---
title: Beyond Best Intentions
teaser: 'Assuming best intentions is the result of building a culture of trust in
  your organization, not a step towards it.

  '
tags: teams,inclusion,community,happiness
author: Amanda Beiner
published_on: 2020-10-20
---

"Assume best intentions" is a common principle for organizations, teams, and
communities. The idea is that if we can approach conflicts by assuming that
everyone _meant_ well, we can solve problems more efficiently and maintain team
harmony.

This is a noble ideal to aspire to, but it obfuscates the real goal:
building a team that works well together because they trust each other.

The problem with telling community members to "assume best intentions" during a
conflict is that it's already too late. If you have to be _told_ to assume that
your teammate didn't intend to cause harm, it means your team hasn't built the
trust to actually believe it. Assuming best intentions is the _result_ of
building a culture of trust in your organization, not a step towards it.

Making "assume best intentions" a rule of participating in your community or
organization is counter-productive. You can't mandate trust; you have to build
it. Building trust requires sustained, intentional effort.

## Why good intentions fall short

A lot of times, people don't mean to cause harm to others. They might not even
realize that they've done it until someone brings it up. Still, requiring that
someone who wants to address it first "assume best intentions" does more harm
than good. It starts the conversation by prioritizing the comfort of the person
who caused the harm over the equitable treatment of the person who has been
harmed. We use valuable time and energy splitting hairs over whether someone
"meant to" do something harmful instead of actually addressing the result.

### Intentions don't actually matter

Let's say someone caught a bug in production. You have customers complaining and
it's costing the company money, so you seek out the person who recently changed
that area of the code base.

Most likely, that person didn't _mean_ to introduce the bug. They didn't
_intend_ to break production. That still doesn't change the fact that _the bug
exists and it needs to be fixed_. That's because the _intent_ of an action isn't
nearly as important as its _impact_.

When Michelle tells you that Jacob keeps talking over her in meetings, it
doesn't matter if Jacob doesn't mean to interrupt her. The impact is that
Michelle isn't able to participate in meetings because Jacob is talking over
her. Making sure that Michelle can participate as an equal is more urgent than
making sure she believes that Jacob meant well.

### Focusing on intent ignores larger social contexts

We are all humans with unique life experiences, and it's impossible to separate
our identities from how we experience work and community. Our companies and
groups exist within a larger societal framework.

Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, queer folks, and disabled people are
disproportionately likely to experience bias and discrimination at work and in
social circles. When we make a blanket rule that everyone must "assume best
intentions", we essentially try to look past these inequalities into an
idealized world where everyone is treated fairly and is therefore equally
responsible for giving others the benefit of the doubt.

The assumption that everyone is _equally_ likely to be harmed in the course of
business is false. Making marginalized people "assume best intentions" in order
to address the harm they're facing further de-prioritizes their experiences.

## Pivoting to trust-building

"Assuming best intentions" can be appealing because it makes conflict less
obviously uncomfortable. Before raising an issue, teammates must filter their
experiences to make it more palatable. It values peace over equity, and prioritizes
harmony when harmony should not be the end goal.

Harmony requires the active work of each person adjusting towards some (usually
white, male) norm. People outside of the norm have to be more accommodating than
those closer to it, while those who fit the norm feel entitled to being
constantly accommodated.

That's not conducive to building strong, diverse, efficient teams. Bending to
accommodate inflexible others is exhausting and unsustainable, and will lead to
burnout and turnover. Building trust is not a practice in conflict avoidance.
It's a practice in consistent, constructive conflict resolution.

## Build trust first

The edict of "assume best intentions" is often a placeholder for a more
intangible question&mdash; how do we build a culture of trust in our
organization?

Teams that operate on a foundation of respect and trust for one another may be
able to assume best intentions by default when conflict arises. But you won't
get there by adding an extra hurdle to addressing harm. It's easier to make
a rule and hold people to it than it is to critically think about which norms
build or erode trust.

Build trust first.
