I’ve been thinking about boundaries lately, and observing how significantly they impact our daily lives.  The lack of boundaries in relationships (or attempts to overstep established boundaries) seem to be a frequent cause of relational tension.

Obviously, there are different levels at which to consider boundaries — at the geopolitical level (e.g. the border between the United States and Mexico), in interpersonal relationships (as wonderfully explained by Cloud and Townsend in their books), and even our physical bodies (our skin provides a boundary between our body and the world around us).

I would like to use the example of our physical body to illustrate a few points about some characteristics of boundaries, and the purposes of boundaries.

First, we need to acknowledge that one purpose of a boundary is to distinguish between A (an object or person)and non-A. This is my body and it is not the same entity as the environment around it. I am me, and I am not you. We are separate beings. Although this seems simple and straightforward, there are many examples and levels at which distinguishing between A and non-A is not that clear cut. When I breathe in, is the air that is in my lungs part of me or is it still separate from me? When I perspire, at what point does the moisture cease to be part of me? The reason this issue needs to be addressed relates directly to the second point about boundaries.

Boundaries serve as a permeable “border” through which we both protect ourselves from the environment and also the mechanism through which we obtain resources and sustenance. Our skin is not a solid piece of fabric which keeps everything out nor keeps everything in. It allows the flow of information and resources between our body and the world around us — it takes in information and things we need (sunlight, moisture) and exhales information (redness of skin when irritated) and unnecessary materials.   This is true in relationships as well, either at the personal level, organizationally and politically.  We do not exist as self-sufficient beings independent from the world around us.  We interact and interchange with those around us — this is the nature of relationship.

In organizations (companies, community groups, churches, etc.) , boundaries (sometimes known as membership) help define who is and who is not part of the group.  Who can participate?  Who can provide input for direction?  Who has the rights of membership?  Who, as leaders, are we to care for and look after?  If membership in a group is unclear, then the processes of the organization become confusing and the resources can be squandered on those who are really not a part of the team.  What is required of members — what resources are they expected to bring to the organization?

Boundaries have a very direct relationship to responsibility (and often in the context of role definitiion).  What (or for whom) am I responsible?  I often see the issue of responsibility become a major source of tension in relationships — within families, family-owned businesses, companies, between businesses and customers, and businesses and vendors.  Individuals and companies who do a good job of clarifying expectations and responsibility in their relationships with others tend to have happier, non-conflictual relationships.

Let me cite some common problems with boundaries that I observe.

    1. Parents continuing to take responsibility for their children’s lives, in inappropriate ways or beyond the normal stage of life for that responsibility.  Most commonly, parents of adult children continue to take responsibility for their children’s financial well-being — rescuing them from a series of poor decisions or “helping them out” so their children will not have to experience some difficulty in their lives.

    2. Children placing responsibility (or blame) on their parents for their (the child’s) life experience.  Sometimes this is financial (”I lost my cell phone but don’t have the money to replace it.  You have money.    Therefore, you should get me a new phone.”)  But it is often at the emotional level — “I’m not happy.  I want x.  If you really cared about me, you would do x for me.  Then I’ll be happy.” 

    3. Family members confusing family and business roles.  One of the core challenges of family owned businesses is clarifying and maintaining appropriate boundaries between the family system and the business systems (ownership and management).  Often I see patriarchs wanting to help their adult children earn a good living (better than they would be able to get on their own in the marketplace) and put them in a position within the business that the individual is not qualified to handle responsibly — to the detriment of the business.  As a business owner, this is their right.  They can do whatever they want with the business they own.  However, in addition to hurting the business, this choice often leads to unintended negative consequences within the family and also often undermines the personal development of their child.

I would encourage you to reflect on the relationships in your life and examine the boundaries you have established (or attempt to).  Is the boundary too permeable?  Do you let in “toxins” from others that you need to keep out?  Or do you create such a firm boundary, keeping others at a distance and not letting them “in”, that you isolate yourself from the resources you need to live a healthy life?  Do you feel others try to place responsibility (or blame) on you that really isn’t yours to carry?  [If so, you may want to review my previous entries on dealing with dysfunctional individuals.] Additionally, in your work, pay attention to the relationships your company or organization has with others.  Are the boundaries well defined?  Is it clear who is responsible for what?  If you have ongoing conflicts with customers, vendors or strategic partners, then I would suggest you need to look closely at your boundaries, or how they are not being clearly communicated to others.

“Networking” is obviously not only about trying to use relational contacts to find a job or find a quality person for a position you are trying to fill.  We use our social networks for a variety of purposes — finding quality professionals or technicians for tasks we need to get done, locating charitable organizations that are good stewards of the monies given them, or learning about areas of life we have limited experience or knowledge.  Since my article / blog on networking, I have had a number of people talk to me about their own networking experiences, and I have had a couple of unique experiences as well.

I also remembered an issue of Forbes magazine, their 90th anniversary issue on May 7, 2007, which they dedicated to “The Power of Networking”.  However, they were discussing networking in the broader context of networking through the Internet (Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, and other professional networks.)   One of the articles discussed some of the reasons people are reluctant to network.  I thought they were worth mentioning, along with some of my own observations.

People don’t like to network because:

  1.  It takes repetitive inititative.  Calling people, sending emails, going to social events to interact with others, setting up appointments — all take time and emotional energy.  And for some people (those who are more introverted) it can take a lot of energy.  It wouldn’t be as bad if we knew that the process was time-limited or defined according to a certain number of contacts.  One of the wearing aspects of networking is its open-ended nature and that we must continue reaching out to others repeatedly. 

  2. It can feel “fake”.  Networking can feel artificial and even manipulative when you are trying to connect with others for the sole purpose of getting your need met (finding a job, making a sale).  One antidote to this objection is to always include as part of your interaction to focus on what you can do for the other person.  Seeing how you can help them be more successful, or connecting them with resources you know, can normalize the interaction (and also build positive rapport that may be helpful to you at some later point in your life).

  3. There is a lot of anxiety associated with the whole experience.  Meeting with people outside of your normal social group challenges us in many ways.  We may not fully comprehend what they do, understand the language and acronyms they use, or feel competent in their social milieu.  Additionally, it is often awkward to ask for someone else’s time, knowledge and social connections, especially when we perceive the other person as important, successful or busy. 

  4. It is easier to network with those who are like you.  This is true, but generally speaking, meeting with people who are already in your larger social network will probably not be that productive in generating new and different types of connections that you wouldn’t be able to reach on your own.  If you are networking because you have a need, often your self-confidence is shaky, your emotional energy is low and it is more natural to make “easy” contacts rather than those that will stretch you, but which may yield greater benefits.

I myself, a highly social individual, get tired of meeting, greeting, social chit-chat, making requests, responding to requests, and reaching out to others.

The other night, at an awards banquet for non-profit organizations in our community, my 24 year old son sat at the table with my wife and I, and a number of business friends.  Our friends were asking Daniel about his thoughts on Facebook and MySpace — how they impacted relationships and his general impression of them as a social tool.  After sharing a variety of observations, he reported one of the challenges of the social network opportunities available now through the Internet is that “you can only keep up a certain number of relationships.”  This is a true statement, whether you are taking about Internet connections or face-to-face relationships.  Obviously, some people have more social capacity than others, but this is a limiting factor I think we need to keep in mind for ourselves (to help us have realistic expectations of ourselves) as we continue to connect with people in our daily life interactions.

In my work with people, I often deal with individuals’ reactions to situations as well as communication issues between co-workers and family members. As a result, in the process of working through these issues, people often say to me, “Well, you know, perception is reality.” Sometimes they say this to explain how miscommunication occurred with another person, or why they feel the way they do.

I am not sure of the origin of the phrase, “perception is reality”, (although I would bet it comes from some realm of psychology — and for those who know me, that is not necessarily a positive statement.) And I am unaware if it is being espoused frequently in the media, but I sure seem to being hearing it more and more.

The problem is — it is not true. At least, not always.

There is a verifiable reality that exists. And sometimes our perceptions (or beliefs about the world) do not match reality. In the physical realm, that is the basis for illusionists — they are able to make things appear different than they really are. Also, there are those tricks of nature that our senses can play on us that can lead us to misinterpret what is really happening (having a sense of your body being warm while you are in the beginning stages of hypothermia).

But in day to day life, I see the mismatch between perception and reality more practically. Here are some examples.

Miscommunication.  The classic example is the scenario like this:  “You said ….”  “I did not.  I said ….” “Oh, but I thought you said ….”  “No. What I said (or at least, thought I did) was …”  “But I thought you said …”  If we stick with the perception is reality proposition, this leads to major problems in communication.  This is true for both parties.  For the initial speaker, “what I thought” does not necessarily equal “what I said”.  And “what I said” is not necessarily the same thing as “what I meant”.  Similarly, for the listener, “what I heard you say” may not be the equivalent to “what you said”.  So perception may be perception, but it may not be what actually occurred.

The mismatch between feeling reactions and reality. I often see the disconnect between reality and perception in the area of worrying. Being worried or anxious is essentially a smaller version of being afraid (there is a qualitative difference between being terrified or afraid for one’s safety and being worried or concerned). However, the realm of worry and anxiety have to do with potential events that may happen. They always have to do with the future. The challenge is — not everything people worry about is reality-based. Those who struggle significantly with anxiety can worry daily about their loved ones being killed in a car accident on the way to school or work. Or they can worry about the stock market crashing, losing all of their savings, and winding up being homeless.

[NOTE: One way we can manage our fears and worries is to do a “reality check” — what is the actual likelihood of x event happening today? Has x happened before? How many times? Even if x happens, does that necessarily mean y will happen? And even in the unlikely event that x happens and y also happens, what are all of the circumstances that need to be in place for z then to occur? The chances are incredibly slim. So, how much time and energy do you want to spend worrying about a series of incidents that will probably not happen?]

Misinterpretation of a situation.  Some people make quick judgments.  Sometimes this is to their benefit.  But, in other cases, it can lead to misjudging what is going on in a situation.  In working with kids and teens, I have often seen a scenario where a fairly impulsive student, who also views themselves as the ‘protector’ of others will come into a room and see a couple of guys “scuffling”.  They have each other in headlocks and are throwing one another around the room.  The self-appointed “hero” sees the guys “fighting” and promptly dives in, tackles one of the fighters, taking him to the ground, and yells, “Break it up!” (Frequently someone gets hurt in the process.)  It is then that the hero finds out that the two boys were just “horsing around” and it was a good-natured tussle between two friends.  The two “fighters” wind up being angry at the hero for interfering with their fun and over-reacting to the situation.  Unfortunately, this happens in the adult world as well — where someone misinteprets a situation and reacts inappropriately because of their misperception.  Truly, in these situations, perception is not reality.

Inaccurate beliefs about the way the world is. For instance, in doing career coaching with individuals, many people believe that finding a job that meets their needs and desires should be fairly easy and should happen within a matter of weeks. So they “dive in” looking and applying for jobs.  After several weeks with no job, they begin to become discouraged (our feeling reactions are inter-related with our expectations) and begin to question if they are pursuing the right career direction.  Self-doubt also sets in, wondering if they are capable of finding the type of job they want and whether they are really marketable.  The reality is that finding a job which is a good fit for you takes a lot of time and energy. Usually three to six months, or longer. And this reality is demonstrated time and time again (one of the aspects of “reality” is that it can be verified empirically).

Misattribution of motive. Probably the most damaging form of misperception is the case of attributing a certain motive to someone else’s action, and being quite far off the mark.  This happens in marriages a lot, it seems.  And it can be the result of either an overt action (that is, something you did) or the absence of an action (something you didn’t do but the other person thought you should have).  Let me state something clearly — most of us aren’t fully clear why we do what we do, let alone being able to understand the motives of another.  It is always best to ask (and hopefully, believe) the other person, “Why did you …?”  It can be helpful to start with the phrase, “I’m confused. Can you help me understand why you…?” (It seems to take the accusatory edge off of the interaction.)  There are tons of examples, more than I want to go into (and for fear of incriminating myself).  Let me just suggest: we often get “bent out of shape” with others because we attribute a reason for their action or inaction that is not accurate.

There are other examples of perception not equaling reality, but I think that is enough for now.  Maybe use these ideas to frame your own thoughts when you hear: “Well, you know, perception is reality.”  Maybe.  Maybe not.