Defy

sometimes we face a choice that defines us. whether it’s a questionable workplace practice or an ethical gray area, these are the moments when outside pressures clash with our personal values – yet speaking up feels impossible. why do good people struggle to maintain their principles in these scenarios?

organizational psychology reveals that our tendency to comply is wired into us from childhood. but this doesn’t mean it can’t be consciously reshaped and redirected. 

in this chapter, you’ll discover practical tools like the “defiance compass,” learn how to distinguish between mere compliance and true consent, and build your capacity for living your values when it matters most.

when alex kueng joined the minneapolis police department, he carried with him the weight of a promise: to be different, to make change from within. as a biracial officer whose siblings had experienced police harassment, he believed he could help bridge the divide between law enforcement and his community. yet on his third day of active duty, kueng found himself participating in one of the most notorious acts of police brutality in modern american history – the killing of george floyd.

this case crystallizes a fundamental tension in human behavior: the striking gap between how we see ourselves and how we behave under pressure. during senior officer derek chauvin’s deadly restraint, kueng checked floyd’s pulse on two occasions and found nothing – yet he continued to comply. his fellow rookie, officer thomas lane, questioned the restraint technique twice, but also ultimately remained compliant as floyd lost consciousness beneath chauvin’s knee.

research in organizational psychology has consistently shown that the gap between our moral self-image and our actual behavior is far wider than we imagine. whether it’s employees staying silent about workplace harassment or patients accepting unnecessary medical procedures, we often freeze or comply in situations that demand action.

so, how do we change that? 

it begins with redefining defiance itself. we often think of defiance as disobedience or resistance to authority. but this is an oversimplification. it isn’t just resistance to authority; it’s also actively aligning your behavior with your personal values in the face of external pressure. this definition shifts the focus from mere opposition to purposeful action, from reaction to intention. it acknowledges that significant defiance can occur not just in dramatic confrontations, but also in quiet moments of decisive choice.

the tragedy of george floyd’s killing lies not just in chauvin’s actions, but in the complicity of officers who recognized the wrong yet felt unable to intervene. understanding this pattern – and learning to break it – is crucial, not just for ourselves but for our institutions and societies.

long before we learn to question authority, we learn to obey it. this starts with our first authority figures: our parents. 

for children, parents and their guidance are intrinsically linked with survival and well-being. thus our childhood lessons are learned and reinforced by a sophisticated system of biological rewards. as children, when we obey our parents and receive positive feedback, our brains release dopamine, the neurotransmitter associated with pleasure and reward. this chemical response creates and strengthens neural pathways that favor obedience, while behaviors that go unrewarded – such as defiance or disobedience – fail to establish similar strong neural connections. each instance of successful compliance further cements these pathways, creating an increasingly automatic response to authority.

as we grow older and move beyond the family unit, we encounter an expanding circle of authority figures and social institutions. schools introduce new layers of compliance: raising hands before speaking, following precise schedules, adhering to dress codes. meanwhile, our peer groups exert their own pressure, creating complex social hierarchies that reward conformity – from the middle school cafeteria table that shuns outsiders to the high school clique that dictates acceptable clothing brands.

the result is a system of compliance training that operates on multiple levels simultaneously: neurological, psychological, and social. this system is so effective that it becomes largely invisible to us, operating beneath the threshold of conscious awareness. these patterns are so internalized that going along with them seems like our natural state, while resistance or defiance feels wrong.

this sophisticated conditioning serves important social functions. it enables large-scale cooperation, allows cultural knowledge to be transmitted, and helps maintain social order. yet this same system can also make it extraordinarily difficult to recognize when compliance might be inappropriate or even harmful – both to ourselves and to others. 

ultimately, understanding this deep programming helps explain why defiance can feel so uncomfortable. we’re literally fighting against our own neural wiring. 

when doctor sunita sah’s pager buzzed during a meeting with a financial advisor, she didn’t expect the interruption to teach her a crucial lesson – one about the nature of choice. exhausted from a thirty-hour shift, she sat in the hospital’s plush meeting room while dan, the advisor, pitched investing in a mutual fund to her. dan spent nearly an hour building rapport – discussing her future and offering seemingly helpful guidance – all for free. only at the end did he disclose that he would personally make a commission if she chose to invest.

that disclosure changed everything. but instead of simply feeling less trusting, sunita felt increased pressure to comply. she was caught between her growing skepticism and her desire not to signal distrust. suddenly, her pager rang and she was called away to see a patient – saved by the bell. later, away from dan’s presence, she clearly saw that investing wasn’t right for her situation. 

this story illuminates the kinds of pressure that can elicit compliance, and the fundamental distinction between compliance and consent. we often treat these words as interchangeable, but in fact they’re two quite different forms of saying yes. compliance is a response to external pressure – whether from social expectations, authority, or systemic constraints. we comply when we sign unread terms of service agreements or agree to unnecessary medical procedures we may not fully understand. moments of acquiescence like these lack the elements of true consent, even if we’ve agreed verbally or in writing.

so, what are the elements of true consent? 

the medical field offers a powerful framework that answers this question. informed consent has five characteristics: capacity, knowledge, understanding, freedom, and authorization. let’s go over each.

capacity speaks to our mental and cognitive ability to make decisions – whether we’re clear-headed, unimpaired, and able to process information. knowledge means that we have accurate, complete information about the choice. understanding goes yet deeper; it means we genuinely comprehend the implications and consequences of the facts at hand. freedom means having a real choice, including the practical ability to say no. finally, authorization represents our explicit, affirmative decision. this last element means very little without the other four supports beneath it. 

real-world situations regularly compromise these elements. an employee could sign a contract without having the practical freedom to refuse. someone might join a gym without understanding the membership agreement’s fine print. scenarios like these produce the appearance of consent even though its substance is missing.

when a doctor recommends a treatment while standing over their patient or a software update demands acceptance before the device will function, the conditions required for true consent are undermined. 

by understanding the elements of informed consent, we can better identify situations where we’re being pushed toward compliance rather than offered a genuine choice. in a world that often seems designed to elicit our compliance, becoming aware of these five aspects is the first step toward reclaiming our power and agency.

the tension between who we are and how we act emerges frequently in professional settings. consider sunita’s encounter with pradnya, an indian immigrant who’d undergone a forced hysterectomy at age 24. when other doctors dismissed pradnya’s ongoing health complaints due to her limited english, making jokes about “difficult” patients in the break room, sunita recognized a profound disconnect between medical ideals and actual practice. it crystallized how institutions – even those dedicated to healing – can perpetuate social inequalities and injustice.

experiences like these force us to confront essential questions about identity and action: who am i? what kind of situation is this? what does someone like me do in this situation? taken together, these three questions form the “defiance compass,” a navigational tool for introspective decision-making. when navigating challenging situations, we can repeatedly ask ourselves these questions, letting each answer inform the others. 

gaps between our values and actions often announce themselves through our internal dialogue. so, if you start to feel that something doesn’t sit right for you, pay attention. it’s a crucial warning sign, signalling a cognitive dissonance between your self-image and your behavior. if we don’t pay attention to this discrepancy, our outward behavior can gradually reshape our private beliefs, eroding our core identity.

consider the case of jeffrey wigand at brown & williamson tobacco company. as a biochemist with a healthcare background, wigand initially rationalized his role as developing “safer” cigarettes. but eventually, the growing disconnect between his value of integrity and the company’s deceptions about their harmful products was unbearable. he became a whistleblower. in the end, his decision wasn’t just about exposing corporate wrongdoing – it was about preserving his fundamental sense of self. 

acting on our values demands more than mere recognition – it requires the courage to face institutional pressure and the wisdom to choose defiance. it asks us to maintain and nurture our values against the steady erosion of daily compromises and institutional demands.

this understanding transforms how we approach difficult decisions. defiance isn’t a character trait – something you either possess or lack – but rather a practice that flows from maintaining our connection to what we care about most.

the ability to say no in moments that matter isn’t a trait we’re born with; it’s a skill we can cultivate. like strengthening a muscle or mastering an instrument, our capacity for principled defiance grows through deliberate practice and preparation. with each attempt, successful or not, we create neural pathways that make future acts of defiance easier.

the transformation from compliance to conscious defiance unfolds in five distinct stages. it starts with an internal tension – that visceral discomfort when something doesn’t align with our values. recognizing this discomfort marks the second stage, where we consciously acknowledge our unease rather than suppress it. the third stage involves voicing our concerns to others, while the fourth requires clearly stating our intention to resist. the final stage is taking concrete action.

even reaching the early stages without completing the sequence builds valuable experience. consider officer kevin, who found himself facing pressure to conduct an illegal garage search. his voice trembled and his childhood stutter emerged as he confronted his superiors, but his previous mental preparation – imagining exactly this type of scenario in the wake of george floyd’s death – had equipped him to progress through all five stages. though his hands and voice shook, he stood firm in his refusal.

fear plays a fascinating dual role in the psychology of defiance. the same anxiety that typically drives compliance can, when properly channeled, become a catalyst for action. kevin’s acute awareness of potential tragic consequences – an innocent homeowner confronting intruders, a situation spiraling into violence – transformed his fear into resolve. through repeated exposure and practice, our brains can rewire this relationship with fear, making principled resistance feel increasingly natural.

but successful defiance rarely emerges spontaneously. mental rehearsal and visualization create cognitive blueprints we can access under pressure. the ancient greek poet archilochus wrote, “under duress, we do not rise to our expectations, but fall to the level of our training.” this is why seemingly small acts of resistance serve as crucial training grounds. each time we question a dubious procedure or challenge a problematic practice, we strengthen the neural architecture that enables more consequential acts of defiance.

it’s this readiness that divides those who speak up and those who remain silent. through consistent preparation and incremental acts of defiance, we build the scaffolding that enables us to do the right thing when it matters most.

the main takeaway of this chapter to defy by sunita sah is that defiance isn’t mere rebellion – it’s aligning your actions with your values, even when you’re pressured to comply. 

there’s a crucial difference between mere compliance and true consent, and by understanding this distinction, we can make better choices. 

a useful tool – the defiance compass – consists of three essential questions you can use to guide your decisions: “who am i?”, “what kind of situation is this?” and “what does someone like me do in this situation?” 

by recognizing that defiance is a skill that can be practiced and strengthened, rather than an innate trait, we can better navigate those defining moments when our values are tested. 

okay, that’s it for this chapter. we hope you enjoyed it. if you can, please take the time to leave us a rating – we always appreciate your feedback. see you in the next chapter.