{"id":28116,"date":"2022-01-28T15:03:25","date_gmt":"2022-01-28T23:03:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/?p=28116"},"modified":"2022-01-28T15:03:25","modified_gmt":"2022-01-28T23:03:25","slug":"triangulation-a-case-study","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/triangulation-a-case-study\/","title":{"rendered":"Triangulation: A Case Study"},"content":{"rendered":"

In the fall, I focused on Edwin H. Friedman\u2019s arguments regarding empathy and the ways in which empathy disempowers personal responsibility, thus contributing to toxic, reactive, chronic anxiety. As I summarized then, in A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix<\/em>, Friedman develops his argument for why it is a leader\u2019s differentiated being and presence that will most effectively bring about transformational change and health in all the emotional (instinctual) processes of the relationship systems in which that leader is a part\u2014family, work, and society. His book includes a thorough introduction, eight densely written chapters, and a not fully developed epilogue. Failure of Nerve<\/em> is a Leadership book under the Social Science classification umbrella.<\/p>\n

In re-reading Friedman, this time I was drawn to reflect on the nature of emotional triangles and the dynamic of triangulation in leadership. Friedman writes, \u201cAn emotional triangle is any three members of any relationship system or any two members plus an issue or symptom.\u201d[1]<\/a> He continues:<\/p>\n

\u201cFor leaders, the capacity to understand and think in terms of emotional triangles can be the key to their stress, their health, their effectiveness, and their relational binds. Almost every issue of leadership and the difficulties that accompany it can be framed in terms of emotional triangles, including motivation, clarity, decision-making, resistance to change, imaginative gridlock, and a failure of nerve.\u201d[2]<\/a><\/p>\n

What an incredibly all-encompassing statement! Can thinking in terms of emotional triangles truly be the key to my leadership success? Friedman further argues that understanding and implementing the art of triangulation can also break a leader\u2019s anxious dependence on seeking yet more data to navigate the challenges of leadership.[3]<\/a> The art of triangulation can break the gridlock that stymies personal and professional relationships, as well as organizations and nations of all sizes.[4]<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

I found myself drawing triangles in the margins of my book as I pondered Friedman\u2019s assertions\u2014triangles of different emotional processes I have been and am a part of. Friedman encourages this practice:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026when a leader can begin to think in terms of emotional triangles and map out in his or her mind (or even better, on paper) diagrams of the family or organization, such analysis can help explain alliances and the difficulties being encountered in motivation or learning. This in turn can help the leader get unstuck by changing emotional processes and becoming more objective about what is happening.\u201d[5]<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Here I would like to unpack one of those triangles using Friedman\u2019s regulating laws as a framework. His list of emotional triangle types does not specifically capture the dynamic I am working with, so I am adapting his \u201cHealing and Mentoring Triangles.\u201d[6]<\/a> My dynamic would best be described as: A\u2014Facilitator (Me)\/B\u2014Iraqi Partner (and son based in the USA)\/C\u2014USA Church Worker Couple (now working with a different organization from mine) based in Iraq.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Law 1<\/strong>: How emotional triangles form<\/u>. I know both parties well from working with them over the past nine years, and they know each other well. The USA Church Worker Couple were colleagues in my organization until fall 2020 when they took an early separation package. They are now working with another organization for their final years of service prior to retirement. The Iraqi Partner is the longest serving Iraqi protestant pastor in the oldest protestant denomination in Iraq (dating to 1841). I first met him in 2011. He and the Church Worker Couple are close in age. I also know the Iraqi Partner\u2019s son quite well. He is bi-cultural, having lived in the USA since 2005 at the age of 18.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Each pairing, independently from the other, contacted me to ask if I could facilitate a mediation between them. This is a modified version of what Friedman describes of why emotional triangles form. He writes, \u201cEmotional triangles form because of the inherent instability of two-person relationships. This instability increases because of\u2026the degree of chronic anxiety in the surrounding emotional atmosphere.\u201d[7]<\/a> I wouldn\u2019t describe this as a dynamic of chronic anxiety. Rather, it was acute anxiety fueled by each party navigating through some very complicated life situations and leadership succession planning. But, none-the-less, it was anxiety that propelled each party to reach out to me.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Friedman continues: \u201cTriangling a third person (A) into<\/em> a relationship with B and C by agreeing to dislike (or even help) A\u2026provides stability to B and C, who then organize themselves around the framework of the triangle.\u201d[8]<\/a> Again, this is not how I would describe how this triangle developed. I (A) was brought into the dynamic between the Iraqi Partner and the Church Worker Couple, but not for the purpose of disliking or helping me (and so gaining pseudo-intimacy between them). Rather, it seemed to me, both parties were aware of their respective anxiety, but also maintaining their own differentiation. When I received their invitations, I was aware of my own initial anxiety about stepping into this complex dynamic as a facilitator-mediator. I discussed the situation with my supervisor. With his support, I developed a conversation plan which I then proposed to both parties and which they both had the opportunity to revise before agreeing to a final plan.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Law 2<\/strong>: How emotional triangles operate<\/u>. Emotional triangles are self-organizing. Friedman writes: \u201cIn most emotional triangles, one side tends to be more conflictual than the other two sides.\u201d[9]<\/a> Indeed, that was true of this emotional triangle. It had been an explosive disagreement that generated the anxiety in both the Iraqi Partner and the Church Worker Couple. But both parties wanted to move through disagreement and the pain that had come with this break in relationship to understanding, forgiveness, reconciliation, and future ministry together. But they were not sure how to navigate this on their own.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Friedman also warns about the danger of distance. By this he means that, \u201c\u2026secrets and gossip that keep a person in the dark will have an avalanche effect on any community, polarizing those in and out of the secret and inhibiting communication between them.\u201d[10]<\/a> I was very aware of how important kind transparency was going to be. Part of the communication plan was inviting each party to share with me their experience of the disagreement and what points they wanted to discuss with the other party during our shared zoom call. From this, we developed together an agenda for our call which was shared with both parties. I made it clear that I had not shared with the other party the details of how each had experienced the conflict. That content was for each of them to share directly with each other during our conversation. As a facilitator, it helped me to know the broad content ahead of time so I could prepare a clear structure and container for the facilitated time.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Friedman additionally warns about the dynamic of perversity in triangle functioning. This dynamic explains the \u201c\u2026uselessness of willing others to change; how conflicts will arise and destroy relationships; and why a leader\u2019s presence is more powerful than efforts at coercion or therapy.\u201d[11]<\/a> I knew I had to remain differentiated and non-anxious in this conversation if I was going to be of any service to these two parties as they sought to resolve their conflict for the sake of Kingdom work. I also knew I could not change either party. But I was and am curious about how the Holy Spirit is at work in this conflict and emerging conversation for the sake of God\u2019s kingdom work. Will something new emerge that neither party had previously considered?<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The initiating cause of the conflict ended up being easily resolved. The more challenging part of the conversation ended up being key differences in missiology and its application to a shared ministry area. We are still taking up this part of the conversation step-by-step. First, with some written communication so that each party had the chance to reflect on the virtual face-to-face conversation: what did they hear, what did they take away as key points of new insight or awareness, what do they see as next steps. Second, I am having some individual follow-up with each party based on them having received the written reflections from each other: what did the written reflections confirm, what clarifications remain, what shifts in understanding or practice might now be possible, what remains the same, what might this mean for future ministry collaborations?<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

I don\u2019t know yet how this will all turn out for either party or for the kingdom work. But I\u2019m grateful I had Friedman running in the backdrop of my thinking as I was invited into this conversation. As you read this case study, what are your observations and questions? What additional considerations would be helpful for me to keep in mind as this conversation continues?<\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> Friedman, Edwin H., Margaret M. Treadwell, and Edward W. Beal. 2017. A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix<\/em>. 10th anniversary revised edition. New York: Church Publishing, 220.<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> Ibid., 219.<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> Ibid., 220.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> Ibid., 107, 220.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> Ibid., 219-220.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> Ibid., 221.<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> Ibid., 222.<\/p>\n

[8]<\/a> Ibid., 222.<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> Ibid., 226.<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a> Ibid., 227.<\/p>\n

[11]<\/a> Ibid., 228.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the fall, I focused on Edwin H. Friedman\u2019s arguments regarding empathy and the ways in which empathy disempowers personal responsibility, thus contributing to toxic, reactive, chronic anxiety. As I summarized then, in A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix, Friedman develops his argument for why it is a leader\u2019s […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":141,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[2180,236,2179],"class_list":["post-28116","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-case-study","tag-friedman","tag-triangulation","cohort-lgp11"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28116","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/141"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=28116"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28116\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":28117,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28116\/revisions\/28117"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=28116"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=28116"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=28116"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}