Keywords

1 Introduction

From the perspective of an individual, the literature disputes a common definition for shame. Shame is often closely linked to humiliation, embarrassment and guilt (Leask, 2013; Zavaleta Reyles, 2007). Shame seems to indicate a painful discord between the self and a specific recognised norm or failure of own standards (Mayer, Viviers, & Tonelli, 2017; Wüschner, 2017; Zavaleta Reyles, 2007). When the self, splits into observed and observing parts, the personal judgement of shame may lead the person to believe they were somehow deserving of the feelings of shame (Zavaleta Reyles, 2007). Imposed or self-imposed withdrawal behaviour may follow as attention is focused inwardly. Wüschner (2017) states that excessive shame experienced in situations of high visibility rests heavily on an individual because of the intensity of the feeling and loss of agency often expressed in the lowering of the gaze or covering the face. In effect, an individual trying to hide from the situation from which they may not be able to remove themselves physically, remaining in a position of discomfort in the presence of others. Shaming an individual in this manner leaves no room for the individual’s subjectivity, but rather seeks to destroy the person, not physically but socially. A power relationship which involves dominance over the shamed according to Long (2008) by the proud, the social character of shame. Through exclusion in the form of inclusion, the odd one and the unwelcomed, according to Wüschner (2017).

From a systems psychodynamic perspective, shame intersects with the manifestation of envy (May, 2017), a defence which serves as a mask to hide anxiety within a system which results in envious attacks on individuals and groups within social and organisational systems. When envy manifests as a negative emotion malicious pleasure may be taken at others’ misfortune, enticing aggressive behaviour and conflict in groups, and trying to bring down the other (Tai, Narayanan, & Mcallister, 2012).

Strong emotional reactions of anger, anxiety, shame, envy or idealisation are clues to underlying dynamics such as transferences and projective identification dynamics in systems (Cilliers & Smit, 2006). The underlying behavioural dynamics of experiencing the idealised parts of the self as unattainable and, unwanted parts such as shame as denigrating, the system splits of those parts and projects them onto others where the others contain the unwanted or idealised parts on behalf of the system (Cilliers & Smit, 2006). In a perverse form of defensiveness against shame those who wish to distance themselves from shame lest their own shame be exposed need to see the other shamed so that they might see that which they are afraid of in the other and deny the shame in themselves (Long, 2008). In this manner, members of organisations, through unconscious processes of splitting and projection, covertly mobilise individuals and sub-groups to hold and express intolerable emotions such as shame and envy on their behalf (Newton & Goodman, 2009).

1.1 Systems Psychodynamics a Composite of Three Distinct but Related Theories

The concept of an organisation as a system originates from Open Systems Theory (Rice, 1953), which is the study of organisations as any open living entity. The primary task of an organisation is to transform inputs to outputs; a task the system must carry out to survive and to which all sub systems must be aligned. Transferring inputs to outputs requires permeable boundary regions around the system. These open systems are comparatively independent of individuals. However, individuals are affected by the system both psychologically and emotionally (Eloquin, 2016). More recently, the permeability of the boundaries of systems have been extended to include the realities of the internet, technology and social media which operate without boundaries where an organisation is no longer just a whole made up of parts, but an ever-changing network (Western, 2012).

Psychoanalytic perspectives on individual experiences and mental processes within systems or networks, such as transference resistance, objects relations and phantasy, are considered as the psychodynamics of individuals in organisations and organisations themselves. These include unconscious group and social processes, which are simultaneously both a source and a consequence of unresolved and unrecognised organisational difficulties. The central view is the existence of primitive anxieties of a persecutory and depressive nature and the mobilisation of social defences against them. Which would either impede or facilitate task performance (Cilliers & Africa, 2012).

The fundamental principle of psychoanalysis in systems psychodynamics considers that individuals have an unconscious mind that shapes their behaviour to a greater or lesser extent (Eloquin, 2016). The task of psychoanalysis is to identify hidden patterns of past experiences and relieve the individual from their power. Often by confronting painful emotional “truths” which trigger anxiety, an individual can defend against by resorting to defence mechanisms in order not to become overwhelmed with feelings of anxiety. Understanding anxiety is therefore a key part of psychoanalysis and systems psychodynamics, as are the defence mechanisms mobilised to manage anxiety (Eloquin, 2016).

Group relations is the third distinct theory within systems psychodynamics, which was largely the work of Bion (1961). In this theory, Bion (1961) postulates basic assumptions as the cornerstones for studying relationships in organisational systems (Cilliers & Africa, 2012; Eloquin, 2016):

  • Dependency, which is the groups’ unconscious projection for attention and help onto an authority figure as if a parent object

  • Fight/flight a defence mechanism to try to cope with discomfort involving an authority figure, that is, management or leadership

  • Pairing with perceived powerful others, such as a manager or leader, splitting the authority figure as an individual or pair in order to be able to identify with one part as a saviour.

Basic assumptions are never exhausted. It is not imperative that groups rid themselves of these characteristics either (Hayden & Molenkamp, 2002). For example, the military and industry capitalise on fight/flight needs, all strong primitive feelings channelled in the service of the work task. However, when individuals or sub-groups become stuck or over-reliant on these basic assumptions, defence mechanisms are employed (Cilliers & Africa, 2012; Hayden & Molenkamp, 2002). Rationalisation, intellectualisation, regression and denial are used unconsciously by the system to act against anxiety to remain in control and to stay emotionally uninvolved to avoid pain and anxiety.

Defence mechanisms such as splitting, and projection does not change the behaviour of the receiver of the projection necessarily. If, however, the receiver of the projection identifies, with the projection, and takes it onto himself or herself, or the system, projection identification occurs (Bartle, 2015). Identifying with the projection could be because of the systems tendency or unconscious vulnerability or predisposition to being drawn into a basic assumption type of functioning such as feelings of anger, guilt, shame and envy; where an individual or system has a valence for regularly receiving these projections and act out a role accordingly. Counter transference, on the other hand, is a state of mind where other people’s feelings are experienced as one’s own. The projective identification could lead to the recipient acting out the projected feelings (Cilliers & Africa, 2012; Handy & Rowlands 2017; Motsoaledi & Cilliers, 2012).

Basic group functioning means becoming stuck in these basic assumptions and defence mechanisms at the expense of transferring inputs to outputs. When there is insight into and taking responsibility for own relationships, the work group functions towards the primary task of the system (Cilliers & Africa, 2012). However, the work group with the underlying elements of maturity and reflective processes combined with well-structured agreement to work on a clearly defined primary task may be rare (Allcorn, 2015).

A case study, part of a larger research project on shame in South African organisations by Mayer and Tonelli (2017) is presented next. Considering the lens of systems psychodynamics, the case study is an example of a system experiencing anxiety over its own performance and the resulting projection of shame (attack on an individual) onto and into the individual. This military setting serves as an example of a system which has an over reliance on the basic assumption fight/flight in the service of its task. From this example coaches, consultants and other professionals working with individuals and organisations might consider the unconscious dynamics at play in systems, which may have ramifications for transforming shame if unconscious behaviour remains unknown, as it will influence relationships mostly negatively and possibly even destructively according to Cilliers (2006) and highlighted in the case study.

2 War and Peace—A Case Study

The South African military had undergone a change process from a military power towards a peacekeeping force. This was during a time after 1994 when the South African Defence Force, which was known as a formidable force on the African continent while upholding the apartheid regime, transformed by integrating previously combatant forces into one national peacekeeping force. In this setting, an Industrial and Organisational (IO) psychologist shares his experience of shame.

He was attached to a battalion as part of the executive team and was invited by the commanding officer and senior personnel to different platoons in the area to address these troops. On one specific day, the commanding officer could not accompany the team to address the troops, at which time the commanding officer instructed the team to address the troops on his behalf. When the time came for the IO psychologist to address the troops he mentioned to them, that as a psychologist he noticed a certain amount of tentative behaviour from the troops when they had to engage “the enemy” in their training. He suggested to the troops that it might be difficult to engage and diffuse a situation if they were tentative. In his mind he was aware that the soldiers were moving away from the role of combatent soldier to peacekeeping force and that this process was difficult for them. What he was not aware of was that the troops did not take his observation positively but perceived it as negative feedback.

He recalls that some of the troops then complained to the platoon officer and the news was communicated to the commanding officer. The next morning, the commanding officer called him over within listening distance of others, where people could hear that he was being scolded. The commanding officer said: “How dare you break the morale of the soldiers!” He then told the IO psychologist that he was there to motivate people, but he was actually destroying the morale of the troops. The IO psychologist felt shocked at the statement as well as being attacked in public. He recalls that he felt his shoulders go down and head drop until he felt himself being filled with rage, at which time he responded by telling the commanding officer: “How dare you speak to me like that!” He told the commanding officer that he would go and talk to the troops, not to apologise as the commanding officer expected from him, but to explain why he said what he had said. The commanding officer then walked away from him, which the IO psychologist found strange, as that was not the ordinary way such an altercation with a commanding officer would have ended. Usually, the commanding officer “was supposed to thrash him further”, the IO psychologist remarked as he was attacking the commanding officer in the presence of the troops. However, at that time, the commanding officer just returned to his tent. From that day onwards, the commanding officer excused the IO psychologist from his order group and said that he was no longer welcome to attend those meetings. The IO psychologist recalled that “The exercise was still going on for three weeks; I was lying there in my tent not doing anything.”

He communicated the situation to his peers who told him to ignore the situation and write a report. He recalls that he often thinks of this experience, and how it made him feel. He worked with many of the soldiers’ present, which made him think of his own credibility and reputation after the incident. He had feelings of humiliation and embarrassment about it. He recalls that to this day he has not spoken to his wife about the incident. Other than the “very cold clinical” report he had to write about the incident, he has never spoken about his feelings and emotions around the incident to anyone. He does recall that it was very difficult. When he thinks back on the incident, he is aware that it has so many layers.

3 Connecting the Inner, Personal World to Outer Work

A possible working hypothesis may be that, the possible shame the troops felt at having to become a peacekeeping force, and their struggle with the new identity, resulted in anxiety. An anxiety, which manifested in experiences of shame in the system. In defending against feelings of shame, shame was projected onto the IO psychologist to rid themselves of these feelings as “how dare he” call them tentative. The IO psychologist then introjected the shame to carry on behalf of the system. The introjection of the shame seems to be held in the expression of “how dare he” which the IO Psychologist projected back at the Commanding Officer.

The hypothesis as a tentative reflection, from a meta-position, has interpretive value for an individual and a system, about what may be happening in the system. There seems to be acknowledgement of the emotional task of the system in creating a new identity. Which according to Cilliers (2006) provides evidence for recognising the psychodynamic evidence, of basic assumptions. One such basic assumption would be fight/flight where the troops flight from the anxiety of what it would mean to be tentative in their role as troops while creating their new identity, which manifests as shame. The troops then fight the IO Psychologist for daring such an observation and report him to the leadership to be dealt with. A familiar defence in the military which harnesses the basic assumption dependency towards its task. What needs to be explored though is how these basic assumptions, core anxieties and social defense patterns influenced task performance, Cilliers (2006). Mobilising thinking processes in this manner then creates potential space for linking where new meanings and insights can be formed (Rao, 2013) towards transforming shame in a space which is often confronting and uncomfortable as it may challenge habitual ways of thinking and doing things (Nossal, 2007).

3.1 Transforming Shame a Coaching Model

At the time of the case study the military’s task was to transform towards a peacekeeping force. Addressing the personal shame experienced by the IO Psychologist alone, without making the connections between the individual and the system would not lead to sustainable changes for both the individual and/or the system. Sustainable changes can only be brought about if connections are made between the individual and the system. A coaching model by Dr. Simon Western is presented which considers relationships, teamwork and leadership capabilities, towards sustainable changes, developed from a rigorous theoretical base and extensive practice (Western, 2012).

By applying the Analytic-Network Coaching (A-N coaching) model, to the case study, there is an acknowledgement that, the individual has an unconscious mind that shapes behaviour and understanding, in terms of past experiences which may assist the coach when it comes to transforming the experienced shame in the system (Eloquin, 2016). From a systems perspective there is acknowledgement that destructive forces of shame may be used to maintain the status quo. Nossal (2007), states that both the individual and the system may defend against feelings of shame in possibly destructive ways in avoiding the task as evident in the case study.

The A-N coaching model could assist an individual to process feeling of shame through five frames. The first of these are depth analysis, the search for the authentic self, identifying defences and patterns of defences against shame. Relational analysis goes beyond intra-personal dynamics focused on by many coaching models by taking account of inter-personal relationships and their influences on feelings of shame. Leadership analysis enables the individual to discover the “unique leader within and “challenge and disrupt the individual’s ideas of what leadership is. Network analysis not only focuses on the system in which the individual operates but extends to the concept of a network society taking in the new realities of the internet, technology and social media into account where boundaries and hierarchical structures are not that clear (Western, 2012). Finally, the frame strategic analysis works on two levels connecting and learning from the previous frames where individuals develop a personal strategy to maximise their potential and an organisational-networked strategy which focuses on where the individual can influence the strategic direction of the organisation most effectively. Analysing and connecting the learning in the previous frames makes the whole greater than the sum of the parts (Western, 2012).

In the section to follow the frames are applied to the case study however, it must be noted that applying the full coaching frame is out of the scope of this chapter. For further reading, the literature on the topic by Dr. Simon Western could be consulted.

3.2 Steps in Analytic Network Coaching

See Fig. 16.1.

Fig. 16.1
figure 1

ANC coaching frames Western (2012)

Full size image

3.2.1 Depth Analysis

Depth analysis is the foundation stone on which this coaching system rests. It helps people to understand who they really are and to discover and re-discover themselves. Within the context of experiencing shame, it is important to explore the emotions that were provoked by questioning meaning, identity, authenticity and engagement.

It is important to create a space where the individual can take a step back and explore the inner self. As the frame suggests this is a depth analysis, the mundane needs to be set aside to focus on emotions, the unconscious and the human spirit. The aim is to ground the individual about their feelings of shame with courage and authenticity.

In this stance, reflection is encouraged towards exploration of defence patterns. The IO psychologist could be encouraged to play with ideas creatively to disrupt normative thinking about the shame he experienced. Free associations in an environment such as an art gallery, museum or the use of materials such as photos or drawings to open a space for new reflections of shame experiences could be encouraged, to view the environment in a new way. The individual is coached to make links between shame and the space or materials. The IO Psychologist did allude to a pattern when he stated that he had a strong valence for competence, a “need” in almost everything he does, and when his competence is questioned, he reacts “forcefully” as he did to the commanding officer. The IO psychologist could be asked to consider a question such as this in terms of his cultural self, to identify important cultural themes that is a vital part of himself such as “how does he perceive his age, ethnicity, place, family history, religion, gender and economic back ground shape what he thinks and feels are normal feelings of shame”?

Working through these reflections in a deeply personal manner could bring about understanding and insight of where the feelings of shame come from. Recognising patterns would enable the IO psychologist to identify where these may play out in the future.

3.2.2 Relational Analysis

Moving from the inner self towards the outer self, the focus shifts to an individual’s team or group, family and friends to gain an understanding of the relational dynamics that exist between themselves and others. The aim is to gain insight to these dynamics and to realise that an individual does not need to be at the mercy of past patterns of shame he may have identified in the previous frame. Inter-personal dynamics are real and powerful. In terms of the IO Psychologist, inter personal relationships such as those with family, authority figures, groups and social roles are explored, gaining insight to these relationships. Coaching the individual to recognise how they are caught up in roles, where they carry their own and other emotions can open new perspectives of feelings of shame together with what the individual contains on behalf of others. In terms of the case study the IO Psychologist would consider the shame he carried on behalf of the troops and their need to see him shamed by the Commanding Officer, thereby reinstating their “morale” a common sub-task of the military and a rational argument from the Commanding officer which allows them to maintain the status quo and flight away from the experiences of shame held for them by the IO Psychologist.

In this method the coaching process itself becomes the approach to explore inter-relationships. The coaching-client relationship is not unique or different from other relationships. In exploring the feelings of shame, the coach would use the coaching relationship as live data, by becoming aware of transference, counter-transference and projections that take place between the coach and individual. Providing hypotheses to the individual of what the coach had become aware of during their interactions. In this manner the individual often gains tremendous insight into their own inter-relationships with others.

3.2.3 Leadership Analysis

Western (2012) views leadership as a “complex process and distributed phenomenon” where leadership transcends one individual. A-N coaching uses a framework of leadership to explore an individual’s unique leadership and followership potential. The central idea being that leadership is both within and beyond the individual and distributed throughout the organisation. In this phase, through reflecting back on the previous two phases of the coaching, the IO psychologist would discover his unique “leader within” towards developing personal leadership and follower potential. Acknowledging the valence for shame, he would explore how he takes up his own authority and reacts to authority and power, while working constructively with the defence mechanism of shame. Normative ideas of what leadership is may be disrupted which may promote insights concerning the de-authorisation he experienced from the commanding officer and expand possibilities of his own and others leadership and followership role and how it affects his own leadership position past, present and future. The focus here is to explore how he conceives leadership itself. Understanding how he takes up his own leadership role and how he can develop greater leadership capacity in the system, through considering formally invested leadership, and the enactment of leadership both covertly and overtly within a system (Cilliers, 2006). He would then work with how he can play a part in influencing the organisational system and wider networks and external influences where feelings of shame may manifest.

3.2.4 Network Analysis (NA)

As a coping strategy, the IO psychologist contacted his peers in his home unit for advice. This phase of the coaching model guides individuals in identifying and recognising where the power and resources lie within their networks and which are accessible to them, while situating themselves within their own network.

The approach here is often to have the individual draw their network as a conceptual map, which includes work and the broader society. Seeing where the power and resources lie, who the strong and weak connections are, and how change takes place over time. In terms of the IO Psychologist he would then be able to identify the connections he needs to make and the nodal points of power he would need to influence, should he find himself in a similar position in the future. The future being a concern for the IO Psychologist, as he stated he would work again with some of the people he had the altercation with. Feelings of disempowerment could be transformed to empowerment, as possible opportunities for influence and change. Working within this phase of the coaching model he would become aware of options, and not only rely on one node of influence such as the home unit he had innitially identified.

He would be encouraged to think spatially and connectedly. A conceptual map drawn by the IO psychologist would allow himself to re-think many assumptions of the military system and extend the assumptions to include how social defence patterns of relationships and collaboration, influence task performance. The conceptual map would allow for external factors such as a social change the military was undergoing at that time and to identify sensitive patterns, relationships and connections, which would be key to understanding change. Nodes of power or areas of resistance could be identified and their influence on change. The IO psychologist would then be able to locate himself in his network, re-imagine how it really works and learn how to take a more strategic, systemic, ethical and connected approach to his work.

3.2.5 Strategic Analysis (SA)

The holistic approach of the model enables individuals to see connections between inner and relational selves; how their emotions and behaviours play out in their various roles, and how strengths and challenges enable them to influence change in the organisation and other networks applying future thinking and action (Western, 2012).

To this end, the previous four frames are reviewed enabling the individual to evaluate, consolidate and innovate by evaluating what is working or not working and then identifying strategies to consolidate, doing more of the same or building on success; identifying where personal strategic changes need to be made for sustainable changes to recurring patterns of shame. This is not a quick fix phase to jump in and leap into action, but rather to reflect and revaluate by revisiting the previous four frames.

In reflecting, the individual would consider both the conscious and unconscious dynamics concerning the challenges, their purpose and an outcome that is desired authentically while questioning its meaning. As the individual works through the phases they may find themselves returning to this phase and others periodically as this process is dynamic where insights in other phases may result in questioning meaning and the outcome from time to time.

The A-N coaching model is not about leaping into action with five steps to transforming shame in organisations it needs to be considered as a process. Western (2012) states that each frame is an important piece of coaching on its own however used together the A-N coaching process becomes more than the sum of its parts. It provides a conceptual framework for coaches and clients to internalise the process of how they think and work creating sustainable change, as individuals work and move across networks, acknowledging personal patterns, how these patterns are used by systems and influence systems. Leadership as a concept of the mind and its distributive qualities are acknowledged by considering how it influences systems and how these need to be adapted towards influencing a network. While continuously building on a strategy towards evaluation, consolidation and innovation towards sustainable change.

3.3 Transforming Shame in Organisations

The systems psychodynamic lens and a coaching model has been applied to a case study which highlights the manifestation of shame in a system. How these two methods can be applied in other systems is explored next.

As previously indicated the case study formed part of a larger study on shame within the South African context, with its own unique multi-culture society (Mayer & Tonelli, 2017). When considering how the systems psychodynamic lens and the A-N coaching frame as methods to transforming shame, could be applied in different organisations, systems and networks, it may be useful to take note of the findings of the study. Comparisons can then be made to different organisations and how shame may be influencing individuals and the system at large.

Findings from the study seemed to indicate that experiences, triggers and, the results of shame come from deep personal feelings of not being good enough where personal errors in judgement often leave individuals exposed to shameful experiences. Feelings that could resurface later with negative connotations. Triggers for a shameful situation at work seem to be activated when there are attacks on employee’s competence and not being supportive to others or not receiving support from the system they operate within. Exclusion from, or voluntary removal from the situation, seems to reinforce shameful experiences as Wüschner (2017) and Mayer and Tonelli (2017) found while at the same time shame is seen as a coping strategy.

From a systemic perspective, leadership was repeatedly emphasised during the study when it came to dealing with shame. First leadership was seen to be shying away from dealing with issues of shame and not being supportive enough, and on the other hand, leadership was encouraged to use shame to enforce the morals and principles of the organisation. These contradicting views could be evidence for Long (2008) statement that in a perverse form of defence against shame, there is a need to see others shamed, to defend against own experiences of shame.

3.3.1 Practical Application for Working with Shame in Organisations

Bearing in mind findings of studies conducted on shame accross different contexts and organisations such as just described coaches would hold the five coaching frames in mind while considering both the conscious and unconscious dynamics at play within the individual and the system they operate within, as it relates to the shame experiences. However, how the process unfolds would be dependent on the individuals own process and insight, which means different frames may be visited at different times and reflected upon based on the insights the individual gains. The coach does allow the process to unfold as such; however, it is also important that the individual does not become stuck in a specific frame. This is where the coach’s knowledge of the unconscious dynamics at play in the individual, the system and the coaching relationship, helps maintain a constructive flow as seen in Table 16.1. The framework is not exhaustive but provides an example of what the aims are in each of the five frames of A-N coaching, possible influences in the system from a systems psychodynamic perspective and, possible reflections for the coach and individual.

Table 16.1 A framework for holding the individual and the system in the mind
Full size table

It must be stressed that there are no neat and tidy conclusions in coaching practices nor should there be (Western, 2012). In this chapter the focus is on shame a so-called destructive emotion (May, 2017). It consists of a devaluation element in the confront of others, embarrassment, humiliation and guilt whether imagined or real. On an unconscious level and at its most unbearable shame signals social annihilation (May, 2017). Guiding an individual through the process and learning how we experience each other, even through what might be considered a destructive force, such as shame, it is important to gain an understanding and awareness of how we relate to one another through these experiences. Working constructively with experiences of shame, and not from a defended position allows individuals to be more confident in their interactions with others. Understanding how shame could possibly shape working relationships, a clearer sense of self and purpose emerges, as individuals see themselves in the confront of others and how they may be “persuaded” by a system to act out expressions of shame.

3.4 Conclusion

Working with the individual from a systems psychodynamic stance considering both the conscious and unconscious processes of groups and individuals would enable the individual to understand where they fit into their system. He or she should identify their own key values; work with their authentic self; consider their own conscious and unconscious patterns relating to their needs and purpose in order to dismiss feelings of powerlessness; become more grounded; and learn how to influence the system for sustainable change (Western, 2012). The individual would then be able to monitor the system and evaluate how an emotion such as shame may move the individual and the system. In this way, individuals see connections between their inner selves and relational selves; and how emotions such as shame and behaviour play out in their roles and in the system as a whole to achieve system goals.

In sum: people relate to one another based on the very real and powerful impact families, authority figures, groups and social roles have on the sense of self and our way of being with others. In this manner, people may be caught up in roles where they carry their own emotions and can become carriers of others anxieties and emotions (Western, 2012).