Every library has at least one; many libraries have two or more: the employee who reflexively objects; who seems constantly to be looking for reasons to be outraged; who thinks everything the library currently does is wrongheaded, but looks at every proposed change in policy or practice and sees only potential disaster; who doesn’t seem to listen to the actual content of what leadership says but hears a million subtexts, all of them offensive.

If you are now, or have ever been, a leader in a library, I’ll bet money that when you read the paragraph above at least one specific person you’ve worked with leapt immediately to mind.

So here’s the question: what do you do with someone like that?

And I have a suggestion: try to pull them close. Why do I say that, and what do I mean? Read on.

Yes, naysayers make your life as a leader more difficult. They will drive you crazy with what feels to you like knee-jerk opposition to every initiative your propose, no matter how obviously right and necessary it is, and they will offend you by constantly (and often publicly) questioning your motives. They will see every hidden downside and amplify every possible negative consequence, no matter how minor or unlikely it might be. But here’s the thing: first of all, they’re not always wrong – and sometimes they see realities that neither you nor your more compliant and agreeable employees see. Furthermore, they will say things to you that others in your organization are also thinking, but don’t have the courage to say. And their willingness to be offensive can, frankly, save you a lot of time – while other people are beating around the bush, trying to be gentle and politic, the reflexive naysayer is cutting the bush down, burning it, and walking straight at you through the flames with a list of objections. 

So take advantage of that, and let your library benefit from it. Where possible and appropriate, bring your naysayers into the tent rather than building a fence around the tent to keep them out. Compulsive naysayers are often driven by the feeling that their views are both important and also unwelcome or unheard, so explicitly providing a structured and respectful forum in which their concerns can get a hearing will often help to defuse their anger and may bring important information to the table.

What might that look like? Depending on your circumstances, it could mean:

• Putting them on a task force created to identify areas needing improvement
• Inviting them to a meeting of your leadership team to express specific concerns
• Privately and informally inviting input from them on controversial issues
• If they are particularly concerned about one policy or area of the library and seem to bring it up repeatedly in inappropriate contexts, asking them to work with one or two other people to formulate a proposal for resolving that issue

Now, two important caveats:

First, being a compulsive naysayer does not grant a person immunity from being held accountable for their behavior. If their naysaying behavior is unprofessional or disrespectful of others, hurts the library’s reputation, or undermines the library’s strategic priorities, then that behavior will need to be addressed regardless of the content of their objections or concerns. But in my experience, naysayers most often express themselves in ways that – while perhaps designed to make you uncomfortable – are not patently inappropriate and do deserve a respectful response. One great way to respond is with questions designed to move the conversation in a more constructive direction. Depending on the form the naysaying takes, you might respond with questions like these: 

•  “What would a better approach to this problem look like to you?”
• “You clearly really dislike this proposal. Do you think it should be discarded, or fixed? If the latter, what adjustments would you recommend?”
• “Are there steps you believe we should have taken before settling on this course of action, but did not? If so, what are they?”
• “How will you know when the library has solved this problem?”

Of course, sometimes naysayers will respond negatively to such questions precisely because they’re not interested in finding solutions; they’re interested in fomenting resistance or simply making you uncomfortable, and that’s their whole goal. But one benefit of talking to them and asking them questions, rather than trying to shut them up (especially in a public forum) is that you signal to both them and their colleagues your willingness to work on solutions. If they engage, so much the better – you have a chance to improve your organization. And if, at that point, they stop wanting to engage, then you have made clear that the disengagement was their choice.

Second important caveat: occasionally, compulsive naysaying – especially when accompanied by unusually severe or pervasively disruptive public behavior – may be a manifestation of emotional or mental illness, or some other organic disorder. It’s important that leaders not try to function as mental health professionals, but if you have someone in your library who you believe may be suffering from a disorder, counsel with your HR team sooner than later. 

Takeaways and Action Items

• Compulsive naysayers make life difficult for leaders – but that doesn’t mean they’re always wrong, and sometimes they’re right in important ways.
• Swallowing your pride and listening, even when the message is being delivered in an obnoxious way, can yield unexpected benefits for you and your library.
• Do you have a compulsive naysayer in your organization? If so, how have you responded to this person in the past, and how well did it work for you? Would a different approach likely be more helpful?