Mastering the relational dance
A woman I greatly admire and learn from once said that “the quality of our relationships determines the quality of our lives.” I would paraphrase to apply it to the quality and meaningfulness of our work too.
So this week, having just emerged from intensive rounds of coaching and team coaching, I wanted to share a model that can help us be more deliberate about the way we build and nurture our relationships.
As the father of adaptive leadership, Ron Heifetz, wisely cautions us:
"Leadership is about mobilising people to make progress on the challenges they face - while maintaining their relationships and values."
That’s a tricky balancing act, one that requires a fluid dance between strategy and connection. Hence this Relationship Map, which I’ve built based on my research in Gestalt psychology:
The most important thing to note here is that none of these styles is good or bad in themselves.
I’m noticing with my coaching clients that people who strongly veer in a high Connection direction tend to look down on the high Strategy ones; and the other way around. That is profoundly misguided. Our goal should be to recognise our natural tendency; and develop enough versatility to flex between these modes as the context requires.
To orientate you to this map, here are some insights on each quadrant:
High Strategy - High Connection (Synergistic): this is where your pursue shared goals while strengthening mutual trust. These are the relationships that require your outmost attention and energy.
👀 Watch-outs: Double-down on boundaries. Connection can easily bleed into Strategy and the other way around, which leads to confusion around roles and expectations. For example, you might hesitate to make tough calls for fear of damaging relational trust.
: Be selective; don’t overcrowd this quadrant or else you’ll exhaust yourself.
High Strategy - Low Connection (Transactional): This is where results matter more than emotional connection. Think regulators, suppliers, etc.
👀 Watch-outs: If this is used with people that you deeply depend on i.e. your own team, it might make them feel exploited, disengaged, resentful, resistant to change.
High Connection - Low Strategy (Supportive): these are the mentorship relationships, friendships at work (where there no stakes), employee resource groups, volunteering groups etc.
👀 Watch-outs: This quadrant is not a good one to be in if you need to ensure accountability and results. Also, beware of compassion fatigue (it’s not a badge of honour!)
Low Strategy, Low Connection (Neglect): Identify and decide whether to reallocate time to these relationships or let them fade.
Now, as always in life, the map on a piece of paper is one thing - and how we master the dance in reality is waaaaaay trickier. One lesson I’ve learned from my own relationships, is that where I’m not clear and deliberate about why, how and when I switch between the modes, it tends to confuse people and complexify our dynamics.
So I’m sharing some points of reflection:
❓What is your natural tendency on the Strategy-Connection continuum? In what contexts might it benefit or sabotage you?
You’ll notice I’m being wicked here 😈 and not offering the third option where we blend the two, as I aim to gently nudge self-honesty. Of course we all do a bit of both, but it’s valuable to understand which style we’re naturally most at ease with.
❓How might your tendency fit with the prevailing style of the organisational culture you’re part of? (If there’s a strong clash you might need a deep rethink…)
❓If you’re a senior executive, how might your prevailing style impact the culture of your team and the organisation at large?
❓Which quadrants does your team tend to spend most time in? What needs to be rebalanced?
❓In case of friction or conflict, how might Strategy and Connection collide? How might you contribute to that without realising?
Let me know how you get on with mapping out your relationships - and what you’re discovering in the process!
Stay fierce, curious and…relational!
Alina