The intention of this blog is to share learning and insights from the Transformational Change Partnership, which develops the capacity of public-serving agencies to advance system-level changes that improve outcomes and reduce disparities. Backed by interdisciplinary research, the blog is based on learnings from the TCP and presents practical actions that practitioners and policymakers can use to diagnose, reimagine and improve public systems. 

“Personal relationships help us remember that we are in the same boat working towards the same goals.” – Placer County behavioral health professional

Introduction

Public sector managers at the state and local levels in California are under tremendous pressure to implement a plethora of state policy initiatives and oversee the ongoing operations of their departments and agencies that they can’t take the time to do what research suggests would make them more successful – have coffee with a colleague.

According to research, most Americans spend a relatively small amount of time intentionally investing in personal relationships at work, with some studies suggesting that leaders dedicate only around 20% of their time to relationship building.1

But is that always the right choice? Emergent evidence from California county professionals – reinforced by extant research in organizational psychology, environmental sociology, and neuroscience – suggest relationships matter a lot in creating better, more coherent system-level decision-making. This research says that building personal relationships – discussing non-work topics with colleagues – generates greater amounts of empathy between individuals, more deeply understood and shared values, and develops trust faster. 

Why it Matters

Public agencies and their community service providers are primarily made up of people. In fact, nationally public education spends approximately 90% of its funding on school personnel.2 The United States spends a substantial amount of its $4.1 trillion healthcare budget on personnel.3 This means that moving any health, human service or education system to accomplish its objectives will require, among other things, strong relationships among individuals. 

Further, a lack of trust between individuals can erode confidence in institutions, which has been on the decline for some time in the United States as shown by Tweng et al. (2014).4 Figure 1 below shows this relationship and the downward trend over the last 40 years.

Evolution & Biology Is Our Guide

Relationships between human beings are informed greatly by our evolution and biology. Mechanisms of empathy, perspective, attachment, cooperation and social norms shape how we build bonds between one another with a favorability to connections that promote our well-being. Historically, our ancestors used versions of these mechanisms because it increased their chances of survival.5 Humans are also naturally skeptical, retaining bias and prejudice,6 the absence of trust. These survival mechanisms can be overcome with direct and honest interactions that advances empathy, surface common values, and increase appreciation for divergent views and opinions.

Mechanisms of empathy, perspective, and attachment create opportunities for direct and honest interactions that advance perspective taking, surface common values and increase appreciation for divergent views.

Our bodies also physically respond to building positive relationships. These chemical manifestations are a signal that we are in a safe environment. These interactions result in the release of oxytocin, often referred to as the “love hormone” because it’s associated with feelings of trust, connection and intimacy.7 Increases in oxytocin can take relationships to higher degrees of empathy.8 Gable and Gosnell (2011) surmised that humans are endowed with separate reflexive brain networks for social thinking – basically categorizing present situations as threats or not.9 Close relationships are linked to longer term well-being as they build biological responses that may protect against the adverse effects of stress. Your brain’s reward circuit also lights up in response to these positive connections, activating the amygdala, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex.10

Application to Public Systems and Teams

Studies show that social connections play a central role in fostering a sense of purpose and well-being in the workplace. They also impact the bottom line: Effective management of social capital within organizations facilitates learning and knowledge sharing, increases employee retention and engagement, reduces burnout, sparks innovation, and improves employee and organizational performance.11

Metz et al. (2021) proposed a theory of change that described how trusting relationships cultivate increases in motivation, capability, and opportunity for supporting implementation among stakeholders, with implications for commitment and resilience for sustained implementation, and ultimately, positive outcomes.12 In the absence of these features of social workplace interaction, Dunbar and Dunbar (1998) suggested that when individuals experience social pain in the workplace, the region of the brain that is activated is the same as if physical pain had been experienced.13

Implications for Practice

Relationships are not static. They are either building or atrophying. They need work, always. This is true today more than ever as public and community systems experience more severe and frequent economic, social and even political shocks, including pandemics, increasing natural disasters, and technological displacements. This raises the urgency to invest in relationships as a shock absorber to the distant and disparate impacts to public serving systems.will experience in the future. Some suggested relational calisthenics: 

Mean it

Working in systems can be difficult and push us to revert to simplistic and cursory behavior. You may be asking someone how they are doing, expecting no more than an, “ok” “good”. Taking even a few minutes to deepen that connection can pay dividends over time to the trust between colleagues.

Don’t make it awkward

Whether it is in a meeting room or in a one-on-one interaction, taking the time to authentically engage with one or two colleagues builds personal rapport that then buffers against the inevitability of instances in which a hard conversation will likely lead to resolution. For example, when dealing with new or difficult issues, take the time to ask colleagues to reflect on their experiences with similar issues or information. There is no need for trust to fall here.

Invest early

At first glance it may not make sense to invest in relationships with colleagues in other agencies that you rarely engage. However, as California continues to encourage cross-agency coordination, these investments will likely pay dividends later. These interactions can build positive relationships and create initial trust between partners.

Big picture

Lean into conversations that allow you and others to see the bigger picture and reframe assumptions that limit the consideration of new and better options. This follows on from selective investment theory and the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions.14

A time for simple and a time for hard

While we may look back at these as the good old days, public challenges seem to be growing faster and more complex than our ability to learn and adapt. Fortunately, research and experience reveals a long-standing way we can work better – that is together, beginning with something as simple as strong inner-personal relationships.   

Additional resources

List practical tools or engaging publications to help readers

Peter Senge in his Compassionate Systems Leadership Frame

Jason Willis

Author

Jason Willis

Clinical Professor of Public Policy

University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law

Footnotes

  1. https://hbr.org/2022/10/the-power-of-work-friends ↩︎
  2. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66#:~:text=These%20services%20and%20commodities%20include,on%20tuition%20and%20other%20expenditures ↩︎
  3. https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2023/oct/high-us-health-care-spending-where-is-it-all-going#:~:text=Possible%20Additional%20Excess%20Spending%20Reflected,Those%20for%20Nurses%20and%20Physicians ↩︎
  4. Declines in Trust in Others and Confidence in Institutions Among American Adults and Late Adolescents, 1972–2012. ↩︎
  5. Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., & White, A. E. (2013). Relationships from an evolutionary life history perspective. In J. A. Simpson & L. Campbell (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Close Relationships (pp. 13–38). Oxford University Press. ↩︎
  6. Emberton M. Unconscious Bias Is a Human Condition. Perm J. 2021 May;25:20.199. doi: 10.7812/TPP/20.199. PMID: 33970098; PMCID: PMC8784036. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8784036/. ↩︎
  7. Louis Carter. 2023. The Neuroscience of Trust. Allen, S. February 24, 2022. How Biology Prepares Us for Love and Connection. Great Good Magazine. Berkeley, CA. University of California, Berkeley. ↩︎
  8.  Head Heart + Brain. The neuroscience of trust… Headheart Ltd. ↩︎
  9.  Gable and Gosnell (2011). ↩︎
  10.  APA. What Happens When You Fall in Love? ↩︎
  11. To Be Happier at Work, Invest in More Relationships. HBR. ↩︎
  12.  Building trusting relationships to support implementation: A proposed theoretical model ↩︎
  13. Senge Compassionate Systems Framework. Senge/Bowle has had a lot of intentional focus on understanding ones colleagues at a more personal level to be able to work more collaborative and deeply. ↩︎
  14. Beyond the Moment, Beyond the Self: Shared Ground between Selective Investment Theory and the Broaden-and-Build Theory of Positive Emotions Author(s): Michael A. Cohn and Barbara L. Fredrickson Source: Psychological Inquiry , 2006, Vol. 17, No. 1 (2006), pp. 39-44. Selective Investment Theory: Recasting the Functional Significance of Close Relationships Author(s): Stephanie L. Brown and R. Michael Brown Source: Psychological Inquiry, 2006, Vol. 17, No. 1 (2006), pp. 1-29 https://hbr.org/2022/10/the-power-of-work-friends. ↩︎