You ask, we deliver?
Service-oriented organizations are accustomed to responding directly to customer requests. When people from such a culture evolve into advisory partners, that same "you ask, we deliver" mentality can backfire.
One way to look at interactions between professionals and their clients is through the Parent-Adult-Child (PAC) model from Transactional Analysis (TA). Eric Berne was a Canadian psychiatrist who developed a theory on communication and group therapy in the second half of the twentieth century. He laid the foundation for Transactional Analysis, which is now widely used. This perspective provides insight into how people maintain and break their behavior toward each other.
The model is represented (simplified) as three spheres with three 'ego states':
- Parent: normative;
- Adult: rational thinking;
- Child: emotional.
When two people communicate, after a while you can predict how they will react to each other, or in TA terms: exchange transactions. Incidentally, everyone possesses all the roles. People react in certain situations from a specific role.
When someone responds from the Parent role and addresses another in their Child role, there is a good chance that the other will also respond from that Child role.Are you putting on your coat?', or 'Please remember to use the default template', can lead to a 'Yeah, duh!' Which causes the first person to remain in the Parent role, and so on. This is called a complementary transaction. You invite each other, as it were, on an unconscious level to maintain the pattern. Complementary transactions are more or less automatic.
Even if you respond from Child to Parent ('Would you like to come and watch football?? ','Would you also like to attend my presentation?'), you can expect a parental response.
Another complementary transaction is from Parent to Parent. Think of Statler and Waldorf, the two grumpy puppets on the Muppets' balcony.The traffic jams are getting longer, aren't they?' 'Yes, and people can no longer merge properly.''Well, and they don't do anything about it … '
Complementary transactions have the property that they can be sustained for a very long time.
Example: 'You're late again.' (O) Then it can yield to the other: 'Yes, sorry, the traffic was bad.' (K) Which again prompts: 'Then you should have left earlier, otherwise you won't make any progress.' (O) And so on.
If you want someone to behave less like a child and more like an adult, it can quickly backfire to act like a parent and direct them in what to do. Adult action is much more likely to succeed. Incidentally, intonation and body language trump words in this case. So, adult words like "How can we make sure we start this meeting on time in the future?" accompanied by frowns and sighs are usually interpreted as parental behavior.
When a principal speaks from a Parent to your Child and you don't respond from your Child to their Parent (a complementary transaction), but rather, for example, from your Adult to their Adult, it often feels a bit strange; the reaction is unexpected and jarring. We call this reaction a cross-transaction.
The OVK model is interesting from the perspective of "taking charge." A parent-child relationship is a vertical one. And that also applies to a client-contractor relationship to some extent. It's therefore understandable that in the vertical relationship you're in as a professional, you'll encounter parent-child patterns more often than in relationships between, for example, colleagues at the same hierarchical level. In many cases, that's perfectly fine.
The remarkable thing is that the professional is often the superior in their field of expertise. They likely know more about their area of expertise and therefore place the client more in the role of Child.
For a consultant, it's not always wise to adopt a "you ask, we deliver" approach (Parent-Child). But by using your expertise and reversing roles (you as Parent and your client as Child), you don't always achieve what you want. You're quickly seen as a know-it-all. Perhaps you know better, but if you can't get the other person on board, it's better to respond from a different perspective.
To satisfy clients, we want to ensure sufficient adult-to-adult transactions. Often, a cross-transaction is necessary to break the parent-child pattern between client and advisor. For example:
Client: "We can't get the management information available quickly enough. That's why you need to arrange a new server quickly." That's from Parent to Child.
- Professional, knowing that a new server won't solve this problem, breaks the Parent-Child pattern by responding as an Adult to the Client's Adult, which is in keeping with their role as advisor: "I'd like to help you get the management information available faster. And in my opinion, a new server won't solve the problem."
You can imagine that the Adult level is even more evident from the tone and attitude of the advisor than from the content.
The model is further developed by dividing the Parent into the Critical Parent and the Nurturing Parent. The child is divided into the Adapted Child and the Free Child. The adult is not divided.
- The Critical Parent sets the standard. In this role, you might say things like, "Make sure you're on time," or, "Could you please work out the minutes?"
- For experts with strong expertise, the Critical Parent is often a familiar face. They simply know what's best for others. If only they would just do what they're told...
- The Nourishing Parent is caring. In this role, you might say, for example, "I'll help you improve this text."
- Logic resides in the Adult. This role is not subdivided.
- The Adapted Child adapts to the situation by doing what is expected.
- The role of Free Child is one of action without thinking about the consequences. But also one of inspiration and joy.
Many professionals grasp the core of this model fairly quickly, but find it challenging to apply directly in practice. This takes some time and practice. A good way to explore this model further is to create an egogram of yourself in your role as a professional. An egogram is a breakdown of how much time you spend in each of the five ego states. Ask yourself questions like:
- If you divide your time among the five ego states, what percentages do you arrive at? And to what extent is this a desirable and effective distribution?
- To whom in your environment do you respond primarily from your Child and to whom from your Parent?
- What would you like to change about it and what not?
- What can be a pitfall for many expert advisors (and for us too): do you have enough time in your Free Child? Do you have enough inspiration and enjoyment?
Want to know more?
This is a model from Transactional Analysis. Basic books on TA include:
- We'll figure it out together. Transactional analysis in the workplace by Julie Hay.
- Einstein and the art of sailing by Anne de Graaf.
This article was written by Jan Willem van den Brink and Maarten van Os from DreamfactoryIt's based on a chapter from our book Client Satisfied – From content expert to advisory partner.
If you wish to use it, we would greatly appreciate attribution.
Want to know more about this topic or how we can help your organization? Email or call us at 0348-741670.