From Drama to Power or how to turn stressful relationships with architects and builders into enjoyable collaboration.

Triangle relationships have never been easy, regardless of the context and position of the participants. If it’s about love affairs, friendships or working teams: groups of two or four seem to be easier, clearer and more manageable. And yet there are situations, like in a construction process, where three is the number we are stuck with and need to deal with.

I am specifically relating here to the traditional form of contract in this country where the construction project is run by an architect, builders company and a client.

There are  of course a few more participants, such as engineers, consultants and subcontractors, however the three above are the main players for 

Those three parties are tightly connected in contractual relationships from start till completion of a project and how good this relationship is, determines to a large degree the success of the work.

So let’s see how this triangle engagement can work from a design and construction point of view.

Maisonette flat in Holborn

The drama triangle and the triangle of winners.

Imagine this: 

Few months ago Peter and Mary bought that wonderful property which needs quite a bit of work to become your dream home. He found an architect who seems to be on the same page with Peter and Mary. The design stage and planning were fun and easy going. The proposal was confirmed by the local authority and the neighbours seem to be supportive of it as well. Happy days!

With the help from his architect Peter selected the most suitable construction company and now the work on site has started. 

Skip four months forward and Peter finds himself stressed and exhausted with the project and Mary is pregnant with their first baby.

The guys on site seem to be miserable. Peter, Mary and the architect  are swapping what’s app messages throughout day and late evenings. The construction company asks for decisions which in Peter’s view don’t seem to be urgent. The architect supports him here and yet the builders appear to be stubborn. At the same time the work on site doesn’t progress as fast as it is expected and there is an increase in the budget which is not quite clear why. The regular site meetings feel like a battle rather than collaborative discussion. One evening Peter receives an aggressive email from the foreman threatening to delay the project by weeks, if he and Mary don’t make up their mind by tomorrow 8 am …

Welcome to the drama triangle!

Let’s step back from Peter and Mary and look at it.

The drama triangle is a social model of human interaction developed by the San Francisco based psychiatrist Steven Karpman In 1968. The triangle maps a type of destructive interaction that can occur between people in conflict. The main participants in the triangle are the persecutor, victim, and rescuer. 

The persecutor - aggressive, angry, judgemental. Discount others values and integrity

The victim - downtrodden, helpless, complaining of unmet needs. Discount self.

The rescuer - over helpful, self-sacrificing, needs to be needed. Discount others' ability to think for themselves.

I’d leave it with you to figure out on which end of the drama triangle Peter, Mary and the other participants are. And If you are in a similar situation right now, the following paragraphs might give you some insight on how to approach the situation and shift the dynamic into a more productive direction.

In the nutshell - all you need to resolve a conflict situation is responsibility, acceptance and clear communication. And this is where the drama triangle can become a triangle of winners. It is easier said than done but it is possible. Let’s see how.

The participants in the triangle of winners are:

The assertive (former prosecutor) - Knows own feelings, needs and wants. Non-judgemental, uses “I” messages. Accept others' values and integrity.

The vulnerable (former victim) - Shares real feelings. Accept self.

The nurturing (former rescuer)  - Gives help when asked, cares and understands, doesn’t need to be needed by others. Accept others' ability to think for themselves.

To shift from drama to win in our context of construction projects, the first thing is to go back to the paperwork and check what has been agreed.

That would be the contract and the accompanying plans and schedule of work.

The plans and the schedule of work will clarify what has been quoted for and to which timeline. This is an example for a traditional contract, with the Architect having the role of a contract administrator.

The contract will inform about payment procedures and options to react in case of justified delays, such as unexpected site conditions for instance.

Once this is clarified you need to clarify who is responsible for what and if everyone is up to date with their responsibilities.

The construction company has to be performing certain results at a certain time and they have to be paid for work done.

The architect has to coordinate the flow of information from and to the site, check and approve payments to the construction clients, control the progress on site based on the programme, and provide any technical information required for the progress of the work.

The client has to follow through their obligations to deliver decisions when those are required, within a reasonable time scale and pay the invoices to the construction company and architect within their due dates.

The cycle of information flow should be from construction company to architect, to client, to architect, back to site. Short cuts are usually a bad idea because information gets lost and sooner or later the drama will start. The construction company has no business chasing the clients. 

And the client has no business to go on site and chat with the guys there about how to do things. The architect’s job is not babysitting the clients but keeping them informed and supporting them making decisions. If you as a client decide about something this is your responsibility. There will be areas your architect will decide on your behalf, then this is the architect’s responsibility. 

Respecting everyone’s responsibility and area of expertise is essential here.

And of course not to forget the old rule of keeping everything in writing: emails, sketches, file notes. Writing is king when it comes to responsibilities.

Maisonette flat in Holborn

And Peter and Mary, well in this late night Peter consulted his architect and following his advice refused to make a decision by 8 am next day. The request was unreasonable.

After some chats and tidying up work he and his architect established where they are in terms of building progress, budget and payments. The contractor was informed by the architect that decisions from the client should be requested at least a week in advance. Additional cost should be justified and explained in writing to him, the architect.

The architect also asked Peter to stop discussing design options with the foreman on site and had those chats with his wife and his architect instead. The final decision was given in writing to the architect who then communicated that to site.

Things calmed down and another 4 months later the new extension with house refurb was completed and the young ground family could move in and enjoy their family life!