Why We Struggle to Connect at WORK And Beyond: Lost Relational Skills

In today's world, many seek deep, authentic connections personally and professionally. However, cultural foundations rooted in both individualism and patriarchy often leave individuals without the relational skills necessary for genuine connection. While patriarchy enforces gendered power imbalances, individualism promotes autonomy and self-reliance, often at the expense of relational depth. These intersecting forces shape how we communicate, collaborate, and relate in professional settings and beyond, creating significant barriers to trust, empathy, and vulnerability. Unless we move beyond, recognize our interdependence, and embrace cooperation and collaboration, we risk deepening disconnection not only in personal and professional relationships but also in society and the environment as a whole.

Understanding Political and Psychological Patriarchy

Contemporary views distinguish two interconnected dimensions of patriarchy: political and psychological (Lerner, 1986). Political patriarchy refers to external social systems where men dominate laws, politics, institutions, and economies. Sylvia Walby (1989) frames patriarchy as a system upheld by six interrelated structures, paid work, household production, culture, sexuality, violence, and the state, that maintain male dominance broadly across society. Patriarchal structures are deeply entrenched in institutions that have shaped and continue to shape social and cultural norms over centuries (Lerner, 1986; Walby, 1989).

The psychological dimension of patriarchy extends beyond observable behaviors to deep-seated identity conflicts crucial in all genders (Sayers, 1986). This dimension involves profound inner tensions arising from rigid gender roles, devaluation of vulnerability, and estrangement from emotional life. Janet Sayers (1986) highlights these conflicts as shaping our relational capacities and emotional expression.

Marion Woodman (1982) further illuminates how internalized patriarchy suppresses authentic emotional communication, particularly undervaluing the feminine qualities of vulnerability, empathy, and intuition essential for connection. She explains that this suppression fosters disconnection within relationships by blocking the empathic dialogue necessary for authentic communication and healing.

At the social-psychological level, psychological patriarchy manifests in the binary categorization of traits into masculine and feminine, elevating invulnerability and emotional restraint while rejecting vulnerability (Adisa et al., 2019; Real, 1994). This dynamic pressures men towards emotional disconnection and women towards internalized misogyny and inhibited agency, both undermining relational engagement and communication.

Thus, political patriarchy, grounded in social institutions and systemic power, and psychological patriarchy, rooted in internalized norms and identity conflicts, are inseparable and mutually reinforcing dimensions of a broader patriarchal system. Together, they create and perpetuate a social reality that limits relational depth and authentic connection for all individuals.

Patriarchy’s Influence and Consequences in Workplace Relationships

Patriarchal gender norms impose communication styles that restrict openness and collaboration. Men, conditioned to view vulnerability as weakness, often limit their emotional expression to anger or silence, thereby suppressing authentic sharing of needs and feelings (Adisa et al., 2019; Sultana, 2011). Likewise, traits associated with femininity, such as empathy and emotional attunement, are frequently devalued or dismissed, weakening relational dynamics within teams.

These societal structures shape not only large-scale institutions but also everyday workplace interactions. For instance, Deborah Tannen's influential work reveals how men's and women's distinct communication styles contribute to the ongoing reproduction of patriarchal dynamics.

In her seminal book You Don’t Understand (1990), Tannen explains that men tend to engage in report talk—a communication style centered on asserting status and independence—while women tend to use rapport talk, which fosters connection and intimacy. These differing genderlects often lead to misunderstandings and conflict in the workplace unless consciously acknowledged and navigated. Tannen's framework complements feminist analyses by showing how these gendered communication patterns are continuously enacted and reinforced, perpetuating power imbalances within organizational roles (Tannen, 1990, 1993).

Consequently, these entrenched cultural patterns create significant relational challenges. Women frequently face competence questioning, voice suppression, and frequent interruptions by male colleagues, behaviors grounded in patriarchal assumptions of male superiority. These interactions erode women's confidence and participation. Research indicates that women perform better and are more innovative in environments where patriarchal attitudes are less dominant (Adisa et al., 2019; Briggs et al., 2023).

The communication styles shaped by patriarchy favor control, dominance, and emotional restriction. Narrow modes such as anger or withdrawal replace collaborative dialogue, fostering misunderstandings and conflict. Leaders embodying these norms may dismiss differing perspectives, suppress creative input, and marginalize diverse voices, fostering toxic cultures marked by low morale and high turnover (Adisa et al., 2019; Walby, 1989). Men socialized under this system often disconnect emotionally, hindering authentic relationships. Women, burdened by suppressed self-worth and excessive emotional labor, face obstacles in developing mutual trust and openness (Kandiyoti, 1988). This relational disconnect manifests in communication failures, stalled discussions, conflict escalation, and deteriorating psychological safety.

Individualism’s Impact on Workplace Relationships

Cultural individualism in Western societies fosters personal autonomy and achievement, but this emphasis on self-interest has been linked to increased social isolation and weaker relational ties, both in the workplace and broader society (Czerniawska, 2021; Henderson, 2024). In work environments, individualistic values encourage transactional relationships and competition, diminishing opportunities for vulnerable, trust-building communication (Triandis, 1995; Peterson & Barreto, 2014). Individuals may avoid seeking support and view interpersonal challenges as personal failures, eroding team cohesion and collective problem-solving (Triandis, 1995; Shulruf, 2003).

Comparative studies suggest that employees in collectivist settings experience higher satisfaction and stronger relational skills, while those in individualist cultures struggle with loneliness, reduced collaboration, and guarded communication (Shulruf, 2003; Yang et al., 2012). Addressing these relational deficits requires a conscious cultivation of empathy, emotional openness, and co-regulative practices that can counteract the isolating effects of cultural individualism (Butler & Randall, 2013; Sbarra & Hazan, 2008).

Communication Challenges under Patriarchy and Individualism

Effective communication is essential for teamwork and innovation, but is disrupted by ingrained patriarchal norms and individualistic tendencies. Under patriarchal communication patterns, vulnerability is shunned; instead, indirectness, aggression, sarcasm, and withdrawal prevail. Men often express frustration through anger or silence rather than honest dialogue. Women may self-censor or minimize contributions out of fear of backlash (Briggs et al., 2023). Similarly, individualism’s emphasis on self-reliance can promote guardedness and transactional interactions, further undermining psychological safety. These behaviors perpetuate cycles of blame and disengagement, turning the workplace into a battleground of power struggles rather than a space for mutual understanding. These dysfunctional communication patterns do not exist in isolation but interact continuously at an emotional level within teams.

Terry Real (1994) highlights a critical dimension of these challenges. Under patriarchal norms, individuals are often caught in a false choice between connection (“power with”) and dominance (“power over”), forced to sacrifice relational connection to assert authority. This paradigm fosters patterns of defensiveness, blame, and disengagement rather than authentic dialogue.

These dysfunctional communication patterns do not exist in isolation but dynamically interact at an emotional level within teams, shaping and amplifying collective relational climates.

Image via Squarespace by Simran Sood

We Do Not Exist in a Vacuum: Co-Regulation and Co-Dysregulation

Individuals constantly influence and are influenced by the emotional states of those around them, consciously or unconsciously. Understanding this emotionally interdependent process invites us to consider how individuals co-regulate one another’s feelings—mutually calming, stabilizing, or conversely, intensifying tension.

The concept of co-regulation, the process by which people mutually regulate emotions, calm and stabilize one another to create relational harmony, offers a crucial framework for addressing the ripple effects of patriarchal and individualistic communication styles (Butler & Randall, 2013; Sbarra & Hazan, 2008). Positive co-regulation in workplaces fosters psychological safety, trust, and belonging, enabling teams to thrive.

Conversely, co-dysregulation occurs when emotional states amplify each other negatively, escalating tension and conflict (Butler, 2011). Patriarchal communication styles often trigger co-dysregulation, resulting in prolonged conflicts and fractured team dynamics (Coleman et al., 2007). Recognizing and cultivating co-regulation skills such as empathy, attunement, and mutual support is essential to move from conflict toward connection.

Why This Matters: Relational Skills as Workplace Essentials  

Relational skills such as empathy, active listening, vulnerability, and co-regulation are foundational for teamwork, leadership, and innovation. However, patriarchy’s emphasis on invulnerability and emotional restriction blocks these essential capacities, fueling loneliness, dissatisfaction, and conflict (Adisa et al., 2019; Sultana, 2011). Similarly, individualism’s focus on autonomy can undermine relational depth, compounding workplace isolation. Women’s workplace confidence and networking opportunities are hindered by patriarchal attitudes that marginalize their voices, while men’s behaviors are shaped by patriarchal norms that often create hostile atmospheres that stifle collaboration (Kandiyoti, 1988).

Building on this, Terry Real (1994) emphasizes the importance of moving beyond the antagonistic “power over” mindset cultivated by patriarchal and individualistic paradigms. He advocates embracing both assertiveness and mutual care, transforming conflict from adversarial contests into collaborative problem-solving where the needs of all parties are honored. This shift involves adopting an ecosystem perspective, recognizing that collaborative connection strengthens individual relationships and support healthier organizational and social systems. Such a transformative relational approach underlines the urgent need to cultivate interpersonal competencies that sustain connection, cooperation, and collective well-being in contemporary workplaces.

Moving Forward

Breaking free from patriarchal and individualistic conditioning means embracing and cultivating relational skills. Encouraging emotional expression, valuing empathy as a strength, and fostering shared accountability transform work and life relationships. Ultimately, overcoming the relational deficits rooted in these cultural forces requires developing interpersonal wisdom, balancing advocating for oneself and being attuned to others. This way of relating nurtures connection and cooperation, embodying a gentle yet confident influence that blends self-assurance with care for the relationship. By transforming conflict into cooperative problem-solving grounded in mutual respect and shared purpose, individuals and teams can thrive, building healthier, more fulfilling relationships. This path toward relational competence offers hope for greater connection across families, workplaces, and society at large, offering a path forward in an increasingly disconnected world.

References

Adisa, T. A., Cooke, F. L., & Iwowo, V. (2019). Mind your attitude: The impact of patriarchy on women's behaviour. Career Development International, 25(2), 146–164. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-07-2019-0183

Briggs, C. Q., Masilamani, A., Skorinko, J., & Marquardt, E. (2023). Competence-questioning communication and gender: An exploration of workplace experiences. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1099998

Butler, E. A., & Randall, A. K. (2013). Emotional coregulation in close relationships. Emotion Review, 5(2), 202-210. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073912461056

Czerniawska, D. (2021). Between collectivism and individualism. Journal of Individual Differences, 42(4), 251–260. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000345

Coleman, P. T., Vallacher, R. R., Nowak, A., & Bui-Wrzosinska, L. (2007). Emotional dynamics and conflict escalation/resolution. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 24(1), 123-143. https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.191

Henderson, R. (2024, March 16). The rise of Western individualism. Rob Henderson’s Newsletter. Retrieved from https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/the-rise-of-western-individualism

Kandiyoti, D. (1988). Bargaining with patriarchy. Gender & Society, 2(3), 274–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124388002003004

Lerner, G. (1986). The Creation of Patriarchy. Oxford University Press.

Sbarra, D. A., & Hazan, C. (2008). Coregulation, dysregulation, and self-regulation: An integrative framework for understanding attachment, separation, loss, and recovery. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(2), 141-167. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868308315702

Peterson, R. S., & Barreto, M. (2014). Societal individualism–collectivism and uncertainty avoidance as moderators of the relationships between job resources and strain. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19(4), 381–392. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037963

Real, T. (1994). I Don’t Want to Talk About It. HarperCollins.

Sayers, J. (1986). Sexual contradictions: Psychology, psychoanalysis and feminism. Routledge.

Sbarra, D. A., & Hazan, C. (2008). Coregulation, dysregulation, and self-regulation: An integrative framework for understanding attachment, separation, loss, and recovery. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(2), 141-167. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868308315702

Shulruf, B., Hattie, J., & Dixon, R. (2003). Individualism–collectivism: Survey and assessment. Australian Journal of Psychology, 55(3), 155–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530444000167

Sbarra, D. A., & Hazan, C. (2008). Coregulation, dysregulation, and self-regulation: An integrative framework for understanding attachment, separation, loss, and recovery. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(2), 141-167. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868308315702

Sultana, A. (2011). Patriarchy and women’s subordination: A theoretical analysis. Academic Research International, 1(3), 194-202. https://doi.org/10.3329/afj.v4i0.12929

Tannen, D. (1990). You Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. Ballantine Books.

Tannen, D. (1993). Gender and Discourse. Oxford University Press.

Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism & collectivism. Westview Press.

Walby, S. (1989). Theorizing patriarchy. Basil Blackwell.

Woodman, M. (1982). The Pregnant Virgin: A Process of Psychological Transformation. Inner City Books.

Yang, L., Spector, P. E., Sanchez, J. I., & Allen, T. D. (2012). Individualism–collectivism as a predictor of psychological consequences of stress in the workplace. International Journal of Stress Management, 19(2), 111-131. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027822