Classification of Relationships
There are three classifications of relationships: Long-term Relationships, Short-term Relationships, and Confused Relationships
Relationships are classified by intent of the individuals.
Long-term Relationships (LTR)
Any relationship that is intended to last for an unknown period of time, or may never end, is a long-term relationship. LTRs require more investment than STRs.
Examples include: marriage partner, friends, birth-family, neighbors, club members, co-workers and community members.
Examples include: marriage partner, friends, birth-family, neighbors, club members, co-workers and community members.
Short-term Relationships (STR)
Any relationship that is not intended to last or has a known ending date or expected termination condition is a short-term relationship. STRs require less investment than LTRs.
Examples include: summer camp friends, project members, summer flings, cruise ship mates, salesmen.
Examples include: summer camp friends, project members, summer flings, cruise ship mates, salesmen.
Confused Relationships (CR)
Since we are talking about intent, not longevity, some relationships are formed where one person intends for the relationships to be a short-term relationship and the other person wishes to have a long-term relationship. I call these relationships Confused Relationships.
Types of Relationships
There are 3 types of relationships; relationships are typified by what they are founded on, whether competition, compromise, or collaboration:
Competitive Relationships - Relationships founded on one individual benefiting above the other individual(s). This kind of relationship offers the very minimal in the hopes of gaining more than is invested; or a relationship in which the investment given, at least to the investor, is trivial and the things they gain are substantial. This type of relationship approaches the other person in hopes of a win-lose outcome. Often times a tug-of-war ensues in this kind of relationship and power switches hands back and forth in a virtual stalemate.
Compromising Relationships - Relationships founded on limiting the roles and powers of each individual so that they don't interfere with the other person's separate agendas. In this kind of relationship, both parties give up a little resulting in a lose-lose outcome. This type of relationship is "safe" because it prevents undue conflicts and frees people up to do their own thing. When one person becomes too powerful, he or she is expected to refrain from using his or her power selfishly. This type of relationship is often, mistakenly, seen as the ideal.
Collaborative Relationships - Relationships founded on genuine mutual benefit. This type of relationship focuses on accomplishing the root objectives of both individuals. Although there may be goals and desires on the surface that are not fulfilled, the basic needs and wants the drive those surface desires are fulfilled exceptionally.
The Relationship Matrix
Definitions:
The 80/20 Relationship - A relationship in which one person makes all the decisions and/or does all the hard work to keep the relationship alive and the other person accepts what the other person does. The person with 80% of the power stays because they have the control, the other person doesn't leave because their superior is looking out for their best interests. (The politician does what is best for his party)
The Rivals - Each individual takes a turn holding the power while the other person succumbs to their demands. (The two sports stars dominate the spotlight as they try to outdo one another)
King/Queen-Servant - Similar to the 80/20 except that the servant stays because he or she fears life without the relationship even though he or she might not be getting all of his or her needs met. He or she is essentially trading needs, wants and desires for security. (The young adult doesn't disobey the parents because she fears being kicked out)
The 50/50 Relationship - Each individual takes turns making decisions and picking up where the other person slacks however neither is permitted to meet selfish desires without the other person meeting their own selfish desires. (The husband gets to go golfing if the wife gets to go to the spa)
Same House-Different Worlds - Both individuals fulfill their roles in the relationship but only do the bare minimum so that they can focus on their personal interests. It is common for neither individual to know, or care, what their counterpart is doing. (The wealthy businessman and his distant wife)
Happily Ever After - Each individual meets the needs that their counterpart cannot meet and helps their counterpart obtain their wants. The necessary trait of this type of relationship is having compatible wants/needs.
Eternal Friends - The individuals meet nearly all of their needs by themselves but where they fall short their counterpart picks up the slack. The two individuals could be completely different, but their desire to stay together and their ability to selflessly pick up the slack allows their relationship to excel.
The Player - Seeks after his or her wants and needs unethically by taking advantage of the large investment of others. (Since forming relationships require an investment, the player tricks his or her counterpart into investing heavily while only investing minimally himself or herself and then walking away)
The Hog - One individual positions himself to hog all of the benefits leaving none for the other individual. (This relationship isn't sustainable and ends when the benefits dry up)
The Ceasefire - When both individuals are forced to have a relationship with one another and agree to rules and terms that prevent them from tearing each other apart. (Ceasefire ends at the end of a project or after the task at hand is completed)
Friends with Benefits - When both individuals plan on their relationship eventually ending and so agree to meet the needs of the other person as their own needs are met. (This relationship ends when a mutually agreed upon termination point is reached)
It is my philosophy that the best relationships are collaborative; however, collaborative relationships require more work and more energy than any other kind of relationship. The effort you put into building a collaborative relationship is well worth it.
Types of Relationships
There are 3 types of relationships; relationships are typified by what they are founded on, whether competition, compromise, or collaboration:
Competitive Relationships - Relationships founded on one individual benefiting above the other individual(s). This kind of relationship offers the very minimal in the hopes of gaining more than is invested; or a relationship in which the investment given, at least to the investor, is trivial and the things they gain are substantial. This type of relationship approaches the other person in hopes of a win-lose outcome. Often times a tug-of-war ensues in this kind of relationship and power switches hands back and forth in a virtual stalemate.
Compromising Relationships - Relationships founded on limiting the roles and powers of each individual so that they don't interfere with the other person's separate agendas. In this kind of relationship, both parties give up a little resulting in a lose-lose outcome. This type of relationship is "safe" because it prevents undue conflicts and frees people up to do their own thing. When one person becomes too powerful, he or she is expected to refrain from using his or her power selfishly. This type of relationship is often, mistakenly, seen as the ideal.
Collaborative Relationships - Relationships founded on genuine mutual benefit. This type of relationship focuses on accomplishing the root objectives of both individuals. Although there may be goals and desires on the surface that are not fulfilled, the basic needs and wants the drive those surface desires are fulfilled exceptionally.
The Relationship Matrix
There are several functioning forms of the combination between relationship type and relationship classification.
| Competitive LTRs | The 80/20 Relationship, Rivals, King/Queen-Servant |
| Compromising LTRs | The 50/50 Relationship, Same house-different worlds |
| Collaborative LTRs | Happily ever after, Eternal Friends |
| Competitive STRs | The Player, The Hog |
| Compromising STRs | The Ceasefire |
| Collaborative STRs | Friends with benefits |
Definitions:
The 80/20 Relationship - A relationship in which one person makes all the decisions and/or does all the hard work to keep the relationship alive and the other person accepts what the other person does. The person with 80% of the power stays because they have the control, the other person doesn't leave because their superior is looking out for their best interests. (The politician does what is best for his party)
The Rivals - Each individual takes a turn holding the power while the other person succumbs to their demands. (The two sports stars dominate the spotlight as they try to outdo one another)
King/Queen-Servant - Similar to the 80/20 except that the servant stays because he or she fears life without the relationship even though he or she might not be getting all of his or her needs met. He or she is essentially trading needs, wants and desires for security. (The young adult doesn't disobey the parents because she fears being kicked out)
The 50/50 Relationship - Each individual takes turns making decisions and picking up where the other person slacks however neither is permitted to meet selfish desires without the other person meeting their own selfish desires. (The husband gets to go golfing if the wife gets to go to the spa)
Same House-Different Worlds - Both individuals fulfill their roles in the relationship but only do the bare minimum so that they can focus on their personal interests. It is common for neither individual to know, or care, what their counterpart is doing. (The wealthy businessman and his distant wife)
Happily Ever After - Each individual meets the needs that their counterpart cannot meet and helps their counterpart obtain their wants. The necessary trait of this type of relationship is having compatible wants/needs.
Eternal Friends - The individuals meet nearly all of their needs by themselves but where they fall short their counterpart picks up the slack. The two individuals could be completely different, but their desire to stay together and their ability to selflessly pick up the slack allows their relationship to excel.
The Player - Seeks after his or her wants and needs unethically by taking advantage of the large investment of others. (Since forming relationships require an investment, the player tricks his or her counterpart into investing heavily while only investing minimally himself or herself and then walking away)
The Hog - One individual positions himself to hog all of the benefits leaving none for the other individual. (This relationship isn't sustainable and ends when the benefits dry up)
The Ceasefire - When both individuals are forced to have a relationship with one another and agree to rules and terms that prevent them from tearing each other apart. (Ceasefire ends at the end of a project or after the task at hand is completed)
Friends with Benefits - When both individuals plan on their relationship eventually ending and so agree to meet the needs of the other person as their own needs are met. (This relationship ends when a mutually agreed upon termination point is reached)
It is my philosophy that the best relationships are collaborative; however, collaborative relationships require more work and more energy than any other kind of relationship. The effort you put into building a collaborative relationship is well worth it.
No comments:
Post a Comment