The Authentic Organization

Emotional skills are fundamental to the success of most organizational projects. Sometimes they mean the difference between nominal success and remarkable success. Sometimes they are critical to any sort of success at all. And without a doubt, they are vital to building the relationships needed for the long term.

I was reflecting earlier this evening on comments made by Asher Bey about how teachers should deal with anger and I was reminded how challenging strong emotions can be for many people in the organizations with which I’ve worked. (I have no evidence that this is any better or worse in civil society than elsewhere.) While Asher Bey’s Guru’s Handbook deals primarily with the responsibilities of the individual in regard to dealing with feelings, I concern myself here with the tight relationship between those individual emotional skills and the organizational context in which they find their expression.

That an organization is often a reflection of the emotional skills of its founders and leaders is well understood. What may not be as well understood is the role that the organization plays in bringing out the best or the worst in people, insofar as how they relate to feelings.

For purposes of exploration, I will propose five ways in which organizations can play a positive or negative role on the emotional skills of staff, leaders, and key stakeholders. These five ways are through (1) recruitment, (2) intake, (3) structure, (4) consequences, and (5) leadership.

Through recruitment, we choose the people that will renew the culture and practices of our organizations. Do we consider their emotional skills? Or do we unconsciously pick people who avoid expressions of certain feelings?

First impressions profoundly shape the attitudes and behaviors of newcomers. How we handle the intake process, both formally and informally, is what creates those first impressions. Newcomers are constantly asking: How do people in this organization handle certain things?

The structure of the workplace — the daily and weekly rhythms, the form of a meeting, the parts of a communication with a colleague — determines what there is room for and what there isn’t. Certain types of spaciousness in our social environment have a way of nurturing corresponding spaciousness inside of us. Are check-ins genuine? Does “how are you” have room for more than “fine”? Do we leverage people’s emotional skills for organizational benefit?

There are always consequences for responsible emotional expression and interaction. Although they may not be intended as such, they can function as rewards and punishments. Do people stiffen and withdraw at enthusiasm, grief, or sadness? What are the reinforcing patterns at work?

Finally, there is the role of leadership. This can also be called “example”, because although it can carry more influence if it comes from recognized leaders, that’s not a prerequisite. Do people take things personally? Do they show strong models for how to use emotions wisely?

I’ll leave you with these five areas of inquiry, along with the core concept of the organization’s role in shaping the emotional sophistication of its people. Please flesh this out, if you can, provide illustrations or counterexamples from your own experience, and suggest other dynamics that may be at work.