Compatibility Considerations

We will have the fewest communication problems with others who match our Communication Process. The next best match-up is with those who have complementary processes (the first and second reversed, with the third matched). We could have some compatibility if our secondary is matched, for at least we will understand what is defensive with another person with the same secondary. We will have chronic miscommunications with wholly dissimilar Communication Processes, as characterized by differences at all three levels. Diagram 8, Communication Process Compatibilities, shows how with the same Communication Process, we avoid misunderstandings and unnecessary effort. While it may be easy to find friends with the same process, we tend to choose partners who match our opposite gender parent (if we are heterosexual) and same gender parent (if we are gay or lesbian) in romantic relationships. This dramatically increases the difficulty of communication, particularly if they did not have the same Communication Process as us.

When we become conscious of Communication Process differences, we can neutralize the distortions that prevent clear and complete communications. The major obstacle to clear communications is repression on thinking, feeling, and acting levels. Whenever we are repressed by our parent(s) or by our circumstances growing up, our communication style becomes defined more by what we are avoiding than by what we are expressing. If we are repressed in our thoughts, we never believe others are honoring us or listening to what we say. It then becomes an effort to prove our thoughts to others, even if they already agree with us. This is because we believe other people will not act on our thoughts without having a clear, definable reason to do so. If we are repressed in our emotions or feelings, we repress our own emotions or even attack people who are emotional with us. If we are repressed on our physical level, we retreat to role-playing and taking actions others have taught us are the right things to do. The difficulty in being repressed is that it makes it harder for others to see and honor us in our natural sequence.

At the Instinctive level, we are attracted to the sequence of our closest parent. We have some natural rapport and common understanding with this person, but it is interspersed with many misunderstandings. Mostly, what is missing in communications are real listening and follow-up skills, those of checking in to make sure the intention of the communication was received. We tend to get caught up in communication conflicts that never get resolved. This is a frustrating experience because we want to be of assistance to others and yet everything we say and do ends up triggering them more.

On the Intellectual level, we are attracted to others with the first two processes reversed from ours and with the third the same. We focus on and develop our weaknesses (the second part of the sequence becomes predominant), and have the most intense learning experiences around miscommunications. We become extremely aware of the differences, but are attracted to those because they serve two outcomes: 1) we and our partner appreciate the differences, and 2) we can become balanced by the third step taken together. We tend to feel isolated, unable to bring up issues because we have experienced how intense the situation gets when our positions dominate.

At the Intuitive level, we are attracted to the same sequence. We can communicate without speaking, and feel understood and in sync with our partner. The main problem is how we could trigger our imprinting differences. With this combination, there is a timelessness to personal interactions. Communication is effortless, received, and understood as intended. As a result, many times we run into upper-boundary limits, where we have trouble when things go too well.

Clearly Recognizing Our Process Reactions

When we experience a reaction it indicates we have triggered an internal fear that we won’t be able to live up to the expectations of others. We then create counter-beliefs to offset these fears. Explore the following reactions primarily to identify our Process differences. In this section we are assuming that all of the remaining compatibility factors are the same. Due to the fact that individuals with the same processes typically get along best with people of the same process, we have organized the following connections by the degree of alignment. This means that we will be moving from the most aligned to the least aligned.

1. Think, Feel, Act with Think, Feel, Act. Maximum synergistic alignment.
2. Think, Act, Feel with Think, Act, Feel. Maximum synergistic alignment.
3. Feel, Think, Act with Think, Feel, Act. Maximum synergistic alignment.
4. Feel, Act, Think with Feel, Act, Think. Maximum synergistic alignment.
5. Act, Think, Feel with Act, Think, Feel. Maximum synergistic alignment.
6. Act, Feel, Think with Act, Feel, Think. Maximum synergistic alignment.
7. Think, Feel, Act with Think, Act, Feel. Concsious growth orientation because both initiate new communication process by thinking.
8. Feel, Think, Act with Feel, Act, Think. Conscious growth orientation because both initiate communication with feelings.
9. Act, Think, Feel with Act, Feel, Think. Conscious grown orientation because both individuals initiate communication by doing things together.
10. Act, Think, Feel with Think, Act, Feel. Interesting, uphill, worthwhile connection based on first two centerings being reversed and with the third centering being the same. This means that there is good recreational alignment.
11. Feel, Act, Think with Act, Feel, Think. Interesting, uphill and worthwhile interactions based on reversing the first two centers and aligning on the third. Good recreational alignment.
12. Feel, Think, Act with Think, Feel, Act. Common, interesting, uphill and worthwhile interactions based on reversing the first two centerings and alignment of the third centering. Good recreational alignment.
13. Think, Feel, Act with Act, Feel, Think. Problematic, challenging, with only defensive secondary centering alignment.
14. Feel, Think, Act with Act, Think, Feel. Problematic, challenging, because the only commonality is the defensive secondary centering alignment.
15. Feel, Act, Think with Think, Act, Feel. Problematic, challenging, because of only defensive secondary centering alignment.
16. Feel, Think, Act with Act, Feel, Think. Exasperating and has no alignment on any level.
17. Think, Feel, Act with Feel, Act, Think. Exasperating and has no alignment on any level.
18. Think, Feel, Act with Act, Think, Feel. Exasperating and has no alignment on any level.

What the diagram, “Communication Process Compatibility,” reveals is the five levels of compatability are symmetrically filled in, based on the degree of alignment on each of three levels. The goal, therefore, is to have as much alignment as possible in the priority of centering. This means primary centering matches are more important than secondary centering matches; the least important are third level centering matches. The worse case scenario is when you have no matches on any centering level; this results in relationships that are fundamentally out of communication alignment with each other. It should also be noted that when an individual is imprinted in their primary expression, which is reversed in their partner, it maximizes co-dependence.

For example, an emotionally imprinted Feel, Think, Act man would be in the most co-dependent relationship with an intellectually imprinted Think, Feel, Act woman. While they only match up in the third centering (where we learn to relax and experience recreation), they are inverted in their primary and secondary centers can actually end up pulling them down if they have been discounted in their primary center.

When individuals are repressed on the first two centers, and are overdoing their third center (because of their imprinting), they will be attracted to someone who is doing the opposite of their imprinting on that third level. This creates the ideal enmeshed relationships where role-playing predominates. For example, a completely repressed Think, Feel, Act man could be attracted to a completely repressed Act, Think, Feel woman, particularly if she was over-identified with her feelings and he were over-identified with his actions (i.e., third centering). This relationship could be ideal for both of them, because neither one will demand anything from the other that will be uncomfortable. At the same time, neither one will be able to grow without leaving the relationship. We see this pattern in worse case situations.