Attachment style at work

Some of us easily enter into relationships and feel at ease in them. Others are so insecure that they cannot enjoy closeness, even though they crave it. Some people do not particularly care about relationships and prefer to engage in work or hobbies. Occasionally, discerning any predictability in someone’s behaviour can be hard. Each of us has an individual model for forming, maintaining, and ending bonds with others. The origins of this model lie in childhood, and the consequences in adult life are most often discussed in the context of romantic relationships, and far less frequently in the workplace. However, the attachment styles of employees and leaders profoundly impact organisations. This manifests in “soft” elements such as team atmosphere, engagement, and job satisfaction, as well as in “hard” indicators like absenteeism, retention, and productivity. How can we leverage this understanding to cultivate a positive work environment? And can an unfavourable attachment style be changed?

Why is attachment so important?

The need to form close bonds is written in our genes. For millennia, attachment provided a survival advantage, as meeting one’s needs in isolation was either impossible or much more difficult. This is the foundation of attachment theory, formulated by John Bowlby and developed by other researchers. We are inherently programmed to assign special significance to certain individuals, to invest in relationships with them, and to become dependent on them. Does attachment still play such a fundamental role in contemporary society? Strong bonds in our part of the world are no longer a matter of survival, and we can manage many things without anyone close. Moreover, this self-reliant reality is becoming increasingly common. However, we know that the epidemic of loneliness causes suffering, and the attitude of “I don’t need anyone” does not bring fulfilment. Conversely, healthy relationships contribute to better health, longevity, and enhanced happiness. Thus, the significance of attachment seems unwavering.

What is attachment and how is it formed?

We begin to form close bonds in childhood. At this time, we are reliant on our caregivers and have no alternative but to depend on them. At the same time, to evolve into independent adults, we must also venture out into the world and discover it for ourselves. John Bowlby describes a child’s attachment to a caregiver as:

• the desire for physical and emotional closeness,
• seeing the caregiver as a safe haven where one can find comfort and support,
• and, at the same time, as a secure base from which to explore the environment,
• anxiety and resistance to the caregiver’s absence.

Harry Harlow’s controversial experiments on baby monkeys demonstrated that attachment is not merely a “side effect” of the necessity to meet physical needs with someone’s help. The monkeys preferred to spend time with a surrogate mother that offered a sense of closeness rather than one that provided only food. This shows how strong and primal the need for bonds is. While adult attachment is richer and more intricate, it is fundamentally akin to early relationships. We want to be close to significant others and feel reassured that we can turn to them. We derive comfort from knowing they are available and well-disposed towards us. The prospect of their absence troubles us deeply. Even when we excel in our independence, these longings remain vividly alive within us.

Can you become attached to your colleagues and boss?

The first objects of attachment are usually the mother and father. Over time, the circle expands to include other relatives, teachers, coaches, friends, and romantic partners. In adult life, bosses and colleagues also assume the roles of attachment figures. Although they usually occupy a lower position in the hierarchy of significant bonds, this fact matters because the existence and quality of attachment in the professional sphere affect how we work and what results we achieve. Drawing parallels between early childhood relationships and adult professional connections can evoke resistance and discomfort. The point is not to search for literal similarities to past bonds but rather to create an awareness that they have shaped us in a certain way. Knowing that, we can either draw from the past or change old patterns. The ability to form relationships at work is in itself a deeply human trait and one of the desired competencies of the future.

Secure attachment style

The secure attachment style is the ideal situation. In childhood, it means we trust the caregiver. We feel understood and cared for. Moving away, we know we can return. Securely attached adults embrace interdependence, allowing themselves to rely on others and to be relied upon in turn. They navigate the intimacy within relationships with ease, effectively communicating their desires and emotions. Embracing differences and conflicts as opportunities for growth, they approach them with a constructive mindset, presuming goodwill from their partners and readily extending forgiveness. They have robust self-esteem, and they derive joy from the successes of their partners. They find contentment both in companionship and solitude. How many of us does this apply to? About 50-60%, although the rates are rather declining. However, statistical data may not consistently match subjective experiences. Some may ask: “If nearly half the people are like this, why do I always run into the opposite?” This can stem from perceptual distortions, the magnetic pull toward individuals with complementary needs, or the manifestation of self-fulfilling prophecies.

What happens when we were not so lucky?

For a considerable portion of the population, navigating relationships presents a more formidable task. These are people representing one of the insecure styles:

• Anxious style develops when the attachment figure inconsistently responds to needs, so it is never known what to expect from them. Anxious children cling to the caregiver, react with great stress to separation, and are not easily comforted when it ends. In adults, a great desire for closeness is juxtaposed with a pervasive uncertainty regarding its attainment. There is also jealousy, possessiveness, excessive expectations, and resentment when they are not fulfilled. The individuals harbour an unwarranted fear of rejection, feeling that they always have to try harder. Their interactions are characterized by meticulous scrutiny and analysis of others' behaviors, accompanied by a habitual prioritization of others' needs over their own.
• Avoidant style results from ignoring needs, experiencing emotional coldness, and being sidelined. The avoidant child neither particularly enjoys the presence of the caregiver nor exhibits distress about separation. The adult avoids closeness and dependency in relationships. They struggle to cultivate trust and accommodate others within their personal space, opting instead to keep their partners at a distance and retreat when emotions intensify. Suppressing or denying their own needs, they are reluctant to share their emotional experiences. They downplay the importance of attachment, preferring activities that serve as distractions from personal engagement, and relegating relationships to a lower rung on their priority list.
• Disorganised style is a consequence of irresponsibility, neglect, abuse, and chaos. Disorganised children desire closeness to the caregiver while simultaneously fearing them. Adults seek affection while expecting to be hurt. If things are too calm, they suspect something is wrong. In their view, disappointment is inevitable. To shield themselves from vulnerability, they exercise caution in sharing and sabotage relationships preemptively to evade anticipated hurt. Oscillating between extremes and contradictions, their relationships are inherently dramatic. They are capable of both intense love and vehement hatred towards others - approaching people, and then smothering them with the closeness, getting close physically but remaining emotionally distant.

Are there “better” and “worse” styles?

A secure attachment style benefits us in many ways because it is accompanied by far more positive emotions. When we are not consumed by anxieties and do not lose energy through constant high alertness and silencing ourselves, we can channel our attention and energy towards the pursuit of better goals. Insecure styles have been linked to a higher risk of depression, suicidal thoughts, problematic social media use, a greater likelihood of risky sexual behaviours, and generally poorer mental health. However, before we start feeling down with this information, let’s acknowledge that in childhood our behaviours—crying, clinging, or nervously seeking—were adequate and allowed us to adapt to unfavourable circumstances that were beyond our control. Understanding this allows us to forgive ourselves more easily in adulthood. Moreover, insecure reactions still make sense in difficult situations. When things get dangerous, hyper-vigilance and escape may be more effective strategies than blind optimism.

Attachment styles in the work environment

In a simplified way, the functioning of each attachment style in the professional context can be characterised as follows:

The significance of attachment knowledge for companies

Research encompassing nearly 37,000 individuals has shown that secure relationship patterns among employees foster organizational success. In contrast, insecure attachment styles are associated with less effective and more superficial performance, negative perceptions of development opportunities, lower job satisfaction, and a higher risk of burnout. Furthermore, these styles are indicative of a more utilitarian orientation towards work, wherein employees persist in their roles not out of genuine enthusiasm, engagement, or alignment with organizational values, but rather due to perceived costs of departure. Due to their impact on physical and mental health, these attachment styles also contribute to absenteeism and presenteeism. Nonetheless, these patterns predominantly manifest at the individual level. When examined through a collective lens, divergent conclusions emerge. Possessing a wide range of possible behaviours becomes a team advantage. In an experimental scenario where a group of individuals with various attachment styles found themselves in a room that began filling with smoke due to a malfunction, anxious individuals were the first to detect the peril, while avoidant individuals found the exit the quickest. Therefore, diversity proves to be the most effective approach.

Leaders with secure and insecure relationship patterns

The larger the domain of influence within an organization, the more significant becomes the attachment style of the individual. The potential for leadership hinges upon personal traits such as self-confidence, the ability to function effectively when exposed to stress and uncertainty, self-efficacy, optimism and future orientation, initiative, internal locus of control, and openness to experience. Drawing upon early experiences - these are the traits that facilitate children's exploration of the world. All of them are more pronounced in individuals with secure attachment patterns. Leaders embodying such a framework are accessible and responsive to needs - guiding, supporting, and fostering competence, autonomy, and self-esteem among subordinates. Conversely, an insecure style detrimentally impacts employees' performance, mental well-being, and job satisfaction, also increasing the risk of burnout. A secure leader delegates, while an anxious one is reluctant to surrender control. For the secure leader, relational dynamics hold importance, whereas the avoidant leader prioritizes task-oriented objectives.

Attachment style and empathetic leadership

In times when the importance of empathetic leadership is emphasized, it can be posited that a leader with a secure pattern exemplifies the empathy with finesse. Conversely, an anxious leader is attuned to the emotions of subordinates, but having weak boundaries and reluctantly communicating difficult information, they easily become overwhelmed. Should they cultivate these competencies while augmenting self-awareness, they will be excellent leaders, adept at interpreting situations and moods, gaining employee loyalty through their attentiveness. An avoidant leader disregards the significance of emotions, thus failing to understand group dynamics, leading to frustration and conflicts, and providing less inspiration. If they decide to befriend their own feelings, and allow sensitivity to permeate their interactions, whilst lowering their guard, they will be valued for easing tensions and bringing calmness to actions under pressure, and will also gain more charisma. The disorganized style is the least favourable among leaders. If they cannot manage themselves, their ability to effectively manage others is severely limited.

Interaction of styles in different employee-boss setups

When two individuals enter into an employee-boss relationship, usually the alignment of styles will foster smooth cooperation. Nonetheless, this alignment can also accentuate less favourable tendencies. An avoidant supervisor and an avoidant subordinate may concur on the preference of maintaining distance, but they may struggle to synergize on creating a vision that requires emotional involvement. While they may favour reduced interaction in remote settings, such an arrangement could impede information exchange. An anxious leader and an anxious follower will perceive emerging emotions in a nuanced way, but expend excessive time dissecting them. Their desire to please the other party may impede their ability to confront problems. Conversely, a mismatch will cause dissonance. An avoidant boss will appear exceptionally cold to an anxious employee, while the latter may find themselves inundated with expectations. An avoidant employee will frustrate an anxious boss who will struggle to connect with them.

How to build teams with this knowledge

Acknowledging that a secure attachment style generally benefits individuals and outcomes does not imply that only those who naturally embody it will make good employees and leaders. Firstly, we are addressing an important but only one facet of personality. Secondly, professional competencies are crucial in the workplace, and individuals of any attachment style can excel as specialists in their field. Thirdly, diversity in a complex and evolving world is valuable and provides greater flexibility. And fourthly - we can all learn to understand our own and others' behaviors, leverage the strengths, and mitigate the unfavourable tendencies of our own style, as well as collaborate better with those who differ from us. This may be challenging, but it doesn't have to be an obstacle. Therefore, it is important that knowledge about the existence and significance of attachment patterns serves not for categorization and labelling in the style of "Oh, Jenny is an avoidant type", but rather for people's development and enriching relationships.

Can attachment style be changed?

During childhood, we are incredibly malleable, hence early experiences imprint themselves upon us so deeply and profoundly that their impact is felt throughout our lives. However, we are not solely determined by how our primary caregivers treated us. Attachment style is susceptible to alteration as our circle of significant figures expands, each individual contributing to its evolution. While we typically have a dominant model of the world, it's highly likely that within our history, we also have experiences that contradict it. Yet, as we mature, our receptivity to diverse influences often wanes, as we tend to gravitate towards those who affirm our existing beliefs, while sidestepping those who might challenge them. Moreover, the pattern of relationships can evolve when we change our place of residence or employment. It is also influenced by cultural factors. Characters we personally do not know, and even fictional ones, such as the ones from books or TV series, can reinforce it. Finally, we may embark on a deliberate journey of self-exploration and development.

Practical guidelines

If you recognize a pattern within yourself that is not serving you well, you can either change it or tame and mitigate its effects. Helpful in this process are:

• Self-reflection - contemplate what your style is and what consequences it brings to your life. Try to recognize recurring patterns.
• Feedback - inquire about how others perceive you. In the workplace, you can utilize anonymous 360-degree feedback tools.
• Contradictory experiences - search your history for experiences that differ from the unfavourable ones, or create them in the present.
• New patterns - observe someone who is likely securely attached. Consider how you would feel with the behaviours they exhibit.
• Learning in relationships - start a relationship with someone different from you, other than you instinctively choose, and notice the emotions it evokes.
• Developing competencies - work on specific skills, such as setting boundaries, active listening, and recognizing emotions.
• Acquiring knowledge - read or listen to podcasts about the style you represent, its potential manifestations, and consequences.

You can work on self-improvement independently or seek assistance from a psychologist or coach. If your company is enrolled in the ICAS EAP Program, you can reach out to a specialist within 15 seconds. If not, you can discuss the implementation of EAP in your company with our Business Cooperation Manager, Magdalena Drożdż, via LinkedIn or by emailing magdalena.drozdz@icas.pl