Relationship Management II: Transactional Analysis
Posted on 15th September 2022 at 11:14
Good relationship management is one of the most important factors that contributes to a company’s success.
This month, we’re continuing to break down some of the theory behind key relationship management strategies. In our second blog of the series, we’re talking about fostering effective peer relationships, to help employees engage positively with each other.
Employee-Employee Relationships
Good working relationships between colleagues and teams can significantly improve a person's morale and enjoyment of the workplace. However, tensions and strains can easily arise. One framework that can help develop awareness of how and why people relate is Transactional Analysis (TA).
Transactional Analysis (TA)
TA relates to the different roles we can take on when interacting with others. It suggests there are three main models that a person can move between in different situations. These are:
the Parent (behaviour, thoughts and feelings copied from parental figures)
the Child (behaviour, thoughts and feelings replayed from childhood)
the Adult (behaviours, thoughts and feelings in response the here and now, responding to objective reality with all the faculties and resources of an adult)
How it applies in the workplace
TA can be a helpful framework to understand interactions between employees. By being aware of how each state might manifest in people, we can see how small changes in behaviour can significantly improve peer relationships.
TA suggests people work best when people speak Adult – Adult. When people speak from the Adult state, they are able to interact using all the knowledge and faculties available to them. However, when individuals slip into Parent or Child states, tensions can arise. Here’s a worked example:
Sally has been asked to complete a project by her manager with a co-worker, John. They’re due to meet to discuss how to divide up the work. Sally is sitting in the conference room, having written down a very clear idea of how she wants to approach the project. John is 5 minutes late.
Parent State
Sally’s parents always taught her to be on time for people. She starts to feel irritated that John clearly has not respected her time as much as she respects other people.
Here, Sally is thinking from the Parent state; Sally feels John is not behaving the way that she has been taught to behave, which Sally sees as the ‘right’ way to be. This causes irritation. Sally is therefore already creating a dynamic where her behaviour and ideas are automatically superior to John’s – not ideal for a working partnership.
John arrives after another 5 minutes, flustered. He sees Sally tapping her pen and notices she doesn’t look up or smile as he enters the room. John sits down and says, with a slight edge, “Sorry I was late, I had to take a phone call from the school and sort out some emergency childcare”.
Child State
John’s parents always told him off for being late and he can see Sally is annoyed. He feels the familiar pang of guilt in the stomach, and immediately goes on the defensive – how can she know that he had to take a last-minute call from school that one of his kids had been sick, so he ended up having to call the childminder on their day off to see if they can pick them up?
Here, John picks up on Sally’s irritation, and moves into the Child state. This sets up a Parent – Child dynamic, which causes tension. John sees that Sally is reacting to lateness in a similar way to his own parents. John has been taught that being late is wrong, which results in feelings of guilt and shame. John then immediately responds to these feelings in the way he did as a child – becoming defensive and justifying his actions. His internal dialogue might be something like this – “I was late because there was a more urgent matter that required my time, and I am frustrated you do not recognise or appreciate that.”
Sally gives a forced smile – “It’s fine, let’s just get on. This is how I think we should be going about this”.
Sally and John’s working relationship has therefore developed into an unhelpful Parent – Child dynamic, which puts them in a position of conflict.
Now, let’s look at how this interaction works when Sally and John are both in the Adult state.
Sally has been asked to complete a project by her manager with a co-worker, John. They’re due to meet to discuss how to divide up the work. Sally is sitting in the conference room, having written down a very clear idea of how she wants to approach the project. John is 5 minutes late.
Sally appreciates there might be many reasons John is running behind – she knows he has children, so there might be a last-minute issue. She takes the time to look over her plans again and think about how John might respond to them.
Sally is now in the Adult state. She is using her objective reasoning and her knowledge of John’s position to explain the lateness. She is then able to use her time productively.
John arrives after another 5 minutes, flustered, and catches Sally’s eye as she looks up. She gives him a warm nod and smile as he sits down. He lets out a deep breath, and explains “Sorry I was late, I had to take a phone call from the school and sort out some emergency childcare”.
“Don’t worry, thought it might be something like that – always happens at the worst time doesn’t it?” Sally replies, with a grin. John smiles back, “Yeah, I know, nightmare. Let me get my notes out, and we can get cracking.”
John has not worked with Sally much, so was a bit apprehensive of her response walking in 10 minutes. However, when he sees Sally smile and express empathy for his situation, this immediately allows John to feel supported and understood. This means he can sit down and relax.
Sally’s reaction means John can also respond in the Adult state. He knows she has a level of understanding for his situation. This means he can immediately move on from worrying about her response and focus on the work at hand, demonstrating his professionalism and preparation for the meeting.
Of course, this is a fictional example and things are often more complicated that this. However, this is one small example of how TA can help us understand interactions between employees.
So, what can managers do to support employees? It’s important to think about the mitigating factors that can encourage employees to relate to each other in Adult states, such as:
1. Workload
If employees are feeling stretched, this can add pressure to team relationships and reduce their ability to empathise with each other.
2. Culture
Senior management sets the tone. If management interact with employees from a Parent – Child dynamic, this can encourage similar dynamics between employees. Think about how management can ensure they relate Adult – Adult when working with employees.
3. Teambuilding
Employees are more likely to interact from Adult states if they have more knowledge and understanding of the other person. Going back to our example, Sally knew John had children. This allowed her to empathise more with a possible cause of delay. Think about how you can create spaces where employees can spend time outside of the workplace to help friendships and trust develop.
Share this post: