1: Is this person supportive? Ambivalent? Or demeaning?
How often do I interact with them—frequently or infrequently?
These are the two questions Sahil Bloom suggests we ask, as outlined in his book, The 5 Types of Wealth: A Transformative Guide to Design Your Dream Life.
We begin by making a list of the key relationships in our lives.
“These can include family, friends, partner, or coworker relationships,” Sahil writes. “For most people, there will be about ten to fifteen relationships on this list, but others may have up to twenty-five.”
Next, we ask the two questions above and score each connection.
“A supportive relationship,” he writes, “is one where there is a mutual understanding of care, love, respect, and comfort.”
“A demeaning relationship is characterized by the absence of the qualities of a supportive relationship,” Sahil notes, “and typically involves specific behavior that undermines one’s self-worth.”
Finally, “an ambivalent relationship has elements of both supportive and demeaning relationships at different times—it is inconsistent.”
2: To create our relationship map, we place each relationship on a simple 2X2 grid with Relationship Health on the x-axis and Relationship Frequency (from demeaning to supportive) on the y-axis (from rare to daily).
The exercise is an adaptation of an idea proposed in The Good Life by Robert Waldinger and Marc Schulz.
The top right quadrant is the Green Zone: Highly supportive and frequent.
“These relationships should be prioritized and focused on to maintain their position and strength,” Sahil observes. This is where we want to build depth [hyperlink to Monday’s RWD] over time.
He writes: “Fortunately, there were several relationships that I identified as being both frequent and supportive. I will continue to prioritize these relationships and make sure I am letting these people know how much they mean to me.”
The bottom right quadrant—supportive and infrequent—is the Opportunity Zone. We want to increase the amount of time spent with these people in our lives.
“I identified over ten relationships that were infrequent but very supportive, some with old friends and colleagues and a few with family members,” Sahil explains. “I deliberately increased the frequency of interactions with this group in various ways, including through group trips and more casual check-ins (texts, calls).”
The Red Zones are where the relationships are demeaning and either frequent or infrequent.
Action is required. We must manage or remove ourselves from these interactions.
“There was one professional relationship—a partner in one of my businesses,” he notes, “that I identified as being both frequent and demeaning.
“With the nature of the relationships identified, I made the decision to communicate a staged exit from my involvement with the business,” Sahil writes. “It took six months, but once it was completed, the frequency of the demeaning interactions was significantly reduced.”
The final zone, Sahil labels the Danger Zone. This is where relationships are ambivalent and frequent.
“Surprisingly, while we might expect demeaning relationships to be the most damaging to our lives,” he notes, “research has shown that ambivalent relationships create the most trouble for your physical and mental well-being.”
Researchers found in one study that participants experienced higher blood pressure after interacting with a person who evoked mixed feelings, compared to someone who inspired purely negative feelings.
“The inconsistency of the interactions is damaging,” Sahil writes. “We have likely experienced a relationship like this in our own lives, a person who provides love and support at some times but criticism and contempt at others.
“The love and support cause us to open up,” he notes, “let the person in, which makes the future criticism and contempt all the more painful.”
“The most toxic relationships aren’t the purely negative ones,” bestselling author Adam Grant writes. “They’re the ones that are a mix of positive and negative.”
When Sahil put together his Relationship Map, he scored three relationships as frequent and ambivalent, i.e., both supportive and demeaning.
“In one case, I communicated directly with the individual (a family member) to explain how certain behaviors felt demeaning,” he writes.
“The open communication led to improved interactions, and this relationship is now pushing into the Green Zone.
“In the other two cases,” Sahil notes, “I reduced the frequency of my interactions with the individuals, which has pushed them out of the Danger Zone.”
3: Being intentional about which people we spend time with is a simple but powerful decision.
“With a completed relationship map in hand,” he writes, we “are well equipped to focus on the relationships that create the most energy, value, and emotional prosperity in our lives.”
It is also important to realize this is not a “one-and-done” exercise.
“The relationship map is not static; it’s highly dynamic,” he observes. “Relationships will shift on the map, and we will undoubtedly add and remove people across the various seasons of our lives, so it’s worth revisiting the exercise regularly.”
More tomorrow!
_________________________
Reflection: Am I being intentional about which relationships bring energy and meaning to my life, or letting circumstance and habit drive my connections?
Action: Create my own relationship map this week—score key connections for health and frequency, and take one step to strengthen a supportive relationship or address a challenging one.
What did you think of this post?
