There has been lot of talk lately around Empathy. Most of it has been in context of a workplace. I work at a workplace and have done so for a few years now. It is not easy to understand empathy even though it is primitively simple in definition. Empathy means the ability to understand and share the feelings of other. Makes sense to me, and perhaps to you too!

Now why is empathy so important? I think that empathy is directly related to the ability of building relationships. We believe that in order to form meaningful relationships empathy is perhaps a pre-requisite. I wont deny that! In order to form deep relationships it is very important to understand what other people feel more than what they say. In fact of all the strong relationships I have built it was empathy that was the building block of these relationships.

Now in order for people to collaborate at work, they need to be able to have relationships. And hence in order for work productivity empathy perhaps plays a very crucial part. Individuals can do a lot of things but to build bigger things you need a team to come together and complete an action or a project. Without empathy this might be very difficult.

So far my line of reasoning says that empathy is building block of relationships and you need relationships to build bigger things and work as a team. At this point I am probably in sync with the majority of people.

Here is where I disagree: Empathy is not a right people deserve. Empathy needs to be earned! Empathy is a by-product of respect. And respect is always earned. If empathy becomes a right that people deserve then this world will implode on itself.

Let’s say a person is studying to become a doctor. He isn’t doing well in his studies. And at that moment his father dies and he is left with a family of three, a mother and two sisters. Should we empathize and pass him in the examinations knowing the condition even though he is not even close to being a doctor. Let’s say we do. Isn’t it more likely that will screw up and cause more damage?

Let’s take another person who is fired because she has a medical condition that does not allow her to do her work. Shouldnt we empathize with her? What do we do: One scenario is we give her paid vacation indefinitely but someone has to be hired to work for her. When this person is fit what do you do with the replacement? This world is interconnected. People work for incentives and profits. If you hire a replacement or give this person a paid time off you in turn increase costs of the work being done. This will lead to an increase in price somewhere making the thing / service un-affordable for some set of people. We only see the direct costs while being oblivious of indirect costs.

You hire someone to work at a warehouse and make them work strict hours and with intensive physical labor. The alternatives are either you replace them with a robot in which case you leave the people unemployed OR you hire more people to do the work so that every one has some respite. But the second option only will increase cost which will result in increased prices somewhere and a whole set of indirect costs.

Empathy cannot just be a fit-all bandage for all issues where it is needed. Given the globalized world empathy to one will result in not empathizing with hundred others. Now what do you do? It is a similar question to do you let one person die to save a hundred others. It is difficult to answer but for me, and for a lot of others, the answer is yes. No one wants to be in a situation like this to take the decision. But decisions have to be taken. And yes if it was firing me to save hundred others, so be it.

So far I have talked about why empathy cannot be applied directly to various situations. The other part of empathy being earned as a by-product of respect is slightly more complicated.

Let’s take a sample workplace scenario. You have a colleague who is brilliant but has a personal problem. You know it does not impact his ability and his intellect. But in his current condition he cannot contribute at his full capacity. Do you fire him? No. You have to empathize because the person has earned the respect of others. You know that his ability is not impaired.

On the other hand, you have a colleague who has consistently under performed. He cannot accomplish the tasks that are expected of him. You know that he is trying very hard. But then do you empathize with his inability? I wouldnt want so. This person has done nothing to earn your respect. The team as a whole is not delivering to their potential because one person cannot work at the level expected.

All my thoughts are from my view point. I believe in complete meritocracy. Unfortunately if this world has to continue to exist we need efficiency. Efficiency is a by-product of intelligent people working at their 100% to achieve goals. If you take a moment to reward mediocrity or indulge in empathizing with people who have done nothing to prove that they deserve it, you are only moving further away from efficiency.

A very weird example came to my mind. Take a pipe that is supposed to deliver water from Seattle to California. This is the lifeline that could save CA from drought and Silicon valley from going dead. If even one person did not do their work correctly and didn’t put the proper infrastructure to support the pipe, it would explode leading to the end of the road for CA and silicon valley along-with. It is not what 100 brilliant individuals can perform. It is always about that one person who screws up for the work of 100 brilliant people to go in vain.

I do not say I am brilliant. All i say is that you have to be committed to the work you do. You dont work more than your ability. You don’t work 60 or 100 hours per week. You do not work weekends. You work 40 hours per week but make it count. You work efficiently in those 40 hours and that is in itself sufficient. In such a world empathy cannot be expected. We do not have the luxury to indulge in empathy for people who do not deserve it. And if we do now, it wont last long.

A last example that came to my mind. Let’s say Uber had a few not so good engineers who delayed the project and increased Uber’s costs by 20%. To keep alive Uber would have had to charge 25% commission from its drivers. The number of drivers signing up wouldn’t have been the same and it would be a negative feedback loop and it probably would have died long ago. Today this app does millions of rides a day, at cheaper rates than taxis because it is utilizing infrastructure to 100% and increasing efficiency. Cheaper rides mean reduced cost of transport that indirectly impacts millions of lives. The indirect cost of this one app is tremendous for a lot and lot of people. And to know that it could have all gone wrong with a few wrong people is what troubles me.

The thoughts of increased reservations (in India) and reduced meritocracy is already leading to many cases where an Uber has died before it could reach its potential.

Empathy is necessary but not mandatory. If it becomes mandatory it becomes a negative co-relation to Efficiency. Without efficiency we will not have any of the modern technology.