How to Stop Taking Things Personally at Work

Abstract

This article is about a pattern many people recognise: taking things personally at work. Three pieces of research bear on it. A theoretical paper on the contingencies of self-worth (Crocker and Wolfe, 2001) argues that self-esteem rises and falls with success and failure in the areas where people have staked their worth. A set of studies with 585 participants (Kross and colleagues, 2014) found that referring to yourself by name, instead of "I", while preparing for a stressful task went with less distress and with better performance as judged by observers. A set of three studies (Ayduk and Kross, 2010) found that taking a "fly on the wall" view of a bad experience went with less emotional reactivity and less replaying. These are associations and experiments in specific groups, not in finance teams. The three steps at the end are practical readings, not tested methods, and this article is not medical advice.

The question about last week's number

Someone from operations writes in the team channel: "Can you explain why this number is different from last week?" It is a normal question, and thirty people can see it.

You answer in two lines. For the rest of the meeting you compose a longer defence in your head, and by the end you have decided that they think you are careless. Nobody in the meeting has given it another thought.

Taking things personally at work: what the research says

The research cited here does not explain why one person takes a question as an attack and another does not. It offers one theory of what can make a comment land on the self, and two sets of studies on how people step back from a bad moment. The studies were research studies and a theory paper, not studies of workplaces, and none was limited to finance. The next three sections cover what each one found. None of them tested the three steps at the end.

What a theory of self-worth says about what lands on you

Crocker and Wolfe (2001) argue that research on self-esteem has focused on how high or low general self-esteem is. They say it has neglected the areas of life in which people base their sense of self-worth. Building on William James, they propose that self-esteem rises and falls with success and failure in the areas where people have staked their worth. They call these contingencies of self-worth.

The authors say the model can help explain how self-esteem relates to emotion, thinking and the regulation of behaviour. They also list open questions: how contingencies form and change, whether they act more as a resource or as a vulnerability, and whether some people have self-esteem that does not depend on any contingency. This is summarised from the published abstract and a repository page.

Read the question about the number through this. If part of your worth is staked on being right about numbers, a question about a number can land on you and not only on the number. This is an inference. It is a theoretical paper, and it is not a study of comments at work.

What studies of self-talk found about stress

Kross and colleagues (2014) report a set of studies with 585 participants about the words people use to refer to themselves when they reflect on an experience. Using non-first-person language, such as your own name or "you", instead of "I", increased self-distancing. In the studies where people prepared for first impressions and for public speaking, those who used non-first-person self-talk were judged to perform better by objective raters, and they reported less distress.

In the public speaking study they also showed less maladaptive replaying of the event afterwards. In two further studies, people using non-first-person self-talk saw an upcoming social stress as more of a challenge and less of a threat. Trait social anxiety did not change the findings. This is summarised from the published abstract.

Read the longer defence in your head through this. A small change in how you refer to yourself changed how people felt and performed in these studies. This is an inference. The tasks were first impressions and public speaking in a research setting, and no study cited here involved a comment at work.

What a study of self-distancing found about replaying

Ayduk and Kross (2010) looked at people who, when they reflect on a bad experience, spontaneously take a self-distanced, "fly on the wall" view. Across three studies, the more people did this, the less emotional reactivity they reported. In the first study it also went with fewer intrusive thoughts about the experience weeks later.

The authors found that this was explained by how people made sense of the event, with less replaying and more working out of its meaning, and not by avoidance. Among couples in the third study, self-distancing went with more problem-solving and less hostility returned during conflicts. This is summarised from the published abstract and a repository page.

Read the rest of the meeting through this. Watching yourself from outside, and asking what the moment meant, is different from pushing it away. This is an inference. The studies used memories and couples' conflicts, and they did not test workplace comments.

How to stop taking things personally at work: three steps

None of these is a tested method, and none was studied in finance teams. They combine what the research points to with ordinary practice. Where a step goes beyond the research, it says so.

1. Ask which part of your worth the comment touched. Separate the question from the story you attach to it. Crocker and Wolfe (2001) describe self-worth as staked in particular areas, and naming the area can show why this comment felt larger than it was. This is an inference, and no study cited here tested this step. For instance: "Was it the number that upset me, or the idea that I'm careless?"

2. Describe the moment to yourself in the third person. Write it in one or two lines, using your own name. Kross and colleagues (2014) found that non-first-person self-talk went with less distress and better performance in their tasks. This is an inference, and no study cited here tested this step at work. For instance: "Why is Anna upset about this question? What did the question actually ask?"

3. Answer only the question, after a pause. Write the factual reply first, then wait until the first wave has passed before you send it. Ayduk and Kross (2010) found that stepping back went with less reactivity and less replaying. This is a judgement, and no study cited here tested this step. For instance: "The difference is the accrual reversal booked on the 28th. I can send the journal."

If the comment keeps playing in your head afterwards, How to Stop Replaying Criticism From Your Boss is about that. For the situation in the example, there is How to Respond When Your Numbers Are Questioned. To work out what lands hardest on you, see How to Identify Your Emotional Triggers (And What to Do About Them). For the first seconds of a strong reaction, The 90-Second Rule at Work: What's True and What Isn't is worth reading.

Questions People Ask

Why do I take things personally at work?

The research cited here offers one theory: when your worth is staked on an area, a comment about that area can feel like a comment about you. It does not say that this is the reason for everyone, and it is not a diagnosis.

Is it a flaw to take things personally?

The studies cited here do not treat it as a flaw or measure it as a trait. Crocker and Wolfe list as an open question whether staking worth in an area acts more as a resource or as a vulnerability.

How do I stop taking feedback personally?

The steps above apply. If you are on the other side of the conversation, How to Give Feedback to an Employee Who Gets Defensive looks at how the same moment feels to the person giving the feedback.

Can coaching help with taking things personally?

Coaching is educational support for work patterns. It can help you notice which comments land hardest and plan how to step back. It is not treatment. No study cited here tested coaching.

When it is more than a hard day

A hard day is one thing. It is more when you cannot stop going over what was said for days, when you sleep badly, when you feel persistently low or anxious, or when you notice physical symptoms. In those cases talk to your doctor, your occupational health service or a qualified mental health professional. This article is not medical advice. Coaching is educational support for work patterns. It is not treatment and not a substitute for it.

Sources

• Ayduk, Ö., & Kross, E. (2010). From a distance: Implications of spontaneous self-distancing for adaptive self-reflection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(5), 809–829. DOI: 10.1037/a0019205 (Summarised from the published abstract and a repository page.)

• Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, 108(3), 593–623. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.593 (Summarised from the published abstract and a repository page.)

• Kross, E., Bruehlman-Senecal, E., Park, J., Burson, A., Dougherty, A., Shablack, H., Bremner, R., Moser, J., & Ayduk, O. (2014). Self-talk as a regulatory mechanism: How you do it matters. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(2), 304–324. DOI: 10.1037/a0035173 (Summarised from the published abstract.)