Let’s be real — there are many things public-sector employees do not get to choose.
They may not choose the budget, the policy, the reporting structure, the timeline, the technology being introduced or the political decision that suddenly changes the direction of the work. Even leaders can find themselves carrying out decisions they did not make and may not fully agree with.
So when someone says, “I don’t have a choice,” they may be describing something very real. The problem begins when that statement stops describing one situation and starts defining their entire relationship with work.
“I don’t have a choice” can gradually become “There is nothing I can do.” Once that belief settles in, people may stop raising concerns, offering ideas or looking for better ways to respond. They conserve their energy because they no longer believe their actions will make a difference. That is where a legitimate constraint can become a leadership trap.
Control and Agency Are Not the Same
Control means having the authority to determine what happens. Agency means having some ability to choose how you respond, contribute or influence what happens next. We often treat those as the same thing, but they are not.
An employee may not be able to change a new policy, but they may be able to ask how it will be applied. A supervisor may not control staffing levels, but they may be able to clarify which work takes priority. A team may not get to choose a new system, but they may still identify risks or improve how it is introduced. None of those choices removes the larger constraint. They do, however, preserve some meaningful influence.
This distinction matters because people are more likely to remain engaged when they can see some connection between their actions and an outcome. When that connection disappears, even capable and committed employees may begin to withdraw.
Watch for the Language of Powerlessness
The shift often shows up in familiar phrases:
- “There’s no point.”
- “They’ve already decided.”
- “That’s just how it is here.”
- “Nothing ever changes.”
These statements may contain some truth. Decisions may already have been made. Previous attempts may have gone nowhere. Change may be painfully slow. But repeated often enough, these phrases can become more than observations. They can become reasons to disengage before testing whether any influence remains.
This is not an argument for pretending that structural problems can be solved through attitude alone. An underfunded, confusing or poorly designed system is still a system problem. Self-leadership should never become an excuse for organizations to avoid responsibility.
It does, however, ask us to look carefully at the difference between what is genuinely fixed and what we have assumed is fixed. That boundary is not always obvious. Sometimes we have less control than we would like but more influence than we first recognize.
This is important because research shows that when we feel powerless, and unable to impact what happens next, our stress levels rise and the enjoyment and productivity of our work decreases.
(And when we spend 40+ hours at work, this is a significant problem!)
In my next article, I’ll look at how employees and leaders can identify where that influence still exists — and how to reclaim agency without pretending they can fix the entire system. Stay tuned!
Jaime Mann is a leadership speaker, facilitator, and founder of The Amaryllis Project, where she helps leaders strengthen self-leadership, communication, accountability, and connection at work. She works with organizations and leadership teams to turn insight into practical behaviour change — without the fluff. Jaime is completing a Master of Professional Studies in Psychology of Leadership through Penn State and brings experience across construction, safety, human resources, education, associations, and professional services. Her writing explores how leaders can show up with more clarity, courage, and humanity, especially when work gets messy.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.