One of the most critical components of the psychodynamic approach is the understanding that to be an effective leader, one must be attentive to their own psychological makeup in addition to the psychological makeup of their followers. This awareness will either serve to promote or hinder the resulting relationship that exists between the leader and his followers. Peter G. Northouse, in his book Leadership: Theory and Practice, conveys to his readers that the development of a human psyche begins at birth and is inevitably influenced and molded by our first teachers, our parents. “Our first experience with leadership occurs the day we are born. Mom and Dad, or those who are our primary caregivers, become our leaders, at least for a few years. Particularly in the early years of childhood, our primary caregivers create deep seated feelings about leadership. This the most basic premise of the psychodynamic approach to leadership.” (Northouse, pg.320) Modern day leaders, however, inevitably question how they can relate (psychologically or otherwise) to the modern day employee when the family dynamic has undergone such a drastic transformation.
So what, you may ask, does the family dynamic have to do with the leader-follower relationship? The teachings that are experienced by most at such a young age are undoubtedly then echoed in how we, as employees in our adult lives, react to different types of leadership that are present in management styles. “Some people respect and respond to authority figures in healthy ways. Others become dependent or rebel and be counter dependent.” (Northouse, pg.320)
When applying this idea to understand how it relates to the psychodynamic approach, one must take into account the changes in the dynamics of the family structure in this country. A structured family with two parental units who are deeply involved and invested in the healthy development of their child will produce an employee with a vastly different psychological approach to leadership than a one parent household with limited involvement will.
Northouse make this very point, “There have also been changes in the American family that affect social character. When individuals raised in that kind of family structure [two involved parents] went to work, they wanted and expected a paternalistic leader, someone who provided the kind of security that had been available in the home. One outcome of these diverse family structures is that the focus on the paternal authority and maternal nurturer has been replaced by identification with siblings and peers. The importance of parental models has decreased.” (Northouse, pg.329) These changes in the home have also manifested themselves in the workplace, whereas modern employees no longer seek the methods of leadership that, at one time, were sought and valued by many older employees at the same firm.
I have seen the subsequent effects of this first hand. I remember a time, in my youth, when children were taught to be respectful of any and all adults. Parents would invariably single out certain authority figures to their children, such as police officers, firemen and teachers. Children were taught to hold these people in high regard because of their inherent leadership qualities, public service and sacrifice. Nowadays, the message in many American households seems to be the exact opposite. This undoubtedly also reflects on how these children react to authority figures at their workplace. To reiterate a previous point, the psychodynamic approach is first initiated when we are very young children and that approach is inherently formed by the influences and experiences of our first teachers…..our parents or guardians. Richard R. Kilburg, of John Hopkins University, in his article When Shadows Fall: Using Psychodynamic Approaches in Executive Coaching, explains two main schools of thought related to this approach: conflict theory and object relations theory. Both theories substantiate the notion that human psychological development is strongly influenced early on in our lives and that it ultimately effects our future relationships including those that exist in the workplace. The first principle of conflict theory is, “Human beings have a set of unconscious feelings, thoughts, motives, and experiences that arise during the normal course of development and life and that can have a radically significant impact on how they grow and interact with others.” The first principle of object relationship is, “People go through a sequence of stages in their development, from an undifferentiated and dependent infant to a fully functional and interdependent adult. These developmental stages each have their own characteristics and specific challenges. Failure to master these major challenges and dysfunctional patterns of caretaking that can be experienced in childhood can result in significantly disordered patterns of human relationship later in life.” (Kilburg, pg.251)
However, the parental dynamic has unfortunately and obviously changed over time which has resulted in too many children being deprived of this initial stage of psychological development, as well as other types of critical early stage development. Leaders in the workplace are therefore unconvinced that they could ever be able to relate to the new modern work force, which makes them inevitably skeptical of the psychodynamic approach and its resulting effects on their ability to become more effective leaders.
References
Northouse, Peter G. (2013). Leadership Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications, Inc.
Kilburg, Richard R. (2004). When Shadows Fall: Using Psychodynamic Approaches in Executive Coaching. John Hopkins University. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research. Vol. 56 No. 4, pgs. 246-268.
Amber M Bankerd says
My dad owned his own business mainly because he could not stand to have a boss. He rebelled against his own father by smoking and doing drugs. I never got to meet my grandfather and my father never spoke to him. I believe his psychohistory (which means why people act the way that they do from their families) led him to act like this. Which is probably why I do not do well with authority figures either.
I have never met my boss. I do have a supervisor who I see maybe once a month. I go to work (I am a flight attendant) do my job and go home. I do not enjoy people hovering over me telling me how to do my job. I wonder how I am going to be able to work for someone when I finally finish my degree. It will definitely be a change for me.