Sometimes relationships of all kinds whether family, intimate or friendship can be very beneficial. The reward from reciprocated teamwork and support can build a vital system for wellbeing. However as many have experienced this can misfire and turn into a very harmful explosion of harm and misunderstanding. An imbalance of communication, understanding and effort can ultimately destroy the system. These systems usually burn out or prolong the pain through the hope of ephemeral or nonexistent repair. This is the risk of relationship of all types. However, what if I told you there was a third system? One that runs well enough to function, but at an imbalance? Almost like a car out of alignment. Let us talk about the butler effect.
Do you have a friend you are cool with but avoid? Do you get an invite that summons extreme excuse making that eventually leads to a well laid out escape plan? Do you have an intimate other who’s phone call you at times avoid? What is this? Do you hate these people? Probably not. But you probably may not have been able to put a finger on why this feeling exists. Here is my best shot at explaining what might be all of our pre existing conditions with certain relationships.
Healthy relationships are a two person job. Like two individuals on a tightrope, one focuses on balancing the other’s movements, and both adjust to the shakes of their environment. This in essence is how a healthy relationship are often played out. I support you, you support me, and together we weather the storms of life together. Now what happens when one person stops balancing the other? The second person has two choices. Let both individuals fall or take on both roles. Often times, person B will take on both roles, as the contract of a relationship is to provide temporary support when needed(I support you). The other person takes both roles of balancing self and balancing the second person. The effort balance shift can be anywhere between 49-51 to a full 0-100. Now in most cases, person A’s guilt or recognition sets in and the return to balance occurs. If that takes place all may seem fine in the relationship but it honestly is not. Person A technically owes person B for the extra effort . Now person B may not make much of it because of how small/short the extra effort was but unfortunately just like compounded interest if this is repeated mostly by one person, the debt builds exponentially. Eventually if this continues this becomes a new system where the second person becomes a back up power generator for the other. This is the first type of bulter system that we can call the misfire. The relationship temporarily goes offbalance and person B pay the majority of the effort until restoration repeatedly.
The second system is Erosion. Person A erodes their responsibility of keeping the relationship in balance with an effect from 50-50 to anywhere from 49-51 to 100-0. Unlike system A, this is not a group of temporary shifts but a gradual neglect. Just like in the misfire example, person B adjusts with the expectation of person A eventually restoring responsibility which often doesn’t happen.
Now why does this happen? Why doesn’t person B confront? As mentioned in the ‘Human Autopilot’ article, we as individuals have a confrontation cost. Whoever blows the whistle on a person not doing their part risks harm to the relationship. Bringing problems to light is the equivalent to taking a car to the gas station or dealership. It disrupts the flow of what on the surface was a well functioning relationship(now late for work/cant go on our way). Therefore, most individuals will wait until a set point to take this action. ‘If things get x bad, I will address.’ This works. Sometimes. This plan fails to one tactic.
The creep. The most common car accident is the rear end collision. This is mostly because of our mental-visual bias. We are able to quickly detect side to side movement and up and down and large movements across our retinas. However, the hardest movement for us to detect is head on. As the image slowly grows in front of us our ability to detect movement is suppressed until it is too late. This bias carries over to everything we do including growing problems coming head on in relationships.
One other bias I want to bring up as well is the issue of sunk costs. As individuals we are more unwilling to give up on things that we have already invested in and often either try to recoup or push a plan to success to avoid lost effort. This is famously exploited in casinos where losing $5 leads to an ATM trip and sometimes unfortunately a towed car/bus ride home. The sunk cost and creep bias together is one of the most damaging combinations for us as individuals. The sunk cost is the chain that keeps an individual form escaping and the creep is the slow sinking sand into peril. Now how does this relate to family, friends and relationships?
First we need to know what a relationship needs run on to operate effectively. Just like a car needs gas, a relationship runs on an intellectual/emotion(intl/emtn) mix. The mixture must always be 51-49. What I mean by this is, the intellect must always overpower the emotion to keep the relationship healthy. Any periods of offbalance will need to be counterbalanced. For example if a INTL/EMTN mix goes to 09-91 for a period of time, an immediate 91-09 mixture would need to take place to offset the imbalance. If not the misfire or erode system will start to seep in. The sunk cost is an emotional bias and therefore the best way out is to prioritize thinking over emotions. Unfortunately this is easier said than done and is very hard. Especially the closer relationships are (i.e. close family and intimate partners). This is the primary reason why most close relationship run offbalance and become a game of avoidance as discussed earlier.
Now hear is another important question. Is person A doing this intentionally? The answer to this depends on we mean by intentional. If we are asking maliciously with intent to deceive? For this I would say yes but this is not as common, as most people are very good at picking up on disingenuous queues. If I have a pack of M & M s and tell you I dont have anymore with a plan to eat the pack myself, eventually my excuses for chewing will make less sense and I will be caught. However this second case is very interesting. What if there is a group of 5 people and I only have 4 M&Ms. I give out four and leave one person with none. Am I responsible for what I dont do(not give said person an M&M)? Seems innocent enough, but lets play with this a bit. Lets say the person that was left without a M&M usually takes you to work, and in response to the M&M situation refuses to drive you for one week. That week you have to pay for the bus to get to work. Next week you have a pack of 4 M&Ms and the same group of people. You give out your M&Ms but make sure person from before gets a M&M leaving out another person. This person is your nephew and he cries the whole week over missing the M&M. I think you get the point. Eventually we shift to leaving out the person that will have the most tolerance/lowest cost. I am not saying that we go around calculating this all day but as human being we respond and shift to incentives. Now exchange the M&Ms for attention. Each relationship needs attention to balance and survive long term but often most of us have more relationships than we can pay attention to. Most of us also do not have the courage to cut off relationships that we can not be sustained and let die away. But the question is, is this intentional and who is left maintaining that dying relationship? Are we responsible for not messaging back that friend that clear their schedule to meet up? Or return that call? Who causing the eroding/misfiring?
The truth is we can only sustain a certain amount of relationships at one time. This number drops even further depending on how much is invested in each relationship as well. Most importantly as well, the interest needs to be agreed and reciprocated by the second party. You only have a set of M & Ms.
If you work in a restaurant and leave the kitchen, your co-workers become your butler. If you leave your team on the field, they become your source of entertainment. Sometimes to stretch out our relationship network reach we neglect the ones closest to us, because the emotion overpowers the thought the most with those people. We take the M&M away from the ones that will complain the least to give to others. The problem is misfiring and eroding relationships like cars invoke permeant damage over time. The insatiable need to please and know everyone slowly leads to no relationships at all. Avoidance and excuses ensue.
Let us re-evaluate our quantity over quality obsessions and promote the butlers in our lives.
Let us put back on our chef hat and reignite the warmth and closeness of those closest to us. And for the ones that are being treated like butlers, it maybe time to draw a line in the sand. Whether it is a line of separation or repair at least it can be assured as a line of healthy new beginnings.
Decoding The Human Mind 