Psychotherapy, Parenting and Millennials: An Interview with Asha Tarry

I was in the process of putting together a post on millennials when I heard about Asha Tarry’s book entitled Adulting as aMillennial: A Guide to Everything Your Parents Didn’t Teach You. I was most intrigued to talk to her and she graciously accepted to do so.

Asha is a psychotherapist and life coach. We had a very pleasant chat that covered everything from psychotherapy, philosophy, our respective childhoods and families as well as the intended topic of millennials. Since there is so much to cover here, I have decided to separate my posts and publish at a later date the article that deals with millennials and current political issues. Instead, I will focus here solely on my interview with Asha whose thoughts, work as well as practice I would like to feature and showcase.

 

Parenting of millennials and our own personal experience

Before we delved fully into the topic and as a kind of icebreaker, I asked Asha, why she had added the subtitle Everything Your Parents Didn’t Teach You and hence put some emphasis on the parents of millennials. She explained how in many ways parenting, alongside wide-scale and rapid social changes, influenced and shaped the mindset and circumstances of the millennials.

This was not necessarily an issue of parents withholding information or refusing to guide their children nor was it intentional, but there were two factors involved. First off, due to economic situations and circumstances, parents would have to work more. This did not only apply to single-parent households but in many families, both parents had to enter the workforce and work longer hours.

This led to the situation that many millennials did not have direct parental access when growing up. Since parents were out of the home, in some cases, they would be raised by their grandparents. Moreover, growing up in a period of fast development, the advent of rapid technological progress with the Internet and Social Media, led many of them to grow up with screens of televisions, computers, and iPads. This robbed and impeded them from actively participating in games as well as outdoor activities.

Moreover, without parents at hand to guide and teach them and even more importantly, to care for and nurture them, these children lacked not only discipline and structure growing up, but they did not have sufficient confidence-building activities. This led them to experience high levels of anxiety and restlessness.

In fact, there were many lessons that millennials missed in their childhood. This impacted and impeded their relationship both with themselves as well as others. There are a lot of things that they have not processed, digested or fully settled into, which is why Asha describes her clients as young and brilliant minds with anxious bodies.

This is mainly because millennials did not learn nor discover important lessons and strategies about themselves. They are not clear about how the world works or how to build relationships, and they lack knowledge about themselves. Moreover, growing up in a fast environment, they tend to look for quick results and solutions.

In their impatience, millennials want to learn lessons quickly while at the same time avoiding, evading, and circumventing difficult and challenging situations. The problem is that it is indeed the hardest lessons that are the best ones: They teach us resilience and strength while putting everything into perspective.

The other issue is that since millennials do not want to suffer, they carry and hold onto the expectation that you can live this life unscathed, which is a myth and is detrimental to psychological and emotional growth and well-being. As Asha put it quite well, you need to allow yourself to fall but not to fall apart. Not everything is a failure, but even failure can be used as fodder and as a means of exploration and understanding of oneself and others.

When it comes to mishaps, we could look at what went wrong in those cases while analyzing the situation and asking ourselves relevant questions. The most important part here is to be curious and to be willing to learn from experience instead of trying to avoid them or to shift blame and responsibility.

Both Asha and I agreed that our own difficult circumstances growing up has in many ways led and shaped us to not only understand ourselves better but to be able to have compassion, empathy, and understanding for others. Nobody wants pain and suffering, but when we encounter and confront them, we can grow much more as a person and that makes them invaluable teachers in and for our lives, something we can then share with others.

 

Anxiety, Impostor Syndrome and Perfectionism

In the meantime, anxiety is on the rise. It is visible everywhere one goes, and we can see it in people, on the news, and on Social Media, and often, we experience it ourselves. It is manifested in different ways, ranging from apathy to aggression, from violence to silence. Add to that, the political climate, social unrest, and a rapidly growing pandemic that has brought the world to its knees, and you can better understand the reasons for the madness that is happening at this moment.

Anxiety can also be manifested in two other ways, both of which we touched upon in the interview, namely impostor syndrome, and perfectionism. Impostor syndrome or phenomenon is fueled by the feeling or the nagging doubt that one is simply not good enough. It leads you to feel like an impostor, a fraud, and that any success you achieve is due to luck and circumstance and not because of your own efforts or work.

We may have all experienced moments of impostor syndrome at some point in our lives. I myself am guilty as charged but Asha pointed out two things to keep in mind about impostor syndrome. First off, it is a syndrome and not an illness. In fact, when it is a cluster of syndromes that affects our lifestyle, feelings, and beliefs, it becomes maladaptive and can cause harm to our self-esteem, self-confidence, and self-worth. Over time, and if avoided and unprocessed, it can create trauma.

Although it is a serious issue, it can also have its benefits. In fact, it can drive people to become better or to strive to overcome limitations. It is the inherent motor and drive for self-improvement. Since anxiety is essentially a similar feeling to excitement, we can put this anxious energy to use by using it to our own advantage.

Perfectionism, on the other hand, is the result of trauma. It is often connected to early childhood experiences, which can lead to maladaptive symptoms. It is compulsive behavior as it pushes people to overwork themselves, and it is a form of suffering that is akin to obsessive-compulsive disorder.

The best way to deal with perfectionism is to trust yourself while knowing and being aware of your limits and limitations. It is good to do your best work and to strive for excellence but not for perfection. It is also a matter of honesty and transparency with yourself: You need to be honest about yourself, understand your flaws, and keep reminding yourself that nobody is indeed perfect.

 

The Role of Psychotherapy

In terms of psychotherapy, we talked about various topics related to the methodology, practice, and perception of it. As someone who loves, practices, talks, and writes about psychology, I was most curious to know her approach. In my experience, some practices are simply better and more effective and productive than others. My concern was that she would be using CBT (Cognitive-behavioral therapy), an approach that I like and appreciate, but one that does not solve traumas as efficiently and deeply as psychoanalysis, for example.

I was most pleased to hear from Asha that she not only tends to have a more eclectic approach but that she is also a supporter of psychoanalysis and its many benefits to health and well-being. Her background included object relations theory, which I find rather fascinating. Over the years, she has come to use and practice a mindfulness-based version of CBT, which sounds quite interesting to me.

What is even more important, encouraging, and promising is that she has used that very same approach on herself for some years now. It has helped her to relax more and to breathe and pause when stressed. She is also aware that it is necessary to dig into one’s past to uncover and reveal past trauma as many of us have a trauma history even if we are not aware of it. This necessary and vital focus is to some extent thanks to her training as an analyst and has been part and parcel of her work for more than two decades of professional experience in the field of mental health.

In Asha’s own case, her experience was also enriched by and through philosophy, another one of my own passions as evidenced in this blog. In fact, philosophy inspired her to question everything. Like many of us, she noticed that curiosity is not always promoted or encouraged, and this resistance would come from those who claim to foster it, such as parents and teachers. It tends to occur in restrictive households and environments that do not allow much room for doubt or for questioning God and religion, while it could also be stifled by parents who do not want to, refuse, or fail to talk about feelings with their children.

Psychotherapy has the potential to give people that space to grow and to know and find themselves. It is a place of confrontation, not in the negative, hostile, or frightening sense but rather as a space of direct, honest talk and conversation. This directness is often missing and lacking in our daily life.

For instance, we are often indirect with ourselves and with other people. We do not want to be asked direct questions but prefer to present an image of a false self and project a fake persona. Nowhere is this more prevalent than in Social Media, but we do the same in face-to-face interactions as well when we pretend that things are great and that we have all the answers.

First off, that is untrue. Yet, more importantly, it is counterproductive to self-development. We are blocking and limiting ourselves instead of being open to exploring who we are. This complacent and narcissistic type of person is not at all interested in finding out things that they did not know about themselves but they operate on the false assumption and delusion that they are fully in control of themselves and their life; over time, this can lead to a crisis of identity.

When people choose psychotherapy, they are often expecting quick results, which is also something that is not feasible or helpful. Years of trauma cannot be undone within a few sessions and this can certainly not be achieved via medication only. Many also do not want to do the necessary legwork and soul-searching and do not want to find answers; instead, they want to be given solutions. The aim of psychotherapy is to give you the tools and understanding but you would have to apply them to yourself for it to work.

One should always discover things and be open to learning. One of the most startling realizations is that there is not a fixed self nor a real you to speak of. When you talk about yourself, you are having an idea of yourself that is fixed in time and space alongside fixed and frozen ideas about the world. But, in reality, everything is in flux, and we constantly change through our feelings and experiences.

This is an important, essential, and necessary insight for the millennials that Asha works with. It is a process, a kind of unraveling of who they thought to be as well as the person others wanted them to be. They wish to feel stable and understood, but first, they would have to become open to experiences and respond to life more authentically, that is, by being more honest and spontaneous without overthinking things.

 

Social Media and Overcoming Groupthink and Intolerance 

Social Media is not the solution but part of the problem itself. In Social Media, everything has to be loud, big, and critical. It is like a room of people who are all shouting at the same time, each of whom craves and wants your attention. It is also a place that feeds intolerance and tends to deplete and undermine critical thinking and open dialogue.

The moment someone disappoints you or says something that you disagree with, you want to cancel them. But you are not aware that this is harmful to people’s psychological health as you are essentially debasing others when they disappoint you. At the same time, your action is often based on distorted, fragmented, or incomplete information and facts.

No matter what the goal and intention, it is harmful to tell people what to think instead of allowing and encouraging people to be critical thinkers themselves. This is apart from the fact that people choose to offend and personalize others instead of showing compassion, empathy, and understanding, traits that are most important and lacking in today’s society.

On various occasions, Asha herself has refused to jump on the bandwagon to debase others. Instead of making quick, righteous, and self-important judgments about others and instead of being pushed or triggered to cancel those individuals, the focus should be on more important goals and issues, such as canceling poverty, racism, sexism, and ageism. Unfortunately, many have lost sight of those goals and use Social Media to elevate themselves and to debase others while shutting down the conversation or the opportunity for any dialogue or discussion to take place.

We also want to avoid prematurely and naively seeing and expecting others to solve all our problems. This was the case with Obama who many believed would solve racial tension and problems and, in a way, it is also occurring with Kamala Harris. First, one needs to be aware that she has not been elected yet, but also that she will not be able to fix racial problems by herself and on her own. It is an important and historical event, but it should not lead one to a sense of false security. We would need to remind ourselves and be aware that she will have her own agenda, and like all of us, her own share of flaws and missteps along the way.

This trauma response, over-attaching oneself to something quickly without giving it time or reflection, is exacerbated by a lack of patience and tolerance among millennials and tends to foster groupthink. This is contradictory to freedom due to its lack of exchange of ideas and it would only lead to more division and segregation. Unfortunately, it is tied to and connected with propaganda and it could lead to dangerous, divisive, and hateful political and social unrest.

For healing to occur, we need to think and work as a community. We would need to take action and be responsible and accountable for our actions. At the same time, the goal should not be to attack others but rather to protect them. For instance, burning others for a perceived lack or an insufficient amount of activism especially while a pandemic is raging and ongoing is not in the best interest of one’s fellow beings.

Whether this is achieved through mindful activism, such as using safe measures like phone calls, writing letters and emails, signing online petitions, or by following social distancing measures and wearing a mask, we want to show that we care for each other. In fact, healing is two-fold and interdependent: When you help others heal themselves, you will also heal yourself.

You can find the podcast here: "Anxiety, Impostor Syndrome and Perfectionism: Parenting and its Effects on Millennials with Life Coach Asha Tarry"

And here's the YouTube video of this interview: "Arash's World Interview with Psychotherapist & Life Coach Asha Tarry on Social Media and Millennials" 

Seligman’s Positive Psychology: Agency throughout History and Time

Through the magic of Zoom and other fortuitous circumstances, I was able to attend legendary psychologist Martin Seligman’s Keynote Lecture on Agency and Positive Psychology organized by The Shipley School and part their annual Positive Education Conference. This summer, I have had the fortune to follow more than thirty webinars and online lectures (apart from a number of personal interviews that I have had the privilege to conduct myself) but before this event, one of my highpoints had been seeing Don Cheadle speak live on Zoom. Now it is Martin Seligman who has managed to take over the top spot (sorry, Don).

What made this event even more amazing was that Seligman was talking about his upcoming book and it was his first open lecture. Put differently, I had the opportunity and privilege of assisting a world premiere of some sorts where this great psychologist was presenting new ideas and sharing his reflections with the world.

Two things immediately impressed me here before I even got to the content and details of his talk: One, that he is still a tireless researcher wishing not only to gift humanity more knowledge and insight by bringing about the potential for greater happiness, but also that he himself was surprisingly open and down-to-earth about it all. There was an unmistaken modesty and a sly sense of humor that you do not see that often with successful intellectuals. It speaks volumes for his endeavors since this is exactly how you would want and imagine the founder of positive psychology to be.

I must add here, and better now than later, that I am not a great fan of positive psychology and if it had not been Seligman, I most likely would not have followed the lecture. But I am so glad that I did because although it did not change my mind on the methodology, I learned a lot in the process and gained much more admiration and respect for, not to mention a better understanding of this field. Like any movement, it has undergone changes, adjustments, and modifications, yet its current approach is much closer to and much more aligned with what I believe in and practice.

The lecture was about the importance of agency, not merely in the sense of locus of control but also the influence and power one has in relation to oneself and with the outside world. Agency is composed of the triad of efficacy, optimism, and imagination. For agency to occur, all three aspects need to be involved and active, which then determines whether we are progressing or stagnating when it comes to issues in our lives and in the world.

What causes human progress was the question that Seligman asked, and he gave us a brief but fascinating overview of human history in about half an hour, not a simple or negligible feat at all. Yet the initial answer to the question of the perceived cause of progress was that it depends. It depends on what field or discipline we are talking about as each discipline has its own lens through which they define, observe as well as measure and evaluate progress.

Hence, there are some who see ecology as a potential cause. Nature would be considered as the determining cause of human agency. Proponents of this discipline would then see global warming in our past lending itself to the practice of agriculture. There are also studies claiming that climate could have been responsible for the decline of the Roman empire, and of course, ecology plays a very significant role in today’s reality, society as well as politics.

Then there are those who see economy as the driving force for human progress. It was the acquisition and distribution of money and wealth that eventually led to and caused the Industrial Revolution. We could pinpoint the move from barter trade to the profit-oriented economy that led and brought us to this precise point in our history, for better and for worse.

Others do not see the economy as a determinant cause but rather focus on society itself; the human organization and class warfare are the points of focus in fields like sociology. Accordingly, these social movements and forces shape our perspective, worldview, and politics at any given period, and we are seeing and witnessing many of these shifts and changes occurring in our current world.

Moreover, history often tends to focus on these social forces of the past that determine outcomes in the present and beyond. Unlike biographers who single out extraordinary decisions and actions taken by unique and great leaders, the historian does not focus on individual or single events but sees them as an expression and articulation of fighting for freedom. They often embody a struggle for recognition, equality, and justice, and they are happening and reproduced time and time again in human history.

Yet the approach that Seligman has taken is regarding the psychological state of agency. Although all these causes are valid and important, they are still remote causes. They all must have been propelled by the belief that one can change the world. Without that belief, we would have been stagnant and not been able to make progress in our history.

We must keep in mind that there are always two opposing forces at play here: we can either progress or stagnate. The choice is within the individual that becomes part of the whole and could lead towards social and political change on a global scale. Agency is essentially a mental state that is propelled and driven by the belief that one can make a positive difference in the world.

In other words, agency causes progress but a lack of it results in stagnation and that is the veritable source of these ups and downs in history. It might explain to an extent how the French Revolution, a liberating and idealistic movement, could possibly give way to the tyranny and bloodshed that followed afterward.

But let us re-examine the different stages of history with agency in mind, agency being a combination of the three factors of efficacy, optimism, and imagination. For progress to occur and to be effective, all three need to be at play and in motion.

We start with the hunters-gatherers-fishers. They had limited agency. They may have had specific but not general efficacy. They depended in many ways on nature and circumstance for their survival. But they did have imagination as is evidenced by astounding cave paintings. There was also a sense of optimism as they would bury the dead, denoting and demonstrating a kind of belief in an afterlife.

Then the age of agriculture entered the scene about 14,000 years ago. Here we can see more efficacy, particularly over plants and animals. There was also optimism at hand since they needed to plant seeds and wait around for them to grow and take shape. Yet their imagination was limited because of the gods and idols they depended on to have rich and fruitful harvests and to whom they would attribute their success or lack thereof. At the same time, they also showed the beginnings of architecture, and with it, the first signs of human initiative.

Then came the Bronze Age around 5000 years ago. Here we have the written word. As an exemplar, we can hold up and analyze Homer’s Illiad. Achilles did not have much efficacy, nor did he have belief as his actions were reflected and determined by what gods would tell him to do. He was neither future-minded nor imaginative, whereas we can see a clear difference here between the Illiad and the Odyssey, with the latter revealing, in Seligman’s words, a “huge blossoming of agency” in comparison.

The Greco-Roman period gave us Western civilization with the Socrates/Plato duo. Not only did they, alongside their distinguished cohort, set the basis and groundwork of philosophy, psychology, religion, politics, and various other disciplines, but they also demonstrated belief in mind and soul. This also gave humanity the means and manners of attaining harmony and justice and the keys to improving and expanding oneself and the understanding of oneself.

It may have seemed that we were set on a clear path of steady progress, but it all came to a standstill and to a period of stagnation, if not regression thereafter. Judaism and Christianity take hold of humanity and take away, limit, or manipulate and control human agency. In fact, according to Augustine, there was no human endeavor to speak of as it all depended on God’s grace.

We see this reflected in the Old Testament, which is overall non-agentic. Abraham just follows God’s command. There is not a lot of choice, agency, or efficacy as he merely complies and follows orders, the same way, followers were ordered to blindly obey the Ten Commandments. It would be Kierkegaard who much later would add existential depth and dimensions to Abraham’s struggle, but in the end, Abraham’s actions were limited and not undertaken by his own volition. The New Testament had somewhat more agency, but that was quashed by Augustine.

This led us to the Renaissance in which we returned not only to the height of the Greco-Roman period again, but it was rapidly promoted, expanded, and elaborated through the invention of the printing press. There was even breakthrough in Christianity since humans had been endowed with agency and willpower, courtesy of free will.

It was in 1524 that Erasmus wrote about the freedom of the will and the power to move oneself as well as others in the process. Reformation, on the other hand, was not about human agency but rather the bondage of the will as exemplified by Luther and Calvin. Although they encouraged personal readings of the Bible, they were anti-agentic in nature because they believed that grace was laid down by God and was not and could not be swayed or influenced by human actions and endeavors.

Yet this was challenged by the Industrial Revolution and its subsequent period of the Age of Progress, which started in the beginning of the nineteenth century and continues to this very day and onward. Agency has been up and down, but it seems that people are taking control and power again and starting to become more conscious and aware of not only their power but also the potential possibilities inherent in it.

When we feel helpless at any period for that matter, we become passive and stagnant, but it is the belief in agency that causes and brings forth innovation and resilience. We have seen how important and vital agency is and has been throughout history, and we would want to continue to build on that positive momentum.

Whether a person has and shows efficacy is often reflected in the choice of words. This method of inquiry has been used by Seligman to evaluate the level of agency across time and history. This would come down to the choice of words that either reflect choice, such as choose and select or that demonstrate duty and obligation, such as must or have to. In comparison, Seligman notes that the Old Testament has many fewer efficacy words as compared to the New Testament, which gives and offers individuals more choice and freedom.

Optimism is determined by analyzing to what degree our outlook is influenced by the past or the future. If we keep looking back to the past or feel that we are constrained and limited by our past, then we tend to feel less optimistic about our future, and vice versa. This is also why people who are not satisfied with the status quo actively seek and ask for change as they want to uproot stagnant structures. In fact, they are often referred to as progressive as opposed to reactionary.

When it comes to imagination, we would be positing our thoughts of the possible versus the impossible. Whenever you think that something is out of reach, you are limiting and restraining your imagination. The Renaissance man par excellence Leonardo Da Vinci was not bound by the reality and conditions of his times as his imagination flew and soared past and beyond those constraints. What DaVinci believed in ended up becoming a tangible reality in later times.

Yet we are often bound by our own negative and limiting beliefs. Most of those beliefs are bound by false information and are fueled by doubt and fear. While Seligman was talking about how we have progressed and improved in most areas of our existence, I was reminded of the excellent book Factfulness: Ten Reasons We’re Wrong about the World and Why Things are Better than You Think by Swedish statistician Hans Rosling. Evolutionary speaking, we are programmed and hard-wired to focus on the negative, but this view and perspective are often not based on facts and do not reflect them.

This pertains to various parts and aspects of our existence, and here are a few examples of the overall improvements we tend to either disregard or not be fully aware of: Literacy has increased from 10% in 1800 to 86% in 2016. Women can vote in 193 countries - with the exception of two countries where they are still not allowed to vote: the two countries are Saudi Arabia and the Vatican. There are many other examples, such as poverty, war, sickness, and disease that we tend to have false impressions and limited knowledge about, which, in turn, makes us feel less hopeful and less positive and powerful about the future.

The problem is that our belief in human progress is often undermined and sabotaged by media and politics. Yet we need to be aware that things are not as bad as they may seem at first sight. In Seligman’s words, what we need most - and most desperately - is a politics of optimism. This is something that we can practice and train ourselves for. Instead of engaging in deduction or induction, we should use abduction, which means to leap to the best possible explanation.

Especially in our current times and climate, be it of political and social nature or even weather-wise - we must overcome present barriers in terms of racial warfare, climate catastrophe, nuclear war or the current threat and restrictions posed by the existence and reality of Covid-19. Our helplessness in the face of adversity is the default reaction to bad events, but we must and certainly can override this.

For this, efficacy is required. We must act and try harder and be more persistent, resilient, and innovative. We should also ensure that we are healthier in body and mind. These negative events that we are facing and confronting, we ought to see them as temporary and not permanent, local, and not global or general, as well as controllable instead of outside of our locus of control. When it comes to COVID, we may feel that we are out of control, but that is when we need to be more responsive to and proactive in safety measures and protocols - until we have a vaccine that promises and guarantees us safety and security.

This is important and vital for our overall health and wellbeing. Those who are positive in their outlook, that is those who have efficiency, optimism, and imagination, are also much healthier than those who are not. They have stronger immune systems with fewer infections, their bodies heal faster, and they have less inflammation. In fact, they also live longer by an average of eight years!

In terms of productivity, they have not only better social relationships, tend to be more creative and resilient, they also get depressed less than those who do not believe or practice positive psychology. With all this in mind, it seems mindboggling why anyone would not embrace this philosophy.

And I very much support these ideas, but my disagreement is not in the goals, principles, and aspirations but in the method itself. For instance, it is difficult to overcome trauma that is deeply ingrained. For that, it is best to use depth psychology to get to the root of the problem, but that is beyond the scope here and needs to be discussed in another post altogether.

What is important to note and looks most promising to me is the multi-dimensional expansion of positive psychology to what Seligman refers to as PERMA, where positive emotion is only the tip of the iceberg followed by engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishments. As a whole, this new approach falls more in line with my interest in and shows similarities to Existential Analysis.

To say that Seligman’s ideas are inspiring would be the least. We can see here how important and relevant his ideas are and I am most excited to read his next book TomorrowMind whenever it comes out. I hope you are inspired as well.

COVID-19, Working from Home and Employee Happiness: An Interview with Dr. Craig Knight

Background and Context

Covid-19 has not only disrupted our lives; it has upended them and turned it all upside down and inside out. The novel Coronavirus has touched us on so many levels: socially, culturally, personally, politically, and of course, professionally. I am fascinated and mesmerized by how a virus has managed to change our lifestyles to such a profound degree.

In its initial stages, I remember reading an article in which a social psychologist was musing about potential lifestyle and behavioral changes that this virus could bring about. He claimed that for change to become steady and permanent, and hence long-lasting, it depended on how long the virus would remain with us and how long these specific behaviors would remain in place. As we are often told, for behavior to set in, it needs to be kept up and reinforced for at least a month. At this level, we are past and beyond that benchmark and with no visible or marked end in sight.

My work, like that of countless others, has also been impacted by this virus. As a language instructor, I had to quickly accept and deal with the fact that face-to-face classes were suddenly and abruptly off the table. I was aware of that, but it hit me hard since this switch from a traditional to a virtual classroom not only happened overnight but also at the tail end of an already busy and engrossing winter semester. 

Our institution was scrambling, and with it, both students and instructors alike. It was not easy to adjust to the changing circumstances, to say the least, but I counted myself as lucky and blessed to still count on a job while many others in different fields and careers had not been as fortunate as me.

Those who already had a certain level of access to technology - or at least the opportunity to use and embrace it - had a somewhat easier time to make the switch and adjustment. In fact, Covid-19 could be responsible for heralding and ushering in a new era: the digital age. It may have been a long time in the making, but this virus could indeed be the necessary catalyst or the final straw that broke the traditional nine-to-five office-work lifestyle. Suddenly and out of sheer necessity, we have shifted from having 3% working from home and online to a staggering 70% of the workforce switching to the online world or being forced to do so.   

A few saw it coming from a long time ago. Benjamin Pring from Cognizant advises us to “be friends with the new trend” instead of fighting or resisting technological change as he himself had been living and working remotely for almost a quarter-century now. He calls it a superior lifestyle, one that brings with it cultural and operational changes and challenges, but it is at the same time the new reality that employers and employees need to accept and embrace. In fact, those who manage to adjust to this new trend, which seems to be for the long haul and here to stay, will have a better chance of surviving, professionally speaking.

 

The Interview with Dr. Knight

The best way is to not only embrace it but to optimize it by supporting and investing in the technological and human aspects of this new reality and by accepting the necessary changes and paradigm shifts that this would entail for companies. This was one of the various topics of conversation I had with Dr. Knight, with the main focus on how autonomy and strong networking and social interactions can help employees become both happier and more productive, a win-win situation for both management and the workforce. But before I get into the content of our interview, let me take the opportunity to briefly introduce Dr. Craig Knight to you.

Dr. Knight is affiliated with a psychological organizational consultancy firm with the amazing and catchy name of Identity Realization. I am in favor of both aspects of life, namely, of finding one’s identity and of realizing it, so I told him that it was indeed a great choice for a name. Dr. Knight added that if you can realize your identity in your space, then it is a good space indeed.

In fact, Dr. Knight combines his knowledge and expertise of two different-seeming fields and creates an interesting and highly relevant hybrid. He has experience in office design, but it has been combined with the psychological effects of design upon the employee and their well-being and their connection with productivity. Having the freedom to develop and arrange one’s own workspace - and for some, this is a new experience and a kind of revelation thanks to Covid-19 – can make employees up to 32% more productive in their respective field.

It will not only benefit workers and employees to have the best possible and most comfortable space to work in and from, but, more importantly, employers can better understand and realize the importance and relevance of the workspace and its environment. Previously, by this, I mean the era before COVID, Dr. Knight has shown us that keeping plants in one’s office space could increase productivity by about 16%. This is a simple, rather inexpensive, and relatively unobtrusive manner of boosting employee satisfaction and productivity, something that is not taken advantage of enough.

But one of the new situations that many find themselves in or that they are unexpectedly thrust into is the home office. Now in my case, I am glad to report that not only do I have a Bonsai tree that has been my companion for the past year or so, but I have also recently acquired a mini-water fountain. None of this was purchased with the intention and purpose of boosting my creativity, but I do not regret that decision in the least.

Not only has it improved my mood and motivational levels, but my creative input as evidenced on this blog has increased dramatically. A case in point is that I had the fortune to have three back-to-back interviews last week, and I am trying to keep up with all the writing to share with you the amazing insight and conversation I gleaned from all those conversations.

Yet how one adjusts to this new reality of work-life may depend to some degree whether you are a segmentor or an integrator. This was information I came privy to thanks to the work and research by Nancy Rothbard from Wharton. Essentially, segmentors like to separate their work from their private lives. They tend to cherish and protect their privacy, and they talk very little about their family or loved ones or even their hobbies and interests. They have a clear separation of workspace and the private sphere. You will rarely find pictures of partners or family members in their respective office- space.

On the other hand, there are also those who like to integrate the two spheres. They do not see a separation between one and the other. You will find pictures of their loved ones and family members as well as personal items in their office. They talk freely with colleagues about their personal lives and feel most comfortable blending the one with the other.

It would come as little surprise that the latter often thrive under these new conditions, while the segmentors have a hard time adjusting to this new reality. In fact, segmentors would have to recreate an office space that is as separate and devoid as possible of personal items. In some cases, it is recommended that they put up partitions, somewhat similar to the cubicles so that they can ensure and secure a clear demarcation line between professional and private life. Others might opt for renting their own office space or to buy what is known as mini-homes, small dwelling spaces, out of which to operate one’s own business and/or do one’s work from.

Although we may stipulate that some of these differences could be gender-based, with women falling more into the second while men topping the first category, according to Nancy Rothbard, the research does not necessarily prove or demonstrate this. There is a slightly higher preference for segmenting among women, but this difference is not statistically significant.

I find myself somewhere in-between on that spectrum. When I asked Dr. Knight about how he feels about his office space, he graciously gave me a view of his surroundings. The view onto green pastures outside was inspiring; the office itself in Dr. Knight’s own words, was “scruffy and disorganized” and it made him happy because it allegedly reflected his own personality. To a certain degree that is true in my case as well. I tend to be most comfortable in a slightly messy environment. It may be my natural state and habitat. In that sense, I may align with my gender and species and concord with Dr. Knight on the matter.

Although some will feel happier with their new working environment, it still depends on various factors and it does come with certain drawbacks. A factor that influences the employee’s happiness level is to what degree they feel autonomous and in control of the environment. In the home space, they have a certain say about their work environment, which they may or may not lack in their office space depending on how much freedom their employers give or assign to them. 

But control and say go deeper than that. If an employee is involved to an extent in the decision-making process or the work that they are doing, then they will feel more engaged and more content, and less stressed. Yet in the traditional perception of a boss/employee relationship, the former gives the orders and the latter obeys them and follows through with them. This was based, among others, on Frederick Taylor’s idea of productivity where one would specialize in certain activities and the superiors would oversee the work and ensure that productivity is at its peak.

In this traditional view of management, knowledge and expertise are embodied by and lie within the managers who think or assume that it is their right to control other people’s lives, when in reality this is not and should not be the case. As a result of this view, managers believe that employees need and ought to be monitored and to be under surveillance at all times, but this has no scientific support or correlation with productivity, regardless of field or discipline.

In fact, it has the opposite and unwanted effect of undermining employee’s satisfaction. The new perception seems to be moving away from a hierarchy and towards what is sometimes referred to as a wirearchy. In this new form of work, it is best to avoid micro-management, but rather to work as a team. There could be immediate supervisors attached to smaller working units who would work as guides and facilitators, or even coaches, to ensure that the working conditions have been optimized for the employee.

Another way to ensure that there is employee satisfaction is to tap into the potentials and capacities of the individual worker. Simply put, ideally one should give the employee the tasks they are most interested in and most likely also best at. If you are good with statistics and numbers, then the spreadsheet should be all yours, while your colleague can work on other aspects and demands of the job. Figuring out the strengths and then investing in them and hence maximizing and utilizing them would lead not only to higher productivity but also lead to higher employee retention.

Dr. Knight states that managers should not tell their employees what to do but should provide resources by asking their employees how they can be of assistance to them and how they can help them. Managers ought to stop viewing and treating employees like children but rather give them what they need to get the job done. This kind of mind-shift and realization may come about due to the new working environment and conditions brought about by Covid-19.

However, there are still many who are reluctant to accept these new trends and prefer the one person at the top paradigm, that is, the traditional hierarchical structure we are accustomed to. Why is that so, I asked Dr. Knight, and he was himself somewhat baffled that many are still following a pattern that is counterproductive to the company and that will undermine and even harm and impede its success. He claimed that the situation might a bit better in the United States, but that Britain tends to be notoriously badly managed in that regard.

Yet all of this has been brought to the forefront thanks to COVID, while many employers will have to face these sets of challenges as well as opportunities. The status quo will be something of the past. The office may not be dead, but it will look very different now that we have had a taste of the inherent and previously latent potentials of technology. The office must and most likely will change as a result.

We often assume that the old ways of doing things were superior, but that may be true only in certain aspects. Dr. Knight underscores that it is most important for human beings to not only talk and socialize over Zoom but to have the opportunity of physical proximity and contact. For instance, Zoom is empowering in many ways and facilitates contact and communication between people across the world, and it is a good substitute for communication, but it is not and cannot be an alternative to face-to-face interaction and cannot possibly replace that.

Social and physical interaction are crucial and important for our health and emotional well-being. We need to have social networks with friends, relatives as well as co-workers and physical contact and proximity would continue to be necessary and of great importance.

Moreover, Dr. Knight finds the term “social distancing” to be dreadful; it should be called physical distancing, and it should only be a temporary means. As it took us quite a while to adjust to the new conditions, it would also take time for us to re-adjust to going back to the normal way of life once the pandemic is finally behind us. But social and physical face-to-face interaction should and must be part and parcel of our life again.

I do miss working closely with my colleagues and running into them as well as students in the hallway. I miss having a brief chat by the water fountain or over a cup of coffee. Zoom may work as a proxy to a certain degree, but it simply cannot replace the personal and human connection that we used to have and that we need. Nonetheless, there are other aspects of the old ways of working that I for one shall not miss.

One of them is the commute. Working from home has eliminated the burden and cost of time and money. I can be at my workplace within seconds, where it used to take me about an hour, and I am aware I should consider myself fortunate in that aspect since many people had to spend even more time in busy traffic and traffic jams.

However, for some, that commute represented an opportunity to clear one’s head and prepare for the day ahead. It signified a clear ritual transition from home to the workplace and back. That transition may be missing or lacking when your home is one with your office. For those who prefer the clear break (and they would for the most part be segregators), there are different ways to achieve this. For instance, one can create their own home office space and limit that location to work-related matters only.

Whenever that is not possible or feasible (my own amount of space in the apartment is quite limited), there is another option, namely creating your own cubicle. This may sound strange and crazy and even silly, but it can be easily done by creating cardboard walls around oneself to denote and copy the office space.

But some may not be satisfied with working at home because they see work either as an escape or refuge. It is a place that is away from the family, a kind of physical and psychological break from all that is going on at home. Being with the family can be stressful, but that again depends both on oneself and on one’s family. If you love and appreciate their presence and company, you would embrace and cherish these new opportunities of working from home.

If you see your family as a burden or do not enjoy being with them, then you cannot wait to go back to the pre-COVID lifestyle with its defined space and delineated timeframe. I for one do not miss the old lifestyle and to be physically, mentally, and emotionally confined and constricted to set schedules. I do not mind routine per se, but the obligation to have to do something at a specific hour creates and implies a certain amount of stress.

Nonetheless, it is the physical contact that I would miss, that is, being there in person with my students and my colleagues. Perhaps hybrids will become the new norm; otherwise, we would need to ensure regular social events and get-togethers to promote comradeship and to foster team spirit and a sense of and belonging to the community. But this can only occur once this virus has been completely tamed and defeated and no longer poses significant threats to our health and well-being.

For my full-length interview on YouTube with global thought leader and founder of Identity Realization Dr. Craig Knight, please click here

If you prefer to listen to the interview, here is the link to my podcast: Arash's World Podcast

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to Dr. Craig Knight for his insightful and delightful interview as well as Nancy Thompson from Vorticom, Inc. for arranging it and making it possible! 

I also want to thank the US Chamber of Commerce Foundation for their outstanding Path Forward series, especially its July 30, 2020 program entitled Covid-19 and The Future of Work in which the US Chamber’s President Suzanne Clark interviewed Benjamin Pring, Jim Harter, and Nancy Rothbard.