Possibilities Newsletter | Oct 2025

Love, loathing and leadership

At a training a decade ago, I watched footage filmed at the famous Gottman “Love Lab”, a Seattle apartment kitted out with cameras to study the dynamic between couples. In one stand-out clip, the wife is at the window pointing excitedly at something on the ocean. Her husband then leans forward from his chair and, without looking at her, turns up the volume on the TV.

A roomful of therapists and one executive coach sucking air through their teeth at the same moment is surprisingly loud…

Why was I there? Well, let's just say my own relationship history was a big part of it. Brought up by a stoic British war-generation father and Chinese-Singaporean mother, conflict avoidance was the name of the game at home and I found it hard to address conflict in the personal arena without drawing on my learned professional skills as a lawyer: which seldom helped.

But I was also there to learn more about how to support the teams I coached. During an exercise in which members of a global team shared how to get the best - and worst- of them, the leader from Taiwan had joked "I'm Asian: if you see me working late, don't tell me I'm 'awesome' - get me some food!' , at which the team leader had joked: “maybe we should be sharing our love languages, not our strengths?!”

It sparked a question in my mind: might studying couple and family dynamics give me some ideas about how to help the teams I coached become more effective - particularly at 'managing' conflict?

Weathering the storms

In the world of teams, the Tuckman model (”forming - norming - storming - performing”) is popular. But although it identifies stages of team development it doesn’t give any practical instruction on how to get through those stages. And in the fast-paced technology industry where I do a lot of my team coaching, it's a standing joke that before we meet again, there’ll be a change in team composition! So teams are often stuck in forming - norming… and then re-forming. They never even get to storming: when conflicts arise in the workplace, folks put their heads down and wait for the next re-structure or for colleagues- or themselves- to move on.

Layered onto that, traditionally in Asian families, respect for one’s elders often means putting up and shutting up. Open discussion of differing viewpoints is not always encouraged- even between peers. It’s common to just avoid speaking to someone rather than try and work through a disagreement. In my own Asian family, there’s always someone not talking to someone else: any celebration involves careful planning around whichever family members are currently avoiding each other.

But for teams who have joint missions and objectives to accomplish, leaving friction unresolved and avoiding inevitable conflicts of interest or opinion that arise is counterproductive. And some underlying sources of conflict are structural or systemic - like mis-matched incentives or span of control. These can never get surfaced and addressed if the people with the knowledge and interest to address them avoid doing so for fear and lack of skill in managing conflict.

In other words, helping teams to “storm” well by identifying tensions and turning them into fuel for creativity rather than descending into unproductive conflict is a key leadership skill.

Tension or toxicity?

John Gottman, co-founder of the Gottman Institute with his wife Julie, was a maths prodigy who stumbled into psychology after rooming with a psychology major and finding it interesting to bring maths to human behaviour. Famously, his studies enabled him to predict whether couples would be marriage ‘Masters’ or ‘Disasters’ within a few minutes of observing their interactions. It was Julie Gottman, a clinical psychologist, who suggested that maybe they could go beyond predicting to actually working with couples to avoid their 'fates'.

 In “Principia Amoris”- the science of love - Gottman introduces Love Equations and shows, with way too much maths for me (I do not recommend this book unless you get excited over parabolas) that Volatile Couples - characterised by frequent passionate arguments - can have relationships that are as stable as those of couples who avoid conflict IF the arguing is balanced with positive interactions, affection, humour and love.

In other words, it’s not whether you fight, but how you fight and the general health of your relationship that determines whether you weather the storms or your partnership ends up on the rocks.

In his early work, Gottman described the particular behaviours that ring the death knell on a marriage as “The Four Horsemen”, after the New Testament harbingers of doom. Re-named

The Four Poisons for less bible-savvy audiences, the behaviours are:

Criticism, Contempt, Defensiveness and Stonewalling.

If in disagreements, and in your relationships generally, you avoid these poisons, there’s a chance of generative conflict: discussions which help you get to understand each other better, resolve difficulties and move things forward.

Crucially, there’s ONE poison which is the most dangerous, eroding respect and affection and predicting not just breakdown of relationship but even the physical health of the recipient (i.e., it’s literally toxic behaviour).

Think back to the husband turning up the TV on his wife that caused us all to take a sharp intake of breath? Yep, the numero uno of relationship poisons is: Contempt.

Whilst Criticism, Defensiveness and Stonewalling are behaviours that can grow into habits: at least habits can be more easily observed and fixed. Contempt can be a creeping attitude that poisons the very ground of a relationship, creating a micro-climate that undermines all other interactions.

So how do we recognise it creeping into relationships or team culture?

Eye-rolling, hostile tone, irritation, dismissive gestures, interruptions and blame are all signs. Refusing to engage, passive aggression, going around others in 'corridor complaints' about rather than to them can also point to contempt.

It’s a form of moral ranking in which one person judges themselves superior to another. Contempt is when the conversation shifts from “you did something wrong” to “there’s something wrong with you”: from behavioural complaints to character attacks.

Crucially, it can spiral into “negative sentiment override” where every word of gesture is interpreted negatively by the other even if it was neutral or positive. Years ago a colleague described how things had got so bad with his flat mate that even the way the guy ate his breakfast irritated him: at that point his logical self could recognise that things had got out of hand between them.

In other words: contempt is a powerful potion that can rewire how people see each other.

The Antidote

At this point, you may be looking around you and wondering whether some of this poison has got into the water in the political capitals of the world. Moral superiority, interpretation of negativity no matter what, attacks, shutting down and expressions of disgust. Is this a fatal poison - or is there a cure?

What if I told you that the antidote is: AI ??

Nope, not that AI. But the AI that stands for Appreciative Inquiry, a strengths-based collaborative approach to creating positive change.

Developed in the 1980s by David Cooperrider and Suresh Srivasta at Case Western Reserve University, AI looks at what is right about a situation, not what is in deficit. And whilst it is a particular process for organisations, it is rooted in the same principles as many strengths- based approaches: that people and organisations are mysteries to be embraced not problems to be solved.

One of Gottman’s most famous relationship findings is the 5:1 formula: that for relationships to thrive, negativity must be outnumbered five to one by positive moments. How do the Volatile Couples stay stable? By maintaining positive interactions at that ratio - even when fighting. Generally though, the positive interactions should be far greater- like 20:1. Cultivating a culture of appreciation and generosity of spirit is what stops contempt from spreading. It's why when we work with teams, whether to help heal conflict, navigate tricky transitions or help them address difficult challenges together we always start with AI: what's RIGHT about what's going on. Not papering over the cracks with toxic positivity or BS sandwiches (if you know, you know*)...but creating generous and generative cultures by, continually and on an ongoing basis:

• noticing and naming what you value in each other and the relationship

• expressing gratitude sincerely and concretely

• naming and celebrating positive moments

• responding with interest and empathy to the expressions of others

Yes, we still have to become more skilful at addressing conflict and working with it productively. But creating the ground for that starts with actively looking for things to respect, admire and appreciate - whether in couples, teams or our wider communities.

And the good news, as we come into the traditional season of giving thanks, is that putting this form of AI first, we contribute to our own wellbeing: the most well-evidenced form of wellbeing practice is a gratitude practice.

We appreciate YOU for being with us and hope to see you soon.

Sue and the Bamboo Being Team

*and if you don't know about the BS sandwich and how the Magic Ratio can be misinterpreted in the context of feedback giving: this is a good explainer.