Guilt like all emotions surfaces acutely and intensifies over time. Most people are motivated by the right thing to do in any situation based on their moral judgments and not always what is in their best interests. The issue is how intentional is this capacity? For example, a person stands up for someone being bullied at work even though this may be personally detrimental in terms of time investment, being seen as an informer and setting the victim ahead of the group.
However, if a person witnesses bullying and does nothing about it, it is assumed that they have chosen self-interest or imprudently think they are protecting the organisation’s reputation over their legal and moral obligations as well as the rights of affected individuals. Non-reporting is regarded as morally agnostic when a person ignores evident wrong-doing intentionally, knowing the consequences. Guilt eventually arises if the‘non-reporter’eventually realises the impact of their actions on others, especially if in due course, someone becomes seriously disheartened, aggrieved or leaves the organisation. The ‘witness’ may cope by dismissing this knowledge and rationalise that they are powerless to do anything about it by being plagued by“what if..?”questions. People are more likely to respond to a situation requiring immediate action to resolve a problem quickly as opposed to one that is hidden and requires a longer termfix.
Feeling and expressing guilt for any wrongdoing is seen as worthy by most people. People, acting wrongly and not expressing any signs of guilt for their actions, are more likely to be blamed rather than understood. Introducing victim-impact statements into our legal system is an example of the perpetrator taking responsibility for their actions as well an opportunity to express remorse. In these situations, guilt is more likely to have a positive influence on motivation in
reforming behaviour and future actions. While the perpetrator may not be praised for accepting responsibility and proclaiming their guilt, the victims and the com- munity will feel more inclined to see that justice has been levelled. Others may be deterred from wrongdoing due to potential public censure and embarrassment (Cohen et al.2012, p. 355).
Experiencing guilt is linked with regret and shame. Research shows that when people experience guilt they are more likely to think, feel, and act ethically (Tangney and Dearing2002; Tangney et al.2007, 2009,2012).
As suggested above, guilt shapes people’s attitudes and actions as in assuming responsibility for one’s actions. Further, a person may feel guilty about not turning up to work on time even though no one notices it. If so their guilt may function to redirect their future actions and decisions about punctuality and strengthen their future resolve to arrive on time. In this case, guilt has a positive influence on motivation.
Feeling and expressing guilt is a way of manifesting a duty of care1to others and an attempt to restore genuine bonds that may have been broken. Psychologically, guilt is sensed when there is a disconnect between what the person believes is right including the morally correct thing to do and their subsequent actions if these fall short of the former. For example feeling guilty about not working back late when the organisation is under pressure or not fulfilling the requirements of the project to your best efforts. How deep the guilt is felt will depend on its nature, whether the person dwells on it, what the reasons for it will influence whether the experience worsens, is overcome or suppressed. In some instances especially if the issue becomes public, such as failing a performance deliverable, guilt is associated with public embarrassment or shame.
Psychological guilt is also experienced when a person(s) from a similar ethnic background violates the rights of a group from a different one. Collective guilt is a despairing feeling experienced when people perceive they or others (whom they identify with in some way e.g. ethnic, religious) is responsible for wrongly harming another, even when they are not personally responsible and had no connection with their actions (Gunn and Wilson2011). An example is the historical mistreatment of Aboriginal Australians (Zimmermann et al.2011). If there is no apology and no recompense, even in this situation some of the Australian population will feel psychological and social guilt for the past and current situation.
People’s response to psychological guilt varies from a sense of“feeling bad”; owning up to their actions and either apologising on behalf of others or themselves e.g. I accept that my actions are discriminatory and issue an apology; I violated the rules and will recompense my team; or confessing to a misdemeanour and seeking a penalty.
1Generically and legally.
6.2.1 Guilt and Shame
Guilt and shame are activated when a person knowingly acts against what they know to be‘right’and cannot justify their actions to themselves even as a post hoc rationalisation. If this is the case, they can feel ashamed, embarrassed and confused.
However, they will either struggle to alleviate their dissonance and guilt or seek to make amends. A mentor may assist the mentee to come to terms with this. For example, this can occur where a manager has treated a subordinate badly without reason. If the situation is not managed it may lead them to feel defensive, and this could exacerbate the situation (Tangney and Tracy 2012; Tangney et al. 2005).
A person may feel guilt after offending her supervisor (action-focused), and feel shame when acting disloyally towards them. While guilt encourages accountability and an apology at times aimed at re-establishing relationships, shame tends to lead people to act in the opposite way. They may seek to run away from the situation or exit altogether so as to minimise further embarrassment and stigma. Mortification and guilt (but not shame) are emotions that people can use to help them restore stability in a situation while simultaneously inhibiting further indiscretions and encouraging them to make amends (Tangney and Tracy2012).
6.2.2 Envy
Envy, generalised or specific, is also a reason why a mentee may decide to embark on mentoring. Envy occurs when a person feels aggrieved because they perceive they have been treated unfairly. This unfair treatment could be direct and specific or generalised in that they were dealt an unfair hand by life. Envy then involves a process of social comparison (Ortony et al.1988). Mentees may be experiencing envy about why others are being promoted, and they are not or about a specific peer whom they compete with has now been made their supervisor through a highly sought after promotion. Envy is experienced more intensely the closer it is to the mentee both in relational and skill terms because the opportunities were there for them to achieve also and believe that they should have attained the role. Envy is more intensely felt, when they dislike the person they were competing against (Smith et al.1996).
The mentee may only have a tacit understanding of the part envy plays in this situation. They may not be able to admit their own feelings of envy as it would be admitting to their weaknesses not only in not getting the job but also in feeling envy itself. If the mentee does not accept feeling envious, s/he will seek to cover it up both to themselves and others by making excuses such as they were not interested in the role, too many other commitments to take on such a senior role or blame political manoeuvrings behind the scenes (Salovey and Rodin1984). Such tactics to suppress envy while relieving self and social damage can lead to longer-term
self-destruction such as not applying for the next promotion and thereby curtailing not only career advancement but also career development.
Moreover, a mentee may not have expressed the felt envy to anyone else, and so if it is discussed with a mentor for the first time, it is a deeply significant and confronting moment for the mentee. It is one issue that a mentor might wish to probe as the relationship develops and their mentee’s trust is gained. They may have been suppressing this view up until their meeting with the mentor where this is first raised and struggling with their emotions about it.
It is healthy to use others as a benchmark for both performance and achieve- ments. The reason for this is that most people engage in some form of social comparison with peers or others at some stage so as to learn from them in some way. Much of this occurs without any sense of resentment, an emotion underlying envy. Learning by social comparison is natural from a very young age, where peers become the benchmark for action and then performance.
Most people strive for self-improvement and this requires a yardstick for self-assessment. Peer comparison is often used for the purpose of judging one’s performance or outcomes against another. It is often competitive but not neces- sarily. Even if it is, this should not be viewed as necessarily negative. On balance, people’s definition of success and failure are constructed by comparing their own performances to those of others.
Most people compete in some way: from the time they first enter school until they retire. Competition necessitates self-comparison with others: what they have attained and how they perform. Outside of these domains, people strive to compete for resources whether this is in the form of opportunities and access to resources.
Being competitive relies on an individual’s capability and talent as well as their accumulated resources such as knowledge, access to income and so on. Sometimes these are inherited biologically, familial and others have been competed for by staving off others.
When a person compares favourably to others on a given dimension, it is typ- ically met with a positive affective response. And so people learn to feel rewarded when they compete favourably with others which in turn increases the likelihood that the strategy worked and is likely to be repeated.
People’s response is to strive hard to enhance one’s chances or appeal so as to achieve an improved future outcome (Buss and Dedden1990). Most societies are successful because of this go all-out behaviour. When people compete and do not achieve the desired outcome, some are not daunted by defeat and invest even more effort to achieve the desired outcome. Others“give up”. People, who are outper- formed, feel okay if the outcome is fair. If not, competing and losing may lead to them to feeling resentment. Both emotions are characterised as envy (Smith and Kim 2007). A second response is to render the competition less attractive or appealing.
Gaining insight into envy assists a mentee conceptually to identify what they are trying to achieve and how this relates to their sense of hurt. If well-founded, the mentor can assist the mentee to develop a course of action to redress both deficits in
their actions and emotions. Dealing with the underlying issue rather than a surface one helps the mentee come to terms with it and readjust for next time.
Superiority is far more negative emotion. It is a form of self-satisfaction in relation to others. It may target another’s misfortune, termed ‘schadenfreude’ (Smith et al.1996) e.g. not getting a job, losing out on a project, failing an exam and so on. How open should a mentor be in pointing out to a mentee that they detect the mentee’s triumphalism? Through an appropriate questioning and problem-solving approach discussed in earlier chapters, particularly Chap.3, it is skilfully handled by the mentor and should be. Peers and supervisors would be well aware of a person’s high-handedness. This posture is a sign of emotional imma- turity and potentially a reason why a mentee’s career is or will stagnate.
6.2.3 Guilt and Self-pity
Expressions of self-pity are not often forthcoming in mentoring. However, there are signs that can alert the mentor about this such as the ways that mentees use to cope in difficult situations, such as escape, physical or mental, preventing them from going to great lengths to conceal their guilt. Self-pity, rumination and projection confusion blocks coming to terms with the issue as these intensify felt-distress and throw any attempts to analyse the situation into chaos. People become self-absorbed and focus on the emotion rather than the issue at hand. Self-pity leads to disen- gagement by personalising issues, becoming defensive, intensifying negative rather than positive emotions.
Mentoring provides the way out of guilt through engagement with a trusted mentor and assists the mentee to re-engage with the problem at hand. The mentor and mentee discover and learn not only about the things that are self-undermining but also how to build a strategy to meet these challenges. Mentoring forms a positive relational resource as a result.