Restoring neglected organisations: “Don’t connect with the darkness of trauma, but with the light behind it.”

The original article has previously been published on the Sioo website in Dutch and can be found here: Herstellen van verwaarloosde organisaties: “Verbind je niet met het donkere van het trauma, maar met het licht erachter” – Sioo

 During and after the Corona crisis, many organisations had to and are still processing various types of setbacks and suffering. However, trauma and neglect in organisations are subjects that are sometimes skilfully and cheerfully avoided: the tendency to idealise is strong. Yet there are many professionals working within, and with, organisations who are affected by this. Observing the system from a distance and searching for small yet powerful interventions can make a huge difference.

It’s time to have a conversation with the expert in this field in the Netherlands, Joost Kampen. Trained as an organisational sociologist, he has published extensively on neglected organisations and completed his doctoral research on the subject in 2011. His Belgian counterpart is found in Philippe Bailleur, someone with an investigative mind who likes to be hands-on with his clients.

We speak to both these gentlemen via Teams, one from Monnickendam (NL), the other from Sint-Katelijne-Waver (BE)…

Both are sitting in front of bookshelves to which they themselves have actively contributed over the past years. “We knew each other’s names, and we felt the need to connect during the beginning of the Corona crisis.” Sioo also brings them together in the summer school ‘Making Organisations Healthy Again’.

“When you want to acknowledge specific suffering, you must acknowledge the right kind.

Unravelling where the suffering is exactly located is remarkable work to do.”

For you, Philippe, there was a specific reason why you delved into trauma. What experience led to that?

Philippe: When I started as HR manager at the Belgian Air Force, four of my colleagues died in a plane crash. Also, 35 Dutch musicians on board died. That was in 1996, but when I talk about it now, I can still feel the deep emotions from back then. It had such an impact, and I could only realise what had happened much later. I was in shock. Our military base was temporarily taken over by the Air Force general staff after the crash. We as employees were paralysed and couldn’t provide the necessary support, which is logical. I’m still grateful that they took over for us, took care of us. It still moves me when I say that. The military is a special organisation for that: taking care of people who have to function in crisis areas and who experience impactful events that have both individual and collective impacts.

Joost: It’s that parallel in thinking how individual suffering touches collective suffering at the beginning of the epidemic that caught everyone off guard. That’s when we reached out to each other as well. The clients I worked with, an energy provider for example, experienced first-hand how difficult some employees’ work had become, especially those who had to go into people’s houses. Those technicians wanted to go on strike because they didn’t want to work. The management could have demanded that they work anyway, but their immediate supervisor acknowledged their fear. He got in his car to visit the team and called the management on the way to say the pressure had to be lifted, that they needed to listen first. Restoring a neglected organisation involves caring, providing structure, and being there for people. That leader had worked on restoring neglect in the years leading up to the crisis and recognised the uncertainty and fears; he was unconsciously competent in this.

Philippe: We see this with our foundation ‘Coaching for Heroes’ as well, that the confusion or pain usually doesn’t lie in the event itself, but in how they were supported afterward. There’s a somatic aspect to trauma, but also an analytical one. When you want to acknowledge specific suffering, you must acknowledge the right kind. Unravelling where the suffering is exactly located is remarkable work for me.

Joost: When you look at this on an organisational level, you often find that things have happened that didn’t suddenly explode like a bomb, but have been dripping steadily for years. When an organisation has been neglected in the worst way, it can take years for it to recover. Often, by that time, a mindset and culture have developed like ‘I’ll do my own thing, I don’t care.’ You can compare it to a severe burnout; the healing takes as long as the neglect lasted.

Philippe: That’s such an important statement. Organisations then hire an expert who has to provide a quick fix. It doesn’t work that way; you can’t expedite that process. Then you’re not doing justice to the situation. No coach should engage in such a request; it only makes things worse.

“It can take years for a neglected organisation to recover. You can compare it to a severe burnout; the healing takes as long as the neglect lasted.”

 Can you always speak of trauma in a neglected organisation?

Philippe: Neglect is the act, trauma symptoms are the potential consequences of that neglect.

Joost: And even more specifically, neglect involves destructive leadership. This can be intimidating (abusive) leadership, but even more harmful is laissez-faire leadership. People then think, just like children, ‘I don’t matter, I shouldn’t have been here.’

Philippe: The importance of that relational component also reminds me of research (Still Face Experiment by Dr. Edward Tronick) on the relationship between mothers and their babies. The mother initially reacts – both verbally and non-verbally – to her baby, and then she’s asked not to react anymore – neither verbally nor non-verbally – and the child, after several desperate attempts to get a reaction, becomes almost panicked. When people ask me how I choose my interventions, I tell them how important it is to realise that you’re working with people. Every person in an organisation is a professional but is also uncertain, vulnerable, and sometimes even wounded. Who are you working with? In my work, it’s often the wounded, and I tailor my interventions to that. Many strategists only focus on the professional, overlooking important, underlying – yet determining – aspects of people.

Joost: We both work from reality, with what is here and now. Many other change approaches involve idealising, but you also need to be able to look at the misconduct and shadow sides.

Philippe: This brings to mind a quote from a poem by Rumi: ‘Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and right-doing, there is a field. I’ll meet you there.’ Emotions, whatever they are, are all equally valuable and important to me.

“Who are you working with? In my work, it’s often the wounded, and I tailor my interventions to that. Many strategists only focus on the professional, overlooking important, underlying – yet determining – aspects of people.”

What do you see in the organisations you’ve been in contact with since the spring of 2020? Is there more neglect and trauma, or something different?

Joost: Since the Corona crisis, neglect has become more visible in various organisations. In Dutch elderly care, for example, there had been budget cuts for a long time; it was already visible, and it has only become more evident. We see this also with budget cuts in healthcare, resulting in a critical minimum of IC units. But we also see it in banks, schools, ministries, municipalities, police, and fire departments.

Philippe: We mainly support residential care centres with our foundation, and we see it there as well. The difference is made by good leadership. Those organisations with sound leadership seem to be more resilient. Even when there are cost-cutting measures – using lean methodologies, for instance – leadership remains a determining factor. I actually find that the concept of ‘lean’ is often used with the wrong intention when that’s not the spirit of lean.

Joost: I also see it in the applications of self-organisation, which can represent concealed cutbacks.

Philippe: It’s almost a way to get rid of the inevitable hassle of working with people. Implementing self-management as a concept sometimes seems like formally installing neglect. Self-management is often misused with the wrong intention.

Joost: That’s also a systemic neglect, preceded by destructive organisational development. Innovations have been implemented in the organisation that have had destructive side effects. A significant example is the Dutch Tax and Customs Administration, which is being split into three directorates again. If you make such an intervention in an organisation where so much is already going wrong, you overlook that ‘peace, purity, and regularity’ must come first. It’s more of a political solution, suggesting that forceful action has been taken against the injustice.

Philippe: It interacts in such a way that it becomes a knot. At some point, it’s no longer clear what the cause and effect are.

“If you make such an intervention in an organisation where so much is already going wrong, you overlook that ‘peace, purity, and regularity’ must come first. It’s more of a political solution, suggesting that forceful action has been taken against the injustice.”

How do you tackle such a complicated knot, and what interventions do you employ?

Joost: I always say: ‘let’s start by doing things normally, getting the basics in order.’ Oddly enough, this is a huge change for organisations where things aren’t going as intended. I’m talking about following formally described procedures and using recommended tools in such an organisation, for example. As a leader, you need to set a good example. I’ve recently added steps like these to my book ‘Learning to Intervene in Neglected Organisations.’ These are steps to catch up on the backlog.

Philippe: On that note, I’m an intuitive person. I start by mapping out how the organisation has suffered. Not to blame or judge anyone, by the way. From there, I look at whether and what healing work is possible. Above all, I’m sensitive to creating the right conditions for an organisation to get healthy again. Safeguarding the context in which this work can be done properly is incredibly important.

How does this hinder professionals involved in their work; what challenges do they face?

Philippe: I work in concentric circles. Often, the most important levers for healing are not found where the symptoms appear but in another circle around it. As an employee, you’re trapped in several loyalties, which makes you less free to move and find those levers in those other circles. Organisations sometimes resemble a minefield, and employees know where the mines are by now. For this kind of work, organisations need to be supported by people who can stand firmly beside the organisation and not become too entrenched in an employee role. From such a position, you can’t adequately reflect the organisation.

Joost: It always helps me to talk to the immediate leadership in those organisations. And also with the internal staff, like HR advisors. They have a lot of information that helps to look into the undercurrent of the organisation.

Philippe: What also connects us in our work, Joost, is that ultimately, we want to increase the organisation’s ability to recover itself. So, you have to provide people in those organisations with certain capabilities. I tend to activate people in certain roles fairly quickly, to make myself redundant. Unfortunately, there are clients who can’t distinguish that kind of facilitating work, let alone acknowledge it. Then you don’t get recognition for your work. That can sometimes bother you because this kind of work requires a lot from us to be done this way.

Joost: What I realise every time is how much you can underestimate the severity of the situation. You might think you can tackle an issue in an organisation, but then you find out that the top leadership ‘doesn’t want any trouble,’ and others in the organisation saw that coming from a distance. But you didn’t.

Philippe: Especially if you don’t have much experience in this field, you really need to learn to feel what’s happening in the systems you’re entering, things that go beyond what you initially register. And step by step, you have to learn where you might be tempted to start working even though it’s a hopeless task.

Joost: For that reason, I often work together with another facilitator. That way, another person can intervene where you might not be sharp.

“It always helps me to talk to the immediate leadership in those organisations. And also with the internal staff, like HR advisors. They have a lot of information that helps to look into the undercurrent of the organisation.”

How can directors, managers, or external advisors address and process the weight of (systemic) trauma?

Philippe: My focus isn’t on the darkness of trauma but on the light behind it. I energetically connect with the developmental perspective. Making contact with that gives me a sense that the weight isn’t heavy.

Joost: That developmental perspective is also crucial in cases of neglect. You’re dealing with a developmental backlog. That backlog needs to be caught up, and it takes a lot of energy at the beginning. It also helps to exchange experiences with like-minded individuals. So, you can look at the situation with humour again. As a client of mine said: ‘Don’t think I’m leaving; I’m staying until I find it enjoyable.’

Philippe: You know, I don’t find it so straightforward to share that hypothesis because it does an injustice to all the people working their fingers to the bone, but I notice that government contexts are often more susceptible to sickening dynamics that ultimately lead to systemic trauma. Do you see it that way too?

Joost: Yes, but companies also make organisations sick. When I started this work, it was mainly about weak leadership and the lack of real solutions in government. Neglect plays a role there in terms of steering towards results. This is less of an issue in the business world, where emotional neglect is more common. You often hear statements like: ‘Solve it and make sure I don’t have to deal with it,’ which leads to different problems.

Philippe: And an important distinction can be made between individual, collective, and systemic trauma. I work more on systemic trauma: the fabric between individuals, departments, disciplines, and/or hierarchical levels. When that fabric is healthy, the organisation appears resilient, and vice versa. It’s fascinating to see that organisations building complex IT systems understand this. Why? Because they notice that the collaboration between the modules of a software system is often a copy of the collaboration between the teams that built the different modules. Being aware of this goes far beyond employee well-being. It’s about the quality of the end product, and it’s businesswise highly important.

Joost: I hope in the future not only to talk about neglect but also about destructive leadership and problematic behaviour in organisations. We simply need to pay more attention to the shadow sides of the organisation.

Philippe: The fact that our books are being noticed – we both won awards with our books – helps to take this difficult theme out of the corner. We can only be grateful for that. People always struggle to confront their shadow sides, and by removing some taboos, the path to healing becomes a bit more open. It doesn’t always have to be heavy, dark, and tough. This work brings a lot of openness and lightness.