The Unconscious & High Performance - Part 2

Part 2 – The Unconscious & Dysfunctional Teams: Common Traps Which Teams Fall into To Avoid Pain

In part one of this article we started to consider how the nature of a high performance environment can cause pain and anxiety in individuals which can easily spread throughout an organisation resulting in further pain, a negative impact on relationships and reductions in performance.

In part two we will start to consider the unconscious in the context of teams or groups of individuals. We often think of unconscious drivers as being very much individual matters. These may be regarded as unique to the individual and based upon our own lived experiences and stories. However, the reality is that collective unconscious behaviours can, and do, extend all the way to a societal level. Much has been written about the relationship between citizens of the UK and the National Health Service (NHS). It has been proposed that far from being a simply a provider of healthcare services, there is an unspoken role in reducing our collective anxiety over our own mortality.

In the 1960s the psychoanalyst, Wilfred Bion started to explore the effect of the unconscious on the behaviour of groups. Bion identified what he termed “basic assumptions” which were essentially dysfunctional patterns of behaviour. It was proposed that there are three distinct patterns seen in groups, although it is possible for a group to exhibit more than one. The commonality across these three patterns is that each involved a group being diverted from what Bion called a group’s “primary task”. This is a fascinating concept in itself and it is key that leaders and groups have shared clarity as to exactly what their primary task is. For now though, let’s look at these three patterns identified by Bion and how they show up in high performance environments.

#1 – Fight or Flight: In this scenario, the group bind together under the perceived threat of a common enemy. This will often be directed towards a body which holds power over the group. For example, funding agencies, senior leaders, government, etc. A group caught in this situation will often spend a great deal of conversation worrying about threatened change or complaining about the supposedly threatening group. Perhaps the most damaging aspect of this pattern is that it provides a distraction from the discomfort of having to think about and focus on the group’s difficulties in their primary task.

#2 – Dependency: Under this condition a group begins to behave as if its main purpose is to sustain itself. This is particularly damaging to a high performance organisation which seeks to be agile and able to adapt rapidly to a changing world. Much of the narrative within such a group is self-sustaining and critique of the group, internally or externally is highly unwelcome. When caught in this trap, a group is unlikely to develop or evolve and, paradoxically, its existence will come under increasing threat. The challenge for a leader is to wean the group away from this mindset without becoming regarded as part of the threat or unsupportive.

#3 – Pairing: Of these three dysfunctions, this is perhaps most commonly observed in elite sport. The term “pairing” refers to the coupling of people in the future and the dysfunction centres on a hope that “everything will be alright when…”. It is common to hear talk of, “…if we can just win the next two matches…”, or “I think they will kick on in the next World Champs”. Often there may be a significant event which all future hopes are pinned on such as the recruitment of a new leader or the moving to new facilities. The critical danger here is that the group are significantly distracted from dealing with the present and forming a plan, thus reducing the likelihood of the future success they dream of coming to fruition.  Arguably the most prominent example of this phenomena on a mass scale occurs around US election rallies in which an ecstatic crowd appear utterly convinced that a victory for their preferred candidate will bring an end to all ills. The presidential candidate becomes the icon of hope, rather than their policies or wider team.

Interestingly, this may be one aspect of high performance which separates sport from other fields. The level of chaos and the impact of chance in sport makes it easy for those involved to fantasise about the possible. This can be a force for good if it inspires aspirational goals, but these must be backed up with planning and rigour. Hope is not a strategy. Contrast this with other high performance environments in which failure can be fatal, such as military combat, mountaineering or emergency medicine. It would seem that in these worlds there is a greater awareness of the cost of poor planning and therefore the dysfunction of relying on hope is less common.

I suspect that on reading the above you are able to recognise some or all of these dysfunctions in teams or groups which you have been involved with. Whether our role in that group is one of leadership or followship, there must first be an acknowledgement of what is happening. We must then step back further to consider our own roles in this dysfunction. After all, it is easy to be drawn into a negative narrative about a common enemy and to enjoy the feeling of bonding that brings with your accomplice. Equally, it can be pleasurable or comforting to engage in the fantasy of a future world when problems have evaporated and victories won. If we can be mindful and self-aware in these moments though we can bring ourselves to a position of clarity and empowerment to help the group and bring it back to its primary task. The challenge here for both leaders and followers is that it will involve letting go of that which has given comfort and moving towards the discomfort of reality…

We have extended our discussion around the role of pain, anxiety and the unconscious in high performance to understand better how groups may react under such pressures. In the final part of this article, we will start to explore solutions and understand how leaders can better understand and manage the effects of unconscious drivers.