When the Golden Rule Backfires: How We Make Decisions

by Jeff Pearson

How could that person do such a thing or say such a thing? Perhaps you’ve asked that about someone you thought you knew well. In my old job, it happened more times than I can remember.

Early on in my career as a young Navy JAG, I was taught to provide timely, objective advice that was both logical and precise. Military commanders usually listened and followed my advice. But in family law and criminal justice matters, the result was sometimes quite different. I can vividly recall times when I provided clients with logical, objective and accurate advice, which they promptly ignored. Eventually, I realized that the disconnect was in how we make decisions. In short, I wasn’t reaching people who looked at the issue from a different perspective.

Welcome to my current series, When the Golden Rule Backfires, where I try to help you make better decisions and more effectively reach others by understanding how they want to be treated, instead of how you want to be treated. The change in mindset is transformative. Here, we look at the differences between two personality types: Feelers and Thinkers.

Feelers tend to make decisions based on their feelings, weighing how their decision is aligned with their values and how it impacts others. Thinkers tend to make decisions objectively, weighing the pros and cons before making a decision that they think is fair and best.

Feelers want to first hear points of agreement. They want others to see their feelings as legitimate and important. Feelers often seek affirmation of their beliefs and prefer harmony. Thinkers often enjoy a good debate. They would rather achieve a fair result, even if it means hurting one’s feelings. Getting to the truth is important, even if it means creating discord.

When in conflict, Feelers can see Thinkers as insensitive, maybe even cold. And Thinkers can see Feelers as illogical, maybe even overemotional and weak.

It’s not that Feelers can’t think logically—some of them are masters at logic and reason. It’s that they tend to make decisions based on their feelings and values. And it’s not that Thinkers don’t have feelings—many of them care deeply about others. It’s that Thinkers tend to set their feelings aside and look at the issue objectively when making decisions. 

These concepts are not my idea. You might have studied them in leadership courses using theories from Myers-Briggs and the DISC assessment. The key principle is we all possess certain natural tendencies, some more pronounced than others. My study of this subject began years ago in leadership courses in the United States Navy. At first, I was a critic and I remained skeptical until the concepts proved accurate over and over again. 

Here are more patterns that have proved true through experience.

Feelers are often warm and friendly toward others. They use people’s names when speaking to them. They engage in small talk and avoid confrontation. They’re also sensitive, even if they don’t always tell others when they’re offended. 

Thinkers want to get right to the point, sometimes avoiding small talk. A Thinker gets frustrated when others make decisions that are inconsistent with the Thinker’s sense of logic and reason. Those with strong Thinking tendencies can be assertive and thick-skinned. 

Of course, Feelers can make decisions based on objective logic and Thinkers can make decisions based on feelings and values. Doing so is healthy. The concept, however, is that we all have a default mode or preference to make decisions based on either feeling or thinking.

The clients I couldn’t reach early in my career were making decisions based on their feelings and I didn’t explain the issue in a way that resonated with them. I needed to understand what was most important to them, not what would be most important to me if I were in their situation. I also needed to recognize that my way of thinking was not always the best way of making decisions.

Think about how these differences play out in other areas, for example, politics. Consider these two candidates: (1) one looks at each issue individually, weighing the pros and cons before making an objective decision, independent of party politics; or (2) another makes decisions based on a set of values aligned with a certain political party. Guess what? Even if you like the first one (a Thinker), those types rarely win. The Feeler wins most of the time by attracting the votes of many like-minded Feelers.

In my job, I still strive to provide objective, accurate advice to my clients. But, as part of the process, I also pause to look at the issue from my client’s perspective, not mine.

The discussion on this topic is not complete, but I’ve reached my word limit. We will continue it in next month’s publication. Perhaps now you can better recognize those who are Thinkers and others who are Feelers. Or maybe it will help you understand why others make decisions that seem surprisingly strange to you. If this article helps you better understand a friend, coworker, or loved one, share it with them. And if you’re wondering if someone is a Feeler or a Thinker, you can always ask them. Which one are you?