Quote from Matthew Whitewood on August 7, 2021, 12:21 pm

Continuing from the discussion on power dynamics traffic light started by Lucio on the thread,
Responding to Compliments with Judge Role by Being a Judge Yourself, Post #3

Power Dynamics Traffic Light

This exchange gave an idea for a new concept.

the "power dynamics traffic light".

Such as:

• Green light (0-2): the net result of power accounting (giving/taking) is within low ranges. It doesn't impact your power and status in a significant way. And it's nothing you can't correct in the future. So you don't need to take immediate corrective actions and you don't need to worry too much about it
• Orange light (3-6): the net result of power accounting (giving/taking) impacts your status and power, and can cost you in terms of relationship and/or money. You want to take corrective actions (re-empowering techniques), and make a mental note about the individual. See if he changes tack later on
• Red light (7-10): the net result of power accounting (giving/taking) heavily impacts your status and power. If you let it slip, your relationship changes, and your status within the group changes. Letting it slip can also impact your bottom line.
  You need immediate and assertive corrective actions, go meta, provide an "either/or", and/or enter into your own "Mach mode". Start plotting on how to win, and/or how to neutralize or cut contact with the individual if he doesn't change approach

In my opinion, the exchange in this thread was, overall, in the green.
There was some power taking, but nothing to worry about too much.

Of course, it's subjective what's green/orange/red, but this concept can still be helpful because it raises a new question that people who are learning power dynamics might not immediately ask themselves.

And the question is:

Is this really bad?

And that can help people better learn and assess.

Thoughts?

I copied and pasted my reply on the other thread so that it's easier to discuss over here.

Fitting This with the Aggression Scale

I suppose the aggression scale can be a type of power dynamics traffic light applied to aggression.
So something like

• Nanoaggression - green light
• Microaggression - orange light
• Aggression - red light

When to Thread-Expand?

These are my thoughts:

• At the green levels of the traffic light, it's best to smooth over the power-taking component.
  Couple this with good frame control and non-verbals, and people know not to mess with you generally.
  If you thread-expand here, you may look defensive and the person may even be able to cover up their move.
• At the orange levels, you don't have to address the power-taking component directly.
  You can expand more effort here to rebalance the dynamics indirectly.
  Going direct may still expand too much effort and de-rail the interaction.
  Or you can get the other person to thread-expand through surfacing/uncovering techniques.
• At the red levels, it's best to address that directly.
  If not, you look weak.
  So you can use going meta, assertive techniques which involve thread-expanding on the behaviour.

All these are general rules, but the specific situation is more important.
Like Lucio uses humour against the alpha male handshake which is smoother.

Frequency

I suppose the frequency is also important.
If someone continually plays green-light, power-taking moves, then one needs to play some green-light moves of your own to balance things.
But then he should get the hint that he should stop using these moves.

For example, your friend is usually very value-adding but, for whatever reason, he comes to your house each time and says with a condescending tone:

It's a nice place you got here.

Then, one should take note and reply with

Good. You seem like someone who can recognise a nice place.

If it keeps happening, that it's good to address that assertively.

But I guess the key is that a few green-light, power-taking moves in an otherwise positive interaction or relationship are okay.
It may be accidental, or the guy has a strong interest in something so he goes stronger.

---

Learning the Nature of Covert Power Moves

On another note, do you think that it's bad practice to analyse the power-taking component in isolation of the bigger situation?

I thought about it more.
It's because I don't understand that the power-taking component which is why I ask more questions on that component in this forum.

The risk is what you say.
Although I understand the power-taking component better, I may place too much emphasis on it.

The ideal analysis would be taking the whole situation into account, and understanding how the power-taking component would fit into the picture.
However, sometimes that is challenging.
Personally, practising a new skill often requires some sort of isolation so it is easier to focus and hone.

Maybe learning covert power moves could take the following route:

• Focusing on analysing the power-taking component of covert power moves
  Well, initially because we even thought it is completely value-adding.
• After the above analysis, take the whole situation into account and then try to fit the above analysis of the power-taking component to get a balanced view.

This achieves 2 things:

• Understanding the power-taking component well
• At the same time, not losing sight of the bigger picture and possibly why the power-taking component is not malicious