The article with the interview with Inwood House’s executive director brought up the issue of boundaries within an organization.  Linda Bryant states that it is important to not fall into the idea that the organization is a family but rather as a team.  I understood and completely agree with Bryant’s distinction on the two.  While it is nice to have the compassion for employees, it is also important to not completely focus on the relational aspect with them-- becoming too emotional would muddle the professional boundaries.  Another point that I liked was that in thinking the agency as a family, the executive director would be a parent thus relinquishing your power to the “parent”.  However, using the term “team” I think of more of a horizontal leadership where everyone holds accountability.  

However, personally I think I would have difficulty finding that balance between friend and manager.  I understand what the role of a manager should be on paper but putting it into action is a different story.  Oftentimes, to be a good supervisor, one might get into deep and personal issues.  For instance, as Bryant talks about conflict resolution and even mentions discussions of “underlying psychodynamic issues”, which may lead to intimate information on an employee’s life.   It would be difficult for me to not get too involved with my employees’ lives.  I imagine appearing lax because I understand where they are coming from and what in their personal lives are causing their behavior.  What can I do to that says “I understand but you have to do your job”?  Negative reinforcements such as warning letters, write-ups?  Or is this something that has to generally be nurtured with team activities or some merit system?  Or a mixture of both?