[00:00:34.000]
Welcome to Episode 336 of The Non-Anxious Leader Podcast. I'm Jack Shitama. If you are new to this podcast, you can connect with me by emailing me at jack@christian-leaders.com with your questions, comments, and suggestions for future episodes. You can find more resources at the nonanxiousleaders.com, including the books that I've written, my coaching practice, speaking engagements, courses that I offer. You can also subscribe to my Two for Tuesday email newsletter there or at the link that I provide in the show notes. Finally, you can support my work for as little as $5 a month which helps cover the cost of bringing these resources to you. There is a link to more information in the show notes. Thanks in advance for your consideration. Now, without further ado, here is episode 336, Four types of triangles and how to manage them.

[00:01:34.540]
Today's episode comes from the same lecture given by Dr. Kathleen Parker at the Family Systems Institute Symposium on Systems and Ministry that I referenced in episode 200. Dr. Parker is on the faculty of the Bowen Center for the Study of the Family at Georgetown University, and I have found her be highly enlightening in terms of how she presents family systems theory. As you have heard me say before, Murray Bowen says that the triangle is the most stable form of relationship, and The reason is because most people do not self-differentiate more than 30% of the time, they lean on triangles as a way to deal with discomfort in relationships with other people. Parker shares with us four different types of triangles, and I found this really helpful to understand how triangles work and how we can manage them. The first type of triangle is pulling a third person in to help you manage your own discomfort with a second person. This is neither good nor bad because it depends on where it goes. The harmless version of this is just having a place to complain, vent, or even get advice from another person. However, if it becomes asking the third person to fix things between you and the second person, then this means you are failing to take responsibility for yourself.

[00:03:10.440]
You're asking the third person to get involved, and so you are deepening the triangle. An important thing to note here is just going to a third person to vent or complain should be a sign to you that you are uncomfortable with the second person and you are using this triangle to help manage it yourself. Now, if use it to get a hold of your own feelings and figure out where you want to go, what you want to do, then it can be harmless because there is nothing necessarily involved there that is going to increase anxiety in the system. It's important to note that a triangle can involve persons or issues. So it is possible to create this triangle when you are uncomfortable with a particularly thorny challenge or issue. In either case, as long as you are using it to manage your discomfort and you realize that you are doing this, then it can help you to figure out how to be intentional. It can lead to greater self-differentiation and the ability to be a non-anxious leader. When you are the third person and somebody comes to you to complain or vent, then the primary challenge is to listen and stay connected to the other person without getting drawn into the triangle.

[00:04:27.840]
If by listening and staying connected, you can help the other person to take responsibility for self without getting drawn into the triangle, then it can be a good thing. One way to do this, of course, is to listen reflectively using open-ended questions, as well as occasionally asking, What do you intend to do about this? This makes it clear that you're not going to intervene for the other person and are challenging them to take responsibility for self. As Edwin Friedmann recommends, you want to have a bias towards challenge as opposed to comfort. Challenge promotes strengths in others, whereas comfort can promote weakness in others. The second type of triangle takes place when two people manage their own discomfort with each other by focusing on a third. This is the classic child-focused couple. Rather than working to gain more healthy connection between each other, the couple avoids this discomfort by focusing their emotional intensity on the child. In this type of triangle, the third person typically pays the price because of the emotional intensity, which makes it harder to function and therefore self-differentiate. This second type of triangle is hardest to manage when you are on the inside position of this triangle.

[00:05:49.820]
That is when you are the one who is uncomfortable and you and the other person focus on a third. An example of this in leadership is when you and a colleague are uncomfortable and focus on a third to manage your discomfort. One reason it is hard to manage is oftentimes we don't even recognize that we are doing this. It takes quite a bit of self-awareness to recognize that you are on the inside of this type of triangle and you're using it to manage your own discomfort. The clearest marker here is when you have emotional intensity towards another. When you do, you want to ask yourself, Where is my discomfort coming from? What is it I'm trying to avoid? How can I better take responsibility for self? When you are in the outside position of this triangle and are the focus of their emotional intensity, the main task is to stay connected to each of the other two individually without getting involved in their relationship. Even if you recognize that you are paying the for the fact that they are uncomfortable with each other, there's nothing you can do about it. You can't change a relationship to which you don't belong.

[00:07:09.260]
The only thing you can do is to work on taking well-defined, non-anxious stands with each person individually. There will be sabotage because the emotional intensity involved will make one or both of the other two highly uncomfortable. This is where being a non-anxious presence is critical. They will try to get you to move back to the former homeostasis. That is the equilibrium of the system through either bribery, that is by offering rewards to go back to your former self, or through threatening and ultimatums that if you don't snap back in line, you will pay the price. The bribes or threats could be anything. Remember, it is process, not content. If you can maintain a non-anxious presence by maintaining a non anxious, healthy stand, staying emotionally connected individually with each of the others in the triangle, you will give them back responsibility for their own relationship. And they will either take responsibility for self or they will find someone else to triangle. But in many cases, I found that they do start to take responsibility for self and the system moves in a positive direction. And remember that a triangle can involve an issue. So a little side note is my own denomination, the United Methodist Church, which has been battling over human sexuality for decades.

[00:08:36.720]
I see this as a triangle between the conservative and progressive wings of the church that are uncomfortable with each other in a variety of ways, and they focus on human sexuality as the problem. And this has devolved into a power struggle between the two, which will likely fracture the denomination. Now, it's impossible for an issue to take a non-anxious stand with the other two sides that are uncomfortable with each other. But what any individual can do in a situation like this is to remain connected in healthy ways with those with whom they disagree. And this can help lower anxiety in the system and at least encourage healthy behavior as the system tries to work through the challenge. It doesn't guarantee anything, but my experience is if anything is going to improve things, that is what will. The third type of triangle is when you feel on the outside of a relationship between two other people or a person and an issue, and you attack the other two. When you notice that you are feeling jealousy or envy towards the relationship of two others, that's a sign that you might possibly be the outside person in this type of triangle.

[00:09:53.740]
If you attack the other two, that's absolutely what you are doing. Instead of taking responsibility for self, you are blaming others. When you are in the outside position, the first step is to recognize the emotion. This is where self-awareness is critical. Ask, What's going on with me that the relationship with the other two is affecting me this way. Remind yourself that this is not a zero-sum game. The goal is to get to the point where you can allow others to have a close relationship while you still have a good relationship with each of the other two, even if it's not as close. Of course, this can be a real challenge when you are really invested in a relationship with one or both of the other two parts of the triangle. For example, in the case when you are a partner with someone and your partner invests in a new relationship or a new passion or pursuit, it can be difficult to remain a non-anxious presence. And while this doesn't mean that things will necessarily get better What is certain is that if you attack the other two, they will move closer together. Remind yourself that your best course of action is to remain a non-anxious presence and to stay connected to each of the other two sides in healthy ways.

[00:11:18.440]
The fourth type of triangle is when you are in the outside position and you are feeling safe and or superior because of the tension between the other two. For example, when There is tension between your boss and a colleague, you can feel safe about it, maybe even good about it. You might actually let them go at it and like the fact that your colleague is taking all the heat. It takes the emotional intensity off of you, but it's usually not good for the team. The problem here is that when you feel safe and or superior, you're likely to do one of two things, neither of which is helpful. The first is that you could disconnect from the other two because you really don't want to get involved in their stuff. The emotional distance can create disconnection in a way that can damage your relationship with one or both of the other two and hurt the functioning of the team. The same is true with siblings or other family members. If you have siblings who are going at it and you disconnect from them, then that is going to increase anxiety in the system and make it difficult to function as a family.

[00:12:31.020]
At the other extreme, as if you feel safe or superior, you might feel like you can play mediator or pacemaker. Now, we know that you can't change a relationship to which you don't belong. So getting involved to try and fix the relationship of the other two will not only get you sucked into the tension and anxiety, it will make their conflict even worse, as well as leave you with the stress of the relationship. Again, the healthy approach is to be able to stay in healthy relationship with each of the other two and give them the emotional space to work things out. The value as an individual and a leader in recognizing different types of triangles is that it will help you to be more self-aware about how you are dealing with your own discomfort. It will also give you helpful lenses to look through to know when you are being triangled by others. Because of the nature of self-differentiation, triangles are inevitable. We are more likely to lean on triangles than to function as a non-anxious presence. But non-anxious leaders recognize this. They don't ignore triangles but lean into them in the healthiest possible ways.

[00:13:50.300]
If you can do this, you can lead a family, congregation, or organization that makes a difference.

[00:13:58.900]
That's it for episode 336. Don't forget, you can connect with me at jack@christian-leaders.com. You can find more resources at thenonanxiousleader.com. If you have found this episode helpful, please share it with someone who would benefit, and please leave a review on your podcast platform of choice. Thank you for your help. Now, until next time, go be yourself.