Mutual Development with the Enneagram

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

2025-12-29T20:00:00.000-05:00

You've no doubt heard the epigram first made public in January 1849 by Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr, founder and editor of Les Guêpes:

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Usually translated as "the more things change, the more they stay the same," plus ça change refers to what happens when we attempt to resolve problems within the paradigm in which they were created. What does this mean in everyday terms? To borrow again from the French:

On ne fait pas d'omelette sans casser des œufs.

Translation: "You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs." I'm tempted to leave you with these powerful metaphors. But I'll illustrate how plus ça change became the code for a married couple to interrupt an interaction pattern that was frustrating to both of them - to "break the eggs" they'd both been hatching and create a new "omelette."

This had been their pattern: When the husband perceived the wife as "interrupting" in conversation, he would shut down and "pout" (according to the wife). The wife, annoyed that he would blame her instead of speaking up for himself, kept talking while pulling back emotionally. He saw her withdrawing emotionally, wanted to have peace between them, so bypassed his feeling of being ignored and tried to draw physically closer. She felt "schizophrenic" - "He's critical and wants to get closer? Doesn't compute!"

In the past, the pattern had been the opportunity for each to give "feedback" to the other, not realizing that his telling her she interrupted, and her telling him he should speak up if he so desired, fed the plus ça change pattern so that it kept occurring, over and over. When they looked at their interaction systemically and saw how both of them kept it going the way it always had (plus c'est la même chose), they stepped back, let go of blame, and agreed that whoever saw the pattern occurring would simply say, "Plus ça change..."

Loop the Loop

2025-12-29T19:58:00.000-05:00

What do I mean by a "systems approach" to relationships? An analogy is our natural environment, where we easily understand two key principles.

A stable environment tends to maintain stability (homeostasis). For example, when sunlight is plentiful and atmospheric temperature climbs, phytoplankton on the ocean's surface thrive and produce more dimethyl sulfide (DMS); the DMS molecules in turn increase cloud condensation, and the increasing number of clouds lowers the temperature of the atmosphere.

Changes in one part of the environment will affect others parts. Think of what happened with the introduction of kudzu, jokingly referred to as "the vine that ate the South." Kudzu was brought to the U.S. from China in an effort to control erosion, but these non-native vines spread rapidly and killed many trees by shading them with leaves.

Those who introduced kudzu to a non-native environment were using what's referred to as "single-loop learning": Hey, this plant grows quickly and would stabilize some ground that's eroding. Let's try it! "Double-loop learning" would have been to consider that basic assumption in light of a bigger picture, the environment into which the kudzu would grow, whether or not it would have natural boundaries or constraints similar to those in its natural environment.

You can use the same principles in your relationships:

What do you do that maintains homeostasis, even when you don't like the results? If your spouse or roommate expects you to manage the finances, for example, and you'd rather not, do you grouse as you balance the checkbook, or do you step back and ask Wait a minute, why does this keep happening even though I complain? Clearly my grousing isn't changing anything. What have you introduced into a key relationship, thinking it would have a positive result, only to find it made things worse?

For example, Gary Chapman's five Love Languages are acts of service, quality time, physical touch, affirming words, receiving gifts, A client whose love language was acts of service thought she would get closer with her partner by doing little things for him, but he withdrew more and more, interpreting these acts as implicit criticism that he couldn't do those things well enough. His love language was affirming words. All she needed to do was tell him what she loved about him, but until they stepped back and examined their assumptions about how to express "love," her attempts to grow closer were only creating distance between them.

Soul-Mates

2023-12-19T23:40:00.001-05:00

Friends interested in each other at the soul level do not simply look at each other's lives and listen to each other's intentions and explanations. They look together at this third thing that is the soul, and in that mutual gaze they find and sustain their friendship. Thomas Moore.

All enduring relationships are friendships, whether pals, spouses, or other life partners. With truly mutual affection, we listen and are listened to; we know the other and are known.

Sometimes we're blocked from true mutuality, however, by automatic responses that are personality-bound. Some partners may resist giving up control, for example. Others may jump to judgment, suppress their own needs, feel competitive over their partner's successes, dream unrealistically of a more ideal relationship, have difficulty sharing their emotions or trusting others, avoid deep conversations, or give in too quickly to their partner's preferences.

These and many other personality attributes, while they can bring complementary gifts to a relationship, also have the potential to exaggerate each partner's down side.

With a couple I've coached, Barb is a highly relational person in partnership with Joe, who's more independent, more focused on thoughts than feelings. What felt like a complementary strength in the beginning had become a source of criticism:

Barb: "You never tell me you love me."

Joe: "It doesn't feel natural to me. You know I love you. Why do I have to say it?"

Barb: "I've lost a lot of weight and have new clothes, but you never tell me how good I look."

Joe: "Well, you can see that in a mirror. Why do you need to hear that from me?"

When Barb and Joe began to examine their relationship as a system, focusing on what Moore refers to as a "mutual gaze," they noticed how, when Barb pushed Joe to share his feelings, that only led him to withdraw. They agreed to two practices that began to change their automatic responses.

First, Barb agreed to pull back some so Joe had space to enter the pool of emotions, one toe at a time. This gradually reduced his fear of drowning in feelings. She and I also explored her sense of self to develop more intrinsic awareness of her attractiveness as a person (not tied to her outward appearance or compliments).

Second, Joe had a private session with me where we invented some playful ways to interrupt his pattern of shy withdrawal from emotions. To him, saying "You look great in that outfit" seemed superficial, especially because he'd loved Barb equally before and after her weight loss.

Joe does spend a lot of time in his head and has a terrific, Far Side kind of humor. So I knew I had his interest when we played with ways to exaggerate comments to Barb:

"My darling, you are the goddess of the universe!"
"My beauty, you are the oil paint on the canvas of my life!"
"You look so stunning in that outfit; it makes me want to sing!"

No, Joe didn't actually say those things to Barb (though she would have been good-natured about it because they were focused on mutual development). But creating those outrageously inauthentic phrases made him laugh, and then a simple "I love you" or "You look nice tonight" began to seem easy.

This is what's meant by soul-mates.

Alter the Interaction, Not the Other Person

2023-12-19T23:40:00.000-05:00

How often when you're having relationship problems, do you focus on how "touchy," "unreliable," "critical" etc. the other person is? Operating from that premise, you may have unwittingly attempted solutions that continued or even exaggerated the perceived problem.

Let's say someone who is operating from Enneagram point One sees her spouse (at point Nine) as not hands-on enough in their family business–she thinks he gives employees too much leeway.

She questions her husband frequently and in detail.

As a consequence, he doesn't tell her about what he does that's hands-on because he thinks She'll just nit-pick anyway.

This confirms her belief that he isn't paying enough attention to details, which leads her to follow up more frequently.

He responds by retreating even more, leading her to check in even more, and so on.

In contrast, you can reframe a situation as an interaction problem. A fundamental premise of this approach is that problems in relationships persist only if maintained by both people–not only the one identified as having the problem:

Problems that occur between people are situational difficulties–both are doing something to maintain the problem.
It's normal and appropriate to resist attempts by another to "fix" us; such so-called resistance can become a source of energy with positive potential.
It may seem paradoxical, but going with the other person's energy is much more likely to make a difference than lecturing, advising, or scolding.

You can shift focus from what's wrong with the other person to how you both contribute to a self-fulfilling problem. To do this requires two critical skills:

Focus on observable behaviors in the interaction (vs. only the behavior of the other person).
Do something to alter the interaction (as opposed to trying to change the other person).

Ideally, both partners in the interaction would talk about the self-fulfilling pattern and decide together how they can interrupt it and do something different. Sometimes, though, one of the partners isn't willing to do this. In this case, it's still possible for one of them to break the cycle.

Paradoxically, changes we seek in other people are more likely to occur if we first accept those people as they are. A particularly interesting application of this concept relies on the paradox of going with a behavior in order to change it.

Following this premise, the person above could reframe the negative connotation of "not being hands-on enough" and frame the same goals in positive terms, with something like this: "I like the idea of being able to trust our employees to do their jobs well. Let's figure out an approach that gives them more autonomy and doesn't require our checking in on them."

(For a full description of this approach see The Paradoxical Approach to Problem Solving)

Forget everything you thought you knew about change

2023-09-03T16:36:00.001-04:00

Greg was a college professor who loved mental gymnastics but wasn't very comfortable with emotions. He especially dreaded extended family holidays because his wife Suzanne thought his relatives were cold and arrogant, and invariably a member of his family would say something that upset her during their visit. She would then go into what he called "a dramatic meltdown." Greg's response? He didn't want to talk about it with Suzanne; he wanted to hide. This upset her even more, which increased his desire to withdraw. Greg wanted Suzanne to stop reacting "so emotionally." She wanted him to "quit being so intellectual and support her."

I asked Greg to think of a way to go with the pattern instead of trying to avoid it. He decided he'd suggest to Suzanne that when with his family they'd find a private space every hour and take ten minutes so she could vent. He would take her feelings seriously.

Greg loved the idea of expecting and planning time for Suzanne to blow off steam, because he wouldn't be distracted wondering when or how it might happen. When he told Suzanne, she was pleased that he was acknowledging her right to her feelings about his family.

As it turned out, they didn't need to take ten minutes every hour. Just knowing they could do it was freeing. "That outing," Greg later said, "turned out to be our very best family visit. While we hoped to be able to make it through two days, we actually stayed three days extra."

More in Out of the Box Self-Coaching Workbook

Transforming the Interaction Patterns

2023-08-25T12:51:00.010-04:00

No matter how deep our individual developmental work, it's only truly tested out in the world, with our friends, partners, and social groups. And it's a beauty of the Enneagram that we more easily see potential interaction patterns among different points.

We know the particular filters at each point, as well as characteristic ways of interacting. Responses from the other eight points will also vary with each.

So, a couple operating from points Eight (female partner) and Nine (male partner) might be drawn together initially because of their mutual comfort with point Eight providing structure, then both begin to feel some pain from that same dynamic. Point Eight has plenty of ideas but may forget to include point Nine, who hasn't initiated any ideas. He goes along with her, then obsesses over being left out. Over time, she's exhausted from having to "hold up the world" (a belief typical at point Eight and thus sustained, of course). He is equally tired of feeling "invisible" (though his fixated behaviors, of course, tend to evoke that feeling).

It's a gift of mutual development that neither partner is on the hot spot because both are learning about themselves within the relationship. This does require courage, however—to take personal responsibility for the relationship, to deepen our own self-awareness, to accept and integrate parts of ourselves we have not wanted to know and see, moving attention away from how we and our partner should be and toward who we are.

Step 1: Each share with the other your understanding of your Enneagram point in general and how, specifically, that plays out for you. What doesn't fit for you about that point's dynamics? What are your gifts? What problems do you think your motivations and behavior do or could create in the relationship? Ask each other for feedback and listen to it.

Step 2: Create a clear picture of what the transformed relationship will look like and commit yourselves to learning as you go. Pick two or three areas of mutual development (don't overwhelm yourselves with too many promises); set some priorities and work on them one at a time.

Step 3: Be alert to how you get in the way of your own progress and stay committed to the transformation—notice and affirm each other for the ways in which you stick to the plan. When one of you gets hooked into an old reaction, instead of placing blame, try to understand how it happened and what either of you could do the next time to keep from getting caught up in the old pattern.

Mother and Child Reunion

2023-08-24T15:30:00.000-04:00

Because many people are worried about their adult children in a tough economy, let's explore a relationship pattern that can emerge when parents help so much that they actually create dependence.

What if one of your adult children needs a car to get to work, requires a lawyer, has a medical emergency, can't provide for your grandchildren? When operating from inside the relationship's patterns, the solution appears to be simple: If you have the resources, you offer them to your son/daughter/grandchild. What could possibly be wrong with this picture?

Consider this story:

A naturalist watched a big worm spend many hours squeezing through a tiny pinhole in its sack, until a slender butterfly with powerful wings emerged and vigorously flew away. Observing a second cocoon, the naturalist became impatient and made a thin cut in the sack so the creature wouldn't have such a struggle. This butterfly emerged after twenty minutes, but with weak wings and a heavy bottom. Without the exertion that pushed juice up into its now flaccid and flabby wings, it couldn't fly!

Upon hearing this story, my client Maureen significantly changed her approach with her adult son. Mike had finally found a job after a long struggle and had managed to pay $800 for a friend's old car and ante up for car insurance on his own. After a few weeks of work, he'd found himself stranded on the freeway when the car's engine seized up (oil leak) and couldn't be repaired. Searching for options and knowing he didn't have good enough credit to finance a car, he'd called Maureen to discuss the possibility of a loan.

She'd immediately dropped her plans for the day and flown to his rescue, helping him choose a better used car and paying for it up front so the title could be in his name. Two days later, when that car broke down, Mike contacted the dealership, arranged for a pick-up and loaner car, then called Maureen to talk over options. Again, her first response was to take it on as her problem but this time she suffered an anxiety attack which spilled over into resentment that "he couldn't do anything for himself."

When Maureen and I observed her relationship with Mike as a system of interconnected parts, where each element in the system sustained another element that contributed to the whole, she realized that her generosity had not been free of strings. Yes, she wanted him to "grow up" and take care of his own problems, but she also had a fundamental story: "If I don't take care of people, they won't love me." Her unconscious motivation was "I need your appreciation," whereas the message to Mike was, "You can't get along without me."

In actuality, Mike did not lay the whole problem on Maureen. He wanted to discuss options in the first call, and when the second car broke down, it wasn't clear to him that it was his car. Yes, his name was on the title, but she'd paid for everything and sent him off with a smile. Yes, she was angry when he called to tell her it broke down, but would she have been angry if he hadn't called her? Hard for him to know.

Also, they had a history of the same dynamic showing up time after time, so Mike was conditioned to look to Maureen for help, even though he thought less of himself when he couldn't seem to manage on his own.

With my encouragement, Maureen shared with Mike the idea of their relationship as a system, and how they'd both played a part. Together they agreed that Mike was responsible for his own life and Maureen was available if he wanted to bounce around ideas before he made his own decisions.

Maureen did slip into her old pattern a week later when she sent an email asking him to please call because she didn't know if his not contacting her was good news or bad news. This was his response:

All is well and everything will be great with my car. They're putting in a "new" engine which will have fewer miles than the original and they're going to warranty the whole car. We're cool, Mom. Please get some rest, don't worry, and I will call you on the weekend.

New Perspectives

2023-08-23T08:21:00.002-04:00

Understanding your Enneagram personality patterns will certainly enhance your personal effectiveness and spiritual development. This work is even more powerful when explored in the context of your relationships with others.

Changes you make may confuse, or even alarm, your friends and intimates. But when you commit to actions of benefit to both of you, the partnership becomes mutually supportive--which reinforces desired changes and builds greater intimacy.

Exploring your Enneagram subtypes can be an added and important element in illuminating the dynamics of a relationship, as illustrated below with an interaction between two friends.

Sally and Oona, both at Enneagram point Nine, had been good friends and colleagues for more than a decade. Sally's instinctual subtype preference, however, was social and Oona's was one-to-one. They had similar values of honesty and integrity in relationship and shared growing concerns about social and environmental problems. Yet Oona made two criticisms of Sally at a dinner party where several other friends were present. It was New Year's Eve, and Barack Obama had just been elected U.S. President.

When their mutual friend, Betty, expressed concern about possibly losing her government-supported job, Sally responded with a passionate discourse about state politicians and their poor allotment of financial resources. Oona listened for a while, then said, "What does that have to do with Betty's concern about losing her job?"

A while later, Sally said she thought Obama's choices of cabinet members would lead to more of the same problems experienced with the Bush administration, but she was, however, happy the U.S. had progressed enough to elect a Black president. Oona said, "I find it interesting that even though Obama had both a white and a Black parent, people refer to him as "Black." Sally said she meant her comment as a celebration of liberalism, but Oona--in what she consciously considered to be a statement of philosophy, not a personal criticism of Sally--looked toward the ceiling and said, "Well, I find it offensive."

Oona promptly forgot about both of her comments. But Sally agonized over them for two days, worried that she seemed insensitive to Betty's job situation and that she'd expressed her political views in ways that turned people off. She called Oona and explained how terrible she felt. Oona, upon being reminded of what she'd said, worried she'd been unfairly harsh. They agreed to meet for lunch and talk things through.

Each took time to think about and take responsibility for her own behavior, and both were committed to work out their differences. Notice how the changes they envisioned were mutually developmental:

Oona admitted she'd been missing one-to-one time with Sally, because they now usually met with a group of friends. She also said she'd been overwhelmed by all the social and political problems Sally raised because she felt powerless to change anything but had tamped down her feelings instead of talking about them openly.

Sally knew she sometimes talked overlong when impassioned about global concerns, but said this was in part because she didn't always feel heard, because her friends didn't respond with interest or take the kinds of actions she felt were vital. She asked how she might talk about her concerns in ways that invited responsiveness and action.

Sally agreed to stop periodically, give Oona time to assimilate and ask questions, and help her think through what actions she could take so she didn't feel so powerless. She also agreed to more one-on-one time with Oona.

Oona committed to speak up when she felt overwhelmed and, instead of tamping down her panic, to ask for specific actions she could take where they shared mutual concerns.

Notice how, even though both were at Enneagram point Nine, the focus of attention for each was quite different, explained in part by the difference in their instinctual subtype focus--social for Sally, one-to-one for Oona.

Note, also, how their agreements to change were mutually developmental and reinforcing:

By speaking up more directly when overwhelmed, Oona could act against her habitual tendency to tamp things down, while also helping Sally break her pattern of talking so long and so intensely that Oona (and probably others) would screen her out.

Sally could feel appreciated that her passionate social concerns were important to Oona, while giving Oona one-to-one attention by discussing specific actions in Oona's areas of interest.

They practiced this mutually reinforcing approach right away. Oona said she was interested in leadership attributes that could lead to new perspectives on world problems. Sally told Oona about a book that spoke to this interest and brought the book to Oona's house later that afternoon. This became a shared, passionate topic for both of them in their future encounters.

Hands Off

2023-08-16T21:38:00.000-04:00

Often when we experience relationship problems we conclude it's the other person who's "touchy," "unreliable," "critical," etc. Operating from this premise, you may unwittingly attempt solutions that reinforce or even exaggerate the perceived problem.

Let's say Anne and Bill have a family business and Anne, a perfectionist, thinks Bill gives employees too much autonomy.

Anne presses Bill to be more hands-on, questioning him frequently and in detail. Bill doesn't keep her posted on the ways he is hands-on because "She'll just nit-pick anyway." This confirms Anne's belief that Bill isn't paying enough attention to details, which leads her to follow up more frequently. Bill responds by retreating even more, leading Anne to check in even more, and so on.

Instead, they could reframe the situation as an interaction problem:

Problems that occur between people are situational difficulties -- both are doing something to maintain the problem.
It's normal and appropriate to resist attempts by another to "fix" us; such so-called resistance is more usefully labeled as a source of energy when released for positive purposes.
It may seem paradoxical, but going with the other person's energy is much more likely to make a difference than lecturing, advising, or scolding.

This approach requires relationship partners to develop the ability to:

focus on observable behaviors in the interaction (vs. only the behavior of the other person),
do something to alter the interaction (as opposed to trying to change the other person).

A particularly interesting application of this concept relies on the paradox of going with a behavior in order to change it. Following this premise, Anne could release the positive potential of Bill's management style by saying something such as "I respect your value of trusting our employees to do their jobs well. Let's talk about how we can help them be more autonomous." This is a win-win situation:

If Bill "resists" Anne's suggestion, he becomes more "hands-on," increasing his oversight of employees and eliminating her basis for criticism.
If they work out standards that ensure employees do their jobs without frequent follow-up, again there is no longer a basis for Anne's complaint.

For more about this approach, read The Tactics of Change, by Fisch, Weakland, and Segal.

Owning Up

2023-08-15T16:29:00.005-04:00

As follow-up to exploring how both people in a relationship contribute to interaction patterns ("Hands Off"), the following exercises will be most useful if both complete and discuss them. Nonetheless, it's possible for even one person to significantly change a relationship if you think through and write down your responses to the following:

First, what is characteristic of you in relationships?

Think of a recent situation with your partner or a close friend where your characteristic behavior played out. Run through it mentally from the beginning.
Now think of another situation. And another.
What do these three situations have in common? What do you notice about yourself and intimacy with others?

Second, identify ten things that annoy you about your close friend or partner. For each, explore:

What is your reaction to their behavior?
How do you provoke that behavior?

Next, describe five painful situations that have occurred in your relationship:

What were the consequences for you?
What was your responsibility in each situation?
What keeps the situation alive for you (what is the pay-off in the present)? Examples are illusion of control, getting a charge from the anger, not having to face your own fear of intimacy, etc.

Finally, describe ten positive characteristics of the other person and the effect of each on your relationship. Reflect on how you might integrate more gratitude into this relationship and into your life.

Romancing the Shadow

2023-08-14T22:54:00.001-04:00

"Most intimate relationships have some version of this story: one partner (or both) turns the other into a parental figure . . . We call this downward negative spiral the roller-coaster ride because the lovers get on at the same place, seem to spin out of control, but end up getting off at the same place--and nothing has really changed." (p. 158, Romancing the Shadow by Connie Zweig, PhD and Steve Wolf, PhD)

In a blog post at her web site, Connie Zweig explains what "romancing" the shadow means. Because this deeply unconscious aspect of yourself needs help in coming to awareness, it's necessary to seduce it with attention and questions: "Who are you? What are you trying to tell me? How did you form? What do you need?"

I've often paired coaching with Jungian shadow work to explore relationships in work, in friendships, and in romantic pairings with clients. Here, I offer insight from my own first marriage at age 22. when I was stuck at Enneagram point Nine, before I had in-depth self-knowledge, but illuminated by what I've learned since.

Later I could see I'd married my father, but I thought I'd found his opposite in my husband, Dave. My father was a military officer and stern disciplinarian, probably mostly at Enneagram point Eight. I always felt an emotional distance from him, though he and my mother were responsible parents and he drove me wherever I needed to go as a teenager. Those rides were agonizing for me because neither of us could think of a word to say to the other.

Dad wore his toughness on the outside, however, so when I met Dave, I fell immediately in love with his sweet, quiet demeanor and our in-depth conversations. He was then at Enneagram point Five, I believe (he's long deceased), and his tendency to hoard emotions eventually began to feel very much like interacting with my father.

Unfortunately, I was young and naive, hadn't yet studied Jungian psychology, and was years away from learning the Enneagram, so I saw Dave as "the problem," having no notion that projections of my own shadow were keeping me from seeing our relationship as an opportunity for consciousness.

In their analysis of one couple cited in Romancing the Shadow, Zweig and Wolf suggested "The couple's parental complexes are shadow-boxing with each other . . . they can put on the brakes only by taking responsibility for their own feelings, romancing their projections, and moving out of the past into present time."

As we do our shadow work, waking up to unconscious drives, we can acknowledge that no one person is "the problem;" both contribute to the interaction dynamics that feed a self-fulfilling downward spiral. We look differently at feeling hooked and--instead of reacting as usual--we romance the shadow, describing to ourselves, our mate, partner, or friend what's happening inside, and asking for space or support or conversation to help us move through it in a way that doesn't perpetuate the cycle.

I don't take these suggestions lightly, nor do I expect anyone else to do so. But what relationship have you ever had that was easy, day after day, year after year? You know the pain of compromise, you know the depression of defeat. Romancing your own shadow will help you engage in the disquieting and lifelong task of being truly open and authentic in relationships:

No more blaming, manipulation, false diplomacy, retreating into melancholy, withholding emotions, casting worst-case scenarios, skating away from personal responsibility, shutting people down, or passive-aggressiveness.

"Oh, is that all?" you must be thinking.

What's Good Enough?

2023-03-01T15:37:00.000-05:00

Several of my clients worked with me to look more closely at their marriages, for a variety of reasons. One couple -- while their marriage was already more than good enough -- wanted some fine-tuning and gave rave reviews of a workshop I recommended with Doctors John and Julie Gottman in Seattle, "The Art and Science of Love."

With a client who wanted to refresh her marriage, we began exploring "what's good enough?" I learned about this concept from Carolyn Bartlett, who uses it in The Enneagram Field Guide. Initially coined by psychoanalyst D.W. Winnicott, "good enough" describes a nurturing relationship that provides the basic safety, love, mirroring, and containment needed by a developing child. It's also a template for effective therapy. And we can easily extend it to effective partnering in adult relationships.

Interestingly, healthy "containment" is not restrictive. Quite the opposite: the term refers to an emotional, mental, and spiritual space where both partners are available, expansive, and secure; where both feel calm and safe; where each can experience and express perspectives and emotions -- with the expectation of support and comfort, and without fear of judgment or rejection.

Clearly, this definition of "good enough" does not mean compromising or lowering standards. It simply recognizes the fact that no human being and no partnership of any kind is or has to be perfect. And it inspires open communication to make sure each partner's needs are being met.

In "Bad Relationships: Change your Role and the Rules of Engagement," Dr. Tara J. Palmatier quotes Gottman's "Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse:" criticism, contempt, defensiveness, and stonewalling. Palmatier suggests two scenarios that can have "mutually satisfying, long-term relationship outcomes" (the remaining eight are "either 'get out now' or 'live a life of resignation' outcomes"). In response to your concerns, your partner could:

Hear what you say, be accountable, respect your feelings, and actively try to change.
Hear what you say, be accountable, respect your feelings, communicate which of your behaviors are contributing to the situation, and you both actively try to change.

From a systemic view, I prefer the second scenario, and suggest that you also (1) look together at how the pattern operates that you've created together, and (2) agree on an interesting and inventive way to interrupt the pattern. Michelle Weiner-Davis addresses this in Divorce Busting, especially Chapter 6: "Breaking the Habit: Interrupting Destructive Patterns."

The Partnership Path to Self-Knowledge

2023-02-28T09:37:00.002-05:00

(From Margaret Frings Keyes' The Enneagram Relationship Workbook)

Falling in Love: Infatuation marks the first phase of relationships, when the floodgates of the unconscious are opened and we glimpse a possibility of our own wholeness. We project our unconscious positive images of the opposite sex onto the other person and we feel spiritually and mentally alive, because each sees the other only in terms of desired aspects and traits.
Adaptation to Power Roles: Now we begin to divert attention away from our own unacceptable traits, urges, feelings, etc., and project those that are negative onto the partner. We also endow our partner with collective authority, and thus rebel or conform to what our partner expects. The relationship shifts as we create rules, roles, and expectations. To some degree we suppress ourselves for fear of losing the partner. Liveliness and compatibility are reduced as we begin to operate from our defenses.
Darkening Conflict: In this phase our unknown and unconscious aspects demand to be seen. We may become depressed, angry, and/or hurt, and one or both will engage in fantasies of separation, longing to ESCAPE! Positive aspects of life are projected onto the outer world (e.g., new career, new associations, new interests), so now everyone but the partner looks attractive. Our feelings and perceptions about power, betrayal, and abandonment deepen as our unconscious issues are reflected in even more negative projections onto the partner. Transformation depends entirely on our conscious involvement in our own drama, the decision to focus on our own need to change. Depending on our level of consciousness, we can:
- Refuse to recognize and deal with differences (and later repeat the problem with someone else).
- Try to control the partner by anger, disapproval, withdrawal, or pouting.
- Experiment with separation (this can be positive if the goal is to achieve consciousness and choice, but remember that eventually even our work on ourselves will have to be completed in relationship).
- Begin the true work to integrate the Shadow. Although uneasy and ambivalent about it, we move our attention away from how we and our partner should be and toward who we and our partner are.
Remembering Self and Completion in Union: If we have the courage to deepen our own self-awareness and take personal responsibility for the relationship, we accept and integrate parts of ourselves that we have not wanted to know and see. We examine how our partner has characteristics that we have been unwilling to acknowledge in ourselves. We feel the pain that results from knowing ourselves, as we recall not only of the pain done to us, but also the pain we have created. Our gifts and strengths are heightened as we re-own our Self, instead of reacting solely to our partner. We develop the ability to observe our interactions without judgment and see our prejudices as distortions. Our love becomes based in reality, and the well-being of the other becomes essential to our own as we forgive our partner, our parents, and ourselves.

Playing a Bigger Game

2023-02-26T15:30:00.000-05:00

Remember Games People Play? The relationship games described by Eric Berne are so familiar from our own interactions, it's relatively easy to notice when someone else plays them. In truth, though, if you're in a game, you're a player, too. When we view relationship interactions as systems, we can see how all players contribute to the pattern.

The popular "Why don't you--yes, but" game is described in 50 Psychology Classics as beginning "when someone states a problem in their life, and another person responds by offering constructive suggestions on how to solve it. The subject says 'Yes, but...' and proceeds to find issue with the solutions. In Adult mode we would examine and probably take on board a solution, but this is not the purpose of the exchange. It allows the subject to gain sympathy from others in their inadequacy to meet the situation (Child mode). The problem solvers, in turn, get the opportunity to play wise Parent."

The Parent, Adult, Child references are from Transactional Analysis, popular since the sixties and still highly relevant.

Now look again at the players in "Why don't you--yes, but." Either party can start the game. The problem solver might be in the role of wise Parent, or might be playing parent, period, whether reacting to the other or initiating advice. How many times have you described a situation to a friend, co-worker, or life partner where you wanted a listener or someone to brainstorm with as you talked it through, only to have the other person jump in and tell you what you should do about it?

When you re-read the above example of "yes, but..." notice the assumption that one player (the "Child" in this case) creates the pattern, and the "wise" Parent is the blameless bystander. Looking at our interaction patterns this way promotes blaming and judgment. Yes, we all play games, and yes, sometimes one party is less emotionally healthy than the other, but by definition an interaction takes two people.

Instead of judging the interaction games in your relationships as someone else's fault, notice how a pattern is perpetuated, by either or both of you, and look for inventive ways to interrupt the pattern. If asked for your opinion by someone who's typically responded with "yes, but," for example, say "I'm not sure what the best thing would be for you," or "What have you considered?" or "What do you think might work?"

And, of course, pay close attention to the games you initiate. They wouldn't be games unless both people wanted to play.

Parenting From the Inside Out

2023-02-25T08:00:00.000-05:00

Implicit mental models that cast shadows on our own decisions and the stories we tell about our lives can be made explicit through focused self-reflection. We are active shapers of our own construction of reality. (Siegel and Hartzell, Parenting From the Inside Out).

If you're reading this blog post, you probably want to be a good parent to your young children or perhaps have issues with adult children you'd like to resolve. One way to view these issues is through the lens of attachment theory.

Childhood Attachment	Adult Attachment
Secure Distress when mother leaves Greets mother when she returns	Secure Comfortable in relationships Able to seek support from partner
Avoidant Does not seek mother when she returns Focuses on environment	Dismissing Greater sense of autonomy Tends to cut self off emotionally from partner
Ambivalent/Resistant Very upset at departure Explores very little	Preoccupied Fears rejection from partner Strong desire to maintain closeness

A child's security of attachment is strongly connected to parents' understanding of their own early life experience. Whether you had good parenting, good enough parenting, or even traumatic parenting, making sense of your childhood can lead to healthy relationships with your children. The universal cure-all in any personal growth approach is to develop nonjudgmental self-awareness -- in this case, mindfulness of your own childhood dynamics and consequent worldview.

Siegel and Hartzell introduced the concept of mind-sight, the ability to perceive the minds of others as well as our own. Resolving issues with your children means mindfulness about your own personality and mind-sight about your child's personality. Research further indicates that intention, when followed by changes in behavior, can change how our brains function. I'm particularly heartened to know this can be done backwards. No matter how old you or your children are, you can re-live your own childhood and your child's, affecting brain chemistry in a way that heals long-held wounds.

All personality styles have strengths and challenges as parents, whether you had a secure or insecure attachment when growing up. Barbara Whiteside, in "Seeing Your Child" (September 2009 Enneagram Monthly), gave the example of a mother at Enneagram point Three who "had a very easy time with her point Seven daughter because they both had assertive energy and enjoyed lots of activity (but) struggled in understanding her point Four daughter. . . ."

Many of you with grown children will believe you could have done a better job as a young parent. However, thinking If only I'd known then what I know now will be wishful thinking unless what you know is based on deep self-reflection about your own personality style along with mind-sight about your child's, especially if very different. This is a potent exercise recommended by Siegel and Hartzell:

Think of an experience from your childhood when your reality was denied. How did you feel?
Think of a time when you and your child had a different reaction to the same experience. Now try to see the events from your child's point of view.

When my daughter's personality was barely forming, I naively assumed she would be like me. This was long before I learned about the Enneagram, and I had little capability as a young point Nine mother to be present to a daughter at point Eight. My poem "Swamp Magic" likens my daughter as a baby to a tadpole, sleeping face-down with knees bent outward, "still swimming in the amnion," ending with these lines:

What could we talk about?
I was brought up to behave,
bewildered by a frog princess
who could be heard for miles.
A ring-tongued, Mohawked
Tarot reader, a hefty bike babe,
she teaches me computer skills,
and I accommodate the real.

As do all families, we had good times and bad times over the years, but I tended to forget the bad times and reacted defensively when my daughter's recollections were different from mine. then she decided I'd never see the world through her eyes and we became politely estranged. I labeled this as her problem until I finally dropped my defenses and invited her to join me with a mother/daughter therapist duo. Only then did I develop retrospective mind-sight about my daughter.

Among many insights was accepting the reality of myself as an unaware young mother. I could see I'd shown little of point Nine's healthy attributes (I encourage her differences from me and we co-create a playful environment), was mostly average (I see myself as nobody special but see my child as idealized. . . not the actual person), and to some degree unhealthy (She needs my full presence, and she doesn't have it). Because of my young self's lack of awareness, my remoteness and blindness to the significant differences between us, I truly did not know who my daughter was.

When we first started therapy together, I knew no words would convince her I could be authentically present to her worldview, and I'd only gain her trust by hearing and acknowledging what her childhood was like for her, not what I wanted it to be. During our second session, she was beginning to accept that maybe I'd changed. Then, in a long phone conversation outside therapy she said, true to her personality style, "It's clear you've worked your ass off, Mom."

Affirming that both of us had matured significantly, we joked about the Work Your Ass Off School of Coaching, a playfulness long missing from our relationship. I hope my story, and Parenting From the Inside Out, will help you get your own you-know-what in gear.

Making sense of life can free parents from patterns of the past that have imprisoned them in the present. By deepening our ability to understand our own emotional experience, we are better able to relate empathically with our children and promote their self-understanding and healthy development (Siegel & Hartzell, Parenting From the Inside Out).

"How," not "Why," is the Question

2023-02-23T15:35:00.000-05:00

To more fully understand the couple in the Plus ça change blog entry, it helps to know that people with the husband's personality -- point Nine in the Enneagram personality system -- tend to go along with others' ideas yet feel unspoken resentment when they stifle their own agenda. At the same time, they are peacemakers and want to be reassured that even their unexpressed annoyance has not created a disruption.

Thus, the husband wanted to snuggle up to his wife, who was very aware of his "pouting" and didn't feel so inclined.

Those of the wife's personality -- point Eight in the Enneagram -- typically have plenty of ideas but often succumb temporarily to their enthusiasms and/or forget to include their partners. This couple might have been drawn together initially because of their mutual comfort with the wife providing structure, then both began to feel some pain from that same dynamic.

What's fascinating about this couple is that we did not spend time exploring their personality patterns so they could understand why they were having difficulty. Instead, I asked questions to help them look closely at what each of them did and said, so they could see how they were unwittingly feeding their interaction pattern. This works in the same way as interrupting a personal pattern. You look carefully at how the pattern operates, then find a way to playfully interrupt it, so it loses its "juice."

A Partnership Model

2023-02-21T15:35:00.005-05:00

A business executive with point Six Enneagram patterns met with her team to define a leadership model reflecting their values as supporters of abused women. They made explicit the characteristics of a traditional power-based system, contrasted with their own vision of an equality-based system -- a true partnership:

Power-Based Systems
(control behavior)*

Don't share feelings
Don't take a stand

Don't accept criticism
Don't listen to others
Don't depend on others

Don't admit mistakes
Cover up skill deficiencies

(or fear of them)

Break promises/agreements

Withhold information

Equality-Based Systems
(resilience, harmony, meaning)

Be self-disclosing
State opinions openly
Share accountability for problems

Acknowledge what others say, feel
Give importance to all agendas

Admit mistakes, fears, not knowing

Be consistent, honor agreements

Give time to process:
- Descriptive feedback
- "I" statements

*Control is a form of addiction, used to deny our fears."

See also Riane Eisler's Partnership Politics ("The partnership and domination systems not only give us names for different ways of relating but also explain what lies behind these differences.")

A Parallel Universe

2023-02-20T15:35:00.002-05:00

When I was coaching, I had great zeal for helping my clients learn how to interact more effectively instead of vying for power and control. But frankly, we often don't see how our own behavior plays a role in the difficulties that arise in relationships. Instead, we tend to blame others for their behavior. We lose sight of the fact that the very act of "blaming" makes us players in the power game.

In The Fifth Discipline Peter Senge describes how the underlying structure of a human system "causes its own behavior." We have the power to alter these structures and create new patterns, but our interaction systems are subtle: we usually don't see the structures at play. In particular we don't see how our own behavior helps maintain the status quo in relationships.

Changing such patterns requires a complete change in context--we must step into a parallel universe of human interaction where the old, unexamined rules no longer compel us to act in certain ways, where we ask new questions:

"What's behind this other person's behavior?"
"What am I doing that keeps this dysfunctional pattern of interaction repeating itself?"
"What could the pay-off possibly be for me to have things remain the same?"
"How might either of us do something different?"

The Book of Love Isn't Always Easy to Read

2021-12-31T23:41:00.000-05:00

"The most changeable aspects of [a] couple's situation, in our view, are in each partner's actions and interpretations of the other's actions. We call this changing the 'doing' and the 'viewing' of the couple's problem." Patricia O'Hanlon Hudson and William Hudson O'Hanlon, Rewriting Love Stories.

Most people who've been in long-term relationships have settled into at least some patterns that seem frustratingly familiar and frustratingly unchangeable.

Sometimes we're aware of how we reinforce these patterns, and sometimes not. Often, we interpret the intentions behind a partner's actions (or failure to act), characterizing them in general terms ("stingy," "thoughtless," etc.), and otherwise casting blame - unwilling to acknowledge our own faults for fear our words will be used as ammunition.

So, instead of thinking of your primary relationship as a battlefield, think of it as a book you're trying to understand. The Book of Love has four key sections:

Part I: The Love Story. In the beginning, we're all reading a love story. We're enthralled, infatuated, paying attention only to the obvious text, seeing only what we want to see, feeling emotionally and mentally alive. We love this book and recommend it to everyone!

Part II: Identifying the Characters. Gradually, we figure out who's doing what in our story, the roles and expectations, and suppressing ourselves somewhat for fear of upsetting/losing our partner. We begin to wonder if our story is what we thought it was going to be.

Part III: The Plot Thickens. We all long to be truly known and show all of ourselves, warts and all. We begin to read and be read "between the lines." When we don't like the way the story is going, our options are to:

see everyone but the partner as attractive;
try to make the partner what s/he "should be" through anger, disapproval, or withdrawal;
refuse to deal with the difficulties (and later repeat the pattern with someone else);
see this part of the story as an opportunity to pay conscious attention to our patterns and grow beyond them (see Part IV).

Part IV: The Love Story Re-Written. We can be good editors of our own stories. This happens when we shift attention away from how we and our partner "should" be and toward who each of us really is. Some suggestions from Bill O'Hanlon:

Acknowledge/validate each person's feelings and point of view. Be specific, give examples, vs. blaming. No need to judge here, just try to understand. Reflect back what you've heard.
Move the discussion from complaints about the past to what you would like to have happen.
Use "videotalk" ("Imagine it's the future. When I'm showing love what, exactly, am I doing? What, exactly, am I saying?")
Agree to what each of you will do that's different, and DO it, with a sense of humor, please.

Reflective Action: Enneagram Point Six and Point Nine Partnerships

2016-12-03T15:33:00.026-05:00

Mutuality

We all want mutually satisfying relationships that nurture our potential and help us find purpose in life, relationships in which we listen and are listened to, know and are known, where we release attempts to manipulate, share our true selves, acknowledge each other as unique and valuable individuals, and are willing to learn, grow, and change in response to the other's development: a dynamic process where the relationship is continually recreated.

However, partners come to relationship from different worldviews. Some may resist giving up control; others may fear sharing their needs. The Enneagram is a helpful tool to clarify interpersonal patterns. Understanding typical patterns of the nine different points can help us recognize our special gifts and areas of growth, better understand our partners, and appreciate the potential in each for higher human capacities.

Any Enneagram combination will bring complementary gifts as well as the potential to exaggerate each style's downside. Here, you'll learn how to create specific actions that are mutually enhancing, whatever the combination of styles.

For example, if you're operating from point Three and interacting with point Eight you might find that both of you (for different reasons) are out of touch with your emotional side. It would be mutually developmental to practice and reinforce each other for active listening.

Or if you're at point Two (highly relational) interacting with someone at point Five (highly independent) you both would benefit from exploring your differences, agreeing the more relational partner will give the more independent partner a little more space and the latter will accede to the former's desire for a bit more interaction.

Focusing on mutual development can accelerate personal growth and transform a relationship. The possibilities are illustrated here with partners at points Six and Nine.

Point Six

Those of us within the constellation of patterns at Enneagram point Six are relationship-oriented and motivated to feel secure. At our best we're loyal, likable, caring, warm, compassionate, witty, practical, helpful, and responsible. We're energetic, with a devotion to the common good, and we attend to interdependent needs. What this Enneagram point personifies for all of us is the fear and caution we feel when our security is invaded.

Typically, those fixated at this point felt powerless as children to influence their own fate. Consequently, they've developed a radar system that leads to high empathy, sometimes to an astonishing degree (it may feel like ESP). On the downside, they tend to check for hidden agendas in their interactions, and their assumptions are not always correct.

They may either procrastinate making decisions or second-guess the decisions they have made. This is because what's "best" tends to be defined in terms of others' wishes or expectations. They too often question their own ideas or even their own competence, especially if challenged. As children, they learned to communicate from a one-down position, and they tend to carry this power-under stance into adulthood, often giving power to others, particularly those in perceived authority roles or whom they believe have higher competence. So it's a sign of growth to learn how to be interdependent, operating from a power-with perspective, a true partnership.

Point Six patterns include two distinct expressions of fear. One can be immobilized by fear and self-doubt (phobic), or one can fight against internal doubt by throwing caution to the winds (counterphobic). Most tend to challenge authority; they may decide it's honest to say whatever they feel at the moment and then worry they've somehow risked too much. For the most part, though, their candid communication is a model for others who tend to be less self-disclosing or less actively involved in a relationship. Consequently, those at Six who are self-aware are highly relationship-oriented and can bring out the best in their partners, working tirelessly to make things better, always hoping the relationship can survive and flourish. This helps their intimates feel secure, knowing their partner will be sympathetic and without pretense.

Point Nine

People stuck at point Nine are motivated to keep the peace and avoid conflict. At their best they're pleasant, peaceful, generous, patient, receptive, diplomatic, open-minded, and empathic. They honor diversity, nurture cooperation, and are typically skilled at building consensus. Unexamined Enneagram Nines tend to merge with others' agendas and to forget their own. They typically forget any childhood difficulties they experienced and may be unaware of the degree to which they've allowed themselves and their wishes to become invisible, even to themselves.

From this history, when conflict arises, they typically take an implicit power-under position, withdrawing or minimizing the importance of an apparent problem. This strategy can lead to a tamping down of emotions but also helps them develop the gift of artful negotiation: they're able to see situations from many points of view and to resolve issues by seeking an integrated perspective.

In organizations, those showing point Nine patterns usually do very well until expected to be decisive, which is difficult because they truly do see all sides of an issue, and because they're unaccustomed to having their opinions valued. Though they typically seek consensus, they can become quite stubborn about opinions they do hold. In a personal relationship, they may seem difficult because they find it easier to focus on what they don't want. They may back off from conflict, unable to take a stand, except indirectly. The partner may long to be met half-way, to talk openly about difficulties, instead of meeting with obstinacy or passive-aggression.

If those at point Nine go along with the partner's interests, even this can wear thin over time, as the partner becomes tired of always planning their time together. What under-developed point Nine personifies for all of us is our universal fear of and resistance to change: change requires confronting what the present situation lacks. A deep emotional fatigue sets in when forced to deal with work overload or emotional stress, because being out of touch with what one wants makes it difficult to act on one's own priorities.

Well-developed people at point Nine are serene and centered safe harbors for intimates. They're good listeners who accept partners as they are and help them see things from a broader perspective. Having worked through their avoidance of conflict, they deal with problems in a constructive fashion while retaining their gift of honoring diversity and differences. In this respect they're the epitome of cooperation and consensus.

How Point Nine Sees Point Six

Those at point Six are quite aware of their own boundaries, so aren't a big threat to point Nines' fear of losing a sense of self. In spite of point Nines' defensiveness when feeling discounted, they want very much to connect with others and be appreciated for their ideas. Those at point Six, with their personal radar, can be sensitive to the partner's needs. When this pair relates with mutuality, Nine becomes more self-aware because of Six's honesty.

Point Six, usually spontaneous and open with feelings, can balance Nine's more laid-back style with a great deal of energy. This is a partnership where fighting can be fun. Nine may not know how to directly express unhappiness with circumstances or people and are stimulated to action by Six's willingness to state the obvious. In fact, Six's tendency toward self-disclosure is a wonderful model for Nine. This is particularly true when the two have a conflict: Nine can learn from Six's active willingness to take some risks and resolve their differences.

How Point Six Sees Point Nine

Point Six learns to be more centered and self-referencing from serene point Nine, which reduces their self-questioning and promotes a sense of peacefulness. From their power-under perspective, they're on the alert for a "take-over," and tend to feel safe with Nine, who is not overtly interested in holding power.

Because point Nine is calm and reassuring, this provides a model for living with more ease and tend to balance Six's emotional intensity. Seeing Nine as a safe harbor, Six feels liked and allows a deeper self to show. This can strengthen belief in one's best self. When things are going well, Nine is generous with praise of Six's good qualities and contributions, which makes Six less likely to look for a hidden agenda and less defensive about discussing areas for improvement or greater self-awareness. Also, Nine can help Six to be less challenging or doubting of others, by offering alternative ways to view a situation.

Merging their strengths can lead to a partnership characterized by reflective action. Nine will reflect thoroughly on an issue, reviewing many perspectives before acting (if at all); Six is more likely to act without a great deal of reflection.

Potential Problem Areas

On the downside, Nine's general tamping down of emotions is in contrast to Six's emotional presence. Six can reach a height of emotion that seems disproportionate to Nine. Nine's withdrawal from difficulty often shows up in emotional apathy, physical fatigue, and/or illnesses such as chronic neck pain. Thus, in a search for stability, Six's response to the ever-changing present may feel like emotional whiplash. In fact, Six is stating where s/he is for the moment, but Nine may take that to be Six's total reality and find it difficult to stay energized and engaged to match Six's current state.

Also, the very activeness that draws Nine to Six may cause difficulty. Six (who may seem constantly in motion over some perceived miscarriage of justice) may push Nine to become more active, which can feel like bossiness, and Nine may express resentment or freeze in a state of inertia and stubbornness.

From the perspective of Six, Nine will seem too slow and deliberate. Six may want to engage in the moment and is likely to interpret Nine's relative lack of response as disinterest. In trying to work through disagreements Six may be disappointed in Nine's tendency to focus on the bright side or, worse, to remain silent or even withdraw. Over time, Nine's accommodating quality may give way to a desire to "fix" the other. This could well show up as criticizing Six for being so tenacious and/or blaming others.

It Takes Three to Tango

2016-12-03T15:33:00.025-05:00

(the two who dance together, and the dance instructor)

I'm counseling a couple to build a healthy relationship. An inventory on this couple suggested she's an Enneagram Two and Six (split) and he's an Eight. What will be the best techniques to use employing the Enneagram with this couple?

First a caveat: I'm not a therapist. I'm a social psychologist and a good process observer who often uses the Enneagram. I like coaching couples about their Enneagram interaction dynamics because there's immediate feedback. I can help them see these dynamics in action instead of relying on how they tell me they interact. It's very effective to be able to say, "Let's stop a minute and take a look at what just happened..." or "...at what A just said to B..."

Because they learn about themselves as they explore their interaction dynamics, individuals can improve their relationships to some degree without the other member of the partnership present, but that's not quite as powerful, because we can fool ourselves about how well we apply something we've learned. That same deficit is present in anything I might say to this reader because I'm not actually seeing this couple in interaction, playing out their Enneagram dynamics in their own unique way.

But there are some guidelines for effective counseling with the Enneagram. First, I'm curious to know which inventory this reader used. Many people rely on written instruments, or at least use them as supplements to determine their key Enneagram point. Because I've seen so many individuals mistyped using written instruments, I find it much more fruitful to help clients themselves determine their Enneagram styles by distinguishing among all nine. This leads them to take ownership and reduces their defensiveness. More important, they become clear that many behaviors are shared by more than one Enneagram point, and they eventually center on the one that represents their primary fixation. While it's common for those at point Six to identify with point Two when they're first learning the Enneagram, those at point Two usually know they're not at point Six:

The driving force at point Two is pride--there's a tendency to influence indirectly, to be somewhat manipulative and/or seductive, to have difficulty focusing on one's own needs, and--particularly--how one may contribute to relationship problems. Twos like to align themselves with those in power, so if your client is at point Two, she wouldn't necessarily be in conflict with a partner at point Eight. This is often a sexually expressive combination as long as Two is focused on satisfying Eight's needs, but as time goes by, she'll want much more emotional reassurance than Eight typically thinks is necessary.

The driving force at point Six is fear. People here have big-time issues with authority (which would be certain to come up with a partner at point Eight), are pretty open with feelings and eager to learn about themselves but may do some blaming of partners that's often based on projection. Early in their relationship Six would typically seek Eight's protection, but later would begin to see the other as a bully. If your client is at point Six, she might well be looking for more equality in the relationship, as well as intimacy.

When you're the counselor, Eight will want you to tell it like it is, no matter how raw or profane, as long as you let him know you care about him in spite of his rough edges. I don't mean you say this to him, but rather show your appreciation: by laughing at his jokes, by not being intimidated. From my own experience with a client at point Eight, at the end of a day when I'd interviewed his team about his management style, and after showing his delight with my very direct feedback, he walked with me to the gate at the airport and, when we shook hands in parting, held the hand I extended with both of his hands, looked me in the eyes, and said, "Mary, thank you for caring."

About working with clients at point Eight, Suzanne Zuercher (Enneagram Companions) writes:

"Once a trusting atmosphere exists, 8s respond to the director's suggestions about how to gain insight… As they become more free and less fearful they open to methods of interior work with the same gusto they display in other areas of living… All of this energy… will frighten 8s; often they will project this fear onto directors, being tempted to hold their feeling back lest their directors not be strong enough to bear it… Strength but not aggression, power but not contest, honesty but not ruthlessness are what 8s look for in a director."

Clients at point Two, on the other hand, are highly relational, want to be in on everything, and will want a relationship with you. Counselors need to be sure they don't let Two's focus on the counselor's needs take over. They may focus on the other person to avoid dealing with their own needs. It helps to ask the simple question, "What do you need?" or to gently point out how helpful she is and how that pattern--at the same time--gets in her way.

Zuercher also notes how likely it is at point Two to make flattering remarks as a way to keep the counselor away from uncomfortable topics. She then writes:

"…directors find it hard to cut through superficiality, reporting, and wordiness with their 2 directees… probably best dealt with by pointing out to the 2 what has just taken place, leaving comments on that observation for the directee to make. Many times 2s are not aware of what they are doing and having it described helps them recognize their fear of acknowledging the unpleasant."

Clients are point Six, because of their watchfulness for others' power tactics, may engage in a push-pull interaction with a counselor. In a class I taught on building relationships with the Enneagram, I asked participants to state an intention for their own transformation. A participant who identified at point Six said, "You're the expert, I'd like for you to tell me what I should focus on."

My answer? "That would be a death sentence for both of us."(If you respond to such a request for advice, you become the authority to rebel against. It's vital for clients at point Six to find their own power.)

When she asked what I meant by "a death sentence" I said, "What do you think it might mean, given the dynamics at point Six?"

"That I'm the expert on myself?" she asked.

"Sounds like you're on to something," I said.

The Container of Soul: Mutuality and the Enneagram

2016-12-03T15:33:00.024-05:00

Understanding your Enneagram dynamics is a powerful tool to enhance your personal effectiveness and spiritual development. The Enneagram is even more powerful when explored in the context of relationships with others. While each of combination of Enneagram points brings special considerations to the development of mutuality, any combination will offer complementary gifts as well as the potential to exaggerate each point's downside. Here, you'll learn how to create specific actions that are mutually enhancing, whatever the combination of styles.

For example, if your patterns stem from point Three and you're interacting with someone at point Eight, you might find that both of you–for different reasons–are out of touch with your emotional side. It would be mutually developmental to practice and reinforce each other for active listening.

Or if you're at point Two (highly relational) interacting with someone at point Five (highly independent) you both would benefit from exploring your differences, agreeing that point Two will give point Five a little more space and point Five will accede to point Two's desire for a bit more interaction.

Regardless of the combination of Enneagram styles, the first steps to create mutuality are to value each person's gifts, be sensitive to areas in need of growth, and approach the relationship in ways that are mutually enhancing and beneficial.

Consciously framing each person's potential development in terms of mutuality includes discussing how the dynamics at one Enneagram point complement the other, as well as mutual blind spots. The examples below, using the Six/Nine combination for illustration, are only some of many possible ideas for mutually developmental actions:

Although acted out in different ways, both point Six and point Nine show problems with decision-making. At point Nine we may procrastinate while gathering others' opinions and/or seek to build consensus because of difficulty choosing on one's own; at point Six we may procrastinate while gathering more data to develop certainty about the "right" choice and/or worry about how others will judge their decisions. Both may change their minds – at point Nine because we don't want to be pinned down, at point Six because we begin to doubt ourselves. Both, however, rely too much on others' opinions. This is a development area where similarity of focus can be beneficial to both. It's often easier to see someone else's behavior initially, so they could agree to give each other feedback about decision-making behavior and to discuss and look for blind spots in their rationale for delaying decisions. Or they might agree to meet once a week to review decisions and compare notes, each learning from the other.
Similarity of focus can also be beneficial in the way both communicate their ideas. Point Nine is known for epic tales; it's sometimes difficult to get a simple answer in a struggle to bring complex awareness of infinite alternatives down to a central theme. At point Six we can feel charged with so many things we want to say that listeners are left trying to figure out the message. For both points, it's useful to ask before speaking,

What's my key theme? What are my main points?
Who is my audience?
What do I want them to understand?

Efforts to improve in this area can be mutually developmental, and heighten clarity in general, by:

Listening to each other and summarizing what appear to be relevant points and/or
preparing and rehearsing with each other to confirm whether or not their message is clear.

At point Six we tend to look for hidden agendas--sometimes unnecessarily. At point Nine we tend to look on the bright side – to a fault. It would be mutually developmental in a complementary way if each would consciously seek the other to fill in the flip side and create a more balanced perspective.
According to Enneagram theory, both point Six and point Nine have a connection to achievement-oriented point Three. They can support each other's development by encouraging the upside of their Three connection, stimulating each other to action, accomplishments, and success. For example, they could set deadlines for a mutually valued project and hold themselves and each other accountable to meet specific milestones.
Those at point Nine need to assert themselves more, speak up for themselves, confront others directly. When we are at point Six, we do this more readily. Together, these two can observe and discuss how to model for and learn from each other:

At point Nine we can openly appreciate and imitate point Six's courageous action by being more assertive, while simultaneously helping those at point Six to know when to draw the line between challenging someone and suggesting a solution.

At point Six we can acknowledge and imitate point Nine's patience and graciousness in sometimes giving others the benefit of the doubt, while simultaneously helping those at point Nine to distinguish between self-effacement and diplomatic problem-solving.

When at point Six, we recognize when we're upset. At point Nine we tend to merge with the partner and may find our own feelings emerging in response to a problem the other person is experiencing: In response to these emerging feelings at point Nine we may withdraw into our own feeling state and/or want to talk about our own feelings and similar experiences, leaving the other person feeling stranded. At point Nine we may also take on the other's problem, playing the role of intermediary in order to seek harmony or stability. It's mutually developmental if the feelings of the one at point Nine are kept separate and the one at point Nine acts as a sounding board for the one at point Six, then encouraging the other to decide what to do (it's important at point Six to experience one's own potency).

Subsequently these companions could focus on discovering and dealing separately with the emerging feelings at point Nine ("Why did I react so strongly? What must I be feeling deep inside?"). At this point, the one at point Six could be the sounding board for the other.

You can use the principles of mutuality to seek interactions that simultaneously develop ourselves and the other person in all our relationships, using the above examples from the point Six/Nine interaction to stimulate your thinking.

Mutuality is a reflection of the shared belief that both people in a relationship can grow, as reflected in this quote from Thomas Moore:

Friendship is the container of soul [and] the soul requires many varieties of vessels and many kinds of spaces in order to work day by day with the raw material life serves up.

The Dynamic Duo - Not! Enneagram Nine Mom, Six Son

2016-12-03T15:32:00.004-05:00

My client Jane was trying to understand her Enneagram Six son. "Our confrontations aren't frequent; however, they seem nearly fatal when they do occur. I realize I can't change how a Six behaves, but I need to understand how I can change my reaction. I'm sure you can understand the toll this takes on me as a Nine ... it has a lingering effect I do not want!!"

I shared with Jane this excerpt from Helen Palmer's "Directory of Relationships" (The Enneagram in Love & Work), changing the wording slightly because Palmer was describing a romantic couple:

"A typical interaction shows Nine as the comforter, because their fears are carried and voiced by Six. These two can overlook the depth of their feelings about each other for many years before they finally [realize how much they love each other]. They meet at Three, which means either can suppress emotions when moving into action. It's important that these two learn to risk being angry rather than dimming their energy with nonessentials. Both have trouble taking action, and both find it easier to act in the name of another than for themselves. An all-time low pictures Nine indecision in collusion with Six doubt. The partners cannot move toward goals, and each sees the other as the cause of their mutual procrastination. Either one can break the stalemate about action, and activity is immensely healing to both Enneagram styles, especially when each can pursue a personal agenda without insisting that the other join in. Action breaks inertia for the Nine, and realistic progress softens the Six's fears."

Jane's son Aaron showed a mixture of phobic and counterphobic characteristics; but parents are likely to see more of the counterphobic because they're the original authority figures to style Sixes. Aaron's most frustrating behavior was making promises and then "forgetting" them. He was a good cook and liked to cook, for example, so he offered to cook dinner when his grandmother was visiting; then returned at 8:00 PM saying "Oh, no, I forgot!"

One unhealthy dynamic in this duo is that style Sixes are more comfortable with Nines' anger than with their placidity. They can't stand the anxiety of limbo, and may taunt the Nine until a confrontation occurs. Enneagram Nines and Sixes are both anti-authoritarian - neither wants to be controlled. So Nine parents need to find ways to help Sixes develop their own authority and not be threatened when they do.

No, we can't change other people, we can only change ourselves and pray the changes will elicit something different (and healthier) in those we care about. Jane, who didn't know about the Enneagram until Aaron was in his last year of college, wished she'd understood style Six when he was growing up.

For example, she remembered with some embarrassment how angry she felt when he took the garbage out on the "wrong" night and how she laid into him in front of his girlfriend. In retrospect, she would have recognized her own fixation of feeling ignored, and possibly have complimented him for covering the possibility they'd miss the garbage collectors if he didn't act.

Where choice and initiative are required, style Nines tend to project their own blind spots onto others. The more out of touch they are with their own agenda, the more critical they can be of someone who has difficulty making a decision. Jane particularly wished she'd known about style Nine's inertia when Aaron was deciding about college. Her Enneagram Eight daughter (first-born) was a brilliant student, and chose her college in her Junior year. So Jane waited for her son (and his high school counselors) to decide what he wanted to do, as her daughter had. Her son had style Six's street smarts, but was not an intellectual. In retrospect Jane realized he'd procrastinated because he doubted his ability to make it in college, and she could have been much more helpful if she'd taken some initiative. Instead her son got the message, "You're 18, you ought to know what you want to do."

Coming Home: Enneagram Nines and Ones in Relationship

2016-12-03T15:32:00.003-05:00

Style Nine

Unawakened Enneagram Nines can be easy to get along with because they're likely to go along with most anything (whatever others are interested in); over time this can wear thin, as others in relationship with Nines find themselves doing most of the planning. Also, it may be particularly annoying to co-workers and friends that Nines find it easier to focus on what they don't want. For example, going along with someone's suggestion, then complaining about the activity once they're in it.

Style Nines may back off from conflict and deal with their anger indirectly. They'll try to maintain their image as "nice" people, by withdrawing (either physically or mentally) from potential confrontation or by minimizing the importance of an apparent problem. Their partners want to be met half-way, to talk openly about their difficulties, instead of meeting with obstinacy or passive-aggression.

There can be benefits in their withdrawing if they use the space to get in touch with their true feelings and figure out what they do want, so they can come back to their partner with more clarity. When withdrawing is a habitual avoidance, however, they're likely to be unable or unwilling to come face to face with their own contribution to problems in the relationship. At this extreme, their need to feel comfortable (and/or to blame their co-worker or partner) keeps them from sharing responsibility for creating an authentic connection.

Style One

Though it's not always apparent, style Ones are "compliant;" moving toward people, seeking affection and approval in their attempts to "do good" or "be good." They'll automatically try to live up to others' expectations, for themselves as parents and spouses or as model co-workers, even to the extent of losing sight of their own feelings and needs.

Unfortunately, their self-esteem may rise and fall with others' approval or disapproval. Thus, rejection or even criticism is very difficult for them. Paradoxically, their own internal critic is often projected outward, when they feel it's justified (i.e., their partner has done something "wrong"). Their anger can show up as cold annoyance or sarcasm, or even as a moral tirade largely out of proportion to the precipitating event. However, self-aware Ones are truly good, and can be counted upon to respond to even the most stressful demands from people they respect and/or love.

Mutual Development

As you think about the individual gifts and blind spots of styles One and Nine, you can begin to speculate how their similarities and differences might trigger difficulties in a relationship. In the discussion below of the three-step model for mutual development, the One/Nine partnership is used for purposes of illustration, but the model applies to any pairing:

(1) Talk about your implicit beliefs and explicit behaviors; become aware of mutually self-defeating patterns:

Acknowledge that you're bound by patterns of interaction and it's difficult to see how you help create problems because you're part of that pattern. This requires going beyond a theoretical discussion of your Enneagram style, observing yourself and soliciting feedback about the ways your style manifests in you.

If you're style One, for example, and don't see yourself as someone who's "punitive," review your history without judgment, ask yourself about times when you felt justifiably angry, and recall how you framed that anger to the person who was the target. If you're style Nine and don't see yourself as "passive-aggressive," do the same.

Seek feedback from the other about what may have seemed punitive or passive-aggressive to them or how they might have observed that behavior in your treatment of someone else. Make it real for you, whatever terminology fits the way you operate.

(2) Envision the transformed relationship and commit yourselves to learning as you go:

Once you have a shared vision of how you want the relationship to thrive, you can commit yourselves to mutual learning about your progress toward that goal - observing your own behavior, but also soliciting and accepting feedback from each other. Whether you're working together or in a personal relationship, appreciate the fact that style One's occasional moral tirades may hook style Nine's tendency to withdraw from confrontation.

Your vision could include a commitment from style One to look for triggers to anger and to be descriptive and nonjudgmental about what's irritating before it reaches volcanic proportions. Style Nine could commit to staying emotionally present and being assertive.

These actions will be mutually developmental, because:(a) learning to give descriptive feedback helps Ones become less judgmental, and (b) knowing Ones expect an assertive response gives Nines more determination to hang in and not withdraw.

As in Step (1) above, observe your own behavior and solicit feedback from each other. Note the situations where you're able to remain unhooked and determine what you did to make that happen. Do more of it.

(3) Be alert to how you get in the way of your own progress and stay committed to the transformation:

Note the situations where you slip into the old, self-defeating routine, try to remain nonjudgmental and explore together what triggered it, where either one of you could have done something to break the cycle; then make a commitment to try again the next time.

For example, if either partner responds to feedback defensively, describe that response non-judgmentally, as if holding up a mirror (e.g., "I just told you how I want to be treated, as we agreed I would do, and you continued to criticize me, so I'm feeling tempted to fall back into my pattern of retreating." Or, "You stuck with me this time instead of withdrawing, but it feels as if you want to put the whole blame on me, and that's hard for me to accept. How could we share responsibility for making this more constructive?")

Styles One and Nine Together

The additional examples below for the One/Nine partnership are only some of many possible ideas for mutually developmental actions. You can continue this exercise with more of your own:

(a) Both Nines and Ones are comfortable with routine, perhaps too comfortable. It would be mutually beneficial if they commit together to breaking this pattern. The more fun they make this exercise, the better. Nines can be a bit serious, and Ones, as well, need to develop their wacky side.

(b) The most obvious dynamic where both Ones and Nines stand to gain by self-observation, mutual feedback, and development is in their common difficulty with anger. They both need to identify and describe how their anger shows up, to discuss with each other what triggers it, what form it takes, how aware they are of it, and what alternatives they can create to respond differently.

(c) These partners can complement each other because Nines see many sides of a situation and Ones tend to be black and white in their thinking. At a superficial level they may seem compatible because Nines will tend to accommodate when Ones have strong opinions, but this can get old for both of them (perhaps more for the Nine than for the One):

The Nine viewpoint is a natural counterpoint if Ones choose to develop more creative thinking patterns. Ones could ask Nines: "What are some other ways to think about this?" This is simultaneously developmental for Nines, who learn their opinions do matter.

Nines could ask their One partners for advice on how to take a stand when something's really important. Because Ones love to teach, this brings their natural gift into the relationship and builds their esteem.

(d) Ones can be demanding, and consequently critical when their wishes aren't met. When the Nine doesn't do what the One expects, instead of "Why did you/didn't you...?" (which is really a criticism in disguise) the One can invite an analysis of the process: stating observations in specific, descriptive terms and asking for help to break the dysfunctional interaction. When the One is less punitive, the Nine can more easily stay engaged until the situation is resolved.

(e) It's developmental for style Ones to learn to give more praise, even if someone's behavior doesn't meet their ultimate standard. By using appreciative feedback, aimed at incremental steps in the desired direction, they're released from seeking total perfection. Style Nines benefit from applying the same technique, instead of focusing on what they don't like. Agreeing both will use appreciative feedback offers this pair the opportunity to model and learn from each other.

(f) Both need to practice a centering discipline: style Nine to develop focus, style One to develop patience. They could take a class together in yoga, t'ai chi, and/or meditation and decide together how to apply it in everyday life. In addition, Nines develop by taking initiative, by not waiting for their partners to choose what they do together. So if they do agree to take a class, the Nine could arrange it. Ones forget to take care of their own needs, so it will be mutually developmental if the One reinforces the Nine's efforts by joining in.

Coming Home

These few examples will stimulate your thinking about other ways Ones and Nines together can transcend their old routines and interpersonal "ruts."

In addition, you can apply this model to all your relationships. Keep in mind it's a real loss of your developmental potential to maintain the status quo. Even worse, you can undermine any relationship by acting on negative expectations based on someone's Enneagram style (e.g., "He'll never change; it's too important to him to be right!" or "She'll never take the initiative to change.").

Margaret Frings Keyes says it succinctly:

"The commonest path to self-knowledge...is often not recognized as such. Partnership...is a lifetime training discipline without equal when we pursue it with commitment."

Partnership is also the place where we can come home to ourselves. Through our truly authentic relationships we come to accept ourselves fully.

The Real Bottom Line: Enneagram Three and Seven in Relationship

2016-12-03T15:32:00.002-05:00

"Why the hell would you suddenly pull that in here?" shouted Oliver F., the company CFO, at a tense budget planning session. "We agreed at our meeting yesterday how we were going to proceed, and now you come in here with something totally self-serving!"

"No," said Jack B., "when we talked about this yesterday, we did not agree to what you're proposing!"

"That's not true!" Oliver rejoined.

And Jack came back with, "Well, of course it's true, and there are four other people who were there and will back me up!"

Everyone else in the room was frozen in place – mature, experienced people who were beginning to feel like children in business attire – until someone finally called a break.

Out in the hall Oliver turned to Jack and said, "You're a #@&! liar!"

Jack wondered how this had escalated to such a point, when he'd worked so hard to get buy-in to his budget before the meeting. In addition he was aware that Oliver – while he couldn't call the shots without agreement – held higher status in the company and was in a particularly key position during a financially troubled year for the company.

Normally a personable guy, Jack wasn't sure at the moment how to proceed. The only options he saw were to continue an apparently unresolvable conflict, cave in, or take it to Bob, the CEO, though he knew Bob hated bad news and would be particularly annoyed his so-called "senior" executives couldn't resolve things among themselves without bickering.

From the perspective of any observer it's clear Oliver and Jack's personal attacks had sidetracked their focus on solving a financial problem important to the business, and placed their energy instead on who was right and who was wrong.

You no doubt have plenty of your own examples – situations you've encountered, or problems members of your family or team have described. I've seen this competitive dynamic over and over, and it's a great relief for people to realize there are practical techniques they can learn on their own or with a little coaching help.

In the situation above, for example, Jack was able to improve his relationship with Oliver by using an assertiveness technique for responding to criticism without defensiveness. The next time he and Oliver got into a conflict, it went more like this:

Oliver: "I can't comprehend why you would say that now!" (Starts crunching numbers on the side to show his annoyance and disinterest in resolving their problems.)

Jack: "I can see you're shocked, and I'm surprised too, because I thought we were in agreement. Let's figure out how we can get back on track." (Paraphrases, discloses own reaction, offers solution.)

Oliver: "I don't need to get back on track. You're the one who's off!" (Still in a competitive mode.)

Jack: "Well, I have been known to rethink things between meetings. What have I added that seems new to you?" (Agrees to a possibility, probes.)

Oliver: "I never agreed to sign off on this budget today. I only agreed to discuss it with the rest of the leadership team." (Still in competitive mode, but willing to talk.)

Jack: "I also understood we'd talk with the rest of the team. What would you need to have happen in order to get sign-off?" (Confirms the part he agrees with, offers solution.)

Oliver: "I'd need to be sure your figures are accurate." (Doesn't offer counter-attack – a sign he's no longer in a competitive mode.)

Even more powerful for Jack than his new-found skills was the understanding he gained with the Enneagram. This powerful model of nine worldviews goes right to the heart of what makes people tick.

Jack identified himself as operating from style Seven. Charming and easy to talk to, they're the organization's cheerleaders because of their natural optimism and democratic style. Equality is important to them, so they sometimes have difficulty with people like Oliver who try to pull rank. In addition, style Sevens are natural storytellers who -- sometimes unwittingly -- can embellish the facts.

Recognizing these underlying dynamics helped Jack examine some of his own plus and minus characteristics. Enneagram Sevens particularly like to be upbeat; consequently they tend to avoid what's painful. In Jack's case this underlying motivation initially made it difficult for him to deal effectively with Oliver's criticism or to accept his role in their competitive interaction. He wanted to make the whole thing Oliver's fault. Taking responsibility for his piece of it was a big step in the right direction.

Jack also gained understanding of Oliver's Enneagram style Three as someone who's results-oriented and competitive. Coming from this strong bottom-line focus, Oliver was impatient with the more touchy-feely aspects of work situations. Style Threes also have an underlying motive to "look good," so Oliver's buttons were really pushed when Jack challenged him in front of his peers.

In the second go-round, where Jack managed to de-escalate a potentially competitive situation, he allowed Oliver to look good while moving the conversation toward getting results, both guaranteed to work better with Oliver.

Like Oliver, you may wish you could focus on the task at hand, but personality characteristics and the emotional aspects of relationships are an irreducible part of the work equation. Some studies suggest that almost 20 percent of the typical focus in work settings is spent resolving personality conflicts.