BUILD THE SUPPORT RELATIONSHIP
When help is provided, over time, the recipient is likely to become dependent upon the provider. Again, over time, the recipient is likely to feel somehow diminished by the pattern of helpful interaction and may become resentful.
With continuing help, the centrality of the helper is increased and that of the recipient diminished. This is extremely important in organizational settings in which those who provide help are typically more likely to be noticed for their contributions and, as a result, are more likely to be rewarded for them.In contrast, when support is provided, there develops a peerlike tone in the relationship between the provider and the recipient. They become, in effect, partners in increasing the productivity derived from their interaction. This is not to suggest that when support is provided in an organizational context there is some disruption of the organizational hierarchy, but rather that the spirit of the supportive relationship encourages an experience of equality.
Related to this idea is another that many people find to be counterintuitive:
Successful conflict resolution is a form of partnership. As a result, significant discrepancies of skill between the parties to a conflict can lead to a decrease in the likelihood of success. If one is invested in true resolution, it is therefore often useful to contribute to the strength of the other party so that he or she can become a more effective contributor to the process of resolution. Using the language we have explored here, it is often by providing support that we can shift the participation of the other from that of conflict opponent to that of problem-solving partner.
Often, as I describe these ideas, an unintended consequence is that it may appear that I am somehow an opponent of help, but that is certainly not true at all. It would be accurate to say that I am an opponent of help that is offered reflexively rather than thoughtfully.
This is because there are many situations in which there would be much greater individual, group, and organizational benefit were support provided.Why then, do people so frequently choose to provide help when they might have offered support? One motivation seems immediately obvious to people who reflect on this matter: Providing help is far more efficient of time than is providing support. This is most obvious in organizational settings in which the time pressures are often profound. Even those who well understand the longterm benefits of providing support are pulled in the direction of offering help because providing support is so time-consuming in comparison.
Less obvious, but in many ways more important, is the fact that when help is provided, the helper maintains primary control of the interaction. In contrast, when successful support is provided, control must be shared with the recipient.
Those who tend to have difficulty relinquishing control (for any of a variety of reasons) are likely to become habitual, or as I described them earlier, reflexive helpers.
When help is provided, the “spotlight” tends to shine on the helper. When support is provided, the focus is on the increased capacity of the recipient of the support. It is ironic to note that in organizational life those who provide support often go unnoticed in comparison to those providing help even though it is the support that will have far greater lasting benefit.