Lemanskills.com

Artykuły

Leadership

Work Drama Triangle (and How to Escape It)

The Drama Triangle is a psychological and social model of human interaction that highlights dysfunctional dynamics often seen in relationships, workplaces, and personal lives. Created by Stephen Karpman in 1968, this model identifies three primary roles people unconsciously adopt: the Victim, the Persecutor, and the Rescuer. While these roles may feel familiar and even comforting in the moment, they often lead to unproductive behaviors and strained relationships. By understanding the Drama Triangle and replacing it with healthier patterns like the Winning Triangle, we can transform our interactions and create more positive outcomes. And strengthen our muscle of Communication Intelligence (CQ). Let’s dig deeper into the subject today so you can understand better your behavior patterns with a practical solutions on how to get out of it.     The Story of the Drama Triangle   Stephen Karpman, a student of transactional analysis, developed the Drama Triangle to illustrate how people can become trapped in unhealthy relational patterns. These roles are not fixed, and individuals may shift between them during a single interaction. The triangle often begins with one person adopting a role, which triggers complementary roles in others, creating a cycle of blame, helplessness, and over-involvement. Let’s explore these roles in detail: The Victim The Victim feels powerless, overwhelmed, and unable to take responsibility for their situation. This role is characterized by self-pity and an underlying belief that “I can’t do it” or “Life is unfair.” Behaviors: Avoidance of responsibility, learned helplessness, seeking sympathy. Typical Sentences: – “Why does this always happen to me?” – “I can’t handle this.” – “No one understands how hard this is for me.” Position in the OK-OK Matrix: The Victim operates from an “I’m not OK, you’re OK” position, perceiving themselves as inferior or incapable compared to others.   The Persecutor The Persecutor blames and criticizes others to maintain control or assert dominance. They often feel justified in their actions but lack empathy for others. Behaviors: Aggression, fault-finding, micromanaging. Typical Sentences: – “This is all your fault.” – “You never do anything right.” – “If you had just listened to me, we wouldn’t be in this mess.” Position in the OK-OK Matrix: The Persecutor operates from an “I’m OK, you’re not OK” position, seeing themselves as superior while devaluing others.   The Rescuer The Rescuer intervenes excessively to “save” others, often neglecting their own needs. While their actions may appear helpful, they can enable Victims to remain passive and dependent. Behaviors: Overhelping, unsolicited advice-giving, neglecting self-care. Typical Sentences: – “Let me fix this for you.” – “You can’t do this without me.” – “Don’t worry; I’ll handle everything.” Position in the OK-OK Matrix: The Rescuer operates from an “I’m OK, you’re not OK” position but masks it with seemingly altruistic behavior.   What Is the Cost of the Drama Triangle at Work?   When workplace interactions are led by the Drama Triangle, several negative outcomes emerge: – Decreased Productivity: Time and energy are wasted on blame-shifting or rescuing instead of solving problems collaboratively. – Eroded Trust: Dysfunctional dynamics create resentment and reduce psychological safety among team members. – Stagnation: Victims avoid growth opportunities, Persecutors stifle creativity through criticism, and Rescuers prevent others from developing autonomy. – Burnout: Rescuers often overextend themselves, while Victims feel perpetually overwhelmed and Persecutors experience frustration from unmet expectations. In essence, the Drama Triangle traps individuals in cycles of conflict and inefficiency, undermining both individual well-being and organizational success.   The Winning Triangle: A Healthier Alternative   To break free from the Drama Triangle, Acey Choy introduced the Winning Triangle as a model for healthier interactions. This framework replaces the dysfunctional roles of Victim, Persecutor, and Rescuer with three constructive counterparts: Vulnerable, Assertive, and Caring/Coaching. These roles empower individuals to take responsibility for themselves while keeping respect and collaboration with others. And to operate from OK-OK position that  gives us a chance to use all of our skills and growth mindset. Vulnerable (Replacing the Victim) Vulnerability involves acknowledging one’s feelings and needs without going into the realm of helplessness. It requires self-awareness and a willingness to seek support constructively. What can you do? – Admit when you’re struggling but frame it as an opportunity for growth. – Ask for help without expecting others to solve everything for you. – Use “I” statements to express your needs clearly. How can you say it? – “I’m feeling overwhelmed; can we brainstorm solutions together?” – “I need some support with this task—could you guide me through it?”   Vulnerability fosters authenticity and encourages open communication. It creates an environment where challenges are addressed collaboratively rather than avoided. It’s healthier, creating a space to grow, make mistakes and learn from them, as well as using the experience and wisdom of others’.   Assertive (Replacing the Persecutor) Assertiveness involves expressing one’s thoughts and boundaries respectfully while considering others’ perspectives. It balances confidence with empathy. What can you do? – Provide constructive feedback rather than criticism. – Set boundaries clearly but kindly. – Focus on solutions instead of assigning blame. How can you say it? – “I noticed an issue with this report; let’s discuss how we can improve it.” – “I value your input, but I need some time to focus on my own tasks right now.”   Assertiveness promotes accountability and problem-solving without alienating others. It helps create a culture of respect and mutual understanding, without treating people like worse or stupid. It’s creating a chance for everybody to take their own responsibility for what they do at work.   Caring (Replacing the Rescuer) Caring involves offering support without overstepping boundaries or fostering dependency. It respects others’ autonomy while providing encouragement. What can you do? – Offer help only when it’s needed or requested. – Encourage others to take ownership of their responsibilities. – Practice active listening without immediately jumping in with solutions. How can you say it? – “How can I support you in resolving this issue?” – “You’ve got this—I’m here if you need guidance.”   Caring builds trust and empowers

Read More »
Transactional Analysis

What Does It Mean to Be OK-OK?

When I think about all workshops and mentoring processes that I deliver each week, very rarely I don’t talk about it with people. Sooner or later, this is a part of a conversation: whether we work together around communication, feedback, leadership, change or transformation. Today the story about OK-OK Matrix, which another name is Life Positions Matrix. One of the most important elements of Transactional Analysis framework, a base of building outstanding relationship: professional and private.   What is the Matrix?   The Matrix is a tool that show us four options that consists of set of beliefs, thoughts and feelings we have about ourselves and others. Based on where we are, we have a certain orientation, that becomes a base for our behaviors, ways of reacting on what happens for us: professionally and privately. It doesn’t really matter about which part of our life or work we think, this tool is applicable equally well. You can take a look on how the Matrix looks like on the simple picture below:   The first axis describes what we think and believe is a truth when it comes to ourselves: who we are (as people in general, but also in each role we have in our life: professionally and personally), what we do, what we are worth because of that etc. The second axis describes the same elements, but in the context of the external world: it can be another person, a group of people (the entire family, team etc.) or the whole institution (organization, state, the whole political party etc.). Where we are in the Matrix influences on our mood, mindset, behaviors in different situations, the way we react, how we communicate and make decisions. The first thing is to be aware what kind of dominant tendency we have in going into certain quadrants. Quadrant 1: OK-OK   OK – OK quadrant is the one that we should aim to be as frequently as possible. This is the space where we are fine, and everybody are fine too. I have good intentions and people have good intentions as well. Of course, not everything and everybody is perfect, but we aim to be the best version of ourselves, we support each other, we share knowledge and work as a team. This is a place where we have and develop a growth mindset. Thanks to that set of thoughts, believes, convictions and decisions we make base on all that we are successful, happy and build a good life. We see opportunities, abundance, instead of gaps and things we don’t have or know. We reach for more, instead of giving up.   Quadrant 2: OK-Not-OK   OK – Not-OK quadrant appears when you think that you are fine, but others – not so much. Example: ‘I always do everything I can to finish my list of tasks before the day ends, and he never does it. He always works 9-5 and then – regardless of how many things are undone, he just closes his computer and goes home. Ugh, I hate it!’. Or: ‘I’m doing everything I can and this organization? Only requires more and give less and less!’ This place is not healthy for us, since we are going to resent everyone and everything at the end of the day. Even if this is only one person at first, it becomes more and more severe with time. When we are OK and the world not, what we end up with? Hate, resentment, miserable life. I would say that’s not the best place to be, especially in a long run.   Quadrant 3: Not-OK-OK   Not-OK – OK quadrat is a low self-esteem place. We are there when we think that everybody is fine, successful, happy, except for us. A good example can be: ‘Ugh, everybody has somebody, and I’ll die alone with my cats’ or: ‘Everybody can handle their tasklist, and I never have time for anything!’ When we think about ourselves from this position, we are never good enough. Sometimes we choose one work or life role (consciously or not) that we are so bad at that it’s pathetic, sometimes it’s all over the place. It depends on what level of low self-esteem we took with ourselves from our childhood into the adult life. People who are raising us most of the time has good intentions, but the wording and behavior they use is not so good or adequate to those intentions.   Quadrant 4: Not-OK-Not-OK   Not-OK – Not-OK quadrant appears when you think that you suck, but other people too, or you have this belief that the environment / organization / economy / world is bad. Example: ‘My goodness, I am so bad at this, but I cannot learn since I don’t have time for anything in this company. My manager always gives me more to do, the colleagues are not helpful at all, and I need to do everything on my own, even if I have no idea what I’m doing’. This is the ultimate, negative place, that we operate from the fixed mindset. We don’t see any opportunities, we use fatalistic view of the world, ourselves, our relationships, competences, organization we work with etc. Everything and everyone are bad, there’s no hope for the better.   The Bottom Line   The bottom line here is that we fall out of the first quadrant multiple times every single day. It’s impossible to stay there all the time, since we are triggered by different stressors, we have frustrated motivational needs and that’s why we go into distress. Being in another quadrant than the most optimal one is being conditionally OK: I’m (or the world) is OK only if… I fulfill a certain condition. The key thing is to recognize when (in which circumstances) we lose our optimal position and what can we do to faster come back to it. Also, what matters is how we behave in relation to others: our employees, team members, supervisors, stakeholders, colleagues, but also in private

Read More »
Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Imaginer

Do you know a person or two who most of the time are staying in silence, observing the world that is around them? During the meetings, a family dinner or other friends gathering they are not the kings or queens of the party, but you can tell that they are processing in their heads what they hear? That’s the Imaginer. The last (but not least) of six personality types in Process Communication Model. We’ve started the story about PCM HERE, then we’ve described the other 5: Persister, Thinker, Promoter, Rebel and Harmonizer. Today we’re adding the missing piece to our PCM puzzle, so we understand different people once we meet them, have them as team members or stakeholders in different circumstances (professional and private). For those of us who has little Imaginer energy (like myself), they might be the hardest to communicate with since they don’t say a lot of things out loud and their processes (i.e. decision making) are longer than in the rest of the types. Why is that? Let’s take a look! How do we recognize Imaginer? Imaginer is a person who experience the world through the lens of reflections (or inactions). Most of the time, they use their reflective mode: they have a lot of processes inside of their heads, so they see many different things in their brains. Sometimes it’s called inactions, since they don’t take action on what they reflect on until somebody says them so. How to recognize an Imaginer in the Base of personality? Again, the easiest way to make a strong hypothesis is to look for the key words that the person uses the most. For Imaginer it will be: “I imagine…”, “As I reflect on that…”, “In my head I can see…”, “I see it that way…”, “I picture…”. They say all that because they operate the best in their internal world. It doesn’t mean that they are antisocial (in a clinical way). I’m sure that you’ve experienced not once, not twice a person who doesn’t say anything, but you see their eyes moving or looking out through the window in intense internal process. That’s because there is a tough reflective sequence that’s happening in the head of that person. They have a lot of things inside them, a lot of options or scenarios they create in a certain situation. The recognition of Imaginer is also easier when we look on their non-verbal communication: like in the Thinker’s case, it’s a flat, computer face, with almost no mimics on it. Their voice is linear, monotonous, static. Their body is still, they don’t use movement to not waste the energy that they can invest in more internal reflective process. They don’t say much, but when they do, that’s what we can observe externally. If you see and hear it, that’s a strong indicator that there’s a Imaginer in the Base on the other side of the communication process. How to use it to get along with that kind of person? What does Imaginer need in communication? The Imaginer needs communication process where they have a chance to reflect on things. Once they do it, here’s a time to directly tell them to share what they have in their heads with us. Extremely important for them as well is to have a space, where they can be alone to reflect, and then they are ready to talk to us. To be efficient in communication with Imaginer, we need to use directive channel of communication. It’s the same story we had in the Promoter’s description: Imaginer needs to know exactly what to do and say to us. It means that asking them questions is not going to work, since they are not responsive to the requestive channel. How to do it right? Using the same example as before: when we want to delegate a task, so a chosen employee covers it, the great approach will be opening the conversation with a direct statement. “Hi Mike, I want you to take a task X. (Now we describe briefly what the task is about). Please tell me what showed in your head when I was describing it to you.” And we give them a moment to reflect. Pushing or rushing them is not going to work well, what can be hard, especially for Promoters and Rebels. They value Autocratic interaction style. It means that they are the most efficient when the other person just tells them what is there to be done and leave them alone, so they can go and focus on the delivery. Straight to the point, sometimes (especially for the people that are not so big fans of a directive communication channel) might look a little harsh or cold. It’s the same situation that we had in Promoter’s case, but the root cause is different. Promoter just needs to get the job done, and Imaginer needs to have direct communication, so they have a one communication and then they are left alone. Also, it helps them so they are not lost in the fog or the infinity of their imagination. Imaginer seeks to answer the existential question: will they come for me? Yes, they prefer to be alone, so they have a space and time to be in their reflective world. But they don’t want to be lonely: they need to have space to say out loud what they imagined. For them this sentence is the truth:   Somebody will come for me = I’m valuable as a person   A motivational need attached to this PCM type is It’s important to know it that sometimes for Imaginer the best way to help them is to leave them alone. It can be extremely difficult for Harmonizers, Rebels and Promoters, since their energy and need of contact is on higher level. They don’t understand how it is possible that a person can be so long on their own, sometimes even not leaving the house. Again: it’s not antisocial, it’s their way to

Read More »