Power in Small Groups

 

Have you noticed a trend these days toward movie villains with sympathetic backstories? Perhaps we’re becoming more empathetic, having come to understand the importance of nurturing in our lives, and the lack thereof. Ah, but are all who abuse their power merely broken children who were never given the opportunity to heal? What about the genetic origins of the so-called “dark triad” personality types? Apparently, no matter how much understanding and compassion they’re shown, these poor souls will always be genetically predisposed toward narcissism, psychopathy, and indulging their manipulative and Machiavellian tendencies just a bit too much.

With an estimated 1 of every 14 individuals being “dark triad” types, we’ve probably all encountered at least one of them in the flesh—or many for that matter. But even “good” people in pursuit of laudable ends can be self-centered, controlling, and manipulative at times. Maybe they so badly want or need to be seen as “good” that they try just a little too hard. Maybe they’re so consumed by their own personal vision of a better world that they run roughshod over anyone who approaches things differently or is perceived as standing in their way. Perhaps they feel a strong religious calling and you, sadly enough, don’t have the correct or deep enough understanding. Maybe you’re not even on the same team!

 

The Dark Triad: Narcissism, Psychopathy, and Machiavellianism

Have you ever been in a group or organization with such a person? You can be left questioning whether the frustration of dealing with them is worth it, no matter how positive the group’s overarching mission might be. Indeed. Is it even possible for good things to result from the bad actions of abusive leadership? Can ends justify the means?

According to Buddhist teaching, the cause and effect of karma cannot be evaded. The karma of every bad deed must play out, just as the karma of every good deed does. So how are we to view the karma of groups and organizations comprised of many different karma-creating individuals performing countless karma-creating actions? Is it simply a matter of the good outweighing the bad?

Perhaps it would be fruitful to consider the fallout in the wake of Joshu Sasaki’s sex abuse scandal. (Check out Zen Masters and Flying Monkeys if you need a little background.) What is the cost of him having sexually abused just one student, let alone many? Consider what it would be like to have your spiritual practice—the only rock available to you—so severely disrupted, perhaps irreparably so. Consider what it would be like to be pursuing a path toward ordination only to have that path swept out from beneath your feet. And what about those in the group who were not sexually abused but who knew of it and did nothing? Some went on to become teachers themselves. Unfortunately, though, their attainment (such as it is) is now tainted by the fact that they learned from such a flawed teacher and were complicit in the abuse by their silence. What does that say about the wisdom and compassion of the leaders in communities that ostensibly hold wisdom and compassion in highest regard? And what about those of us who learn of such abuse perpetrated by one so trusted and esteemed? How many will be forever disillusioned and disinclined to trust the Buddhist Path, the lineage, or monastic practice?

Why then would I want to keep that bad karma circulating by keeping the story alive and potentially tainting the view that others may have? Because the abuse is still alive. The karma is still playing out. When Sasaki died, a teacher from an entirely different school of Zen Buddhism lamented the loss of one of our great contemporary Zen Masters! Can you imagine what it must be like to be one of Sasaki’s abused students and hear such misguided praise for your abuser?

Perhaps I’m a bit more sensitive than many. I formally practiced with a Zen teacher who eventually displayed a very abusive side towards me and others in our community. No, he wasn’t a sexual abuser, but there was emotional and spiritual wreckage left behind, nonetheless. Consider me one whose practice was very negatively affected by the fallout. Ah, but what if for every individual like me there are one or two others that fared better? Is the net effect all that matters?

That experience and others I’ve had with small group dynamics have given me insight into the harm done when power is carelessly wielded. Dark triad or not, we all abuse our power from time to time. I say that not to excuse it. Rather, I hope to point to its ubiquitous nature that we may be quicker to notice it, curtail it, and heal from it.

A little introspection may well keep your group from languishing with too few members or dying out altogether. Every group I’ve been part of has tried to attract more members. As such, we can think of prospective group members as our customers. Which reminds me of an old adage I learned in the business world: It costs less to retain an existing customer than to find a new one.

What follows are examples of small group dynamics tainted by what I’ll call “everyday abuses of power”—abuses that may have you forever looking for new members to replace the ones you lose. I’ll introduce each as a question to reflect upon:

Does leadership seem so content in their position(s) of power and control that they don’t really attempt to get to know group members or prospective ones?

When I was on the board of the aforementioned Zen center, discussion occasionally arose as to why there seemed to be a revolving door of practitioners coming and going without staying long. “Ours is a difficult practice,” one of our longest-term group leaders would say, and that was certainly true. However, I came to see in that response a reluctance to delve into what was long a dysfunctional environment. Some people don’t really want their organization to grow in healthy ways if it means them giving up the power they enjoy. On the other hand, be on the lookout if someone in leadership seems unduly excited about elevating you into a leadership position before you’ve really gotten to know the “lay of the land” so to speak. This could indicate an inability to retain solid people for any number of reasons.

Do social connections within the group alienate those on the outside of a trusted circle?

Unfortunately, cliques form within groups, and the results can be destructive. Healthy groups have transparent processes and foster understanding and a sense of belonging.

Do outspoken group leaders use their social capital to squelch discussion and further their own agenda for what should be done and/or how it should be accomplished?

This is similar to the previous point, but perhaps less obvious. Sometimes a group leader doesn’t really have to do anything at all to have their position on a matter prevail. They simply have to speak their mind and wait for those in their camp to offer up their support. But that doesn’t mean that a sound decision has been made. Differing viewpoints should be seriously considered within any decision-making process.

Has the primary contributor of money, time, or energy commandeered the group and shut down input from others?

Some may tacitly approve of such de facto leadership. And from a transactional point of view, it does have some superficial reasonableness. Others may simply go along due to their conflict-avoidant tendencies. However, this sort of environment can be alienating. Such organizations risk becoming collections of leaders and their “yes men,” either by attrition or by never growing in the first place. Healthy groups respect whatever time, money, and effort someone is able to give without judging it to be too small an offering to have “earned a voice.”

Does someone with knowledge of interpersonal connections and information access within the group use it to control the narrative and further their own agenda?

This, of course, is a truly Machiavellian environment. When one party has the time, energy, and determination to have whatever side conversations are necessary to make certain their view prevails, then meaningful public discussion will disappear, as will your members.

Though not exhaustive by any stretch, I hope these scenarios help give voice to your feelings if something is not quite right in whatever group you may be part of. Don’t jump to conclusions, though. People often have the best of intentions that somehow go awry. Their negatively perceived actions may be inadvertent or misunderstood. On the other hand, our gut feelings do frequently prove to be correct. If so, I wish you the best in coming to terms with the situation and resolving it. Be well.

Power, Practice, and Peace logo

This post is in the Power, Practice, and Peace series.

Find a running list of all posts in this series by clicking here.

 

Images:

The Dark Triad: antisocial personality traits of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy

by Matinee71 via:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Dark_Triad.png

Credited mage is superimposed on the author’s palm.

 

Copyright 2025 by Mark Robert Frank