To Control or be Controlled-that is the question

It is a truism that it is difficult to insulate the work environment from the home environment. Many organizations are recognizing the importance of caring for the overall emotional needs of their employees to guard against stresses at home affecting their productivity at work.

I would like to take this concept one step further. Is there a correlation between the way that we handle our relationships at home and they way in which we handle our employees or colleagues at work? To explore this further, let's use the example of the person who is the classic controller in the home. This person is the one who wants to know exactly what any person in the family is doing at any point in time, sets very tight and strict boundaries on family members' free time and gets very upset when they are not consulted about the very smallest of decisions. They need for the family members to revolve their lives around them.

From the initial perusal of this description it would appear that there is an ego issue going on and a certain level of arrogance whereby the controlling family member feels a sense of power and entitlement. However, while working as a therapist, I was constantly struck with the direct relationship between a client's need to control and their sense of fear or insecurity. Controlling personalities were not those who had the most power but in fact were often those feeling powerless, impotent. Their desire to control was a means by which they were attempting to minimise being hurt and trying to reduce the feeling that they were being controlled by others. It is the classic, "attack is the best form of defence" argument. This observation was true in both the parenting and in the couple relationship. The "controller" attacked from a place of insecurity and fear and knew no other way to exert their personal power other than by force, whether emotional or physical.

The theory that I am proposing is that these same underlying insecurities are at play for those who use an overly controlling management style in the workplace. We have all met the manager who micro-manages every single move of their staff, who will not let their staff make any decisions without running it past them first and who are highly critical of the efforts of their employees. Studies have shown that such management styles tends to have a number of undesirable effects:

• Employees tend to withhold their opinions or their input for fear of being criticized
• Passive aggressive behaviors increase in the workplace in reaction to the controlling behavior e.g. slow down in work pace
• There are increasing work absences due to illness 
• At worst, there is a higher staff turnover as employees reach saturation point and are unwilling to stay in such a controlling environment.

The paradox is the same in both the home environment as well as in the work place. A person who fears losing control, who feels insecure about the relationships around them and whose fears drive them to control others ends up getting exactly what they feared. They become impotent, relationships are no longer effective and eventually break down.

So what is the answer? I would like to present a second paradox that is necessary in order to resolve this. The more that someone lets go of their self-perceived power over others and acknowledges that those around them are capable and worthy of trust the more likely they are to have significant, meaningful relationships. Brené Brown expressed a similar concept as a result of her research that vulnerability is an essential element in developing true intimacy. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCvmsMzlF7o) Vulnerability is not about becoming a piece of carpet to be walked all over but it is about two things from what I have observed:

1. Stepping in and having faith in your own personal power. 

This means to accept that you are a powerful person without having to exercise that power over someone else. This is true inner power that can demonstrate a sense of self-confidence and trust in your feelings, beliefs, principles and decisions. There is a humility in this personal power that says that we don't have all the answers and that we are still capable of learning.

2. Leaving space for those around us to contribute and make decisions 

This implies that we have trust in those around us and allow ourselves some level of vulnerability in our relationship. True personal power and confidence says that we have no right or capacity to exercise what I would call unrighteous dominion over any other person, man, woman or child. Vulnerability means accepting that other people have something of value to add, that they are capable in their own right and best yet, that I may learn something and be enhanced because of their contribution.

So this sounds idealistic. What happens if the other person does not fulfill those expectations? That will be a subject for the next blog. This is but one example about viewing our lives as one great whole rather than compartmentalizing our lives. So the idea is to examine the way you are at home and how you behave at work. Is there a correlation?