INKOVEMA Podcast „Well through time“

#241 GddZ

The Pentagon Game by Oswald Summerton

Do people change positions here like in the drama triangle - or not?

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: Concepts of transactional analysis

Contents

Chapter:

0:05 – Introduction to the GamePentagon
1:03 – From drama triangle to GamePentagon
4:28 – The functionality of the positions
7:39 – The five positions in the GamePentagon
14:26 – Humour and mnemonic devices in the GamePentagon
21:32 – Sniper role and its consequences
27:28 – Dynamics in the organisation
29:40 – Systemic perspective and communication
33:08 – GamePentagon in supervision
37:02 – Conclusion and outlook

detailed summary

In this episode of the podcast "Gut durch die Zeit", I join Thomas Wehrs to explore the concept of the Game Pentagon, an extension of transactional analysis that deals with the dynamics of interactions in organisations. We shed light on how the Game Pentagon, also known as the Game Pentagon, is characterised by   was developed on the basis of Eric Berne's classical game theory and how it differs from well-known concepts such as the drama triangle.

The GamePentagon enables us to analyse the multi-layered roles that people can take on in organisations in a differentiated way. While the drama triangle predominantly describes dysfunctional interactions, the GamePentagon recognises that positions can be both functional and dysfunctional, depending on the perspective of those involved. In this episode, we delve into the five positions within the GamePentagon: the Stage Manager, the Bystander, the Saviour, the Scapegoat and the Sniper. Each of these roles brings its own challenges and opportunities that need to be considered on both an individual and organisational level.

An important aspect that we discuss is the complexity that arises from the interactions of these roles. I explain how a person can switch between these positions in practice and what impact this has on the dynamics within a team. These switches can often lead to misunderstandings that cannot be captured in a traditional understanding of the drama triangle. We also discuss how the GamePentagon shifts the focus from individual blame to systemic dynamics, providing a better understanding of the interplay between people and organisations.

We will also look at the practical application of the GamePentagon in coaching and counselling situations as well as in supervision. I share examples from practice in which the GamePentagon serves as a model for thinking and acting to help clients better recognise and reflect on their roles in an organisation. We discuss how this reflection can help to eliminate misunderstandings and break down communication barriers in order to improve the team climate.

Through practical exercises and case studies, we illustrate how the Game Pentagon can help coaches and consultants to better navigate complex situations and facilitate constructive dialogues within teams. To summarise, this episode provides a comprehensive analysis of the Game Pentagon and its relevance for combining psychological and systemic perspectives in transactional analysis.

  • Summerton, O. (1979). The Game Pentagon, Souvenir of ITAC 2, 1979.
  • Summerton, O. (1993a). Games in organisations. Transactional Analysis Journal, 23, 87-103.
  • Summerton, O. (1992). The game pentagon. Transactional Analysis Journal, 22(2), 66-75.

Mediation training

Our training in mediation and conflict management in the business and labour world,

headed by Prof Dr Sascha Weigel.

New start each year in March and October.

Register now for the next course!

More information here...

Training in organisational mediation - mediation in and for organisations.

Organisational mediation is the handling of conflicts that arise in the business and working world. It takes place in, with and for the organisation - by enabling the relevant members of the organisation to deal with conflicts appropriately.

We train you for this or professionalise your mediation and conflict counselling approach. We start our training programme regularly in March each year.

More information here...

Complete transcription

(AI-generated)

 

[0:05]
Introduction to the GamePentagon
[0:00]Positions are interconnected. Welcome to the podcast gut durch die Zeit. The podcast about mediation, conflict coaching and organisational consulting. A podcast from the company. I'm Sascha Weigel and I'd like to welcome you to a new episode. And today's episode is all about a transactional analytical concept called GamePentagon. Also called the Game Pentagon, but also known in the German-speaking world by the term GamePentagon, which I discussed with a colleague here in the podcast a long, long time ago and recently, in conversation with Thomas Wehrs, who is also here in the podcast again today, I came up with the idea that we should take it up again. First of all, hello and welcome, Thomas.
[0:45]Yes, Sascha, thank you very much for the invitation. I'm very pleased. The GamePentagon is one of those models that suddenly explain completely different situations in coaching without you having to analyse them at length. And that's why I like this concept.
[1:03]
From drama triangle to GamePentagon
[0:58]Yes, and that already lays the foundation. We will take a closer look at this concept. We got there in a very similar way when we didn't want to talk about the Pentagon game at all, but about the drama triangle. But that's quite common in TA. You want to talk about one thing and end up talking about another because things are so interlinked and connected. And then comes a big but, we have to take a closer look, because it's not just the same thing again in a big way, with two corners attached, from the triangle to the pentagon, but it has a completely different perspective. And that's what we want to focus on today. Let's retrace the route from the drama triangle to the game pentagon. How long is the journey for you?
[1:45]The path from drama carrier to game pentagon is not a long one for me. The game pentagon was expanded by Oswald Summers on the basis of Eric Berne's classical game theory. Summerston - just as an addition. Summers. I think it's Oswald Summers or Summerton.
[2:03] Buzzer tone. Good. But you, in any case, that which is over, the summer. It's definitely in there. I'm not source-proof right now. I had Oswald Summers in my head and, no, Oswald Summerton. Summerton, yes. Yes, Summerton, exactly. So Oswald Summerton developed or recognised this model of the Game Pentagon on the basis of Eric Byrne's psychological games. Developed or recognised it. He writes in his literature, in his article, that he observed a certain scene in a suburban train in New Delhi and he said, wait a minute, what's happening here? Erik Byrne describes how people repeatedly fall into recurring patterns of relationships or get caught up in them. So the so-called psychological games and Summerton developed this pentagon from them. So he has the pentagon with five positions that people can take. And I would also differentiate again between the role in the drama triangle and the position in the game pentagon. That was also the origin or the point where he couldn't explain a flaw or something with the drama triangle because it wasn't in there.
[3:15]Yes, these are the positions that arise in organisations or groups when people interact with each other. And that's where he said the drama triangle, I say, is too short-sighted. There needs to be another level and with the Pentagon game he has developed the level of time and what else has he developed? So for me it's the organisation, so to speak. I can't quickly trace whether Sammerton has also explained this in his essay or in his explanations, but that he has incorporated the organisation or, in this case, the context, which is so easy to lose sight of if you know the drama series. And here we come to a point, but that's probably it, it's the context. It's the context, exactly. So that means this context. And the exciting thing about GamePentagon, I think, is that these positions that people take can be both functional and dysfunctional at the same time. So we have the drama triangle in the sense that it's dysfunctional if I'm in the role of the rescuer or the persecutor, in the role of the victim.
[4:28]
The functionality of the positions
[4:24]And Summerton says that in the GamePentagon it can be both at the same time. It can be functional, i.e. supportive, or it can be dysfunctionally inhibiting or disruptive. Yes, and simultaneous is, I think, also the important term, it can be both, it depends on the perspective. For the organisation it can be functional, for the person it can be dysfunctional. And that's what I find so fundamentally interesting. It's different and not just enriching, but it's a completely different game when we look at organisations and consider them as a context than if we only or exclusively look at them psychologically.
[5:01]Yes, and you just mentioned these functions in the organisation, because I think that's how I feel, that the positions in the gamepad ensure stability in the organisation. So if I take on the position of, let's say, stage manager now, then that's a stability that I feel within myself and at the same time I provide stability for the organisation. This stage manager exists independently of a person. If there is no person, it's a vacancy that has to be filled and then it has to be there. In this respect, it is a stabilisation of the organisation as such.
[5:38]And if this stabilisation of the organisation is sought at that moment, so to speak, it can often prevent real responsibility and cooperation from arising at the human level, at the level of collaboration. And that, I think, is functional on the one hand and at the same time it can also have a dysfunctional effect. And I would like to draw your attention to another aspect that I wanted to discuss with you, because you also work in a person-orientated way, not only in coaching, but also in other assignment settings, where you keep the focus on the individual. That's not just because I know you as a person; your publications also show that this is a very central factor. And on the other hand, the organisation as an abstract entity that can also be a client and has a completely different logic. And for me, these two concepts symbolise the difference.
[6:37]So, if we take the drama offence, which is such a well-known concept, it's also familiar outside the TA scene. And once you've heard it, you walk through the world and only see persecutors, victims and saviours. For a certain amount of time. So you kind of have to get used to it for a fortnight, you have to cope with the fact that you only see these treige buzzing around.
[6:55]Nice picture. And for me, that represents this personalisation of problems. So basically, the victim is to blame. If they had a different basic attitude, then the whole thing wouldn't materialise. It's not enough if we have organisations that have these structural differences built into them and people then simply take on this role and find themselves in a conflict or in a constructive way that would not be explainable without this organisation. It was a bit too complicated, I realise. Yes, I realise that you're trying to link two or three levels at the same time.
[7:39]
The five positions in the GamePentagon
[7:39]Please help me, save me from this situation. Save me, save me. But I mean, the game pentagon is not so easily applied as a concept and therefore I don't think it has this publication status or popular status, because this level of organisation means additional effort.
[8:01]Which is no longer quite as easy to explain as if I only had to think in terms of persecutor, rescuer and victim in order to explain a problem situation. Would you go along with that? I fully agree and I think it has something to do with the fact that transactional analysis originally comes from the field of psychotherapy. And that's where the image of the human being came from, where you dealt with people and got involved with people. And over the years, in the 1970s, it then went in other directions with consulting and organisational development. And I believe that perhaps that would be the current status, that we as transactional analysts, who are close to people, could deal much more with this perspective or with this aspect of organisation, in order to deal with this complexity, as you have just described it, of organisation and people in organisation, and there are also publications by transactional analysts on this, that people in the field of tension of their organisation also come into contact with these topics again and again. As transactional analysts and organisational consultants in the organisation, we can use these models or concepts to create moments of enlightenment.
[9:14]How this organisational level is connected to the human level and how the drama triangle, this psychological level, can also repeatedly manifest itself at the organisational level in the different positions. Yes, but I also find that point in transactional analysis, and that's where we dare to tackle the steep mountain. After all, TA has its roots in group therapy. Yes. In the therapy of people in groups. And one of the hallmarks was that you are not treated alone here, but I can only treat you in the context of the group. And Byrne also wrote a book about groups and organisation that... I'd say, to put it mildly, ended up in the third series of books by transactional analysts, because it's more difficult to access and doesn't have the ease of access that other writings with the classic concepts have. And Sammerton also has to travel through India by train, so to speak, and have a high level of observation to realise that the drama is not enough. It is simply not enough to depict the essential figures in the complexity of an organisation.
[10:29]I think it's a great achievement for a thealer to create this openness and this curiosity and this sensitivity in the moment and say, wait a minute, I'm seeing something here right now that I can't cover with the concepts I know, that I can't explain what's happening here. I need something else here and then set off and say, wait a minute, what was that here just now? And then realises, ah, stop, and there is a drama triangle taking place or there are interactions within a drama triangle. And yet on another level, I would say it is still an organisational game, which is represented accordingly by the five positions of the 5S. And that's what Sammerton explained and said, and that's how I explain what happens in the context of organisations. And so we have, perhaps an inadmissible conclusion, but let me put it this way, no longer exclusively a psychological perspective and approach, but a sociological one. And we are not alone in these roles in the Pentagon with, well, these are just the three drama roles and two others.
[11:40]But it's a different lens. I also think that it takes the drama drama to another level because, for example, as we have just mentioned the stage manager, the stage manager can think and act from the role of saviour, from the role of persecutor as well as from the role of victim in their position as stage manager, i.e. the person who holds the framework or provides the initial ignition for what then takes place. And that's the complex thing. Let's name these five positions in the game-bender concept again, because a large proportion of the listeners are mediators and conflict counsellors etc., but not explicitly transactional analysts, and then we mentioned that again. Mmm. Got it. Five positions. Thomas, can you do that?
[12:28]Are you spring-proof? Here comes the chaser. Thomas, can you do that? Yes, are you Quellenfest? Now let's have a look here. Now let's see if he can do it. You, I'm a teaching thealer. I don't have to call it that anymore. I can now... I see. Yes, you, I'm a teaching thealer too. What are we going to do now? Oh good, we'll bring in a spectator. Okay.
[12:48]Well, firstly, it's the stage manager. That's the person who designs the background, the stage. Then there's the audience, the spectator, who watches it, keeps their distance and says, this is not my topic. Applauding, sometimes even applauding and wanting to attend the play with high expectations. And then we have the saviour, Xavier. It's usually us who are brought in. Please save us, please help us. We are brought into the role of the saviour. Or colleagues who always step in when there's a fire, who are always there to save the team, so to speak. You could also say that there could be a pattern of over-responsibility. And then perhaps I would like to combine Claude Steiner Stroke Economy with it again to say what could be brought into it. The other two, I'm always a bit of a scapegoat. That's the one who's to blame. If it wasn't for him or her, the person, if it wasn't for the person, then we wouldn't have this whole issue here. Well, if they were gone. Fix that one. Fix that one. Yes, and I keep forgetting the fifth one. That's the sniper. The sniper. The sniper, exactly. The hand gunner. He draws attention to the problem. He marks it. Yes, yes. That's right. There's also a nice film, isn't there? Well, that's another topic.
[14:15]Did you notice it? I didn't notice it, but Thorsten Gagg, who also formulated the concept in German, drew my attention to it.
[14:26]
Humour and mnemonic devices in the GamePentagon
[14:27]Everything starts with S. Yes, everything starts with S. And I think it was a little one from Summerton, I think, who had a sense of humour. Yes, he had a sense of humour and wanted to make it easy to remember. But I'd completely missed that until now. But these are the five positions, the five S's. The five S positions. And now again, because you've made the point crystal clear and it wasn't so clear to me yet, but these five roles are already functionally divided into something like persecutor and sniper, as the one who draws attention to the problem, the gateboat as victim, that's already like a victim role. But the people who have taken on these positions can experience this with different qualities. And these can be described using the drama triangle.
[15:18]And that's the complex thing. And now it becomes confusing, perhaps for outsiders, to really analyse it, to find out what kind of energy is there on a psychological level and in which position of the gamepadon it is currently manifesting itself. And that is thinking and observing and also not bringing in any judgement, i.e. not bringing in any moral issues, but also looking at it from the positive side, as these are also protective mechanisms that people develop for themselves because they don't feel otherwise, I would say, safe in the organisation. And how they also bring in their personality with all its deficits or parts that are still ready for development in order to fulfil such positions, such functional roles, as the Pentagon game provides. Yes, I'm bothered by the word deficient. I'm always a bit ambivalent about it, because for me, deficient means there's something pathological or there's a plus-minus attitude underneath. I put the ready for development after it, but I knew it would be labelled immediately. I'm also telling you, I'm grateful for that. Great.
[16:33]I take that out. And that's also what I mean by not projecting blame or responsibility onto the scapegoat or the sniper, for example, but saying, no, we're all part of the whole thing, so we're part of this situation as state managers, as spectators. So I applaud and enjoy the fact that the two of them are crushing each other. Yay. A nice spectacle delivered. I go home in the evening and say, boah, that was a great day, they crushed each other. For example. That would be the effect in everyday life. And that would mean we would no longer have, and maybe that's what you mean by this moral point of view, in drama, the first question of the activity-orientated is, how do I get out of it? I don't want to be in there. Whereas the gene pentagon is not about this question, i.e. not as a learning path or as compensation for deficient situations.
[17:37]How do I get out of the gene pentagon? It's not the mode to put on these glasses at all. Whereas the drama strike is. The conclusion and also the recommendation from the TA is to leave it alone, don't take on any role at all. Don't take on a role, go into the winning strike or go into the intimacy strike. Or, well, somehow, try a different kind of relationship and make sure that you simply don't take on these, shall I say, familiar roles. I can learn that. It's different in the Game Pentagon. It's about autonomy. I think the goal is to achieve autonomy in the Game Pentagon. In other words, to achieve autonomy for the organisation, along the lines of: how do I recognise which game I'm currently in? I then also decide how I can proceed with it. In other words, I do it consciously. And what do I choose how I want to lead in the future, for example now at management level or that I look at what I am doing to ensure that this Game Pentagon keeps showing itself in my team or in my group. Hey, you who are listening to the podcast right now, we are bringing you a new episode of this podcast every week to listen to and we need your support. Take your smartphone, leave a star rating and a comment on how you like the podcast and make others aware of this podcast here. Thank you very much and now the podcast continues.
[19:04]And that's where a small imbalance arises for me. Because as a GamePentagon, it connects to the game concept, just as drama is a representation of psychological games. And the GamePentagon is like a bridge or something, yes, it's also a representation of games. And with that per se, with concepts of basic attitudes, with the double-barrelled communications, it also has the tendency, well, the role that is now named there can be explained or explained with a drama role in case of doubt. As a sniper, I am a sniper. So it's not yet a description of how someone constructively draws attention to grievances. Exactly. And that's exactly the point. And that's why for me it's also in the category of games, because it's not authentic communication, it's an authentic self that I'm showing at that moment, but it's a role that I take on because I might be worried that if I say that directly, I have no idea what fantasies are going on in my head. And that's why I go into the sniper role, to achieve something with the sniper role or with the pickpocket role.
[20:21]Perhaps we can use an example. So what would be a situation where you say I now have a person in training or coaching or counselling, if I now use the Pentagon game as a foil, as a thinking foil, I would say they are in the role of a sniper here. And we don't have to do it that way in counselling, but that would be the theoretical concept in practice. Can you give us an example?
[20:52]I can give you an example of a manager who was annoyed with her team recently. It was more of a persecutor issue, a persecutor dynamic that she had within herself. And then I tried to find out a bit, what is this all about? On a psychological level, yes, the persecution theme. And what kind of position are you taking in your organisational role right now? And then I asked, well, I always think that every game or even this Pentagon game is always played with a good intention. I then ask, what do you want to achieve with this intervention that you are making? What is their goal? And then came the question, yes, I would like to,
[21:32]
Sniper role and its consequences
[21:29]that they simply coordinate better with each other.
[21:33]And what's stopping them from not communicating this directly? Yes, I already know what the other person is going to say and I already know how he's going to position himself. So then, on a psychological level, it comes down to these minus-plus attitudes, which then manifest themselves in the dynamics of the drama triangle. This manager has then thought, okay, I'll take a shot in the direction of the team and hit them in the face so that they get a bit shaken up and then, without his direct communication or his direct concern, believes that the team knows where he wants to go so that the team moves in this direction. And we both know that doesn't happen, but that new dynamics and confusion or irritation arise, so I asked them what it would have been like if they had communicated differently, i.e. if they hadn't gone into these snipers at all.
[22:24]position, but they would have said, what is my goal, what do I want to communicate here, so this immediately comes to my mind, how about the 3W formula according to non-violent communication, I wish for something, I perceive something, I wish for something and how can we reconcile this for the future?
[22:42]And then the guide came and said, I didn't dare to do that. And through this, I didn't dare, he realised that he was so angry and also felt such frustration within himself, he said, but somehow I had to, I wanted to get rid of this frustration and then got into this sniper dynamic, so to speak, and just hit them in the face, told them you're stupid. In other words, the term sniper or what it stands for already has the connotation of destructive communication, i.e. a negative attitude. That's also obvious when you're working on improvements, so to speak. From a theoretical point of view, I had the idea in a situation like this that he called it Sniper, it was just a nice word with an S, and he just needed a word with an S. But that the role in the game pentagon is initially named without judgement and says that it's a placeholder. There are people who have a position in the organisation that has something to do with, I have to draw attention to problems, that's just my job. And how I do that, whether constructively or destructively, is how I fulfil my role. But drawing attention to problems is part of the job description, such as controlling, works council or even in the good old days, in inverted commas, the manager, if you wanted it to be understood as ordering and controlling.
[24:11]There were good reasons for modernising or wanting to modernise what leadership is and what leadership should be. But for a long time, of course, there was a consensus as to what their task was. And then conceptually this would be more of an invitation if there are difficulties, because that is the reason to frequently deal with change, then I have a thinking film in which I name five positions, because they are essential for change work. The one who is reproached, the one who draws attention to the carrier, yes, yes. The one who then steps in, which is often the case, and says that it's not all that bad and to put your own house in order. And then the auditorium around them, the bystanders, the team, who never identify with conflicts and are happy for others to deal with them. And of course the people in charge, the stage managers. Yes, and that can change. And that's what I find interesting again, that these positions can also change.
[25:07]So that the spectators suddenly take on an active position by becoming rescuers or by taking on the role of sniper again and others then take on the role of spectator. As you say, it's a dynamic that manifests itself in organisations and where the drama triangle keeps running on a psychological level. Yes, we have worked out a nice difference for you in how we apply the concept differently. I don't have it right now, but that's how I understood you in the GamePentagon And the idea that these positions are changed, so it's becoming straight.
[25:43]So now comes a typical TA insider thing, there are no arrows drawn between these positions like in the Travertreieck, they are just lines. They are just lines and they are either spontaneous, intuitive, situational and they change from one to the other. So all five positions are connected. So I can go from one position to the other and can also go to the third position. And I think that's the dynamic that becomes so complex.
[26:16]That we then think, damn, what's happening here? What kind of game is going on here?
[26:21]Yes, then we look through our classic drama triangle games. Yes, but or wooden foot or all sorts of things. We say, no, somehow this doesn't fit here. Ah yes, that's interesting. I can well understand that this is also effective in counselling. For me, the moment I say, okay, let's assume that the works council is the one who draws attention to problems and goes to the manager and says, well, that's not how it works. And I have the mandate here from the scapegoat or from the person who has this position and who you really always tackle in the end. And when there is a change in the conflict communication, as we know it from the drama strike, you don't need to get upset now, you didn't say anything to the other person either, then another problem is pointed out. And then the game pentagon is distributed differently, so to speak, because it's a different problem, but I then take it apart and say that these are two different problems and we can work on them both together, but not in a change of positions, so to speak, but they are two different ones.
[27:28]
Dynamics in the organisation
[27:26]They are two different things and that is often not recognised. Yes, that's also the consequence, so to speak, in which you then say that you can change positions in the Game Pentagon and thus make it possible to discuss them, whereas I tend to take a separating approach and say, okay, that's a different topic, not a word about autism now, but please just stick to the topic.
[27:49]When I do this in team coaching sessions, for example, I put the Pentagon game on the ground, i.e. the five positions, and say, in which position do they feel they are? Where do they think they are? How are they travelling? First of all, there is silence. Nothing happens at first because they say, oh God, now I have to position myself. Now I have to position myself visibly. Did he ask me something? Now I have to join in. Now I have to position myself as well. Oh God, it's like a role-playing game. Okay, and then stand there. And then they stand there and then I go into the interaction and say, okay, so what's their thinking on this position? Why are they doing this? Or what do they associate with this position? And then I ask them to take a different position and say, what do they think if they were to move from the position they're in right now, I say, if they were to stand with the stage manager.
[28:38]And I say, why don't you go and be a real spectator? Why don't you stand on the spectator side? And now take a look at how they suddenly feel. And then they start to perceive other sensations and say, wait a minute, that feels completely different. And I make that understandable, I make it visible that this change can take place and at the same time that these positions in the game pentagon can be dynamic and also helpful. As you say, the stage manager can say, oh guys, let's close the topic here slowly and move on to another level and then perhaps return to constructive cooperation. So it's like team coaching, making these positions tangible, visible, creating ground anchors, standing on them, getting into a connection with them, energetically. Then psychological things happen. Then I simply let them change a bit and then we see what dynamics arise in the group, what dynamics arise in the team. How do they perceive these dynamics for themselves? How can they then utilise this for themselves in the future for the team, for working together?
[29:40]
Systemic perspective and communication
[29:41]What conclusion do they take away with them? This is also relieving for the team members at that moment, because the focus shifts from blame to the system. So it's not your fault that you're in this position, it's systemic that we're behaving this way. And that's okay if you change positions. And that also opens up paths to communication, trust and real effectiveness. So that's my thinking with the game pentagon. Yes, and work. So you work with it explicitly. You don't just have it in the back of your mind, you also work with it explicitly in a similar way to the drama game. I also do it openly. So I also introduce it theoretically. Maybe one more word, because you're also a teacher. How do you experience the GamePentacon in TA teaching? So what role does it play for you in TA teaching? I'm curious about the smile now, because I couldn't quite categorise that.
[30:36]Yes, because in TA teaching I am on a relational level and on a co-creative level with the participants. And for me, that's another special learning situation that we enter into together. I wouldn't bring the game pentagon into that for me, I'd be more interested in the classic burn group dynamics, that a quality and an awareness arises in this learning group through the relational and co-creative principles that can only really take place in this closed group, because they can simply learn together. That's something else in a team, because a team is not, let's say, already together voluntarily and yet they are not together voluntarily. Ah, you've now applied the concept to your learning group, or thought you had. I mean, I'm quite simple in that respect. You present it as a TA concept and between the lines it says with exclamation marks, you must know that, you must have learnt it by heart. But how do you experience how the other....
[31:48]So they are initially enthusiastic about this opening of the drama triangle, because the drama triangle is also a favourite concept for many people. It's applicable, it's visible, so it can be implemented quickly. And the GamePentagon takes this drama triangle to another level for them, and especially for coaches and counsellors who are gaining further qualifications in the field of application O, they are happy about this concept, because they say that I now understand the system in which I am currently working or for which I am working in a completely different way. In collegial case counselling, we sometimes clarify situations in the learning group by asking them to tell us what happened the other day when you had a coaching assignment or a case.
[32:32]had a counselling request? How did the Game Pentagon become visible? What did you realise for yourself? And also the question of why it sometimes failed. Why did this counselling request not continue? And using the game pentagon, you can And then you can then wonderfully, ah, I see, I was sent in the direction of the scapegoat. And I accepted this role and allowed myself to be made a scapegoat, so to speak, even though I was brought into the organisation as a saviour. Along the lines of, ah, dear events, we've tried, but you see, it's no use.
[33:08]
GamePentagon in supervision
[33:04]It is well received, especially for O-people who are doing further training in the O field. And I also find it interesting that supervision is very useful for external people to be able to position themselves well. Definitely. In other words, to compare your own learning journey with it and to say, what happened there, what did I do unconsciously and if I now consciously look at it in supervision, what would I do differently in the future and what will I do differently? What will I pay more attention to now or make more contracts or better contracts or whatever the result of the supervision is for the person being supervised? That's why I think it's worthwhile, especially in supervision, not just as a foil for thinking, but simply as an intervention. The organisation has its positions and the position of the senior is not a member of the organisation.
[34:01]So the is for me always the most interesting Question, what the Clients in addition say would, respectively as Consultant the really to confront, what the means. Because it is natural one very practised Practice and for us external Consultant also soothing Practice, that one as External requested becomes. But it is already one important Question, also the Logic to understand, Why the Saviour outside positioned is. Yes, and that the Saviour itself then to the Scapegoat so to speak stop remodelled becomes in the Game Pentagon, so that the Stage Manager or the Spectators itself again confirmed feel and say, you see, also the gets it not there. But Thomas, the use me. We have it managed. We have today about the Game Pentagon spoken. Have we everything dealt with, what it needs to this? I think also. None Deficits leave behind. Find I also very reassuring, there again one reset to may. I will the Word so often like possible say, also next week or next month on the Teaching Conference. We can Yes in the Examination times the Test to check and ask, say times, where are you so deficient for you on the road? Okay, the Question leave I you.
[35:11]I would rather so ask, times with one Glasses from Deficit-orientation considered, what see you? Is also one beautiful Variant. I likes Yes also as Spectacle wearer the Spectacle metaphor underneath, like I the always to use. Thomas, I happy me, that we us there See become. I me also, Sascha. And thank you me first for the Just a moment, that you with me the GamePentagon on smooth-running Kind and Wise discussed have and hopefully also for those, the in the TA language not so Practised are, by no means deficit, but even not Practised inside are, the with catchy represented have. Many Thanks to. I notice, you have genuine Fun on this Insert.
[35:50]Wonderful. Do you really. Since leave I none Deficit. I delight me straight on it. And it was me one Joy, with you to discuss and also these Aspects of the Game pentagons also more visible and clearer for the one or for the other to make. And we become look, like the then at the Teachers' meeting in the Examinations visible becomes. Come good through the Time. We See us in Rössrad. Many Thanks to. Until to the next Times. Very with pleasure. Got one good Time. Ciao. The Game Pentagon was already times Topic. Back then with Thorsten Gäck. In the 84. Episode was the Topic been.
[36:29]Today have I with Thomas Weirs about the complex Ratio from Drama carrier and Game Pentagon spoken and about the Application then in the Practice, in the practical Consultancy. And are then also in addition come, that it natural in the Supervision from Consultants outstanding suitable is. We have Differences in the Application and also in the conceptual Representation worked out, the we here also presents have, like we different so that act.
[37:02]
Conclusion and outlook
[36:55]And the would be also again for the theoretical Relining this Concept from Relevance. The be but only exclusively so to speak the transaction analysts, the here listen, at home. Many Thanks to, that you and her all here again with thereby maintained at the Podcast Good through the Time. Leave behind with pleasure a Feedback and one Star rating on yours Podcast catcher or with Google Business. Recommend the Podcast here with pleasure more and subscribe him, when you him still not subscribed have, then missed you none Episode. I say goodbye me with best Wishes. Until to the next Times. Comes good through the Time. I am Sascha Weigel, yours Host from INKOVEMA, the Institute for Conflict and Negotiation management in Leipzig and Partner for professional Mediation and Coaching training programmes.