Empathy is, at its essence, one of the most special skills we have at our disposal. Most every human can empathize, and the ability to do so distinguishes us from plants and animals. Though several species exhibit various forms of altruism, humans are capable of experiencing the extremely high level of interpersonal awareness that is true empathy.
Empathy and sympathy are commonly confused. To clarify, sympathy is understanding a person through your perspective based on your experiences, whereas empathy is stepping into the perspective of another person and experiencing life from their vantage point. Empathizers needn’t lose their perspective, but they do need to step outside of themselves to truly understand.
The word “empathy” is everywhere. A few years ago, President Obama mentioned America has an “empathy deficit,” and scientists churned out research studies linking various factors to the decreased empathy we experience today. But, both the President of the United States and scientists refer to real empathy, empathy that falls in line with its original definition. And this definition of empathy has been stretched over the past several years in order to encompass its new role as a sort-of buzzword.
The evolution of empathy as a buzzword may be due to the advent of “needfinding” in business, where companies and organizations use “empathy” to improve products and services for its users. While some groups may truly be using empathy, it seems that many businesses are streamlining the skill to create “empathy,” the buzzword that captures the process of observing and listening that is needfinding. This “empathy” is then used to generate revenue and maximize profit.
But, in the market, “empathy” is referred to as simply empathy, and this is where definitional confusion and buzzwords arise. A buzzword is a word that sounds fashionable, familiar and comfortable, but isn’t necessarily used with its intended meaning. Empathy is a deeply human experience, but it is now used to describe looking for problems to fix using business practices. Using empathy for purposes other than its intended purpose – for interpersonal connection – concerns me, primarily because altering the meaning of empathy takes away from the power of the word.
True empathy cannot be blown up to large-scale proportions and systematically reaped for profit. That defeats the whole purpose of the word; empathy is about stepping out of our lenses in order to view the world through others in order to understand humans and to connect with humans. Empathy is meant to be rewarding for its own sake, not because it can be turned into a product or service. Another word would be more accurate to describe the “empathy” many organizations currently employ: needfinding, learning, etc. Most of the time, business empathy is not real empathy; real empathy is what motivates people to donate their time to caring for those in need, to prioritize the wellbeing of other people over work, to genuinely care for other human beings. In short, when employed true empathy, money is not a concern.
By using empathy to describe these practices, empathy loses its power; it changes from a deeply human experience to a profitable tool. I fear that soon, empathy will be nothing more than a trite buzzword, overused to the point of becoming a cliché. And then not only this special word, but also this sacred value, will be insignificant.
