From some of the comments, which were valid, I got the impression we did not get the gist of what Toni was saying. I heard her stating specifically, take a good look at yourself. It's easy to slip into habitual negativity and never know it. I know, I had to change some things in my life. It is not about legitimate reasons, as stated above. I don't think the above examples demonstrate habitual negativity. But I think what is REALLY being missed is, taking a moment to check how you're "feeling" about the "negative" point you're about to make. It is about the "energy" behind it, more than if it is legitimate or not. Are your intentions of pointing out a potential problem to help the project be a success, or because you want to be right, look good, put a damper on someone's idea? I think Toni's article goes way beyond the workplace, and equates to a formula to live life. It's not about being Pollyanna, it's about, what do you want the outcome to be? Do you want success? Success may equate, as in Marc's example, as stating that you are unwilling to do what a client is asking you to do, as illegal is outside your integrity. So you lose the client? do you really want that kind of client? Okay, so how do you pay the bills? If that is what makes the final decision, then your values are conditional, and therefore not values at all. And that is not a successful outcome. What if they want to do stupid? It is not your job to save the stupid from their stupidity. Let them learn it their way. CYA? Document your response of why you disagree and potential outcome, and then do it their way, or get another job that is more conducive to your values.

I applaud Toni's article, because in the end, it is not what others are doing, but who we are choosing to be in the midst of it. Pointing out the cons along with the pros is balanced. Constanstly pointing out the cons with no solutions, is not. My two cents for the day