Up to this point, I have focused primarily on the impact of collusion on the dynamics of groups and entire organizational systems. I want to conclude this analysis by describing something of the impact of collusion on the individual participant in the collusive process. This analysis will also serve as a segue into my concluding comments about narcissistic collusion. At the heart of the matter is control. The collusion is in control. The participants in the collusion are not in control. They are caught in the spell of the collusion. As Kets de Vries notes, we get carried away as participants in a collusion. We are blinded to reality. The dynamics of projective identification, role suction, and enmeshment cultures all lead to what Wilhelm Reich (1980) described many years ago as character armor. Men and women become stuck in the armament of collusion. What they hope will protect them from their own fears, challenges and diminishing sense of self—the collusion—comes at a great price. There is no room for either movement or growth when encased in collusive armament.
Using another metaphor, participants in collusions are frozen—much as the narcissist (as I shall note shortly) is frozen in the ongoing admiration of his own reflected image. I suggest that this frozen state occurs at three progressively more destructive levels. Level one concerns the freezing of Implicit and Explicit Expectations about oneself and other people in the organization. There is an orientation in most organizations to existing patterns of behavior—this is one of the critical roles played by organizational cultures. It is also one of the outcomes of collusive dynamics operating in organizations. If the patterns are not reinforced and expectations are not constantly being met (through the power of self-fulfilling prophecies) than members of the organization are likely to become disengaged (lower morale and involvement) and may even leave the organization.
If a member of the organization tries to shift the expectations (“is the emperor going to appear without clothes again?”) or if she publically identifies what is really happening (“the emperor is naked!”), then one of the fears I enumerated above is likely to be realized. At the very least, she is likely to be isolated in the organization or forced out. A penalty box is often employed to ensure that all members of the organization fully and deeply understand the implicit as well as explicit expectations and resultant behavior patterns. The penalty box might consist of social shunning (I’m never invited to anyone’s home!”), the loss of influence in the organization (“No one ever listens to my suggestions anymore”) or even the moment-to-moment plopping in meetings and interpersonal relationships (“He/they don’t even acknowledge that I have said something. Even disagreement would be better than the lack of acknowledgement I am getting . . . I would rather be criticized than ignored!”).
