|
 Troubled or
Troublesome?
Most people who serve as team facilitators have
developed a toolbox full of methods for dealing with
dysfunctional behaviors. As Steve Davis, editor of
The Master Facilitator Journal, says,
“Intervention is one of the most challenging
tasks facing facilitators. From the
facilitator’s perspective, intervention
involves interrupting the flow of group process to
correct dysfunctional behaviors, patterns, or
interactions that weaken group process. Knowing when,
how, and why to intervene with a group is an art that
takes courage, finely tuned intuition, and
practice.”
(www.masterfacilitatorjournal.com/archives/skill35.html)
Have you ever encountered a team member
whose dysfunctional behaviors didn’t respond to
traditional interventions? Did you ever mentally
mutter, “This person is crazy?”
If you have, you may find it reassuring to know that
there is a difference between “troubled”
and “troublesome” people. The
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (www.m-w.com/
home.htm) defines troubled as being
“emotionally or mentally disturbed” and
troublesome as being “difficult or burdensome,
giving trouble or anxiety.”
The behaviors of team members who are
“troubled” are unlikely to change without
the involvement of a mental health
professional. In fact, a well-meaning
facilitator may exacerbate the dysfunctional team
member’s problems if inappropriate
interventions are applied. The line between troubled
and troublesome isn’t always obvious. Even
psychologists haven’t come up with a definitive
way of differentiating between normal and abnormal
behavior. Here are several perspectives on how to
separate the two.
Statistical approach
This view relies on averages and departures from
the average (deviations) as the way to separate
normal from abnormal. People whose behaviors are
rare or extreme would be considered abnormal from
this perspective.
Distress approach
Suppose a person has a very odd behavior that
doesn’t cause stress to him/herself or
others? Should that person be considered abnormal?
The answer would be, “yes,” from the
statistical approach, but the distress approach
wouldn’t view this as a problem behavior.
Utilitarian approach
Does the person’s behavior keep him/her or
others from attaining their goals? In this view,
behavior is considered abnormal when it is
maladaptive, bringing harm to the individual or
society, or preventing the person from fulfilling
his/her potential.
Social values approach
In his book, Abnormal Psychology: A Discovery
Approach, Steve Schwartz writes, “Most
societies disapprove of behavior that is
statistically rare, distressing, and maladaptive.
But social disapproval is more than a combination
of the definitions already discussed. It is
actually a fourth definition of abnormality, quite
separate from the others. Behavior can be common,
adaptive, and not distressing and still be
considered abnormal if it is socially disapproved.
This is understandable. Social relations are based
on a shared knowledge of how people will act in
familiar situations.
If everyone were to behave unpredictably, society
as we know it would be impossible.”
What does all this mean from a practical,
workplace perspective? Monitoring the “degree
or magnitude” and “frequency” of
the behaviors can help facilitators decide when to
refer a team member for professional counseling.
Dysfunctional behaviors that fall far outside the
boundaries of typical workplace exchange or that are
repeated regularly may be the sign that an underlying
mental health problem exists. Recognizing when a team
member’s behaviors need to be addressed by a
mental health professional and being willing to step
aside is a critical skill for facilitators who care
about others and themselves.
|
