One of the conversations I’m regularly confronted with questions the use of protocol. The way protocol appears, to those complaining about it, is as too restrictive and uncomfortable.

Diving deeper into the subject a few things will regularly appear. People become aware of the protocol whenever it feels uncomfortable, sometimes because they are not aware of the protocol and sometimes because the person applying it seems to be overdoing it. This sense of discomfort often leads to reactions calling for more clarity and better instructions as to how and when to apply the protocol. Which in turn highlights that the purpose of the used protocol isn’t clear. What it is for, isn’t understood.

They most often react to the sense that protocol is used as an instrument to demonstrate one’s power or install it. In turn, this transforms their opinion about protocol into the belief that it is an instrument of power they are being made subject to.

It’s because they don’t see the true purpose of a protocol, that is the possibility to distribute power according to everybody’s roles. What they find challenging to see is that it is a power they too have and need to take up.

Instead of having to learn the rules of the protocol they probably intuitively hoped to be able to use the rules of power they already know.

But that’s what protocol is for: create somewhat universal rules allowing for an accepted and shared power distribution.