2.4 Power in an Organisational Context
2.4.4 Organisations and Power: The Psychodynamic Approach
57
that are rooted not only in organisational norms, but societal norms as well. The unconscious processes of groups in organisations and the emerging culture and power dynamics arising within a system has been the focus of psychodynamic studies within organisations over the past seventy years.
58
In the previous section on a systems approach to organisations, power is recognised as an unconscious process at an individual and group level, which will impact on conscious processes, such as formal authority, structures and goals of an organisation.
A psychodynamic approach to organisations often incorporates the systemic paradigm, but typically focuses more closely on individual behaviour in groups, where individual’s motivations need to be understood and analysed (Cilliers & Koortzen 2005;
Gabriel 1999). French psychologist Gustave Le Bon (1960) was one of the earliest researchers to study groups (Gabriel 1999). At the heart of his theory lie two ideas: first, that the individual’s mental processes are radically altered when they find themselves as a member of a crowd, sharing the emotional experiences of others; and secondly, that within crowds, emotional and unconscious forces predominate against the forces of reason. This has significance for the role of leadership in a group and the unconscious, emotional responses it may generate amongst followers.
Bion (1961), one of the most prominent contributors to the field of group dynamics developed Le Bon’s theories further by studying the processes in small groups in the army during World War II and later at the Tavistock clinic (Gabriel 1999). He identified three basic assumptions to be studied in the individual (micro system), the group or division (meso-system) and the organisation (macro system). These assumptions were the concepts of dependency in groups which manifest in the group’s need for an authority figure; the fight/flight dynamic in which individuals respond to the anxiety of organisational life; and pairing in which groups or individuals connect to other powerful groups or individuals to alleviate anxiety and isolation. These assumptions have been accepted as the cornerstones of the study of organisational dynamics (Cilliers 2010, 2012; Gabriel 1999).
The Tavistock method developed by Bion in the 1940’s shifted how groups were viewed and instead of focusing on roles that individuals assume in work groups, he focused on the dynamics of leadership and authority relations in groups. Bion (1961) concluded that projective identification, a psychological process first introduced by developmental psychologist Klein (1946), is the essence of group experience and functions at the level of unconscious beliefs about the leader and other group identification (Gould et al. 2004). Projective identification in a group context describes the follower’s propensity for evoking reactions in a leader that approximate to his or her
59
own internal experience. The emergent leader of a group, according to Bion (1961), is a creation of the group as a whole and corresponds directly with primitive fantasies that are projected onto the leader by group members. These may be idealisation of the leader and personal identification to the extent of merging with them or demonization of the leader and a wish to annihilate them (Gould et al. 2004). A major focus of the psychodynamic approach in the years that followed Bion’s studies became the interaction of leaders and their followers and the power dynamics between them (Blasé
& Blasé 2000; Cilliers 2010, 2012).
According to Gabriel (1999) the emotional needs of a group may drive them to seek strong identification with the leader to the point of idealisation of the leader. The emotional role of the leader becomes the transferred and projective target of the group’s feelings ranging from dependency, fear, love to envy and rage (Stapley 2006). The psychodynamic perspective can help leaders appreciate how powerful feelings are unleashed in others and in themselves. Leaders play an essential role in the unconscious life of groups and become enmeshed in the group’s emotional processes (Gabriel 1999).
The powerful emotional dependency of a group on a leader is played out through the followers’ fantasies of the leader which may include the way in which they care for them, their infallibility or their availability as a leader (Kets de Vries 2006).
The leader stands at the boundary between rational and non-rational decision making, in psychodynamic terms, between realities and fantasies (Gabriel 1999; Stapley 2006).
They rely on their followers to engage in their dreams and visions to achieve organisational outcomes. Followers have a critical role in helping the leaders translate this vision into reality, but they can also become complicit in protecting leaders from this reality so that the faith in the vision is never threatened (Gabriel 1999). This is dangerous when leaders become trapped in delusions of grandeur and omnipotence and so absorbed with fantasy they lose touch with reality (Kets de Vries 2006; Blasé &
Blasé 2000).
Emotional engagement with an organisation, according to Carroll (1998) depends not only on identification with the leader, but the belief that consenting to the fantasy will result in a satisfying and non-threatening order. Voronov and Vince (2012) emphasise the link between emotions and domination experienced within the ‘field’ of the
60
organisation. The ‘field’ of the organisation is defined by Gestalt theraprists as “a web of relationships and exists in a context of even larger webs of relationships” (Yontef 1993). The organisational ‘field’ contributes to both reproducing and transforming the organisational order. In a psychodynamic study, exploring South African diversity dynamics, Pretorious, Cilliers and May (2012: 7) affirmed that “South African diversity dynamics is not a rational phenomenon and cannot be treated as one.” In their study, they highlighted high levels of anxiety amongst participants from both genders and diverse races, which manifested unconsciously, around authority and the taking up of leadership roles. The emotional experiences associated with women leaders’
construction of power in the interviews will have a bearing on the extent to which they engage in the transformation or perpetuation of existing organisational norms around the construct. The perpetuation of organisational norms where they are destructive, dysfunctional or even abusive, is the focus of more recent studies by organisational psychologists due to the common occurrence of corporate bullying and organisational corruption (Cilliers 2012).