Interdependence and Autonomy

The values of interdependence and autonomy are frequently gender related. “Generally women place a higher priority on interdependence which values such things as social relationships, closeness and intimacy. Men usually place their priorities on autonomy which is grounded in individualism, adventurousness and independence.” (Cornelius, 1998). The purpose of recognizing each other’s differences is to help us forge meaningful and productive work relationships. Both interdependence and autonomy influence people’s communication styles and when we are able to recognize these patterns we become more effective communicators.

Characteristics of interdependence:

ü  Believe we don’t get anywhere alone, nor do we have to

ü  See people as a resource for support, information and advice

ü  Accept responsibility to care for others

ü  Place their own personal goals second to group goals

ü  Prefer a consultative approach

ü  Prefer collective group activity

ü  Closely observe the patterns of interconnections between people

ü  Use their social context to define themselves

Characteristics of autonomy:

ü  Aim to be an independent, powerful contributors to the organization

ü  Like the freedom to make independent contributions

ü  Make tough decisions and see them through

ü  Prefer to have total responsibility for a task

ü  Form strong personal opinions

ü  Rise to leadership positions easily

ü  Protect individual rights

ü  Value self-sufficiency and ego-strength, and expect other to act responsibly.

Excessively interdependent people tend to often be “self-righteous about their consultative, interactive style, while excessively autonomous people can be equally self-righteous about the responsibility they exercise.” (Cornelius, 1998). The purpose of attempting to evaluate these differences is to recognize the best way to approach and communicate effectively with employees and to form work relationships that ensure productivity in the work place.

(Cornelius, H. (1998) The Gentle Revolution)

Conflict Resolution Network

www.crnhq.org

 

Competition in the Workplace

Agreers and Competers in the Workplace

Agreement and Competition

In any given workplace there are two camps of people: agreers and competers. Agreers are often women and they believe that behavior is based on the premises that if they just agree and get along with everyone then that will be reciprocated to them. While competers, who are often men, feel that other people won’t look out for them so they need to look out for themselves. While it may seem that working with a group of agreers would be, well, agreeable quite often the opposite is true.

Characteristics of agreers:

• Keep the peace
• Emphasize similarities and common ground
• Are urgent about concluding disagreements
• Modify behavior and suppress needs readily to fit in with others
• Need harmonious teamwork for job satisfaction

Characteristics of competers:

• Enjoy the challenge of competitive strategies
• Value Competition because it drives people forwards and tests worth
• Accepts some aggression as part of the ‘rough and tumble’
• See interaction with others as inevitable competitive
• Use and receive one-upmanship as a comfortable, light-hearted way of relating.

So it would seem that agreers would be very pleasant to be around, but in general agreers often are drowning in a sea of frustration and disappointment which often comes out in inappropriate actions and settings. Agreers often make statements like; “I thought it was obvious that I disagreed, but that didn’t stop him!”.

When agreers clash with competers it is not only about the problem, there is also a style clash. It is usually the agreer who by nature backs down. Agreers usually see only two alternatives: losing repeatedly to competers or sacrificing their own personal values by ‘playing dirty.’ In reality there is a third way: appropriate assertiveness.

Agreeres can learn to be appropriately assertive by:

• Adjusting their expectations. They need to learn that competers cannot or will not ‘tune in’ to their needs. They also need to move past the notion that competers will address or seek out their point of view. They must be ready to grab the opportunity to promote their thoughts and actions.
• They must learn to be assertive and not to go along with things that they didn’t really agree with.
• They must oppose dominating or narrow-minded approaches.
• They don’t always have to be nice.
• It is alright for them to show their anger in a controlled way.
• They need to plan to strategically to ‘call in the troops’ if their own efforts are not sufficient.

For many agreers the move to self assertion is usually a bumpy one. They can be a bit heavy-handed and often over assertive. They operate on past frustrations and losses and lack judgment to figure out what is fair. This new found assertiveness causes hardships in relationships and it causes their co-workers to make major adjustments. Things do gradually calm down, but many relationships were damaged in the process.

One way agreers can practice becoming more assertive is by using “I” statements. It is a good practice for them to learn to gauge the effectiveness of their assertiveness and it helps them to communicate clearly and cleanly. (“I feel that you do not understand me when I speak to you about my feelings on this issue.”)

One of the main determents of being an agreer is that they are often people pleasers too. They tend to agree with whoever they are talking to at the time. This gives them the impression of being fickle and changing with the wind. They don’t establish any kind of real credibility with others. (“ She’ll promise you the moon…while you’re in her office.”) What makes working with agreers so difficult is that slights rapidly turn into issues, problems and then a crisis. Situations with agreers need to be attended to very quickly.

So is working with competers any better? While the spirit of competition is natural in the workplace and is responsible for helping us to know the limits of our own courage and endurance, it too can cause discord in the workplace.

Some traditional male competitive characteristics are: dominance, courage, confidence and tactical analysis. Males who exhibit these qualities are often promoted over women who exhibit a different set of leadership qualities.

Women who are agreement oriented often exhibit a very different set of leadership skills that include: consultation, and ethic of care, communication and conflict resolution and whole system awareness. For women, relationships are primary.

It is true that good leaders will be strong in all aspects; but this is seldom the case. Effective working teams should consist of the following:

Dominance+Consultation=Real authority

Courage+Ethic of Care=Right Action

Confidence+Communication & Conflict Resolution Expertise=Enabled, empowered teams.

Tactical Analysis+Whole System Awareness=Strategic Thinking.

The only way to have an effective and well run organization is to have a win/win situation with employees. It takes care and persistence to enable employees with different work strategies to form cohesive and productive teams. The win/win approach requires two basic things:

1. The desire by employees to work towards problem solutions that give everyone more of what they want in the long run.
2. The ability of the employees to engage in as much consultation and joint decision making as the situation will allow.

Once employees cease to see the work environment as a game they must play and more of a situation that they must engage in, the organization discovers the win/win sweet spot and the organization and employees all benefit.