“No one is more hated, than he who speaks the truth.” – Plato
Confrontation is healthy.
It’s difficult. It’s uncomfortable. It'll lead to some tension and disarray at that moment of time.
It may not always go the way you expect it to, giving the desired outcome.
It’ll be akin to unleashing a storm in a teacup.
And yet, if you really look at it and take most scenarios, being evasive and elusive and not addressing an issue (regardless of scale or size) only opens a much greater cataclysmic Pandora’s box in the future.
Whether it’s in our personal relationships, at work with our peers and colleagues, at school and university, in social circles... honesty and transparency is certainly the road less travelled by many, but the route worth taking.
Haven’t we all been in situations or witnessed others kind of digging up small holes for themselves and then burrowing further still by choosing to avoid conflict even in moments where openness, confrontation, and honesty is the right approach and the way forward?
We see many today who are as quick as gunslingers to fire away criticisms, stooping to petty gossip-mongering, bad mouthing, and slandering others when they aren’t around.
Aren’t Sri Lankans champions of bitching about others behind their backs? Causing friction in personal friendships, professional partnerships, and in social cliques. This is a pointless habit which leads to more insult and injury than good.
Pride and prejudice 
“To err is human; to forgive, divine.” – Alexander Pope.
People, people, people.
Unreliable. Disloyal. Unfaithful. Untrustworthy. Petty. Ignorant. Conceited. Egocentric. Foolish. Impulsive. Reckless. Violent. Prejudiced.
Oh the woe! To bemoan over spilled milk.
However, people are also kind, patient, understanding, generous, empathic, courageous, passionate, ambitious, tolerant, forgiving, loyal, relentless, affectionate, committed.
It’s the grand cosmic Yin Yang of this existential ether we dub life.
We have within us the ability to act out of volition with a sense of value, virtue, and nobility as much as we possess the proclivity and propensity to stir the calm and concoct carnage.
But let us not put the chariot before the stallions. Can all confrontations be good and healthy?
No.
Burning bridges
We need to establish the clear-cut differences between positive and negative confrontation. Knowing the right time, suitable moment, and appropriate place to confront someone is essential. Inference and judgment is a destructive thing. Nothing productive will come out of demeaning, demoralising, and chastising someone in a setting where they will be humiliated and ridiculed. Negative confrontation can lead to digging at old wounds, reopening scars, and sometimes causing a giant rift so deep and wide, that it’s nearly impossible to proceed without burning down bridges. It is important to be as patient and strategic, as it is to be honest and straightforward. Sometimes being thick headed and insensitive at the wrong time and place can do more harm and damage than any real good. As humans who err perpetually, our default setting when confronted will not be to always accept and own up to a fault or flaw, or to admit we were wrong, but rather to be passive aggressive, defensive, to recoil and withdraw, or even retaliate.
Ready, aim... fire!
Professionally speaking, positive confrontation really does help prevent a problem from aggravating and elevating into a greater issue. Timely and private confrontation in a corporate context helps find a resolution of problem solving by identifying and addressing issues early on. It helps solidify communication, building a rapport between individuals. Candour and honesty are the currency of good leadership. Learning to react to situations thoughtfully, instantly, and methodically will help formulate sound risk management practices, eradicate performance issues, interpersonal conflict and unproductive behaviour, reduce wastage of organisational resources, pinpoint flaws in processes, determine sound business ethics, and establish steadfast customer service methods. Imagine nipping a catastrophe in its waking bud? Not interfering with someone else’s progress, not derailing workflow, and building a collaborative spirit to fulfil objectives and goals will improve organisational health and exacerbate growth.
Socially positive confrontation helps to build and fortify confidence, assurance, and shared respect when you know how to be diplomatic, sensible, and meticulous in going head to head and face to face with someone. Take Professor Jordan Peterson interviewed on Russell Brand’s Under the Skin podcast. A perfect example of how two very intelligent, diverse, and philosophical beings can engage, interact, and exchange points of view and ideas with many disagreements as well as agreements in amiable, commendable, and gentlemanly fashion. You don’t need to always be the hero of the day and the centre of attention at a social gathering by provoking others. Choose your words as carefully as one would his or her battles. Healthy debates can also get heated at times, especially if it happens under the influence of some good ol’ liquid courage.
Moderation friends is key. Knowing when to back down, to compose yourself and live to fight another day is smarter than trying to bring the whole castle tumbling down simply because you can and it’s your impulse to do so. Positive confrontation is not about proving to everyone that you are always right and others are wrong. It’s about showcasing that you mean well and can have a healthy discussion addressing aspects that you don’t agree with and emphasise that you choose to point out another side to the narrative by engaging intellectually, in a calm and composed manner.
Personal confrontation is absolutely valuable to forge trust and understanding, affability and reliability, love, and respect. In order to develop shared sentiments of being mindful of each others wants, needs, and expectations, solid, open communication, and thorough discussions are vital in grasping the essence of compromise, sacrifice, and working in tandem towards common objectives, to progressively grow as individuals, leading to more sound decision making, clarity of mind, and making an integrated, collaborative effort towards positive consequences and favourable results. This is true for romantic relationships and marriages as it is for friendships to build camaraderie and longevity via mutual trust, honesty, and transparency by being confrontative.
Carpe diem
Trust and transparency is after all quintessential for all relationships, be it a sports team, a musical ensemble, a marriage or partnership, a business coalition, even friendships in life. To a great degree human qualities of loyalty, integrity, respect, and value balance on a fulcrum of honesty. It’s got to start somewhere.
We can assess then that positive confrontation inspires behavioural change. It can help remedy cultural differences and personal and social conflicts, and terminate small problems at their inception and culling it before the aforesaid grows into mammoth predicaments and calamities.
Finally, we need not cower when it comes to facing hard facts or having to deal with the prospect of a myriad challenges in life. If done right, confrontation can be a constructive act as opposed to a destructive one.
The next time you confront someone, do so privately, with purpose and respect; learn to listen as much as you are willing to actively share your opinions and feelings. People cannot read our intentions, they will interpret what we project based on how we choose to express ourselves (body language, tone of voice, and choice of words).
Hubris and hostility will neither save the day, enact change, nor make any difference.
Humility and honesty on the other hand will.
Go then. Confront away.
Just be smart about it.
Because you will never change what you refuse to confront.
Suresh de Silva is the frontman and lyricist of Stigmata, a creative consultant and brand strategist by profession, a self-published author and poet, thespian, animal rescuer, podcaster, and fitness enthusiast.
The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect those of this publication.