A few weeks ago I had the opportunity to try something new with one of my clients. The client in question is a counsellor and so quite familiar with the drama triangle.
Throughout the weeks that I had been working with her, I had gradually introduced more and more NLP. She had just finished describing the situation in her life and compared it to a drama triangle. As we had already utilised meta-model questioning, I asked if she would consider going meta to her triangle. She felt it would be interesting and so what we did resulted in the following process:
1) Recall an incident/interaction the results of which could be considered less than effective.
2) Recognise the role that you were playing within the original incident/interaction and state three things that you believe to be true whilst in that role. Question each belief using the meta-model, if you are not familiar with the model you can find more information here http://tinyurl.com/yj9qmcv.
3) Break state.
4) Repeat steps two and three for the other two roles of the triangle.
5) Let the client know that in the centre of the triangle are all the resources they could possibly need to handle this or any other drama triangle type interactions more effectively in the future. Remind them that having experienced all three roles they know better than anyone else what resources are required for each role.
6) Have the client enter the centre of the triangle and relive times that they have demonstrated that they have the required resources, where possible use sub-modalities to maximise the experience. If they feel that they have never demonstrated having a particular resource, then have them imagine someone that they have seen exhibiting this particular resource, making the gift of it to them in some way.
7) Once they know that they have all the resources they need, have them step out of the centre of the triangle and briefly visit each of the three points of the triangle. Whilst on each point ask them to take a look at the other two points for a moment, gathering any further understanding to be had from that perspective.
8) With the circuit completed, have them step back into the centre of the triangle and gather any resources that they feel they may have missed.
9) Exit the triangle and break state.
10) Future pace and reinforce if necessary.
Having produced this 10 step process I became intrigued by the idea of the drama triangle evolution and asked colleagues on the Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn if and how they still used drama triangles with their clients. I've had some fascinating responses including the following from Rhoda Mills Sommer
Honesty: Say what you mean, mean what you say. There is greater soul in honestly facing painful situations. Look fearlessly within. The people you love the most are the ones to risk more honesty with.
Respect for Self & Others: Balance both. Take Responsibility. Learn boundaries. Have empathy and self-protection. Do not be either too self effacing or too narcissistic.
Make Agreements That Work: Negotiation/middle ground leads to possibilities. More able to handle complexity. There has to be room for both people's wants and agendas. Solve problems together.
The theory behind Rhoda's triangles is really quite extensive and well worth reading in full. You can do so at http://www.therapyideas.net/index.htm.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mari Kruger
Consultant, Facilitator & Coach at Synchronicity Management Consultants
Finds that people enjoy relating the times in which they played their parts.
Instead of having them create their ideal triangle, she speaks of a centre point, at the centre of the triangle, this point is where:-
(1) Where one is not persecuting/blaming but putting self at cause or asking how am "I" to blame for co-creating the situation.
(2) Where one is not rescuing but empowering the other person so that they do not need assistance in future.
(3) Where one is not being the victim but rather looking for options.
She uses analogies:
The Shark (persecutor)
The Carp (victim) and
The Pseudo-Enlightened Carp (rescuer).
In the centre point we have The Dolphin (the emotionally mature human being)
She often asks the Coachee to give the roles/parts their own names e.g "that part of you that plays the victim ..... give it a name.... what would you call it?"
That way the triangle is their personal triangle of their own archetypes.
From an NLP perspective one can elicit the positive intention of the part or the strategy and then work from there.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Melody Cheal
NLP Master Trainer, Owner, GWiz Learning Partnership
Uses this model quite frequently however she pairs it with a development from Transactional Analysis called the Winners Triangle. Having got perspective you transform each of the roles into more empowering ones.
The roles of the Drama Triangle each have their equivalent role in the Winner’s Triangle. Each of the three roles in the Winner’s Triangle is an ‘OK’ role and requires the development of a different set of skills.
Any technique that the Vulnerable person can use to get themselves thinking about options and consequences is valuable. In the Caring role the development of listening skills that involve emphathising with the Vulnerable person is required. Listening is frequently the only Caring response needed. Assertiveness is about getting your needs met without punishing. Self awareness is essential in all three roles.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Michael Mallows Director at Social Effectiveness Training Author of 'The Power to Use NLP', co-author with Joe Sinclair of 'Peace of Mind is a Piece of Cake' Writes:
I find the Drama (or trauma) Triangle an excellent model/metaphor for working with all sorts of people. It is elegantly simple, has the advantage of a geometric shape, and I have introduced it to people aged eight to 80, along with its 'antidote'.
It's great for working with teams, teens, managers, parents, teachers....and I have various exercises that work fantastically
When ever we are 'on' the Drama Triangle, we are involved in what Eric Berne (who developed Transactional Analysis in the 1950s) described as The Games People Play. I believe that most people spend most (90%+) of the time are engaged in Games, which means we spend most of the time we're spinning around the Drama Triangle.
Games, for any one who doesn't know, are survival strategies based on decisions made in childhood before we even knew there were choices or that we were making decisions that can reverberate throughout our lives. Unless we recognise and accept accountability for what we contribute to a Game, we will forever and predictably replay these Games on obvious and ulterior levels!
Games are played mostly out of awareness, partly because the process of making these decisions happens simultaneously with self-denial, sacrificing healthy connection with, and expression of, normal and natural feelings and emotions. We make these sacrifices because we have certain needs that must be met for our survival. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs will be familiar to many.
People’s reactions to our words, moods, gestures and other behaviour offer clues to the way they interpret, ‘filter’ and process our communication. Those clues can reveal the other person’s Metaphors, Assumptions, Patterns and States that trigger Games. This provides a lot of information that can be very useful!
Opening gambits are seemingly plausible surface statements (“I’m BORED!”), sounds (heavy sighs) or actions (losing or ‘forgetting’ things). If you want and choose to play the Game, you’re predictable and put yourself on the Victim, Rescuer, Persecutor triangle!
Berne's Basic Game Formula: C+G=R -> S ->X ->PO
The con hooks into a gimmick (C+G) that compels predictable reactions (R). The player then makes a switch (S), usually followed by a confusing cross-up (X), after which both players collect their payoffs (P).' (Berne (1972)
When describing the transactions involved in Games, Berne used the vocabulary taken from games as played by con-men, the main terms being:
Mark - the target in a game: the ‘victim’ – target of the con.
Gimmick - the gimmick is some kind of weakness in the mark
Hook - the gimmick is used to hook the unsuspecting mark
Switch - the switch is pulled when the game-player uses some phrase or action that changes the direction of the transaction and hooks the mark
Cross-up - at the point when the switch is pulled, the cross-up occurs, i.e. the confusion felt by the mark at having been hooked
Payoff - the payoff is when the game-player enjoys having scored a point (his/her payoff) and the mark feels inferior, which satisfies all sorts of scripted ‘needs’ and reinforces decisions made by both players before age seven.
I sometimes explore issues with spatial and collaborative exercises; here’s a template that can be expanded, varied, modified and otherwise played with to the limits of imagination – and beyond.
Write Victim Rescuer Persecutor on three A4 sheets (one word on each page).
Assume three people Mo, Jo, Flo, (team / family / bully and target) involved in transactions that all three recognise as typical.
Have one of them, Mo, stand on any label and say what they think and feel when they find themselves in that position (for real). I often do a body checklist, “What’s happening in your head? Your jaw? Neck muscles? Breathing? Heart? Stomach?” This helps develop self-awareness, and will be useful if I decide to do some coaching in state control.
It’s also useful because, whatever slight differences, everyone involved will have more in common physiologically than not. Just knowing that can start to remove barriers, even start to build rapport.
I’ll then ask Mo to place Jo where s/he experiences Jo to be when s/he (Mo) is in the place s/he’s chosen.
Then I’ll explore with Jo what s/he’s feeling, hearing, seeing when Mo’s behaving from her first position. Again I’ll do a head to toe inventory – and ditto with Flo.
I might then have them move around the triangle in the dance they all know so well.
Mo, for example, might start in the Victim corner in response to Jo, who’s acting from Persecutor position. Mo, as hir feelings get more churned up by Jo’s aggression, might move to Persecutor, at which either they are competing for the Power (over) position, or one of them might retreat to the Victim corner. Flo might place herself in hir usual peace-making (Rescuer) role...etc.
As I said, there are many ways to play with this – perceptual positions, translating between rep-system, taking them over the same ground asking them to describe which Ego states they’re in at any given time, and introducing them to the notion and the impact of different Fundamental Filters (meta-programs).
And it can be used to coach people in different ways of being Crafty:
Connected Respectful Attentive Flexible Thoughtful Yes! (Positive even when it’s difficult).
I facilitate, choreograph, cajole, chivvy, joke, direct and otherwise seek to create a sense of the whole group being held and each person being as important to the process and the desired outcome – even if some of them start out simmering with rage and resentment that’s been festering for aeons.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Putting this blog post together has been very educational and has put me in touch with some very knowledgeable contributors. It has also started me thinking about a book on the evolution of a wide range of therapeutic/coaching theories but I guess that will depend on the feedback on this post.
Blog Quote: "Evolution is a change for the better!" ~
Russell D'Avilar
No comments:
Post a Comment