Misconceptions of Competition

Competition is Misconceived

Sports and competition in general has been under siege for decades. There is a persistent and negative perception of grades, sports and competition which ebbs and flows in its popularity. Part of this perception is due to the negative effects on a sense of self worth for the losers. Perhaps none of us have escaped the feelings after a loss, or worse, the negative reactions (imagined or real) by peers after suffering ‘failure.’ No one likes being called a loser.

Competition is also viewed as being counter productive to most of the important traits we’ve been taught since childhood; compassion, empathy, sharing, win-win, helping. Competition is seen to be antithetical to these life lessons, instead teaching selfishness, and win-lose. Many people want to dampen or get rid of the hurtful effects of competition altogether in schools and some even wish to transform our competitive and capitalistic society. All of these stances are born of a fundamental misunderstanding of competition.

Imagine the love that nurtured these dogs

Competition and empathy

We don’t want to throw the baby out with the bath water. Competition teaches people to share and empathize. Anyone who has heard a runner talk about their fallen competitor, or witnessed a team mate sacrifice themselves for the team, knows this to be true. On the other side of the same coin, competition teaches lessons on self-expression and confidence. And whether on playing fields or table tops or art easels, learning these life lessons are easier in simplified game environments which help us identify our strengths and better know ourselves.

Very few competitions are zero sum games. Most organizations battle for market position rather than in win-lose scenarios. Since it is impossible in the long run for any organization to fill all market positions, they are rarely competing for survival. In fact, industries with multiple strong combatants often increase the size of the market. We find that free markets empirically produce the richest result for the consumer when a segment is filled with strong competing organizations, influenced by entrants and exits at the margin.

The essence of competitive sports is a measured public display of the fruits of labor and discipline. Publicity produces its own pressure on emotional performance. In sports, there can be only one winner. Unfortunately our popular literature has attached a peculiarly negative connotation to the other performers’ characters as ‘losers.’ Performing well in competition is its own reward and is cause for self-respect, and the measured feedback necessary to continually improve. Thousands of university students compete who will never win, but virtually all of them develop discipline and character that aids them in any situation they will meet in life.

Competition and Self-Worth

Worth is unassailable. The Queen of England, an ax murderer, a shiftless man, and a preacher all have the same worth. No action, deed, thought, accomplishment or mistake can improve or denigrate one’s worth. No one can take worth from another. It is impossible for losing to negatively affect one’s worth.

Competing well must increase one’s self-respect as it encourages discipline and nurtures a synergy of our spiritual, physical, emotional and intellectual states. People who insult competitors for losing do not appreciate the essence and statement of self in the act of competing. Venturing out onto the field and striving is a foundational precept of competition, and a deeply self-affirming act.

Competitors who do not win may have doubts about the gap between their actual and potential abilities, or their preparedness to compete, but they should be encouraged to never doubt their self-worth. Competitors may also accept constructive criticism regarding a performance when their results did not live up to their previously displayed potential. For competitions provide insight and measured feedback into how this gap may be resolved.

Competition in the Work Place

Formal competition in the work place for jobs or promotions or treasure is a misuse of competition and destructive to the team and culture. Organizations that celebrate only a few winners from a group must strongly consider the negative effects it has on the spirit and synergy of other team players, most of which play important supporting roles. Teams compete with the opponent, not amongst themselves.

The most appropriate team member will be chosen, sometimes mistakenly, for the positions on a team. It is every member’s responsibility to support the team in whichever position they are asked to play. Sports team members compete for the Captain position at their peril, and good coaches do not allow it.

In the work place, promotions or the lack of them do not mean lack of talent in even the majority of cases. Professionals who struggle at one organization often thrive at another. Culture, systems, history, and other indefinable traits often constitute larger influence on organization than talent or performance.

Rarely are employees fired because of poor performance. More employees should be encouraged and aided by organizations to find an organization which better suits their talents, style and approach. More organizations should consciously accommodate differences in style and approach. Conformity and outright competition in the workplace tends to deny diversity, upon which creativity depends.