For years my late partner, Boyd Clarke, and I would ask participants in our leadership workshops to complete a simple matrix. A replica appears below. The question is simple. If having a high performing work team is important, what must leaders give up to achieve this and what do they get in return. The same question applies for constituents.
As you might predict, participants suggested the number one thing leaders had to give up was control. And the number one thing constituents had to give up was safety (or constituents had to show more initiative).
In a new study just released in the journal Psychological Assessment, Keith Sanford suggests there are two basic feelings at play in nearly all couples disagreements. Control and neglect. At the root of conflict one of the parties feels the other is being over-controlling or neglectful. These primary emotions are in constant play.
In a way this confirms my thesis concerning the emotional channel in leadership communication. My research shows leaders need to declare their emotional states (in appropriate ways) and that they need to demonstrate appropriate empathy - especially when in conflict. I may be leaping a bit to tie couples research to leadership research, but I doubt its much of a leap. I doubt anyone would argue that control and neglect are core emotions that run in workplace situations as well as at home.
Sanford suggests that concerns of perceived neglect may be "best resolved when a person receives an apology and then makes a decision to forgive." In cases of perceived threat, a person may be "more interested in receiving demonstrations of deference, expressions of appreciation and reductions in hostility."
Same advice Boyd used to give. And both showcase emotional declaration and empathy demonstration.
