The easiest way to get rid of responsibility is to pretend that you don’t know what to do. This is strategic incompetence, calculated behavior, packaged in helplessness. Psychologists attract attention: this seemingly trivial tactic can lead, over time, to major imbalances in relationships, professional frustrations and communication impaired.
Photo source: Shutterstock
Strategic incompetence is not the real lack of abilities, but a repetitive behavior by which a person is dodging from certain tasks, claiming that he does not understand or do not master them, say the specialists. It is a form of avoidance that, over time, moves the full responsibility on the other, whether we are talking about a life partner or a teammate.
Mimicry failure becomes shield
The mechanism is simple and efficient: the one who “does not know” what he has to do, over time, will not be asked. In couple relationships, this means that one person constantly takes over daily tasks: from cooking to children’s care. In the professional environment, it means that the same employees end up carrying the projects, while others keep their image clean and the light program.
Most of the time, this strategy is not declared or aware as such. It is installed gradually, in contexts in which a partner or a colleague seems to “always have a job”, “not to understand”, “to have difficulty with technology” or “not to understand the task”, until it becomes more efficient for others to take it directly.
An important detail is that strategic incompetence does not manifest itself isolated, but becomes recognizable by repetition. An occasional mistake, a moment of hesitation or lack of a punctual abilities does not mean anything serious. But when the same type of excuse appears constantly and only in certain types of responsibility (heavier, more invisible or more unpleasant), it becomes a clear behavioral model.
“In the office, I frequently encounter dynamics in which one of the partners seems to” do not understand “simple tasks in everyday life: cleaning, changing a diaper, paying an invoice, supplying the house. However, behind this apparent failure, a tactic can be hidden more or less conscious: the use of incompetence as a mechanism to avoid responsibility ”, declares, for Adevărul, Gabriela Răileanu, clinical psychologist.
Where does it all start from: the “unheard” child
From the perspective of the one who uses it, this form of avoidance can, in fact, be a learned adaptation in childhood. “If the effort was not valued or noted, the result was ignored or criticized, and the mistakes were punished, the child renounces to try again. Or perhaps a parental figure, usually the mother,” take everything “and the child learned that” failure “brings comfort and others will take responsibility. For some, the message “I am not capable” is strengthened. If in childhood they were labeled as “unheard of”, it is possible to have internalized a self -based image. The question is equally important: why is this dynamic? Why does the “capable” partner not only accept, but sometimes even feeds this unequal division of responsibilities? “, draws attention to the specialist.
In fact, for some partners, disproportionate assumption of tasks can come from a deep need for control or rigid perfectionism, which does not allow them to give up tasks without discomfort, says Gabriela Răileanu. The inner message is often: “If I want to go well, I have to do myself” or “no one does things like me.” “In reality, it is a difficulty in tolerating mistakes, lack of control or uncertainty. This position can provide a feeling of superiority and control. To be” the capable “,” the organized “,” the one that can be contained “becomes a source of personal validation and safety in the relationship. It is a subtle dynamic, in which the functional superiority sometimes masks a deep uncertainty: if my partner would really become autonomous and involved, what remains of my role? What do I bring valuable in the relationship? ”she warns.
“I do everything.” When the fear of conflict becomes strategy
In other cases, avoiding conflict plays a central role: it is easier to “do everything” than to go into a quarrel about who takes the garbage or who changes the diaper, says the psychologist. “Dynamics often rest on gender beliefs. In some couples this dynamic is fueled by deeply rooted beliefs about the” natural “roles of men and women. Household tasks or children’s care are seen as “women’s work”, while the man’s involvement is optional or “help”.
The use of incompetence as a mechanism to avoid responsibility does not appear only in the couple’s relationship, but also in the workplace. The psychological mechanisms behind the behaviors are the same. Some people can use a subtle strategy that avoids difficult, unpleasant or less visible tasks, passing them to colleagues considered more competent, more available or simply willing to “solve things”. “In such contexts, the person who postpons the resolution or claim that he” does not know “,” does not understand “or” does not do “directly or indirectly transmits that it is more effective for someone else to take responsibility, feeding Team imbalances and relational frustrations,” explains Gabriela Răileanu.
The use of incompetence as a mechanism to avoid responsibility does not appear only in the couple’s relationship, but also in the workplace. The psychological mechanisms behind the behaviors are the same. Some people can use a subtle strategy that avoids difficult, unpleasant or less visible tasks, passing them to colleagues considered more competent, more available or simply willing to “solve things”.
“In such contexts, the person who postpons the resolution or claim that he” does not know “,” does not understand “or” does not handle “directly or indirectly that it is more effective for someone else to take responsibility, fueling team imbalances and relational frustrations,” confesses Gabriela Răileanu.
In his opinion, this dynamic can generate frustration among colleagues who take on additional tasks. In the long term, these employees are often overloaded, emotionally exhausted and demotivated, especially when they notice that those who contribute less, but know how to make themselves visible or avoid the effort, are rewarded, promoted or protected by the system. “Thus, the organizational culture risks promoting appearances instead of the real value, and the internal equity is eroded, affecting the motivation, loyalty and dynamics of the whole team.” she concludes.
