Lonely Managers at the Top

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 7/30/2019 Lonely Managers at the Top

    1/5

    Lonely Managers at the Top

    Power is coveted, sought, and tightly held onto. From the animal kingdom to all human

    societies, power is the currency of success.

    Those in power are less likely to reciprocate because they tend to believe that the

    favors they have received were selfishly motivated.

    However, the very nature of power and its psychological effects often leave the powerful

    feeling lonely at the top.

    We list five ways in which power perverts, contorts and undermines a number of

    psychological processes that normally nurture close connections and form the foundation of

    healthy relationships.

    1. Power alters our beliefs about others generosity. When people do nice things for us, we

    automatically devise an explanation for their behavior: Why did they go out of their way tohelp me? What is their motivation?

    Often this process is so quick and automatic that we dont even realize we are doing it, but

    despite its subtlety, it has dramatic implications for how our relationships develop and how

    close or connected to others we remain.

    Typically, our theories for why people do nice things for us reflect well on the giver and

    portend good things for the relationship. We often think: Because this person really likes and

    cares about me. Because this is a kind and trustworthy person. Thus, we often see others

    through a beneficent lens.

    However, ones own power represents a compelling alternative explanation for what appears

    to be another persons generosity.

  • 7/30/2019 Lonely Managers at the Top

    2/5

    When individuals have power, they know they are more likely to be the target of opportunists,

    who use kind words and seemingly selfless acts not for altruistic reasons but to further their

    own selfish goals.

    It is this alternative explanation that always exists for the powerful and leads them to become

    more suspicious of others seemingly generous acts.

    Of course this jaundiced view of others intentions can be functionalwho wants to develop a

    relationship with a selfish sycophant?but those in power often over-apply this principle and

    become more suspicious of any kind acts they are offered, irrespective of the source.

    In one study, we asked people to recall the most recent favor they had received and who had

    done it for them. Most people wrote about favors from friends or family, such as a ride to the

    airport or taking care of a child.

    Importantly, there were no systematic power dynamics described in these descriptions.

    Then we randomly assigned half the participants to complete an exercise that would make

    them feel powerful and half to complete a neutral exercise. When we then asked everyone to

    think back to the favor they had described earlier and report why they thought the favor-giver

    had acted thus, we found that feelings of power dramatically altered reactions to the favor.

    Simply making people feel powerful made them more likely to report that the favor had been

    selfishly motivated. Those in power saw, for example, a friends favor through a cynical lens,

    as being driven by more opportunistic and conniving intentions.

    2. Power affects our responses to the kind acts of others. Our beliefs about the motivations

    behind the actions of others ultimately drive disconnection because they inform our responses

    to gestures.

    One of the most basic and critical responses to others generosity is to reciprocate with

    generous gestures of our own. Reciprocity, the social norm that people should do unto others

    as others have done to them, has been identified as a key component of relationshipsfrom

    Roman times by the philosopher Cicero to more recently by sociologists such as AlvinGouldnerand even of a stable society, because it creates social equilibrium and cohesion.

    However, we only reciprocate favors that we think were done for our benefit and not for the

    favor-givers ulterior motives. For example, if a work colleague stays late to help you out on ajoint project that was important to her own success, you will feel less compelled to reciprocate

    than if that colleague had stayed late to help on a project she wasnt part of and thus wouldnt

    personally benefit from the projects success.

    Those in power are less likely to reciprocate because they tend to believe that the favors they

    have received were selfishly motivated. If we return to the work example, and add our

    knowledge from point 1 above, then we may begin to see how the powerful can become the

    architects of their own loneliness.

    Lets say a colleague stays at work late to help you on a project that shes not associated with.

    She saw you could use some help and offered to stay a few extra hours. Our findings suggestthateven if this persons motivation in doing the favor is completely benevolent, only

    driven by true generositythis persons hierarchical position in the organization relative to

  • 7/30/2019 Lonely Managers at the Top

    3/5

    you will affect your response. If this person is junior to you in the organization, you will be

    less likely to reciprocate than if this person were a peer. This lack of reciprocity means that if

    a similar situation emerged sometime later you would be less likely to help this junior person

    in a similar situation.

    Why?

    Because of the cynical attributions that power inspires. Your power over the junior person

    makes you more likely to believe she did the initial favor for selfish reasons and therefore is

    less deserving of reciprocity. Moreover, by failing to reciprocate the favor, you will be

    keeping distance between yourself and your more junior co-workers.

    3. Power reduces trust It has been said that love makes the world go around, but when we

    speak of the quality of our relationships with others, it may be more accurate to say that it is

    really trust that is the engine of effective social relationships.

    When we trust someone, we believe that the person will act in our best interest, even when weare not there to monitor their behavior. At work, interpersonal trust can be hugely beneficial,

    not only because it feels better to work with people you trust, but also because it saves time

    and effort. For example, if you trust that your co-workers are not working on their own

    agenda and to your disadvantage, you dont need to obsessively attend to their

    communications with others.

    Trust doesnt just happen though; it develops. By exchanging small vulnerabilities back and

    fortha favor received, an embarrassing disclosure revealedtwo individuals build a

    relationship characterized by ever greater trust.

    Power puts a wrench in that process by creating a reason to mistrust others kind acts. The

    powerful generate cynical attributions for others kind deeds and fail to reciprocate with

    actions that display their own vulnerability, thereby stunting the possibility for a trusting

    relationship to develop.

    4. Power reduces commitment. The word commitment, as it applies to interpersonal

    relationships, generally brings to mind images of romantic attachment. To demonstrate that

    our theory affects not only work interactions, but also personal relationships, we looked at

    how power may create loneliness in marriages.

    We asked married individuals to think about a specific favor that their spouse had done forthem, to answer why they thought the spouse had done the favor, and then to report how

    committed they were to the relationship.

    At the end of the study, each married participant indicated who earned more income: the

    respondent, the spouse or about the same. Income has been cited across many literatures as a

    source of power, both inside and outside marriages.

    Indeed, we found that spouses who earn more felt more powerful in their marriages compared

    to those who earned the same or less than their spouse.

    Consistent with our theory, participants who earned more than their spouse, and thus hadmore power in the relationship, were more suspicious of their spouses motives in offering the

    favor.

  • 7/30/2019 Lonely Managers at the Top

    4/5

    Remarkably these cynical attributions, which appear to be part and parcel of having power,

    led the high income earners to feel less committed to their marriage relationship. Thus, the

    very state of being powerful causes individuals to feel less connected to others, even to ones

    own spouse.

    5. Power damages relationships in the very moments when they have the greatestpotential to develop. The dynamics we have outlined above present the possibility that

    powerful people are just generally suspicious of others. Whether instrumental or beneficent,

    those who interact with power-holders will be perceived as having more suspect motives.

    Interestingly, this doesnt appear to be the case.

    In one study, we asked participants about a peer or a subordinate who had either done a favor

    for the participant or just done required work. It turned out that participants trusted

    subordinates less than equal-powered peers only after receiving a favor, but not after

    receiving required work.

    These results mean that those in power are not necessarily walking around every day feeling

    suspicious of their colleagues. Rather, it is in the very moment that someone tries to establish

    closeness through generous acts and unsolicited favors that power gets in the way.

    Overall, power weaves a jaundiced and cynical psychological web. In the face of favors, the

    powerful see selfishness, refuse to reciprocate, strangle trust, and ultimately feel less

    committed. It is these psychological and social processes that leave the powerful sitting ever

    more alone at the top.

    What can you do about this?

    Many of these psychological processes occur outside of conscious awareness and it can be

    difficult to reign in. However, one potential step is to increase awareness of the different

    spheres and roles you take on in your lifemanager, colleague, parent or friendand the

    different psychological states you inhabit in each.

    Instead of instinctively and unconsciously drawing cynical explanations, take a step back andtry and to truly discern where the generosity came from. Look for patterns in this persons

    behaviorare they generally generous or do they only help me just before the want

    something from me?

    By bringing more conscious awareness to the situation, individuals have greater capacity to

    differentiate the generous from the sycophantic.

    It is also important to note that favors motivated by selfish intentions are not necessarily to

    your disadvantage in the short term. So while you still may want to exercise caution in

    exposing your own vulnerabilities to such favor-givers, reminding yourself to say thank you

    and showing your appreciation in small ways can do wonders to create a more positive

    working relationship.

    Another key solution is to avoid carrying feelings of power from one context into another in

    which ones power is less relevant.

  • 7/30/2019 Lonely Managers at the Top

    5/5

    We know whenever people feel powerful, even in the absence of actual power they

    demonstrate greater suspicion of the favors of others. Therefore, a conference call from home

    with a subordinate, in which power is relevant, may affect your behavior with your children or

    your spouse just after you hang up.

    Create cues that remind you to shake off one role and engage in the mindset appropriate to thecurrent context. A brief pause to remind yourself of this process, or thinking of a memory

    with your children or spouse, can often do the trick.

    Awareness of this psychological lens that power provides can be the key to feeling socially

    connected without leaving oneself overly exposed to selfish sycophants. By doing so, the

    powerful can sit at the top, neither lonely nor vulnerable.

    The authors of this WSJ article are: M. Ena Inesi of London Business school and Adam D.

    Galinsky of Kellogg Graduate School of Business, Northwestern University and is based on

    an academic paper by M. Ena Inesi, Deborah H Gruenfeld (Stanford Graduate School of

    Business) and Adam D. Galinsky. This is the latest article in The Sources managementseries.