Former Community – We Moved

🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.

ForumPublic Forum: Power DynamicsPublic teaching as way to gain St …

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Public teaching as way to gain Status

#1 · December 19, 2022, 10:24 pm

Quote from John Freeman on December 19, 2022, 10:24 pm
Hello everyone,
Lucio's lesson in PU got me thinking about the teacher-student power dynamics.
There are two situations of teaching: public teaching (to others or teaching someone in front of others) and private teaching (1-on-1).
As Lucio said, the one who teaches has the value to give, therefore he has higher social status (higher social value) by definition. This translate in higher power as this person is recognised for the value provided, being provided and that will be provided. Therefore this individual has higher social value than the student.
Now, I would add that I think that what happens is a trade. The master trades knowledge he has for social status. That is the social recognition of his value and/or the value he can/will provide. They actually blend/overlap together (his value vs the value given). The person is valued proportionally to the value this person can deliver, since this value only exists through this individual.
The student gets the knowledge and the master gets the status.
What I noticed when I was teaching interns at my hospital is that teaching him in front of others (that's actually the only way we can do it in the ED) is giving me status.
So I think further than teaching 1-on-1 (which has its own merit), one can maximise the status obtained from the knowledge given by doing it as publicly as possible. This allows one to be perceived as an expert. It's actually a multiplier. Instead of having higher social status with 1 person (private teaching) you gain it with more people (public teaching). The person does not even have to get the value for themselves. They must feel the value transfer from you to the student. They will attribute you automatically a higher value.
Then another question comes: but if they don't acknowledge the value trade ("thank you"), isn't it value stealing?
Yes and no.
Most of the time the person won't be able to use the actual knowledge you gave the other person because they're not in the given context. So they feel they're getting value or that the other person is getting value. However, the knowledge won't stick as much as it will to the student being taught.
Even if they don't acknowledge privately or publicly the value received or perceived, they still felt it. So now they know you are high-value. They might not acknowledge publicly but they know for themselves that you are. That is enough to give you higher status in their eyes.
Disclaimer: this is a machiavellian/social exchange analysis. Of course, on a higher level: teaching/sharing one's knowledge is beautiful in itself and fundamental to the human condition. Also, the knowledge is ultimately useful and being delivered to the end-recipient (customer/patient/citizen/etc.).
Questions and Comments are welcome as usual!
Cheers!

Hello everyone,

Lucio's lesson in PU got me thinking about the teacher-student power dynamics.

There are two situations of teaching: public teaching (to others or teaching someone in front of others) and private teaching (1-on-1).

As Lucio said, the one who teaches has the value to give, therefore he has higher social status (higher social value) by definition. This translate in higher power as this person is recognised for the value provided, being provided and that will be provided. Therefore this individual has higher social value than the student.

Now, I would add that I think that what happens is a trade. The master trades knowledge he has for social status. That is the social recognition of his value and/or the value he can/will provide. They actually blend/overlap together (his value vs the value given). The person is valued proportionally to the value this person can deliver, since this value only exists through this individual.

The student gets the knowledge and the master gets the status.

What I noticed when I was teaching interns at my hospital is that teaching him in front of others (that's actually the only way we can do it in the ED) is giving me status.

So I think further than teaching 1-on-1 (which has its own merit), one can maximise the status obtained from the knowledge given by doing it as publicly as possible. This allows one to be perceived as an expert. It's actually a multiplier. Instead of having higher social status with 1 person (private teaching) you gain it with more people (public teaching). The person does not even have to get the value for themselves. They must feel the value transfer from you to the student. They will attribute you automatically a higher value.

Then another question comes: but if they don't acknowledge the value trade ("thank you"), isn't it value stealing?

Yes and no.

Most of the time the person won't be able to use the actual knowledge you gave the other person because they're not in the given context. So they feel they're getting value or that the other person is getting value. However, the knowledge won't stick as much as it will to the student being taught.
Even if they don't acknowledge privately or publicly the value received or perceived, they still felt it. So now they know you are high-value. They might not acknowledge publicly but they know for themselves that you are. That is enough to give you higher status in their eyes.

Disclaimer: this is a machiavellian/social exchange analysis. Of course, on a higher level: teaching/sharing one's knowledge is beautiful in itself and fundamental to the human condition. Also, the knowledge is ultimately useful and being delivered to the end-recipient (customer/patient/citizen/etc.).

Questions and Comments are welcome as usual!

Cheers!

Emily has reacted to this post.

#2 · December 19, 2022, 11:12 pm

Quote from Ali Scarlett on December 19, 2022, 11:12 pm
Agree with much of what you've said here, John.
A quick note on this part:
Quote from John Freeman on December 19, 2022, 10:24 pm
(...)
So I think further than teaching 1-on-1 (which has its own merit), one can maximise the status obtained from the knowledge given by doing it as publicly as possible. This allows one to be perceived as an expert. It's actually a multiplier. Instead of having higher social status with 1 person (private teaching) you gain it with more people (public teaching). The person does not even have to get the value for themselves. They must feel the value transfer from you to the student. They will attribute you automatically a higher value.
Then another question comes: but if they don't acknowledge the value trade ("thank you"), isn't it value stealing?
I think that as much as the social exchange dynamic is a concern, the power dynamic might be an even bigger one.
If you're constantly "schooling" the same person in front of others and they're power-aware enough, they might start to get sick of it (or at least annoyed by it).
And, that can cost you an ally or, worse, create a potential enemy.
So, in order to take that approach of "the more public teaching I can do the better", one must be careful to mix as much warmth as possible (and I think that sometimes the warmest thing you can do is indeed to just keep it private).
And, now that I'm rereading, another thought here:
Quote from John Freeman on December 19, 2022, 10:24 pm
(...)
The person does not even have to get the value for themselves. They must feel the value transfer from you to the student. They will attribute you automatically a higher value.
Then another question comes: but if they don't acknowledge the value trade ("thank you"), isn't it value stealing?
Yes and no.
Most of the time the person won't be able to use the actual knowledge you gave the other person because they're not in the given context. So they feel they're getting value or that the other person is getting value. However, the knowledge won't stick as much as it will to the student being taught.
Even if they don't acknowledge privately or publicly the value received or perceived, they still felt it. So now they know you are high-value. They might not acknowledge publicly but they know for themselves that you are. That is enough to give you higher status in their eyes.
It sounds like you're saying that bystanders/people overhearing the teacher give value/insight to the student could be takers for not acknowledging that the teacher's wisdom was helpful for them too (i.e. they're credit withholding).
And, that the circumstances by which those bystanders are in the green are only if:
They can't easily implement or internalize the teacher's lessons and/or
They can intuitively tell/feel that the teacher's status has raised due to having helped the student
Can I propose another idea though, John?
Perhaps the teacher's lessons were only valuable to the student who requested them and, therefore, the bystanders overhearing/listening are already in the green.
I'd say that's the case because if the teacher started to assume that the help he provided to one was help needed by everyone (and then expecting credit based on that assumption), his good intentions could actually turn into social scalping the group (which is a form of social exchange manipulation) because of that credit presupposing — all for the sake wanting to social climb.
Happy to read if you disagree mate.
P.S.:
I think a more descriptive title for this thread might be:
Taking the teacher role publicly to gain more status with more people faster
If you think so too, happy to adjust it, and if you disagree happy to leave it as is.

Agree with much of what you've said here, John.

A quick note on this part:

Quote from John Freeman on December 19, 2022, 10:24 pm
(...)
So I think further than teaching 1-on-1 (which has its own merit), one can maximise the status obtained from the knowledge given by doing it as publicly as possible. This allows one to be perceived as an expert. It's actually a multiplier. Instead of having higher social status with 1 person (private teaching) you gain it with more people (public teaching). The person does not even have to get the value for themselves. They must feel the value transfer from you to the student. They will attribute you automatically a higher value.
Then another question comes: but if they don't acknowledge the value trade ("thank you"), isn't it value stealing?

I think that as much as the social exchange dynamic is a concern, the power dynamic might be an even bigger one.

If you're constantly "schooling" the same person in front of others and they're power-aware enough, they might start to get sick of it (or at least annoyed by it).

And, that can cost you an ally or, worse, create a potential enemy.

So, in order to take that approach of "the more public teaching I can do the better", one must be careful to mix as much warmth as possible (and I think that sometimes the warmest thing you can do is indeed to just keep it private).

And, now that I'm rereading, another thought here:

Quote from John Freeman on December 19, 2022, 10:24 pm
(...)
The person does not even have to get the value for themselves. They must feel the value transfer from you to the student. They will attribute you automatically a higher value.
Then another question comes: but if they don't acknowledge the value trade ("thank you"), isn't it value stealing?
Yes and no.
Most of the time the person won't be able to use the actual knowledge you gave the other person because they're not in the given context. So they feel they're getting value or that the other person is getting value. However, the knowledge won't stick as much as it will to the student being taught.
Even if they don't acknowledge privately or publicly the value received or perceived, they still felt it. So now they know you are high-value. They might not acknowledge publicly but they know for themselves that you are. That is enough to give you higher status in their eyes.

It sounds like you're saying that bystanders/people overhearing the teacher give value/insight to the student could be takers for not acknowledging that the teacher's wisdom was helpful for them too (i.e. they're credit withholding).

And, that the circumstances by which those bystanders are in the green are only if:

They can't easily implement or internalize the teacher's lessons and/or
They can intuitively tell/feel that the teacher's status has raised due to having helped the student

Can I propose another idea though, John?

Perhaps the teacher's lessons were only valuable to the student who requested them and, therefore, the bystanders overhearing/listening are already in the green.

I'd say that's the case because if the teacher started to assume that the help he provided to one was help needed by everyone (and then expecting credit based on that assumption), his good intentions could actually turn into social scalping the group (which is a form of social exchange manipulation) because of that credit presupposing — all for the sake wanting to social climb.

Happy to read if you disagree mate.

P.S.:

I think a more descriptive title for this thread might be:

Taking the teacher role publicly to gain more status with more people faster

If you think so too, happy to adjust it, and if you disagree happy to leave it as is.

Lucio Buffalmano, John Freeman and 2 other users have reacted to this post.

#3 · December 20, 2022, 6:20 pm

Thanks Ali for your feed-back!

About the title: it's all good as it is now. Thanks for the proposition though! :)

Ali Scarlett has reacted to this post.

#4 · December 21, 2022, 1:01 am

You're both right:

Teaching in public does spread that "teacher status boost" over a larger number of people (and it's not just a "teacher" thing, people who teach within organizations tend to be higher power because it's most often the higher-ups who teach, sometimes even independently of the true depth of knowledge).

On the other hand, Ali's note is a fantastic reminder: it just follows the general rule of power dynamics / power moves: if you overdo it, you disempower people, and many will resent you -the most clueless may not even realize of course, but you don't want to necessarily count on that-.
Even many of the bystanders may think "not cool" when it's too much -and especially the power-aware and "eagle" ones-.

The shades of grey

Also, there are many shades of grey between "1:1" and "public".

For example: you may take one person on the side, or lower your tone of voice if you're in a group to explain something.
It won't be as obvious, but many will still realize that you're teaching.

Also, 1:1 isn't really always 1:1 if the person is grateful and/or a giver and/or a smart social strategist, because he will tell other people about the great mentoring and support -including in the future-.
Both with you present, and sometimes even without you.

For example, when I was in Toastmastering and mentoring some folks, many would often publicly acknowledge me. And one then made a speech about her mentor (me) long after I had left.

It's certainly possible some drop my name in other conversations even when we're not in touch anymore.
So one good person you help a lot may mention your name for a whole career long.

Ali Scarlett, John Freeman and 4 other users have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#5 · January 8, 2023, 11:08 am

Quote from John Freeman on January 8, 2023, 11:08 am
Hello Ali and Lucio,
thank you very much for your answers.
I agree with you Ali:
Constantly schooling someone in front of his/her colleagues is disempowering for the person so it would become a win-lose situation
Sometimes/many times the people around already know the knowledge you're teaching. I think it still present you as an expert despite them having the knowledge or not. That being said, it's a great reality check!
I think the way you present it Lucio is the most social savvy way of doing it by being discrete: it power protects the other person in the sense that you don't reveal publicly what the other person does not know and you still appear as an expert. An important disclaimer: in this situation we work in an open space (the ED) so I did not create the public teaching situation, it's how the environment is designed, there is little privacy. I am noticing the effect rather than saying that it's a situation one must create. That does not prevent one from doing Lucio's approach: teaching in public discretely. The main takeaway is that people seeing you teaching someone is positive to your status. Whether you use it actively or not is up to you.
Also, 1:1 isn't really always 1:1 if the person is grateful and/or a giver and/or a smart social strategist, because he will tell other people about the great mentoring and support -including in the future-.
This is key: it goes beyond the primary effect towards the secondary effect. I also witnessed this. When I was teaching interns in a private setting in a private consultation (no witnesses other than parent, translator, patient, intern and me), after the consult my (benevolent) boss would sometimes come and ask the intern if "I was nice or not" (in a joking/warm way and at the same time gathering information, he knew I was nice and we had a great relationship). I never taught thinking about what the intern would tell my boss or someone else: it's my job and I love to do it. However, every time the intern would say: "Yeah I'm learning a lot, that's great" so it would look good on me. So I definitely witnessed this ripple effect.
So one good person you help a lot may mention your name for a whole career long.
True. As we do it likewise for the people who played this role for us every time their name get mentioned: "Talking about him, as a boss he was great, always helpful always nice always supportive".

Hello Ali and Lucio,

thank you very much for your answers.

I agree with you Ali:

Constantly schooling someone in front of his/her colleagues is disempowering for the person so it would become a win-lose situation
Sometimes/many times the people around already know the knowledge you're teaching. I think it still present you as an expert despite them having the knowledge or not. That being said, it's a great reality check!

I think the way you present it Lucio is the most social savvy way of doing it by being discrete: it power protects the other person in the sense that you don't reveal publicly what the other person does not know and you still appear as an expert. An important disclaimer: in this situation we work in an open space (the ED) so I did not create the public teaching situation, it's how the environment is designed, there is little privacy. I am noticing the effect rather than saying that it's a situation one must create. That does not prevent one from doing Lucio's approach: teaching in public discretely. The main takeaway is that people seeing you teaching someone is positive to your status. Whether you use it actively or not is up to you.

Also, 1:1 isn't really always 1:1 if the person is grateful and/or a giver and/or a smart social strategist, because he will tell other people about the great mentoring and support -including in the future-.

This is key: it goes beyond the primary effect towards the secondary effect. I also witnessed this. When I was teaching interns in a private setting in a private consultation (no witnesses other than parent, translator, patient, intern and me), after the consult my (benevolent) boss would sometimes come and ask the intern if "I was nice or not" (in a joking/warm way and at the same time gathering information, he knew I was nice and we had a great relationship). I never taught thinking about what the intern would tell my boss or someone else: it's my job and I love to do it. However, every time the intern would say: "Yeah I'm learning a lot, that's great" so it would look good on me. So I definitely witnessed this ripple effect.

So one good person you help a lot may mention your name for a whole career long.

True. As we do it likewise for the people who played this role for us every time their name get mentioned: "Talking about him, as a boss he was great, always helpful always nice always supportive".

Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.

#6 · January 15, 2023, 2:34 am

I generally think the wider audience you can get, the more status you have - bystander or not (why not include them all? haha). Also intrinsically communicating the value of your knowledge - that many people are willing to listen. For example, recently I've been listening to some expert interviews/talks about workplace team building. I feel some of the short videos are not offering the depth I wanted - yet this expert is really, really big. I feel a lot of those experts only have to coin one or two catchphrases to imprint on people's minds, and it works like magic. Sometimes it's not even the fact or opinion itself, but the "feel good" factor (or public sensation). This also could be done in Machiavellian ways such as the case that the more "certain" you appear, people are more convinced.

Lucio Buffalmano and Kavalier have reacted to this post.