Relationships At Work, That Work: How Team Culture is Co-Created

Philip doesn't like the new manager and complains privately to a colleague: "That Kim! She's too controlling. I feel micro-managed, not allowed to bring my own expertise to the table. She has an opinion about everything and what's more, I disagree with a lot of those opinions!"

The possibilities for a collaborative relationship have just plummeted, the productivity of the team has been eroded and the energy and pleasure of the work has just been squashed - not because the manager is (perhaps truly) wanting in leadership skills or because Philip's reactions to her aren't legitimate, but because she has now been left to her own devices. Instead of the position of manager, she's been promoted to a role of absolute power because hers is unmediated by the input of her colleagues.

In this scenario, Philip has an adverse and possibly adversarial reaction to Kim, but she walks away either blissfully unaware, or with a vague sense of unease, or perhaps even wondering why Philip is so prickly. In no case does she have what she needs in order to make this work for Philip and the rest of the team.

Leaders are increasingly turning their attention to the dynamics of effective working relationships and they are concurrently proving a basic tenet of quantum physics: that everything exists in relationship to everything else - or: everyone exists in relationship to everyone else. When it comes to interpersonal influence, there is no hierarchy: Philip equally impacts Kim, even if he's in the lower position of authority. Through his commitment and energy he co-creates the quality of their interaction. And certainly when his energy is actively withdrawn, he can wreak havoc.

He can do this by:

• withholding feedback from Kim;
• speaking his complaints to others;
• criticizing, resisting or sabotaging her direction;
• using undermining body language such as lack of eye contact, rolling his eyes, shrugging; and
• generally abdicating responsibility for the working of the relationship.

And yet all these behaviours are natural human responses to feeling diminished, irritated at a lack of support, and frustrated by relational tension. If Philip is going to make a shift to greater responsibility, he will have to be convinced he's going to benefit. So, too, will the legions of colleagues who have shared this experience.

Nobody Wants to be a Bad Leader

Well, almost nobody. In Toxic Emotions at Work, Peter J. Frost lists seven sources of toxicity, only one of which involves intention. For the most part, people want to feel competent and would perform better as leaders if they only knew how. Kim may be lacking in awareness or emotional intelligence, but she may also believe she's doing what is required, may even be working hard at what she believes others want of her. Maybe she "ought to know better" but clearly she doesn't, and to let her get away with behaviours that are alienating others, helps her fail. Staying honest in the relationships and giving feedback appropriately contributes to the possibility of success. It is not without challenge to stay this course. Philip, for example, might want to say: "She's not worhty of this magnanimous response." But what is the option? The act of withdrawal does not create a neutral space - it creates a barren (at best) or even hostile environment.

Hostility Bites Back

If we assume intent on the leader's part, we have already moved into a hostile place. We are then reacting not to a particular behaviour or even style, but are ascribing values to an entire personality: "She doesn't care about anyone but herself" or the ubiquitous "she so doesn't get it". In refusing to lock into these assumptions, we diffuse the charged atmosphere and hold a space for a more collaborative, mutual relationship. Where there is space, there is possibility that the other will step into it. It may take time and require extended benefit of the doubt, or indeed it may never happen. But if you stand in Philip's place and ascribe intent and blame to the other, you will feel how his - and your - options are reduced to reacting to that intention. That robs you of your personal power. Whereas, when you are the one who has intention - that is, deciding consciously on what you want your input to be - you are out of reactive mode and free of the unpleasant toxicity of your own hostile reaction.

Becoming Your Own Coach

Is there any possibility that the size of Philip's outrage is an indication of his vulnerability? Perhaps he doubts his own skills and Kim triggers a defensive response in him. This can become an unconscious habit and one that requires self-observation to catch: when does it happen? Why? In becoming your own coach you can enhance your self-awareness and determine not to act out of place of vulnerability. Dramatic shifts can follow: instead of matching the other's poor behaviour, it becomes a springboard to your better behaviour; instead of looking for the model, you become the model. How the meeting goes becomes an act of co-creation because you ensure that who you are and what your values are and what your leadership style is, are all part of the mix.

Courage and Compassion

With increased self-awareness about his areas of competence as well as those insecurities he feels he needs to protect, Philip will be in a position of choice: to experience Kim's input as a threat or as a contribution; to be influenced to change or to hold to his course not out of defence, but out of conviction. The risk of seeing a relational disruption as solely initiated by the other, is to place all the blame on that other and thereby abdicate responsibility for the impact of our own vulnerabilities and reaction. It takes courage and self-compassion to work with one's own under-developed skill. Optimally, people are hired and promoted because they have the right skill set and experience for the position. But in their own makeup they may be no more confident or self-aware than their direct reports. A little compassion goes a long way with them, too.

Do Yourself a Supreme Favour

This culture or ethic of relationship "promotes" everyone to manager: manager of his or her working relationship. It models leadership skills up, down and sideways in the organization. And while the team is accruing complementary benefits, it is the individual who:

• acquires agency over his or her own emotional life;
• meets a challenge by growing self-knowledge and leadership skills;
• minimizes the fallout from poor leadership (even if some machinations slip through!); and
• contributes to a positive and collaborative team culture.

Kim may never become Philip's favourite manager. In fact, irritation and disappointment may be part of his on-going experience with her. But there's the silver lining: only part of his experience. The balance lies in the personal authority that returns energy to the productivity and pleasure of the work.

[As published in Your Workplace - June/July 2005]