We continue the series on basic concepts in Bowen Family Systems Theory (BFST). Today’s question: What are some misundertandings about triangles?
Some of the most common misunderstandings about triangles I hear are:
That triangles are “bad.” BFST is primarily descriptive of emotional process phenomenon, not prescriptive. As such, it does not ascribe moral values to concepts. Triangles are not “good” not “bad” they are merely the product of emotional process, typically, anxiety. However, triangles are not always neutral. So it is appropriate to think about to what extent a triangle benefits the health of the system, or, to what extent a triangle hinders healthy functioning in a system.
That the trick about triangles is getting out of them. If you’re a leader you likely cannot, nor should, get out of the triangles you’re in. The issue is being able to respond appropriately, rather than react, in the triangles you are in.
That one can only get “invited” into a triangle. I heard this one recently. I think the error here is that it ascribed intent and motive to a dynamic. Triangles tend to come about as a result of anxiety and reactivity, which are non-thinking postures. Ascribing anthropomorphic causes are not always helpful to understanding what is going on.
That long-patterned triangles are easily changed. I see many pastors get caught by this misunderstanding when they attempt to change a systemic triangle that has its origin in the founding and formation stage of a congregation. While I’m not fond of the metaphor, it’s helpful to appreciate that triangle is “in the church’s DNA.” Some triangles are a product and element of homeostasis.
That a triangle not of my making is not my responsibility. This is a tough one for anyone in a leadership position. Some triangles come with the job, and while they may not be of your making, since you took the job they are your responsibility to deal with. For example if you accept the position in a congregation that has a systemic pattern of a triangle between pastor-deacons-concept of leadership that was established during the church’s founding means that, as long as you are pastor in that congregation, you will be in that triangle. It comes with the job, it’s in the church’s DNA, and you can’t get out of it.
One big one is, that if I know I’m in a triangle I can change another person’s behavior. This one is fascinating in that it highlights the myth of knowledge, which says that once we understand something I’m immune to making a mistake. Most of us know that we can only change the relationship of our side of the triangle (I can change the relationship between me and my father; and I can change the relationship between me and my mother; I cannot change the relationship between my father and mother). But that knowledge doesn’t keep up from falling in to the trap of changing that other side of the triangle. Two insights here: (1) note that the issue is that I can work on changing the relationship on my side of the triangle—which does not mean that I can change the person; (2) it is the nature of anxiety in triangles that gets us caught into trying to change the other side of the triangle (the relationship between to other persons). And it gets us every time, no matter how much we know about the dynamic!
From, Perspectives on Congregational Leadership: Applying Systems Theory for Effective Leadership, by Israel Galindo. See the new Perspectives on Congregational Leadership blog site.
