Place blog title here
Mary-Anne Murphy 19/5/26
Why Do We Make Excuses For People Who Treat Us Badly?
I've worked with someone who made me scared to ask a question.
Not because I didn't know what I was doing. Not because the question wasn't valid. But because I never quite knew what reaction I'd get. Would they snap? Dismiss it? Make me feel like I should have already known the answer? So I'd think about it. Weigh it up. Wonder if it was worth it. And more often than not, I'd stay quiet.
And here's the thing. I wasn't alone. Everyone around me was doing the same thing. Tiptoeing. Carefully choosing their words. Softening their approach. Bracing slightly before speaking.
We all knew. Nobody said it.
Instead we said things like, that's just how they are. You get used to it. Once you get to know them you'll like them. They mean well. They're just direct.
And I've been thinking about that ever since. Because those phrases sound like understanding. Like generosity. Like giving someone the benefit of the doubt.
But sometimes they're just a way of making peace with something that isn't ok.
Because when we normalise behaviour that makes people scared to ask a question, we don't just protect the person doing it. We silence everyone around them. We send a message, this is just how it is here. Adjust yourself accordingly. And people do. They get smaller. They stop contributing fully. They save their best thinking for somewhere it feels safer to share it.
And the cost of that is enormous. Not just to the people tiptoeing. To the whole team. To the work. To the culture.
So why do we do it? Why do we make excuses for people whose behaviour isn't ok?
Sometimes it's about power. When someone is more senior, more established, more certain than us, it feels easier to adapt than to name it. The risk feels too high. And the fear of their reaction, of being dismissed, humiliated, or making things worse, keeps us exactly where we are.
Sometimes it's about loyalty. We know the person. We know they're not bad. We separate their behaviour from their intention and give the intention the benefit of the doubt.
And sometimes it's simpler than that. We just don't have the language. We don't know how to name it without it becoming a bigger deal than we feel equipped to handle.
But here's what I've learned. When we don't name it, it doesn't go away. It just goes underground. And underground it does more damage, not less.
So what do you do when you're scared of the reaction? Here are some approaches that protect you while still moving things forward.
Name the pattern, not the person. In a team setting, raise it as a general question rather than about anyone specific. Something like, how do we make sure everyone feels comfortable raising ideas and questions here? It opens the conversation without anyone feeling targeted. Including you.
Use curiosity instead of critique. Rather than naming the behaviour directly, approach it as wanting to understand. Something like, I want to make sure I'm communicating well with you. Can I ask what works best when I need to raise something? It puts the framing on you rather than them, which lowers the defensiveness immediately.
Find one trusted person first. Before you do anything, say it out loud to someone you trust. Not to gossip. Just to reality check. Am I reading this right? That alone reduces the isolation and helps you figure out your next move.
Write it before you say it. If you need to raise something directly, write it down first. Not to send, just to get clear on what you actually want to say and what outcome you're looking for. It slows the emotional brain down and helps you find the words before you're in the room.
Choose your moment carefully. Timing matters enormously with reactive people. Catch them when they're settled, not rushed or stressed. A quieter moment one on one is almost always safer than raising something in a group.
None of these are guaranteed. But all of them are better than staying quiet and getting smaller.
Because the behaviour that goes unnamed gets permission to continue. And everyone in the room pays the price.
The Conversation
Is there someone in your world whose behaviour you've been making excuses for?
And instead of staying quiet, what's one small move you could make this week?
Go with confidence this week
Mary-Anne
The Work Beneath the Work - Starting the Year Well
“Can we talk about how we want to work together this year?”
It is a simple question. It often feels awkward. It is almost always worth asking.
Starting the year well is not about certainty. It is about intention. About recognising that how a team works together under pressure is shaped early, either deliberately or by default.
Leadership scholar Linda Hill reminds us that leadership is about creating the context in which people can do good work together. That context is built through early conversations that clarify expectations, norms, and boundaries.
These conversations include how disagreement will be handled, what matters when time is tight, and how feedback will be given when stakes are high. Teams that invest in these conversations early are not immune to difficulty. They are simply less surprised by each other.
Reflective questions
What conversations have we already had about how we will work together?
Which ones have we avoided or postponed?
What would starting well look like for us this year?
Have a great week
Mary-Anne
The Work Beneath the Work - Why Emotional Capital Matters
What really happens in your leadership team when pressure rises?
Not the agenda.
Not the protocols.
Not the carefully worded norms on the wall.
What actually happens in the room?
Because before any decision is made, before any strategy is agreed, something quieter and more powerful is already at work.
Emotion.
The reality we don’t name
Emotions are already present in leadership teams.
They shape how feedback lands, how safe it feels to challenge an idea, and how quickly frustration escalates—or shuts down discussion altogether. Ignoring this reality doesn’t make teams more rational. It simply makes emotional dynamics harder to see, name, and manage.
Under pressure, this matters even more.
Neuroscientist Antonio Damasio demonstrated that emotion and cognition are inseparable. When stakes are high and time is short, emotional signals increasingly guide behaviour and decision-making.
This means that leadership is never just a technical exercise. It is always a nervous system exercise too.
What happens when emotional dynamics go unacknowledged?
When emotional signals are ignored or misunderstood, teams don’t suddenly become inefficient because they lack skill or commitment.
They become reactive because their nervous systems are overloaded.
Decisions are rushed.
Tone sharpens.
People retreat into certainty, defensiveness, or silence.
Not because they don’t care - but because their capacity to think clearly is compromised.
Emotional capital: the work beneath the work.
Emotional literacy gives teams a steering wheel instead of a brake.
Teams with strong emotional capital can notice when they are reacting rather than responding. They recognise when stress, fatigue, or frustration is shaping behaviour. They know how to slow the pace, lower the temperature, and recover after difficult moments - without blame or drama.
This is not therapy.
It is leadership capability.
In complex environments, emotional steadiness is foundational to sound judgement, trust, and long-term sustainability.
Reflective questions
How does emotion currently show up in our team when pressure increases?
What happens to our decision-making when stress levels rise?
What would emotional steadiness look like in everyday practice for us?
Go steadily this week
Mary-Anne
The Work Beneath the Work - When Awareness Changes Things
The Work Beneath the Work - When Awareness Changes Things
Someone finally names the thing everyone has been thinking.
The room goes quiet.
Not awkward quiet.
Thinking quiet.
Moments like this are inflection points. What shifts is not the problem itself, but the fact that it is now shared. Something that was previously carried privately is placed in the centre of the room, where it can be seen, examined, and responded to together.
For weeks or months, individuals may have been holding the same concern silently. Each unsure whether they are the only one noticing it. Each managing their own interpretation rather than testing it collectively. When someone finally names it, the emotional load redistributes.
This is not about confrontation.
It is about clarity.
Organisational psychologist Edgar Schein described culture as the pattern of shared assumptions a group learns over time. When those assumptions remain unexamined, they quietly shape behaviour. When they are surfaced and discussed, teams regain choice.
Shared awareness creates space.
Space to slow reactive responses.
Space to separate intent from impact.
Space to respond rather than defend.
When teams can name what is happening between them, not just what they are doing, conversations change. Issues surface earlier. Feedback becomes more direct and less emotionally loaded. People stop carrying concerns in isolation.
The work does not become easier.
But it becomes shared.
Shared awareness does not require agreement. Teams can name an issue and still disagree about the path forward. What changes is that disagreement happens in the open, rather than through silence, side conversations, or withdrawal.
Over time, this builds practical trust and resilience that compounds under pressure.
Reflective questions
What might our team be carrying silently right now?
How safe is it for someone to name what others are already noticing?
What becomes possible when concerns are shared rather than privately managed?
Go with clarity this week
Mary-Anne
The Work Beneath the Work - How Teams Really Work
How Teams Really Work
Most leadership teams believe they understand how they work together.
They know who brings ideas, who keeps things moving, who asks the hard questions. Over time, teams develop rhythms and roles that feel familiar and functional. Much of the time, these ways of working are effective.
Until pressure arrives.
Under pressure, something shifts. Conversations shorten. Decisions speed up. Curiosity narrows. People stop raising concerns that feel risky or inconvenient. Silence begins to substitute for agreement. These changes rarely arrive all at once. They accumulate quietly until the team realises it is no longer having the conversations it once did.
This is not a failure of character or commitment. It is a predictable response of human systems under load.
Psychologist Daniel Kahneman demonstrated that when cognitive load increases, people default to habits rather than reflective thinking. Teams behave the same way. Under pressure, they revert to what feels efficient, familiar, or safe, even when those habits no longer serve the work.
Pressure does not fundamentally change a team.
It reveals it.
What becomes visible under pressure are the underlying patterns that were already present. Who speaks when time is tight. Who withdraws. How disagreement is handled. Whether questions are welcomed or quietly discouraged.
Many teams misinterpret these patterns as interpersonal issues. Someone is “difficult.” Someone else is “disengaged.” In reality, what they are seeing are systemic responses to pressure.
When teams build shared awareness of these patterns, behaviour stops feeling personal. Curiosity replaces blame. Conversations become clearer and less emotionally charged. Decisions become more deliberate.
Shared awareness does not remove pressure.
It reduces friction.
And reduced friction frees up energy for the work that actually matters.
Reflective questions
What patterns show up most clearly in our team when pressure increases?
Which of these patterns help us, and which quietly get in the way?
What changes if we treat these as system behaviours rather than personal traits?
Go with shared awareness this week
Mary-Anne
The Work Beneath the Work - The Year Forms Early
By the time you notice the year has picked up pace, it already has.
Calendars fill quickly. Meetings stack. Decisions are made at speed. Everyone is capable. Everyone is committed. Nothing appears obviously wrong, and yet something subtle is already forming beneath the surface.
Leadership teams rarely pause at the beginning of a year to consciously decide how they will work together when pressure arrives. How disagreement will be handled. How safe it will be to question decisions. How quickly tension will be named. Instead, these patterns are set quietly, early, through small interactions that feel insignificant at the time.
Who speaks first in meetings.
Who gets interrupted.
What happens when someone hesitates or softens their view.
These moments do not feel strategic. But they are deeply influential. They send signals about what is valued, what is risky, and what is better left unsaid.
Early habits form quickly, like wet concrete. At first, there is room to adjust and reshape. Later, the shape is set and teams find themselves working around patterns they never consciously chose.
This reflects the research of Amy Edmondson, whose work on psychological safety shows that teams learn very early whether it is safe to speak up. That belief is not established through a policy or a values statement. It forms through repeated everyday signals about voice, response, and consequence.
When teams describe a year as heavy or exhausting, the cause is rarely a single event. More often, it is the accumulation of small, unexamined habits that hardened quietly over time.
Starting strong together is not about perfect conditions or grand plans. It is about noticing what is forming while there is still room to influence it. Once pace accelerates, teams default to whatever was established early. Changing course midstream always costs more energy than shaping direction at the start.
Strong years are not accidental. They are shaped early, deliberately, and often without fanfare.
Reflective questions
What patterns are already forming in our team this year, even if we haven’t named them yet?
Whose voices are most present, and whose are quieter?
What is one habit we could shape now, before it hardens?
Start strong this week
Mary-Anne