INKOVEMA Podcast „Well through time“
#230 GddZ
The drama triangle
Stephen Karpman's model of psychological games.
A model from transactional analysis
In conversation with Thomas Wehrs
Studied practical philosophy, specialising in business ethics. As a coach and supervisor, he supports organisations, companies and people in change processes. Professional coach (DBVC) and coach and supervisor (EASC). Teaching transactional analyst (PTSTA-O).
Small series: From transactional analysis
Contents
Chapter
0:21 Introduction to the drama triangle
3:59 From podcast to the joys of life
4:42 Entry into the drama triangle
15:19 Change of roles in the drama triangle
20:59 The dynamics of the roles
27:35 Paradoxes in the drama triangle
31:38 Team processes and their challenges
40:31 Cognitive approaches in coaching
42:09 Options for exiting the drama triangle
43:49 The Pentagon game and organisations
45:55 Conclusion and outlook on future topics
Summary of content
In this episode, I discuss with Thomas Wehrs, an experienced transactional analyst and coach, the drama triangle - a central concept of transactional analysis that has proven particularly useful in various coaching and mediation situations. We begin with an introduction to the basic roles of the drama triangle: the victim, the persecutor and the rescuer, all of whom are linked in a dynamic interaction. These roles often emerge unconsciously in communication and team dynamics, and we show how they are linked and what impact they have on interpersonal relationships.
Thomas shares his practical experience and emphasises the importance of recognising one's own affective patterns and preferred roles in order to improve interpersonal communication. We discuss the challenge of dealing with the unconsciousness inherent in these role changes and how coaches can support these dynamics. We will also explore the Historical development of the drama triangle through Stephen Karpman and the Relevance of fairy tale structures in this theory.
It is also clearly explained that the application of the drama triangle is not only helpful in coaching, but also in mediation processes by helping the participants to recognise their patterns. We discuss the difficulties that can arise when communication is based on firmly defined roles. We also address how important it is to develop an empathetic understanding of the motivation behind the behaviour.
In this episode, it is particularly important for me to emphasise that the drama triangle is not a fixed set of roles, but rather a dynamic interaction that can change depending on the context. Our discussion concludes with the idea that it is essential for coaches and mediators to understand the depth and complexity of the drama triangle in order to bring about effective and meaningful change in their work.
Thomas and I also share our perspectives on the challenges that arise in the context of transactional analysis, particularly in relation to the balancing act between individual analysis and the application of the model in group or team settings. We realise that it is crucial to create opportunities to step out of the dynamics of unconscious roles and encourage more constructive communication.
Finally, we mention the concept of the game pentagon, which allows a deeper consideration of the drama triangle in organisational psychology contexts, and agree to explore this topic in more detail in a future episode.
Complete transcription
[0:00]Music.
[0:18]I'm Sascha Weigel and I'd like to welcome you to a new episode.
[0:21]
Introduction to the drama triangle
[0:22]And today's episode is about a model, a concept of transactional analysis that is probably known to far more people than there are transactional analysts.
[0:35]Because this is a classic concept, as they say. And I don't want to hide it for long: the drama triangle, ideal for coaching, mediation and other settings. And I have invited a colleague, transactional analyst and coach by trade, to join me. Welcome, Thomas Wehrs. Hello Sascha, thank you for the invitation and I'm looking forward to discussing the drama triangle with you. Yes, and I'm also looking forward to seeing you again for a long time, including in a podcast studio. Podcast studio, we've podcasted before and that must have been so long ago. I've almost forgotten what context it was in, but it was on the podcast that you've been running for years with your colleague Thomas Lorenzen. He's still active too. You did adjust the frequency a little, but… we adjusted the frequency to once a month because we realised that we could no longer manage the preparation of podcasts and all the background tasks with our schedules. Then we said, okay, then we'll cut back and make good podcasts once a month and we're happy that people continue to listen to us and follow us and that we continue to deal with current topics on permanent change.
[1:57]Very interesting. There is no drop in the number of users, but loyalty remains throughout the month. It's impressive that we really seem to reach our listeners well with just once a month and that we then shed light on the topics, which we mostly deal with from the current situation, social topics or personal topics or professional topics, from different aspects of psychology, neurobiology, transactional analysis and philosophy. And then we illuminate these topics with these aspects, so to speak, and then usually come out with a conclusion. Very good, very nice. But I don't want to, well, I don't want to tempt you. I'm about to go on holiday, so I'm always thinking about where I can cut back a little and scale back. But I will also be doing the podcast every week in the second half of the year. I think it's impressive that you manage to do it every week, because I know a bit about how you're travelling, where you're travelling. So I find that impressive and I always admire you when I see how you regularly show yourself and your guests with your podcast. So hats off to you, Sascha. Good, great performance.
[3:20]That is, thank you, thank you. Thanks to transactional analysis, I've also learnt to accept it and let it work for the time being, but I have to say that it's now really more of a team effort here. So there are three people working on it, more or less. Sometimes one or two others join in. So it's more of a team effort, so for me the best part of all this work is usually the conversations with people and sometimes, of course, the organisation of appointments.
[3:59]
From podcasts to the joys of life
[3:56]But is that really what we are dealing with? This really is a very central project that is on the agenda every week.
[4:10]You can't do it alone. Definitely. We can't do it alone either. We also have someone in the background who edits, uploads and edits it for us. So Thomas and I wouldn't be able to do that on our own. So it's challenging in terms of the technical effort involved and we really do get the right people to edit it for us. Well, let's move on from the joys and sorrows of podcasting to the pleasures
[4:42]
Entry into the Drama triangle
[4:40]Things in life, the drama triangle. The drama triangle, that's always a favourite. Exactly, but first perhaps, how do you come to think that Drama triangle and you also said in front of us in a subordinate clause that you also talk about philosophy and then I remember, I think you even studied philosophy, you are a philosopher, if you like, you study philosophy. Yes, I have a few more words for you. I'd love to. I studied practical philosophy, specialising in business ethics.
[5:16]I wrote my master's thesis with Homo economicus, so to speak. Not yet with AI, but with Homo economicus, so to speak. When there was no AI yet. So that was a long way off, galaxies away from AI. And then, based on this experience with philosophy, with practical philosophy, I moved on to coaching and organisational development and then took these approaches or this philosophical aspect that I had in me into my coaching sessions and used it as a supervisor, used it as a coach, just as you, Sascha, have your further training groups in Leipzig, I have further training groups in Berlin and then of course I also use this in my teaching, i.e. with people who simply want to progress with their personal professionalisation in these further training courses. And of course, drama is also an important topic here, namely these personal affinities that we have as coaches or as people. I'm not just a coach or philosopher, but I also sit there as a person and react and resonate, and I also have my own issues that perhaps show themselves to me in the coaching sessions.
[6:36]In other words, that was, so to speak, the application of the drama triangle to your very own involvement and, so to speak, in the meta-reflection of counselling processes, to what extent you yourself act there. You yourself, as a coach, are also involved. I sometimes hear, also because of the article in Coaching Magazine about the drama triangle, that coaches write, well, it's important that the clients know their, let's say, their roles. And as a coach, you have a neutral distance to this.
[7:13]So I ask myself, how do you do that? I'd like to see how you deal with your own personal issues. Yes, that is, perhaps we approach the drama triangle in such a way that, even if many people already know it, we name the most important points again, including those that become clear to you again and again from practice, so to speak, and say that you actually need to know this so that you can categorise it. From a historical perspective, Stephen Karpman, the American transaction analyst, developed the drama triangle based on fairy tales. He read through fairy tales and realised that there is always a regular structure in fairy tales. In other words, there were always helpless protagonists. I would say that in the drama triangle, this is the role of the victim. Then there were the evil antagonists. In the drama triangle, that would be the persecutor role. And then, of course, there are the rescuing helpers in the fairy tales. That would be the saviour role in the drama triangle.
[8:18]These three roles run unconsciously in the interaction between people. This is something that really is a phenomenon when I look at or listen to team dynamics or coaching dynamics, for example, that when I hear people when they come with their stories, a lot of these unconscious dynamics take place, role changes take place. Someone comes out of the victim role, goes into the rescuer role or goes into the persecutor role and so on, and then they wonder why the communication between them is somehow not so positive or productive or neutral or even empowering. And I think this drama triangle really has a simplicity of representation because these three roles are dynamically connected with each other and.
[9:14]This is a good way of demonstrating or resolving real conflicts if you recognise your own affinity for one or perhaps two or all three roles. The affinity means, so to speak, that we have favoured roles when the game is about to start. So that's an assumption. These are hypotheses that I experience in my coaching practice, that people have a tendency towards a certain role, unconsciously. And this affinity is then acted out. And if this drama triangle is then consciously pointed out and perhaps the scaling process is run through and they then see their tendencies or their affinities or their tendency towards certain roles in writing, then we can work on this in a completely different way in coaching.
[10:20]Perhaps so that we can get a picture, the idea that everyone has described their role and their tasks in there and then goes out into the world, so to speak, doesn't seem to come across as appropriate. So we don't just go out with a role and look, I don't know, with our own persecutor role under our arm and see where the victims are, but the communication will then continue in the encounter, for example at the workplace or in a public area, in a café or something. When communication then takes place, these affinities become clear, that you're excited or agitated, so to speak, when you see someone stumbling around helplessly, perhaps a little, apparently, if you're not careful now, they'll somehow run into a chair or drop everything or behave clumsily, where you then, depending on your affinity, jump in to save them or chase them, in the sense of, you don't need to go out on the street like that. What kind of a looser are you? Tell me, why are you running into the chair? What's going on with you?
[11:38]And in this initial communication, so to speak, the roles are suddenly seemingly, in inverted commas, suddenly distributed. Yes, that's the interesting thing about the drama triangle, that it is embedded in Eric Byrne's concept of psychological games. Yes, and this invitation to play is, so to speak, an unconscious invitation into this drama triangle. And it might start with a, I'll say, a statement, like now, what do I know, someone comes and says, man, really, Thomas, I really had to do everything on my own because my employees didn't hand in the reports on time and nobody was available.
[12:25]For the time being, the sentence and the words would be information, but something resonates subliminally in the tournament. Something resonates in us immediately. Whether it's along the lines of, tell me, what are you doing? You can't do that to yourself. Or I go into the, that would be the pursuer role, or I go into the horseman role and say, 'Gosh, can I help you or can I do something? And that's exactly what I find so exciting and I only realised this in practice, this balancing act at the beginning between victim and persecutor. So this, there's this saying about working with professionals. And it's not quite clear yet, if you just say it like that, is that a description of a victim or is that already a description of a persecutor.
[13:17]And it's only when the colleague who's standing in the air, who's standing around, who hears it somehow, jumps on it that it becomes clear, so to speak, what is preferred. If he jumps on it and says, well, come on, they're not that bad again, then I might be inclined to make it even clearer what kind of victim situation I'm in with my colleagues. Or they might say, finally someone who experiences it like me. Someone who also understands me. Yes, finally someone who understands me. Yes, and this burr warning, that was never clear to me. So the drama triangle is, if you point it out and there are also pictures in the show notes, you can look it up. That seems to be the furthest apart.
[14:07]Persecutors, victims and saviours are very far apart, so to speak. But in practice, they're like people who are walking a tightrope together and then decide together that I'm going to fall to the right and you're going to exaggerate to the left. Yes, and what might even happen in the second sentence is that both of them change roles, that they suddenly slip from the role of persecutor into the role of rescuer or they go from the role of persecutor into the role of victim. And then the next sentence can be formulated from a different role, whatever is going on in people's minds. Yes, the role changes after the comma in the same sentence. The comma is often the change of role. And after the comma, the famous but then says, now comes the persecutor. Now comes the persecutor, if then this yes, but and then..., what comes next is then the persecutor mentality. And I'm interested to know what experience you've had in which setting. So I think it will certainly be different in mediation than in coaching or in team development or larger-scale facilitation.
[15:19]
Role change in the Drama triangle
[15:20]That the complexity and the real learning lies in this change of roles. In other words, what happens between the roles, if you take the triangle graphically, what happens in the straight line and not at the points on the roles. But first of all, especially when teaching or familiarising yourself with the concept, you want to clearly understand these roles. In other words, if you differentiate and divide them so far apart that you understand the connection that the drama triangle is an entanglement or a competition, a rollercoaster ride in this drama triangle.
[16:01]Can actually get lost. But that we are quick to think, okay, you are the victim, you are the persecutor in this whole conflictual, problematic situation, i.e. fixed roles. And I would always make it clear that it's not about fixed roles. Nobody is a victim, nobody is a persecutor, but it is a dynamic that manifests itself due to inner psychological experiences, experiences from childhood perhaps or from adolescence, certain trigger points that set something off in someone. And I've just realised that I've just used the word trigger points and I was recently thinking that I don't want to use this word any more because it's used so excessively that nowadays everyone uses it, so to speak. So things are triggered in me when a phrase comes up, when a certain formulation comes up and we're both now in our discussion, for example, you don't know my history and you don't know my family history and you use a phrase or a choice of words that triggers something in me that has nothing whatsoever to do with the current situation with you here in this conversation, but rather I'm catapulted in milliseconds into a past situation from which I then react and you then look at me and say, what's going on with you right now?
[17:30]Yes, so that you can't grasp for yourself what has just happened with Thomas? Yes, and in this irritation I go back into a new role or with a different emphasis in the same role. But where I, so to speak…
[17:50]Furthermore, this, the drama triangle is more important with the term trauma, this change of roles, than with the triangle. Yes. So, perhaps from this perspective. Yes. And so in coaching, I notice that that's where people are most likely to look for clear roles, so a decision, as it were. Oh, so I'm in this malaise here, so I'm the victim, good to know. And then the clarification work really starts.
[18:24]And in mediation, I think the concept is even more difficult to explicitly name or work on because the parties can usually name several examples for each role. So the roles are not clearly allocated for us, but we take on several examples for each role.
[18:50]And then to get to this point, so that an analysis can emerge from it that the parties can recognise, so to speak, to say for themselves, but I recognise a pattern in it. I find that particularly challenging and that's where this old transactional analysis experience comes true. These are all very simple concepts, but working well with clients is extremely challenging and not at all easy. And I'm right there with you, because simply saying that you are the persecutor is not a predetermined situation or a predetermined task or takeover, but rather a response to something that has just happened. And therefore, as you say, the drama, because it is the dynamic that can go on indefinitely. And I can stay in these three roles indefinitely. I slip from role to role and don't realise that I'm always communicating from a different role.
[20:04]And as you just said, I find that with mediation in particular, with these different aspects, that is the case in coaching, when people realise for themselves in coaching that they are not the victim, but that this victim role is a symbol for a pattern, as you just called it, for a pattern. And that this pattern is perhaps only triggered in them in certain situations. Through stress, through internal stress, through whatever. And to find that out, that's what I found so nice, as you just said, that I then go into the analysis and I go into the research and check with the clients, in which situation does it happen that you then behave like that? Because there are also other situations in which you don't do it. What's different then? Yes, yes.
[20:59]
The dynamics of the roles
[20:59]Yes, in order to then perceive that and say, as you say, in order to then see, okay, and if you then realise in the situation, ah, I'm slipping into a situation in which, with certain, let's say, information in me, I'm suddenly experiencing, let's say, an attack dynamic, be perfect, do it quickly, and I then put myself in the victim role, because I then have the feeling of not being enough, when we have researched and analysed this, then you could say, okay, what would it take at that moment for you to get out of this victim dynamic, out of this role that you are playing at that moment, in inverted commas, because it is the easiest solution for you to get out of the stress. That's what it's about. That's what Drama Triangle is about for me. That other concepts are added, so to speak, that clarify one or two things about the role.
[22:01]In mediation, I sometimes have the task, or the process step, if you want to talk in technical terms, which doesn't always work, but is very helpful when it comes to the drama triangle. Parties present themselves, they have their war reporting, as Ed Watzke always says, their fixed image of what they are saying and of course it is also possible to hear this in mediation. And if they now describe how they couldn't help but criticise, i.e. become persecutory in their role as a victim or even a pure victim position, then I often have them say, In a silent work, or send them home with it, if it goes into several sessions, then also with the question, and where and how do they occupy the other roles in the drama triangle? So if they present themselves as someone who has put me down in public, where do I take on the role of persecutor and how do I rescue myself from this role? What do I do to save myself, so to speak? And these are often things that are then named that only take place in the mind.
[23:18]So criticising and putting the other person down, so to speak, sometimes or relatively often only takes place in your head or when you've somehow managed to call a friend in the evening to build yourself up again. But I found it interesting that people often write down, well, when I'm on my own, I can manage it, that that was an impossible thing to say. I would have loved to say that to him. And then there's a whole litany of persecutory, hypercritical statements that are not channelled into conflict communication, but remain purely psychological. And this intersection of social communication, the drama triangle and the psychological, the edification pattern, is an interesting point for me, because this concept is actually laid out at the intersection.
[24:21]Yes, and that is, I think, just as you say, just from the mediation process, I think that is the essential thing in the coaching process as a gain in knowledge for the coaches, that if they develop this for themselves with, so if they develop this and say, ah, this is how I react when this pressure arises or when I behave in, As you just said, when I behave persecutively in the victim role, it's like an energetic equalisation, which is then balanced out by a plus-minus attitude towards the other person.
[25:02]That there has to be an energetic balance within us at that moment, so that we as human beings can feel aligned again on a psychological level and feel equal again.
[25:16]I think it's a minus-plus-plus-minus thing that has to happen in us again and again if we remain unconscious, if we want to consciously change it, that we then realise in the plus-plus attitude, ah.
[25:31]Why am I now slipping into the minus-plus attitude for myself? Why am I slipping into the role of victim? What is it in me right now that is making me react like this? Yes, exactly. I also find that I always include the basic attitudes in the description. And that brings me to the next question. But this is excellent because it also makes it clear that the socially completely differently connoted persecutor role and saviour role, i.e. everyone wants to be Superman, no one sees the good in evil, points to a critical state. It's clear from the basic attitude that both deal pejoratively with the victim role and see the person in it as incapable of solving their problems. And when I address this topic, for example in team development processes and we talk about the rescuers, people say, yes, but if I want to help other people, that's a good thing. If I'm empathetic and see that the other person is in need, then it's good for the team if I stand by them and help them. And when I realise that they're not feeling well.
[26:47]And that is precisely the issue that we should shed light on here. What is their motivation for behaving the way they do? What is happening to them, what do they think might be happening to the other person at that moment? Yes, that's a good example of how you can also help blindly, so to speak, and maintain problems very knowingly. With pleasure. I have a young son who has now learnt to speak and then we read the study at breakfast that fathers are very important for children's language development. They are even more important for children to speak well. And you know why?
[27:35]
Paradoxes in the drama triangle
[27:36]Because they understand the child less. So they usually have less contact with the children. The women do the care work. And my wife also plays a decisive role and understands the little one's mumbling. And I don't understand him. And then I always ask, what are you saying? Say it clearly. And with me, it just takes more effort to speak clearly because I can't read his lips. And according to the study, this encourages children to speak more clearly because they naturally want to be understood.
[28:15]And this paradox also often comes into play in the role of victim and persecutor in the drama strike, where the persecutors simply have a good cause, but broadcast it at a pitch that is socially impossible and, conversely, the rescuers receive social recognition and fall behind and it is not recognisable where they are perpetuating the problem. I know the example is very, how do you say it, tainted with mines. I think one or the other would probably say, wait a minute. Yes, exactly. The chaser is about to be activated. Exactly. But it was so fitting and plausible that I don't have to attribute any great achievement to myself, and you have to bear this in mind in the dramatisation, so to speak, but that it's an effect outside of my intention.
[29:12]I can cultivate it now and say I don't understand you and want to encourage you to improve. But often we can only see this afterwards. In the drama triangle, because it is an unconscious pattern that is activated there, there is no need to look for guilt and intention. We are simply talking about social effects that have psychological causes. Definitely. And this gain in knowledge in the coaching process or in the supervision processes is, on the one hand, my own inner reaction to external stimuli, to stimuli that come to me from outside. Which roles do I slip into or from which role do I communicate? And how do I approach others, so to speak? As you say, if I as a father communicate with my son in a certain reproachful attitude because I don't understand him and I'm annoyed, then some kind of image is formed in the child's mind. Ah, Dad doesn't understand me and I need to speak clearly. And it's possible that the child then develops a feeling that I'm not enough because Dad is somehow angry with me at the moment and I have no idea why he's angry with me. I just want to be in contact with him.
[30:41]Yes, that is of course also a problem. Of course, that would be even worse if my annoyance and annoyance resonated in my plea to please speak more clearly. That would make me a victim. I am a victim of not being able to speak. Or, and this is of course the most constructive way, to soberly ensure clear pronunciation, knowing full well that it is a learning process and not letting anger or despair resonate. At the morning table, I can put the minds of those who may have had terrible images there at ease. It was a very relaxed and Sunday situation. Otherwise I probably wouldn't have prepared the study.
[31:38]
Team processes and their challenges
[31:38]And now to transfer that to, let's say, team processes, so there might be two or three conversations going on in an office and they are communicated from different roles and a person who comes into the office for the first time doesn't know what's going on or what situations are going on and brings in a completely different dynamic. And I always find that so difficult, this, as you just said, this exploring and analysing. Where are people in their psychological roles right now and how does that affect them socially in their communication with others? Yes, I also have an example from group dynamics, team development. In committees, when it's a question of who writes the minutes or who takes notes and then often or who gives the presentation, who does it in small groups, even in training sessions, and then it's often you, because you're good at it.
[32:46]You did it last time, you're good at it and before you know it, you've got a team full of specialists because people are only doing what they're already good at, thereby preventing the learning step or learning opportunity for someone who isn't yet good at it. To say, well, okay, if I'm not good at moderating now, then maybe I'll take advantage of the situation right now, when it's not so crucial, and practise moderating. Then it doesn't always have to be done by someone who can already do it. Yes, but that would be challenging for everyone because it would immediately create uncertainty in everyone else and also in me, because I'm practising my moderation and then moments of embarrassment can also occur. Or that I'm ashamed because I'm perhaps not exactly phantasmic in my life.
[33:36]To prevent that, I'd rather get into the drama triangle and take on the role of saviour and say, you're so good at this, why don't you do it? You did it really well last time, so that would be great, because then we'd have a great protocol because you did it so well. Yes, so you can clearly see that these games don't just pay off within a few minutes or hours, and that's the concept behind games, but that they can also be longer processes. And before you know it, you've spent three years in the team and still haven't moderated or given a presentation. And it only works by consciously stepping out of the routine, out of the familiar or out of the comfort zone. So there are many descriptions from completely different conceptual directions that describe what the TA has put in the drama triangle. And I would now like to build a bridge to the embedding of this concept in the general counselling landscape. And my thesis or observation or over-optimistic assessment is that so many people are familiar with the drama triangle, it's such a commonplace because it's also so catchy that it's already been lost, similar to the driver concept.
[35:02]The conceptual embedding in a psychological game as a description of psychological games, which was a very sophisticated concept by Eric Byrne, which initially has the advantage that many people know it, but also the disadvantage that it is applied in an oversimplified way. Would you agree that it is so oversimplified? So can we transactional analysts claim depth, which we perhaps ascribe to ourselves because we also know the other TA concepts? That would mean that we would attribute something else to other people if we were to attribute depth to ourselves. I didn't want to make the curve quite so steep. I'd like to offer something different that we can achieve through ours.
[35:59]The training opportunities in the TA community have given us a different view of drama, the triangle and psychological games, so that we can, I believe, locate the effects and the roots of the emergence of the drama triangle differently and also perceive them differently for ourselves. Whether that's good or not so good, I don't know. So I notice that when I work with people who have no TA training or no TA further training per se, that they tend to stay on the cognitive level with the drama triangle and then say on the cognitive level, so the persecutor, yes, okay, he has to formulate it differently and then it has to be a bit, so the accusation has to be taken out. They have to get out of the accusation. As a transactional analyst, I have to look at it from a different angle and say, what is the motivation behind the person behaving the way they are behaving or the way they are showing themselves? What is this inner-psychic theme that shines through because we are perceiving such a persecutory dynamic?
[37:15]So we then immediately open up a field where we say, this is actually the way forward for the person, which is sometimes simply inappropriate in other contexts. Even in mediations, where we say that the people are now entering into social interaction with all their dynamics, it is sometimes inappropriate to continue working in this direction. Sometimes that is simply the case, it is inappropriate. Especially in the team development process or in mediation, as you just said, I find it inappropriate to go into such depth, because it's something purely personal and individual. And I also need a safe space. As an individual, I also need a safe space in the team so that I don't somehow expose myself to things that I don't know how I can or should deal with. Or maybe my image in the team changes or people suddenly perceive me differently. And I think that as a transactional analyst, I also have the aspect of protecting the system, protecting the individual in the system and at the same time protecting myself, which I also perceive at that moment.
[38:29]Yes, and as you say, I think it's inappropriate to go down this path and say, yes, what's the motivation behind it, but then to ask, okay, how could you formulate it differently, then I would stay on the cognitive level and then I would stay on the communication level and ask how could you formulate it differently, could I formulate it as an I-variant, could I formulate it as a request, could I formulate it as a question to defuse it, to take out these issues, so to speak. Yes, let me feel whether it has a different tone, a different sound, but not the whole personality. Would you say that it's better or safer not to use the concept explicitly if you don't have the framework to continue working with the individual, biographical influences? Then you should rather hold it back or say, that's okay, you can also work with it purely cognitively, purely technically, it's still catchy and helpful and if there's more time or the need is greater, then more and in more detail in a different setting, but it's not really a bad thing.
[39:44]Let me put it this way, it's not a bad thing if non-transactional analysts also use it and simply see a social value in the fact that this concept has a broad impact. And I think I'm right there with you. And I think that's why Armature Reaching is such a popular concept for coaches, because it's so easy to understand on a communicative social level and so easy for people to accept, so that they can then communicate changes without necessarily having to analyse their own psychology. This is not necessary to bring about change in the team. I don't have to get into the deep psychological issues straight away.
[40:25]When the team says it's enough for us if I know I have this kind of chasing momentum
[40:31]
Cognitive approaches in coaching
[40:28]in me, then I just see how I can deal with it differently. And if someone knows that I have a chasing dynamic, then they can say, "You, hold back your chaser a bit. Yes, I can also simply implement this in the team on a playful, easy level, so that the team then has a new concept with which they can improve and change communication for themselves. So, yes, definitely on a cognitive level straight away. That's good.
[40:57]Thomas, I can't rule it out. We are two transactional analysts, we have many years of training and also language training. So in short, we were talking about the drama and nobody could follow us in terms of content. So that's not out of the question, because we probably spoke with a lot of presuppositions. The dramatisation is well described. We will also refer to the essay and the contributions that are worthwhile in the show notes. But what else do we need to know in any case, what have we perhaps not yet addressed that you say is absolutely important to keep in mind when approaching the concept or if you want to work with it? Are there any other points where you say we need to make this clear again so that this doesn't just become a technical discussion and people can't follow it without prior knowledge?
[41:56]So at this moment, if you ask me like this and I look inside myself, I think we have presented this well so far, reflected on it well. We have given practical examples.
[42:09]
Options for exiting the drama triangle
[42:10]It is possible to get out of the drama triangle, there are possible solutions, perhaps we should briefly go into this again, that this drama triangle, that it is not determined, but that I can get out of it, and there is coaching for this, there is mediation for this, there are settings, in which I learn to change myself with these dynamics, to change my communication and that it is definitely worth looking into this concept, whether in terms of TA or systemic or counselling or mediation, because I think it is a helpful and simple concept that changes communication. Yes, I think that's an important point. It's not about looking at what my favourite role is, i.e. where I want to position myself even more, but it's about not communicating and reviving any of these three roles and then something else will definitely emerge if you're not in one of these roles yourself. I think that's another important point. For me, it's still important to actually, I always say this, training candidates.
[43:22]That this Concept docked, embedded in the Concept the psychological Mirror is and that the simple one important Attention is, because the so a powerful Instrument is, that the Dramatic inertia in his Simplicity and Seclusion then sometimes, have I the Impression, on Depth loses.
[43:49]
The Pentagon game and organisations
[43:45]Because it simple these three Points are and then a little Arrows towards and here draw. I speak now the Podcast with the, what I now say would like, because Oswald Summers has the Drama triangle Yes again on the organisational Level upscale and has Yes the Drama triangle Yes again as organisational Drama triangle represented and has Yes the psychological Level, the we now here in this Podcast again deepened have, Yes in his Organiser pen…
[44:15]The Game Pentagon, Thank you I had straight the Word not, with the Game Pentagon Yes again on one whole other Level upscale, what Yes again one new Dimension of the Drama Triangle enables and also a Understanding for the Effects and the, like you say, these Power or these Power, this Concept also represents, Yes, you, Thomas, Attempt failed, so Blasting there’s not. We make the simple like this, when the for you OK is. We make in addition one Follow-up sequence and look us the Game Pentagon to, the I also a very important Concept find and then also in the Manual extra Torsten Gag commissioned have, commissioned Inverted commas. The shall absolutely in addition what write, because he that, find me, mine In my opinion really again revitalised has. And there watch we us to, like in Organisations the Basic idea processed was. And then would have we there again really one important Supplement. Sascha, very with pleasure. So I find, the GamePentagon is really, the could much more popular be and much more tangible for the People be, because it is really helpful, straight for us, the in Organisations active are, at the Dynamics in Organisations better to localise and so that clear to come. The make we. Super, Thomas.
[45:41]Then until here for the first time, Thank you for yours Insights in the Drama triangle and like you so that act and whereupon you pay attention.
[45:55]
Conclusion and outlook for future topics
[45:51]I wish you one good Time and many Thanks to for the Conversation. Sascha, Thank you you and Thank you you for yours Time and I happy me on next Times. Bye bye. Then make we it. Ciao.
[46:02]I have with Thomas Weirs to the Drama triangle spoken. In the Podcast here, good through the Time. We have spoken about the Application, the Prerequisites also, at with the Dramatraieck to work and whereupon it to pay attention applies, at the psychological Depths, the controlled become, not unnecessary to claim or but even also damaging so that to deal with, but Helpful and to a certain extent the Drama redeeming. Many Thanks to, that you here again with thereby was in the Podcast. And when you the Episode please has, then leave behind but a Like and a Feedback on yours Podcast catcher and parts with others, that here to Coaching and Conflict and Mediation topics podcasted becomes. I thank you me with you. Remain with best Greetings, Sascha Meigel.
[47:05] Music
Leave A Comment