4th article on change; psycho dynamics of change

7/29/2019 4th Article on Change; Psycho dynamics of change

1/7

10.1177/0893318902238900ARTICLEMANAGEMENT COMMUNICATION QUARTERLY / FEBRUARY 2003Nichol, Nichol / CHANGE PSYCHODYNAMICS

THE PSYCHODYNAMICS

OF AN ORGANIZATIONAL

CHANGE INITIATIVE

BRIAN NICHOL

LOU RAYE NICHOL

Business Coach Institute

This is a sad story of organizational mismanagement, indi-

vidual ineptness, abuse of employees, and ultimate failure

in achieving LEADs mission. On first reading, we aredrawn to the

failures of Rachelandherdeputy, Wanda. Rachelbullies herwayto

her objectives. She dismantled the original department with no

attempt to work through the issues of loss and attachment with the

new group as if theywereas unfeeling as Legoblocks. She harasses

Gabriela and finally gets rid of her. She stuffs the departments

value statement down her staffs throat. With Wanda, she forms a

subgroup in which they create a paranoid fantasy of their relations

with other staff. They humble their star consultants Joe and Nora

through an ill-conceived assignment and create an impossible

working situationfor Joe, which leads tohisresignation. In thefinal

scene with Carlton, Rachel regresses to petulant adolescence,

rationalizing and lying to defend herself against the reality of her

situation.

From this perspective, we explain the failure of LEAD as a con-

sequence of Rachels incompetence. However, it is unsatisfactory

to blame just Rachel. If she were so transparently inept as a man-

ager, why had Carlton not recognized this earlier and attempted to

influenceher? Themore likelyposition is that Carlton andthe other

managers were blind to Rachels failings because she embodied

446

Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 3, February 2003 446-452

DOI: 10.1177/0893318902238900

2003 Sage Publications


2/7

their own beliefs about how to get things done. Rachel was still in

post after squandering thousands of dollars at considerable per-

sonal cost to individuals because she approached her task ina man-

ner similar to that of other managers in the organization.

The psychodynamics of groups and of organizations can shed

light on dysfunctional processes affecting Rachel, her department,

and the organization. Central to these processes is the failure of

individuals to face up to reality.

GROUP DYNAMICS

Subgrouping is a psychological process that can be destructive

in groups (Agazarian, 1997). We find others in a group with whom

we agree and align ourselves. In a perfect world, these alignments

shift as the issues we deal with change. However, we have a ten-

dency to identify with others who hold similar views, and over

time, the subgroups formed by these alignments can become rigid.

Differences within the subgroup are suppressed, and differences

between subgroups are exaggerated. A them and us dynamic

develops, and polarization and paranoia result.

Another process, splitting, is a primitive defense mechanism

that protects us from theinabilityof our immature selvesto tolerateambiguity (Hirschorn, 1990). We find it very difficult to tolerate an

ambiguous position toward anyone for whom we have strong feel-

ings. We often cannot see good qualities in our enemies, for

instance.Therefore,we split ambiguoussituations intoan idealized

good and bad and see things in black and white. That person is

bad while I am good. Splitting is the basis of scapegoating and

many organizational rifts.

Both rigid subgrouping and splitting distort perceptions of real-

ity. Increased anxiety exacerbates these defenses. Rachels initial

handling of the LEAD department created the conditions for them

to emerge. The reorganization of the department could not have

been anythingbut an unpleasant, anxiety-ridden episode. Theerrorwas in not acknowledging the effects of the reorganization on

members of the new department and working through the issues it

created. Some members would beangry at the way theyand former

Nichol, Nichol / CHANGE PSYCHODYNAMICS 447


3/7

colleagues were treated. New members would likely be anxious

about their reception. There would probably be some guilt. It is

unhealthy to pretend the events never happened. Members need to

talk together about their feelings and find some sort of resolution

(Noer, 1993). Because this psychological work was not accom-

plished, several issues remained in the group unconscious, interfer-

ing with the development of respect, trust, and authenticity in their

relationships.

Unprocessed affect can leak out in indirect ways, as exemplified

in Rachel and Wandas subsequent treatment of Gabriela. Early in

the case, they talk of her as a troublemaker, as if she is to blame

for their anxiety. By splittingandprojecting their bad feelings ontoGabriela and getting rid of her, the unconscious fantasy is that they

will be released from their anxiety. They doremove Gabriela,but of

course, they are left with their anxiety. Predictably, they find others

on whom to project their distressing feelings. In time, Rachels ide-

alization of Joe and Nora, her star employees, begins to collapse.

She blames them for the failure of the diversity program. After

Nora leaves, Joe takes the full brunt of the negative fantasy in his

humiliating interview with Wanda.

Another mechanism fostering the groups deteriorating contact

with reality is the subgroup formed by Rachel and Wanda. Their

conversations createa paranoid fantasy. Theydevelopshared fanta-

sies of their relationships with the other group members. They col-lude to reinforce each others fears. Being shared, their fantasy is

less vulnerable to information that could bring it down to earth.

They repress any dialogue because at an unconscious level they

must sense their fantasy could be destroyed, takingthem in thepro-

cess. The delusion leads to such absurdity as Rachels bullying the

group with the departments values. After this meeting they talk:

Dont you wonder what they are talking about. . . . With that

crowd,I know what theyre talking about. Imsure Gabriela is lead-

ing the rebellion.

Later, Wanda discourages Joe from developing his relationships

with managers in the organization. She explains that his manner

irritates people. The reality is that by cutting off communicationwith the remainder of the organization, Rachel and Wanda will

have more control.

448 MANAGEMENT COMMUNICATION QUARTERLY / FEBRUARY 2003


4/7

It is also important that we not discount other members respon-

sibility in these events. For instance, we can presume that nothing

wasdone toprocess Gabrielas departure. We canblame Rachel for

suppressing the discussion. However, any member of LEAD could

have spoken up: I am sorry to see Gabriela leave. I enjoyed work-

ing with her. I wonder how others are feeling. Yet presumably,

nobodydid (outside of subgroups), no doubt because there was too

much anxiety around this issue. This leads to the question of the

larger system in which Rachel and her department operated. To

speak up would have been counterculture in Prestige.

ORGANIZATIONAL DYNAMICS

Organizational dynamics exert a powerful influence on the indi-

vidual. They can draw the most competent and nondefensive peo-

pleinto unexplainable contradictions, to theextent that such people

will articulate the counterproductiveness of their processes and

procedures and yet continue to follow them (Menzies, 1988). The

LEAD case outlines a number of contradictions between intent,

behavior, and outcomes.

It is interesting that Rachel was charged by Carlton to be a

driver of change for the organization and bring in a different setof values, but in the end, she recreated the culture and structure of

theorganizationwithinherdepartment. If we look at thefive lowest

rated organizational survey statements, we have to ask, Did

Rachel mentor anyone, and who was her mentor? Has she

rewarded teamwork? Were people treated fairly based on their

work and abilities, and were the most qualified promoted? Were

people given clear and consistent messages about performance?

There is also a contradiction between what Rachel set out to do

in her own department and what she actually initiated. Her brief

wasto shift thetrainingdepartment from developinganddelivering

programs to a customer-focused consultative role. From what we

know from the case, what she actually did was to develop anddeliver programs.Joe, whohad done more than any tobuildconsul-

tative relationships, was chastised for doing so.



5/7

A basic thesis of the psychodynamics of organizations is that all

work creates anxiety. If the anxiety is not acknowledged and sup-

port not provided (as is the case in most organizations), people will

find ways to ensure that their anxieties are eased. The process will,

however, be unconscious and covert, and the defenses developed

against anxiety will become embedded in the organizations struc-

ture and culture. Work is organized to contain the anxiety, and peo-

plearequickly inductedintodefensive structures(Menzies,1988).

Another relevant phenomenon is that of parallel process. Covert

processes in the systemprocesses that are hidden or denied

tend to get played out in parallel at different levels within the orga-

nization. The same theme or issue will manifest itself in differentforms, each relevant to the person acting it out. For example, a

major theme at Prestige seems to be that of looking good.

Carltons desire to look good approaches the grandiose in his plan

to create a world-classmodel forHR. Rachelsaw theopportunity

to build her resum and show the company how radically the

department had changed. Gabrielas sin was to embarrass the

department. Lipservice to theculturewasall Rachelrequiredofher

team. The diversity course was an opportunity for the new depart-

ment to showcase its services and for Joe and Nora to get more

visibility. The executives, instead of addressing humiliating

recruiting practices, asked that thecompany be portrayed in a more

favorable light.Carlton wasconcernedabout thenegative attentionto LEAD and his reputation. He told Rachel, People need to be

impressed with your department.

Serious organizational pressure is being exerted to look good. If

we treat this as a defensive structure, then thequestion arises: What

service does looking good perform for the organization? What

anxiety does it allay? It is difficult to know from the case material

presented, although we do know that Prestige is a telecommunica-

tions business. According to Carlton, it is slow, bureaucratic, and

lacks a customer orientation. It is just possible that Prestige has

moved into a deregulated market, and it is not uncommon for com-

panies that change from a monopoly to a competitive environment

to have defensive reactions. One such company responded with amanicalmost panic strickenwork pace. An executive there

once commented that if a manager were to take time out for train-

ing, they would look to see if they really needed him or her.



6/7

We do not have to speculate, however, that at Prestige looking

good prevents people from looking at a messy reality, bringing

problems into the open, and addressing them. We see numerous

incidents of this. The executives do not want to face up to their

humiliating practices. Rachel did not want to face up to the fact

that Wanda had taken Gabriela off the project and not told her.

Rachel and Wanda could not face the full picture of the mess made

of the diversity training.

So what kind of impact might this have on Rachel and Carltons

enterprise? We suggest that both Carltons positionwithinthecom-

pany as HR director and Rachels brief of developing consultative

relationships place them in thestanceof a stewardship type of lead-ership rather than a heroic model of leadership. Such a stance does

not fit well within the defensive structure of looking good.

First, there is a basic error in Carltons vision. HR cannot drive

organization-widechange. It isa staffdepartment serving line man-

agement. Organizational change is driven by people in positions of

authority who see the need for business reasons. When manage-

ment begins to hurt from lack of customer focus, then they might

change(if theycan get beyondthe needto lookgood). IfRacheland

Carlton believe that they can direct the work of line management,

then theyare out of touch with the reality of power and authority in

the organization.

Second, there is a basic contradiction between consulting andlooking good. Consultants work in the background; they build

frank and honest relationships with managers and help the manag-

ers diagnose problems anddevelop solutions. Themanager andhis

or herneeds stay in theforefront. Theconsultant leads from behind.

A consultant cannot quickly look good, cannot make a big splash,

and stay consistent with what he or she is attempting to do.

Because of theorganizations culture, Rachelmayhavehadvery

few options other than to develophigh-profileprograms. But inter-

estingly, she did not seem to consider anything else. She and the

company appeared to be well suited for each other. The defensive

structures in an organizations culture are felt by and acted out by

individuals. Individuals are attracted by organizations whosedefenses match their own and vice versa.



7/7

REFERENCES

Agazarian, Y. (1997).Systemscentered therapyfor groups. New York:Guilford.

Hirschorn, L. (1990). The workplace within. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Menzies,I. (1988).Containinganxietyin institutions. London:Free Associations.

Noer, D. M. (1993). Healing the wounds. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brian Nichol (Ph.D.) and Lou Raye Nichol (M. Ed.) are coowners of the

Business Coach Institute. They are professional and business coaches

working with managers and executives who want to build and maintain

healthy organizations and create a healthy work life for themselves. They

are creators andcodirectors of theBusinessCoaching CertificateProgram

for the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.


4th article on change; psycho dynamics of change

Documents