Some of our toughest (and often best) decisions are by-products of competing identities we hold. For example, a politician courageously acts in the best interests of the nation—rather than acting in the best interests of their political party.
What competing identities, you ask, were in ‘play’ for the politician? Namely, being an American versus being a Republican. (NOTE: The example of being a Republican is for illustrative purposes only. The politician could have just as well have been a Democrat). In this particular instance, the politician felt the ‘tug’ of being an American outweighed being a Republican (their revered political party). Thus, the politician was willing to take an unpopular stand—unpopular, at least, from members of their own party.
Recall Stanford Professor James March’s research on decision-making wherein he theorized that our choices are strongly influenced by one of two factors: 1) the consequences one is subject to–what one gets versus what it costs OR 2) an especially important aspect of one’s identity. The former is quite calculated, the latter is quite intuitive.
Yet, decisions aren’t always rendered exclusively by a comparison between March’s two factors. Sometimes the decision is rendered as a result of a comparison within only one of March’s factors. In the politician’s case, the defining struggle became one of identity. Which identity (being an American versus being a Republican) was more important? In the end, the politician made a value judgment in putting the country first, their political party second.
It’s not unusual for one’s most difficult and consequential decisions to be influenced by an especially important identity they hold. That shouldn’t be surprising—given the inseparable correlation between identity and one’s personal values. And it also shouldn’t be surprising that an identity-based decision is one that, while difficult, is often one that the individual is especially proud of. After all, it frequently reveals their very ‘best-self’.