Jim and Beth had been tangling for weeks. Finally, Jim asked to meet with Lars, Beth's boss. He would ask Lars to talk to Beth. By making Lars his agent, Jim was dealing with Beth indirectly. He was triangulating Beth by asking Lars to fix the problem. His approach was more direct than most — the triangulator usually complains to anyone who will listen, out of the hearing of the target.
Triangulation rarely works, and when it fails, it can fail catastrophically. Here's why.
At a conversational distance, we can maintain real contact with only one person, because our eyes, ears, and mouth all point in the same direction. And most of us can listen to only one person at a time. When three people are in conversation, one is "on hold," while the other two are in connection.
We've all experienced being on hold. As infants, we watch in befuddled left-out-ness as our parents converse. Most of us are uncomfortable on hold. We search intently for pauses where we can "break in," or we tire of waiting and just break in anyway. Or worse, we tune out. For most of us, triangulation pushes powerful buttons that were installed long ago.
When Jim triangulated Beth through Lars, he created a triad. While he and Lars were in contact, Beth was on hold. Aware of the tension between herself and Jim, Beth eventually became uncomfortable, worrying about Jim discussing anything with her boss with the door closed. Later on, when Lars spoke with Beth, Jim was on hold. In his turn, he experienced left-out-ness as Lars and Beth talked privately. All of this increased the tension. Now add the "telephone effect" — any message passed between Jim and Beth through Lars is jumbled somewhat by Lars. Lars cannot be a perfect transmitter, because he brings his own perceptions to any communication.
For most of us,
that were installed
long agoMoreover, both Jim and Beth tend to slant their views most favorably toward their own positions, because their partner in conflict isn't present to refute their claims.
When someone triangulates through you, you can always decline to participate, by offering another, more constructive approach:
- Offer to arrange a joint meeting, and volunteer to mediate, if you have the needed skills.
- If you don't feel that you can mediate effectively, offer to help find a mediator.
- If action is urgently needed, and you have the skills, offer to meet with both of them right now.
Avoid listening to one side privately — it compromises your neutrality, making you less useful as a mediator.
Pondering your options, you might be tempted to let it "resolve itself." Whatever the cost of resolving the problem proactively, the price is bound to be higher if you let it fester. In the Triangulation Zone, doing nothing is the most expensive strategy. Top Next Issue
Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenxEmDquaFqRZnVUiBner@ChacMcczRjhaSDJqPreNoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Emotions at Work:
- The Slippery Slope That Isn't
- "If we promote you, we'll have to promote all of them, too." This "slippery-slope"
tactic for winning debates works by exploiting our fears. Another in a series about rhetorical tricks
that push our buttons.
- Believe It or Else
- When we use threats and intimidation to win debates or agreement, we lay a flimsy foundation for future
action. Using fear may win the point, but little more.
- Ethical Influence: II
- When we influence others as they're making tough decisions, it's easy to enter a gray area. How can
we be certain that our influence isn't manipulation? How can we influence others ethically?
- Self-Serving Bias in Organizations
- We all want to believe that we can rely on the good judgment of decision makers when they make decisions
that affect organizational performance. But they're human, and they are therefore subject to a cognitive
bias known as self-serving bias. Here's a look at what can happen.
- Big Egos and Other Misconceptions
- We often describe someone who arrogantly breezes through life with swagger and evident disregard for
others as having a "big ego." Maybe so. And maybe not. Let's have a closer look.
See also Emotions at Work for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming April 24: Big, Complicated Problems
- Big, complicated problems can be difficult to solve. Even contemplating them can be daunting. But we can survive them if we get advice we can trust, know our resources, recall solutions to past problems, find workarounds, or as a last resort, escape. Available here and by RSS on April 24.
- And on May 1: Full Disclosure
- The term "full disclosure" is now a fairly common phrase, especially in news interviews and in film and fiction thrillers involving government employees or attorneys. It also has relevance in the knowledge workplace, and nuances associated with it can affect your credibility. Available here and by RSS on May 1.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenuizvMOngdiWZEkzNner@ChacVqIdteZbHMqgRvRmoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
- Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.
- Your stuff is brilliant! Thank you!
- You and Scott Adams both secretly work here, right?
- I really enjoy my weekly newsletters. I appreciate the quick read.
- A sort of Dr. Phil for Management!
- …extremely accurate, inspiring and applicable to day-to-day … invaluable.