Journalist finds 'no-shame' work rule challenging

A journalist at Fast Company embarked on an experiment to eliminate shame associated with unproductive workdays, only to find the endeavor more challenging than anticipated. The article delves into why shame can persist in specific life domains, such as professional endeavors.

The initial concept for removing shame stemmed from an interview with a woman who structured her business around "cozy entrepreneurship," optimizing it for her life rather than the other way around. A core principle she followed was the elimination of shame and the liberation from harsh inner criticism.

During the first week of the experiment, the journalist observed that when she felt well-rested, physically active, and socially engaged, feelings of shame rarely surfaced. However, difficulties arose when life presented unexpected obstacles, such as sleep deprivation, illness, or schedule disruptions. During these times, critical inner voices intensified, despite her logical understanding that self-compassion was needed.

Lydia Woodyatt, a psychology professor at Flinders University, explains that actively trying to eliminate emotions like shame is unhealthy, as feelings are a natural human response. Instead, Woodyatt suggests viewing shame as a signal that alerts individuals to potential social devaluation or exclusion. In professional settings, particularly those with high performance expectations, this emotion can become more pronounced due to internalized group norms and standards. Furthermore, a strong identity tied to one's work can heighten pressure and the fear of failure.

Woodyatt advocates for moving away from an "all-or-nothing" mindset and reframing situations. Rather than attempting to eradicate shame, she recommends focusing on how to rectify the situation and how to act in accordance with one's values moving forward. The journalist is now shifting towards engaging in a dialogue with shame, seeking to understand its message rather than fighting against it.