If you want to say sorry, say sorry lah.
But psychology professor David Chan is not going to make it easy for you.
In his illuminating article entitled
"Say you're sorry: How to suss out an insincere apology," David makes
an apology a loaded word. Or at least, he makes it a lot of work for the apologizer.
First, he wrote about the apologizer. There
are seven Rs to an apology that he or she must take note.
Second, David wrote about manipulative
apologies where the receiver of such apology has to take note.
And third, he reminds us not to accept an
apology too readily. It will send out the wrong message to the public at large
- something we all have to take note.
If you apply David's seven Rs to an
apology, many may not measure up.
He wrote that the apologiser (like an
energizer) has to Recognise the damage done, Reflect about his wrong, Regret
the hurt, take Responsibility without giving excuses, Request (ask) for forgiveness,
Redeem by making restitution or amends, and finally, Resolve to turn over a new
leaf by assuring the victim he/she will not do it again. That's the seven Rs in
a nutshell.
I guess the chicken rice chain boss would
find it a mammoth task to live up to all seven of those Rs.
If anything, he definitely
"recognised" his error since it is all over social media. He must
have "reflected" long and hard about it in a direction that has led
him to "regret" his foolish act, which has so many consequences for
him and his business.
From there, his deliberation must have
brought him to a point that he felt he needed to take
"responsibility" by asking for "forgiveness" and
"redeeming" his mistakes by slaughtering 200 chickens as a peace
offering. As for "resolving" to change, well, only time can divine
that.
Here, David warned us about the
manipulative apologiser. He is one who crafts apologies for maximal effect.
These are usually "street-smart sweet
talkers" or "swindlers who con people".
He wrote, "In crafty apologies, there
is more to saying sorry than meets the eye. The apologies are not genuine. They
are calculated, deceptive moves to serve some self-interest or advance hidden
agendas.
Their real purpose is to induce specific
feelings in the offended person or the audience to garner sympathy that is
otherwise undeserved, or mobilize action that otherwise would not occur. They
deny, detract and cover up motives and wrongdoings that are more severe than
what is being apologised for."
Phew! Good luck trying to peel off all
those layers of an apologetic onion.
I guess under such tight scrutiny, the
United Airlines Chief Executive would not have sauntered through (without
sounding off the siren) the apology sincerity detector if one were ever
installed in his airport terminal.
Lastly, David turned his attention to the
receiving end of an apology. He wrote that we should not so readily accept an
apology when there is a "clear" and "severe wrongdoing"
committed and the offender is clearly "unrepentant" and
"manipulative."
He said accepting such apology without
thought can have negative consequences like giving the impression that one
condones the act, thereby trivializing the wrongdoing.
Further, it may compromise the moral
standing of the one who accepts the apology, discourage discernment in general,
and make flippant the hurt of other innocent parties who are the victim of such
offender.
Lesson? Just one.
In one article, David has managed to cram
in all the lessons about apology, and they are bursting at the seam.
Indeed, sorry has become the hardest word,
loaded sometimes, and a lot of work at other times.
I guess when it comes to apology, Kong Hee
has since the trial taken us through all its 50 shades.
And if we'd to line them all up, that is,
the two oral apologies on stage, which won him thunderous applause, and the one
intimate and quietest apology written on his Facebook two days before he
surrendered himself to serve his time (and of course, minus the one he said god
said sorry to him), it is obvious to me that his last apology goes the deepest,
addresses the widest, and touches the most.
Alas, it took him altogether (since October
2015) one and a half year to say sorry. It was definitely a long, tough and
hard struggle for him to mouth those plain words (as if the first two apologies
to rousing applause and accepted unconditionally by his congregation somehow
needed more injection of heart-sore sincerity).
And although there were no free chicken
rice and flight seat to go with it, it would nevertheless still take more than
words to bridge the gap and heal all wounds he had perpetuated for the full
seven years.
I guess the main lesson for us all here is
to never give (or receive) an apology lightly.
More importantly, it is always wiser to think before we act because an
apology, at most times, requires much more from us in time, effort and remorse
than words, chicken rice and three bows. Cheerz.
No comments:
Post a Comment