The Stories We Tell About People

The constant churn of conflict, uncertainty, and rapid change does not stay in our news feeds. Over time, it shapes how we interpret the people around us, often without our noticing.

Psychological research helps explain why. Under pressure, our minds look for quick explanations. Psychologists call one common pattern the fundamental attribution error: our tendency to explain people's behavior by who they are or what they intend, rather than by what they might be dealing with.

I have seen this across my career, but it became especially visible during a period of rapid growth and multiple acquisitions at Teladoc Health. The pace was intense. Teams were integrating different cultures, leaders, systems, products, and priorities, often all at once. With responsibilities spanning multiple parts of the organization, I watched how stress and uncertainty shaped perception.

When friction showed up, it was easy to explain behavior by assigning negative motives: disengagement, resistance, a lack of commitment. In many cases, what was actually happening was overload, competing demands, or missing context. When that context surfaced, the story changed. And when the story changed, the outcomes often did too.

I have seen the same dynamic up close. I have worked with managers who were convinced an employee had checked out, only to learn, after slowing down and asking better questions, that the person was navigating a serious family tragedy or personal situation. The behavior did not change overnight, but the leader's understanding did, and that shift changed how the leader showed up and what support looked like next.

This is where a quiet ego and perspective-taking matter. A quieter ego creates enough space to question our first explanation. It helps us move from assumption to understanding, not to excuse behavior or lower standards, but to respond more accurately.

This matters especially during ongoing change. AI adoption, uncertainty, and constant noise all increase the chances that we misread one another. When we do not take the time to understand people beyond the surface, we risk making decisions based on incomplete stories.

A simple practice

Before labeling someone's behavior as disengagement or resistance, pause and ask: What context might I be missing right now? Then ask the person directly, with care.

Quiet ego does not mean avoiding hard conversations. It means slowing down long enough to see more clearly. In a world that feels loud and fast, that pause is not a luxury. It is a leadership skill.

Where might an assumption about someone's motivation be shaping how you interpret behavior at work?