0
0
Shadow at the Table: When Informal Networks Replace Formal Accountability
Why do some organisations run on whispers instead of minutes? Favours instead of frameworks? Personal alliances instead of transparent agreements?
Through a Jungian lens, we might say the shadow of the organisation is at play—what’s unspoken, denied, or disowned. When formal authority is mistrusted or resented, informal networks rise. But these often privilege the in-group, where loyalty and familiarity matter more than clarity or fairness.
In such environments, scapegoating becomes a risk. Those who ask for process, structure, or documentation may be seen as “not one of us”—rigid, controlling, or disloyal. They can be subtly (or not so subtly) pushed to the margins. The act of “outing” formality is a form of unconscious group projection: what the group resists in itself (structure, scrutiny, power) is cast onto others, who are then excluded or undermined.
This isn’t just inefficient—it’s psychologically dangerous.
It creates two systems: the visible one (org charts, governance, job descriptions) and the hidden one (favours, alliances, whispered deals). When power resides in the latter, accountability suffers—and resentment festers, especially among those excluded from the inner circle.
A collegial culture must hold the tension between individual trust and structural trust.
We should not suppress the human impulse to connect, nor should we fear honest structure. Collegiality means recognising that everyone belongs, not because of who they know, but because of shared purpose and transparent practice.
Mistrusting formality isn’t always irrational—many have been hurt by rigid hierarchies. But replacing governance with gossip is not the cure. If anything, it deepens dysfunction.
The challenge is to integrate: to bring what’s hidden into light, to align our formal processes with our lived values, and to treat those who speak for structure not as enemies of culture, but as guardians of coherence.
In Jungian terms, the shadow must be made conscious.
In practical terms, documentation is not a betrayal of trust—it’s the architecture that allows trust to flourish.
