is it wrong to want to be right? The more useful question is, What am I hoping being right will accomplish?
Right About What?
Facts: What actually happened? What could an impartial observer have seen or heard?
Interpretation: What meaning did I assign to those facts? Could another person reasonably interpret them differently?
Wants: What do I want to happen now? Do I want acknowledgment, change, repair, agreement, understanding, or something else?
Values: What matters to me here, and why?
Conflict gets particularly messy when one person is arguing facts while the other is arguing interpretation, values, or their wants. You can argue for hours without realizing you’re answering different questions.
The Cost of Winning
If my number one goal is to prove I’m right, certain behaviors make sense. I may interrupt you to correct the record. I may gather more evidence, repeat my strongest arguments, point out holes in your reasoning, recruit people who agree with me, or keep returning to the conversation long after you want it to end. If I become frustrated enough, I may even attack your judgment or character.
Those choices may make perfect sense if my primary goal is winning. But what if winning isn’t what I want most?
If my goal is understanding, influence, problem-solving, or preserving a relationship, I may choose differently.
Being right answers one question. It doesn’t tell you what to do next.
Choice Theory® Connection
If you’ve ever had the pleasure of looking at William Glasser’s Choice Theory brain chart, you may have noticed a thing in the center labelled the Perceived World. [You can see it above?]This is where the information coming through our senses is filtered through what we know and value. What we notice and how we perceive it are influenced by our experiences, values, wants, and what matters to us.
Two people can encounter the same situation and perceive it differently. You’ve likely experienced this when talking with friends about the unclear ending of a movie you all saw, or when you attended a team meeting with the boss and got different interpretations about what was said or what you need to do next.
Understanding someone’s perception does not require agreeing with or supporting it.
Self-evaluation
In conflict situations, I can ask myself, What do I want most right now? Do I want to establish that I’m right, or is there something else I want more?
Perhaps I want to understand, influence, solve a problem, preserve a relationship, or simply be heard. Once I’m clear about what I actually want, I can self-evaluate: Is what I’m doing likely to help me get it?
That question doesn’t require me to give up being right. It asks me to decide what I want to do with it.
Applications
Couples
Imagine discovering that your partner cheated. The betrayal can be incredibly painful, and it makes sense that you wouldn’t want to experience that kind of pain again. You may become vigilant, looking for signs that the affair is continuing or that another one is beginning. Confirmation bias can make it especially easy to interpret ambiguous information as evidence supporting what you already fear.
You may be right. Your partner could be cheating again. But if you don’t have factual evidence, repeatedly arguing your case may move you further away from what you actually want.
Ask yourself: What am I trying to accomplish by proving I’m right? What do I really want?
If what you want is honesty, reassurance, greater transparency, or an opportunity to repair the relationship, what response is most likely to move you toward that? Being right about your suspicions and rebuilding the relationship are two different goals. Knowing which one matters most to you can help you decide what to do next.
Parent and Teen
Imagine your teenager breaks one of your rules. You may interpret that behavior as disrespect and become determined to get your teen to admit they were disrespectful.
You may be right that your rule was broken. But are you also right about what the behavior meant?
Using the Unconditional Trust Challenge, I would become curious about what the teen was trying to get for themself. They may have wanted more Freedom, time with friends, acceptance from peers, or something else that mattered to them. The effect of their choice may have felt disrespectful to you without disrespect being their intention.
Ask yourself, What am I trying to accomplish by getting my teen to admit they were disrespectful? What do I really want?
If what you want is a relationship in which your child talks with you, considers your concerns, and comes to you when they need help, insisting that they agree with your interpretation may not get you there. Understanding what they wanted creates an opportunity to talk about the rule, consider whether there are other ways they can get what they want, and perhaps negotiate more Freedom in a way that works for both of you.
Workplace Disagreement
Imagine having a disagreement with a colleague and the facts really are on your side. You can document what happened. You can prove your position. You are right. Now what?
Ask yourself, What am I trying to accomplish by proving I’m right? What do I really want?
Perhaps you want the mistake corrected, greater clarity about responsibilities, a better process going forward, or a cooperative working relationship. Establishing the facts may be necessary to accomplish those things. But being right doesn’t tell you what response will best help you create the work environment you want.
If what you want is a peaceful, supportive work environment, the question becomes what you choose to do with the fact that you’re right.
Counselor and Client
Imagine you’re a counselor who is convinced your client is about to make the mistake of a lifetime. You’ve worked with them for years. You understand their history, recognize the pattern, and can see risks they may not be seeing. You may even be right about what is likely to happen.
Ask yourself, What am I trying to accomplish by convincing my client that I’m right? What do I really want?
If what you want is for your client to become increasingly able to evaluate their options, make their own decisions, and take responsibility for their choices, convincing them to follow your preferred path may accomplish something very different.
Counselors can have tremendous influence. Clients sometimes ask, “What would you do?” You can answer that question if you choose, but what you would do isn’t necessarily what they should do. They are a different person with different wants, perceptions, values, resources, and risk tolerance.
Your client may choose the path you wouldn’t choose. They may discover it works for them. They may discover it doesn’t and come back ready to evaluate another option. Either way, their agency matters.
Being right about what you would choose is not the same as knowing what they should choose.
Being right isn’t the problem. Sometimes the facts really are on your side. Sometimes your interpretation may be well supported. And sometimes establishing what’s true is important.
The question is what you want to do with the fact that you’re rightness. If proving your position helps you get what you really want, proceed. If it begins costing you the relationship, influence, cooperation, or outcome you care more about, being right may no longer be enough.
Being right answers one question. It doesn’t tell you what to do next.
And even when you remain convinced you’re right, another question remains, “Does your ability to be okay depend on someone else acknowledging it?” I explore that question in You Can Be Right and Still Be Miserable.
Reflection
Where might proving you’re right be getting in the way of getting what you actually want?
