Structure is Not Safety: Redefining "Love" in the Context of Leadership
In our quest for efficiency, we have over-engineered our structures and under-engineered our relationships. Why modern leadership requires us to stop suppressing emotions and start negotiating reality
The High Cost of Silence: The Pressure Cooker Effect
In many organizations, there is a silent agreement on what “professionalism” looks like. It looks like stoicism. It looks like leaving your humanity at the door to focus on the task. This definition of professionalism often acts as a rigid container designed to keep “messy” human feelings out of the workplace.
But emotions do not disappear just because we forbid them in the meeting room. When we suppress frustration, doubt, or fear because they don’t fit the corporate script, they don’t vanish—they accumulate.
The Invisible Load
Imagine your team like a physical structure under load. Suppressed emotions act like hidden friction. You cannot see it on the agenda, but it generates heat. It wears down the machinery of collaboration. We all see the “elephant in the room”—the failed project timeline, the toxic behavior of a high performer, or the collective exhaustion. But because our “professional” culture lacks the language to address these realities, we remain silent.
This silence is not just inefficient; it is dangerous. Living with the cognitive dissonance of seeing a problem but being unable to name it creates a state of chronic psychological stress. It isolates us.
It is no coincidence that 73% of European IT professionals report suffering from prolonged periods of high stress and burnout amid rising workloads.
We are not burning out from the work itself. We are burning out from the energy required to pretend that everything is fine when it isn’t.
We cannot solve this with another process chart.
Structure is not safety. True safety comes from connection.
It requires us to reclaim a concept that business has exiled for too long: Love. Not as romance, but as the rigorous practice of seeing the humans behind the roles and creating a space where the silence can be broken.
Love: The Map is Not the Territory
If “Structure is not Safety,” what is? The answer lies in a fundamental shift in how we view our colleagues: moving from a prescriptive to a descriptive stance.
The Prescriptive Trap
Most organizations operate on a prescriptive model. We treat the job description like a rigid blueprint and try to force a human being to fit inside a narrow box. We rely on implicit norms: “You are a Senior Manager, so you must always be confident.” This is like trying to navigate a complex mountain range using a simplified subway map.
When reality inevitably clashes with the map — when the Manager is overwhelmed or the Specialist needs creative freedom — the system views this as a defect in the person. The result? The employee masks their true self. They spend their energy hiding their “deviations” from the blueprint rather than solving problems.
The Descriptive Alternative
Applying “Love” in business means flipping this dynamic. It means acknowledging that the map is not the territory. Instead of asking
“How do I force this person to fit the blueprint?”
we ask
“Who is this person actually, and how do we design our cooperation to fit their reality?”
This is Negotiated Design. As Jessica Fern argues in her work on attachment theory (Polysecure1), safety arises when we feel seen as a human, not just used as a resource.
This distinction—between imposing a generic rule and inviting a specific reality—is the difference between a hollow gesture and a secure connection. A prescriptive approach relies on the ‘correct’ procedure, assuming it works for everyone. A descriptive approach relies on the specific human in front of you.
Let’s look at how this shift changes a common leadership scenario:
Prescriptive: “We have an open-door policy.” (A static rule). But nobody is going to enter your door because there is a blanket of silence. The door is technically open, but the psychological path is blocked.
Descriptive: “I know that coming to my office might feel intimidating. What do you need from me to feel safe enough to share bad news?” (A genuine inquiry). You hand out an open invitation for a relationship based on servant leadership, authentic connection, and shared understanding.
The Fear of Letting Go
This shift sounds simple on paper, but in practice, it feels counter-intuitive. Why? Because most of us have been trained to believe that ‘clarity’ means having one single rule for everyone. Letting go of this certainty feels dangerous, like a path leading straight into hell.
To explain why we cling to these rigid structures—and how to break free from them—I need to take you out of the office context for a moment. My understanding of this dynamic didn’t come from a management book. It came from personally challenging a much deeper societal narrative about loyalty, truth, and secure attachment.
Language: From Implicit Ownership to Explicit Agreements
To understand why I look at business relationships differently, I have to share where my perspective comes from.
Here is my confession: I am polyamorous.
In my private life, I have learned that relationships do not have to follow the prescriptive cultural default to be deep, committed, and secure. But this realization required me to question deeply ingrained narratives.
The Possessive Organization
When I look at the corporate world, I see a striking parallel: Most companies operate like jealous, insecure partners. They operate on an implicit claim of ownership: “We need 100% of your time, your resources, and your passion. You want a side project? Aren’t you happy with us?”
This is the Trap of the Single Truth. Traditional management suggests there is only one “right” way to see the world: The company’s way. Leaders often act as if their perspective is the objective reality. Any deviation is treated as a threat to the relationship and the organization as a whole that must be prevented by exerting control instead of trust.
Multiple Realities
If we want to fix the talent crisis, we must stop acting like jealous partners. We need to accept that an employment contract is not a vow of total exclusivity. We need to move from implicit expectations (”You belong to us”) to explicit agreements.
Instead of implicit demands, we treat the contract like a Relationship Smorgasbord2 —a buffet of different needs where both parties agree upon what they would like to eat together. Instead of the silent assumption that ‘you are cheating on us if you have a side business,’ we negotiate openly:
Company: “We need your high-level technical skills for the platform migration.”
You: “I love the intellectual challenge, but working purely with abstract code drains me. I need one day to work with my hands—carpentry or gardening—to feel grounded again.”
The Agreement: “Let’s switch to a 4-day week. You get Fridays to build physical things, and we get an architect who returns on Monday with a cleared mind and restored focus.”
This turns a potential conflict and shame (hidden side gig) into a strategy for sustainable high performance and transparent partnership.
But how do we facilitate such a sensitive negotiation without forcing our own will upon it? This requires a specific tool: Clean Language. Clean Language is a communication method designed to explore another person’s reality without “contaminating” it with our own assumptions or metaphors. It keeps the leader’s ego out of the equation (”clean”), allowing the true needs of both parties to surface.
By using this method, we stop fighting for the “Single Truth” (who is right?) and start exploring the “Multiple Realities” of the people involved. When a leader admits, “My view is just one perspective, not the absolute truth,” the pressure creates space for genuine loyalty—the kind that stays because it wants to, not because it has to.
Leadership: Mapping the Territory
We often talk about “empowerment”—giving authority to the team. But many leaders struggle to do this because they carry the Burden of Competence. They believe they must always have the answer. This creates a bottleneck: the leader solves every problem, while the team learns helplessness.
Cartography instead of Command
This is where Clean Language becomes a critical tool for leadership. It changes the role of the leader from a “Commander” to a “Cartographer” (Mapmaker). Instead of directing, the leader helps the employee map their own perception of the challenge.
The approach is simple but rigorous:
Listen Exquisitely: Give full attention, quieting your own internal monologue.
Backtrack Exactly: Repeat their exact words. If they say the project is “stuck in mud,” you don’t say “it’s delayed.” You say: “And it is stuck in mud.” This validates their reality instantly.
Ask a Clean Question: “And what would you like to have happen?”
By exploring their metaphors (”mud”, “wall”, “flow”), you help the employee understand their own situation. The result is Self-Efficacy. They find the solution within their own logic. For the leader, this brings immediate Relief. You don’t have to carry the weight of knowing everything. You just need to be curious enough to ask the right questions.
Conclusion: The Corporate Polycule
Ultimately, we need to correct our understanding of what a company actually is. It is not a machine made of gears. It is a biological and social network—a molecule of interpersonal relationships. Let’s call it the “Corporate Polycule.”
In this structure, the laws of physics apply. Every employee is an atom; every interaction is a bond. If a relationship between just two people is under high tension—a conflict between a Lead and a Manager—it doesn’t stay isolated. It sends a vibration through the connecting bonds.
The Ripple Effect
If ignored, this tension creates a Resonance Disaster. Small, unaddressed misunderstandings create ripples. These ripples amplify each other until they hit the organization like a tsunami, shattering culture and retention. We often look for the “big cause” of a crisis, but usually, it was just the accumulated vibration of poor relationships.
“Love” is the stabilizing force
It is the conscious maintenance of these bonds. By using clear Language to negotiate tension early, we keep the structure stable. We create a Secure Base from which we can explore the market and innovate.
This is the promise of Love. Language. Leadership. It is an invitation to stop building machines and start cultivating a resilient network of human connections.
Stop Guessing. Start Mapping.
The most expensive thing in your company isn’t the software licensing; it is the friction caused by the silence between your people. You don’t have to overhaul your entire culture overnight. You just need to change one conversation.
I invite you to test this “Operating System” yourself. I offer a free 15-minute Clean Language session.
See the hidden dynamics of your team clearly mapped out.
Hear what happens when someone listens to your reality without judgment.
Feel the immediate relief of dropping the burden of having to know it all.
There are no slides. No sales pitch. Just a rigorous, safe space for you to experience the difference.
Polysecure: Attachment, Trauma, and Consensual Nonmonogamy by Jessica Fern, https://www.jessicafern.com/books
The Relationship Smorgasbord is a concept from relationship anarchy. It encourages partners to consciously choose the elements of their relationship from a wide variety of options, rather than accepting a pre-packaged set of social norms.