In this piece, I’m using the well-known family systems concept of ‘triangulation’ to describe a particular process I’ve noticed in and outside therapy, to myself included: A relationship moment where the idea that “two’s company, but three’s a crowd” can actually ring true, especially in the context of navigating complicated group and relationship dynamics.
When a third person changes the dynamic unhelpfully
Have you ever had a decision or plan you thought was set, derailed unexpectedly when a friend, partner, colleague, boss or family member brings another person into the situation?
Or have you ever experienced feeling stuck in the middle, repeatedly undermined or pulled in different directions by the actions of others around you when you’re trying to actualise a plan, or resolve an issue or misunderstanding that doesn’t involve them?
If so, you may have experienced triangulation.
Not all triangulation causes problems
Triangulation in terms of how ‘threes’ can interact, is a natural part of human group life. Its impact can be neutral. For example, consensually involving or adding a third person into a discussion or plan, or bringing up a third person’s potential insights and views on the matter at hand, which may be genuinely helpful for their expertise or insight.
But I’ve noticed that in many situations where a third person is brought in, symbolically (by mentioning their views, power or influence) or actually (directly inviting, encouraging or coercing them to join in), without consideration of the consent, agreement or impact upon the situation or those involved, this can sometimes be problematic depending on the intentions of the person doing so. I’ve seen much of the time, this process can be initiated without malice, but when it happens, it can still create practical and emotional upheaval.
What’s going on behind the scenes
This is what I mean by triangulation: It is a relational process usually initiated by one person in a twosome, where a third person, or sometimes a third thing or entity such as a group, or another person’s opinion or circumstances, is brought into a situation involving two people (often unexpectedly or without warning).
This has the effect of influencing the situation and them. It can happen as a pattern, but sometimes also as a one off. It’s effects can include avoiding an issue being addressed directly and creating more mess rather than resolution in a situation.
Bowen’s family systems theory describes triangulation becoming unhealthy when two people aren’t able to talk openly about a problem. Bringing a third person into the situation, either by mentioning them or involving them directly, can unconsciously, or more intentionally, create deflection, distraction, confusion or chaos. This can cause the original issue or plan to remain unresolved or unexecuted.
I observe it often happens in families in which one person or more habitually have learned to disregard the autonomy, wants, needs and boundaries of others, and/or where some people may have learned to use subtle or more direct control or manipulation patterns to persuade others to meet their needs.
Sometimes I’ve seen it prone to happen within organisational systems where there are cronyistic cultures, confusing hierarchies, or unclear power or reporting structures. Such as when systems have recently undergone or are currently going through structural change.
Emotional purpose & relatable examples of triangulation
Bringing in a third ‘other’ can often serve an unacknowledged emotional purpose, to defuse intensity within the individual or within a pair, even if there is a practical or strategic purpose put forward as the main reason.
Consider the following examples:
A third person, brought actually or symbolically into a repeated argument between partners about finances, might be practically mentioned by one partner they claim, for helpful comparison. But the underlying emotional intention might be for a new object of focus, an emotional distraction or deflection.
Consider a longstanding childcare or travel plan between two co-parents. A third person is unexpectedly brought in as a last minute substitute by the person responsible for providing the care or transport. That third person has their own agenda or schedule, so changes your timeframe, disrupting your own obligations. For the triangulator, this might serve the underlying emotional purpose of shifting accountability or managing their guilt about their own poor capacity for planning, or even their underlying resentment.
A colleague, family member or friend might invite a third person to a closed meeting or social event, or disclose information shared confidentially with them. Not checking with others first, causes surprise and a breach of trust. The triangulator might, in this case, have their emotional needs for control or power met, even if the action appears benign.
Triangulation can also be applied to an action an organisation takes to unexpectedly involve a third person or entity in a situation. This can occur in ways similar to those described above, that breach the agreements, wishes, trust or boundaries of the individuals involved, with manifold messy and complicated results. In this scenario, rather than only meeting a personal emotional need, triangulating may also function to protect organisational interests.
The impact
In all of these situations, one person or entity: the triangulator, involves the third without seeking consent or agreement from anyone. This can disrupt or undermine the original issue or objectives, emotionally benefit the triangulator and disregard the autonomy, expectations and boundaries of the other people involved. This often results in tension, or conflict by creating practical, social and emotional counter-problems and responses, sometimes initiated by the third. In the complicated family and organisational systems I’ve described, for those on the receiving-end, this may land as a sense of catastrophe, and overwhelm from the trust that was broken and the mess that requires detangling. This kind of behaviour can influence others through changing the focuses and agreements between the people involved.
In this way, triangulation can be both a symptom of and a contributor to complicated group or relationship dynamics where boundaries are blurred or disrespected and people involved or on the receiving-end, end-up feeling confused, pulled in many directions, betrayed, undermined or managed in subtle or obvious ways.
Alternative ways to make sense of tricky trios
In relationship-focused psychological therapy, there are alternative models to help us understand what roles people might play in challenging situations involving three.
A well-known example is Stephen Karpman’s “Drama Triangle”, which explains how people can move between the roles of rescuer, persecutor or victim. Participants may experience confusion, feeling compelled to respond by filling each role, even though they may not want to or feel able to.
Triangulation is an adjacent idea. It may help explain the mechanism by which a person sometimes becomes part of the Drama Triangle, but the two concepts are not the same. Rather, I am describing triangulation as an action one person takes, intentionally or less consciously, to involve a third person or entity in a situation where the third may not be genuinely willingly invited or expected, thus truly welcome or even practically needed.
So what can we do about it?
In essence, when triangulation is coercive or manipulative in intention or result, it can become a subtle way of playing with power, confusion and boundaries in relationships, and of meeting the triangulator’s rather than the other involved parties emotional needs.
Once in it, the ‘exit’ or route out of the Drama Triangle, is to become aware of its structure and your position within the roles being occupied. Then you must choose to respond in a new, more realistic, healthy way. This could mean voicing and assertively acting on your own or another’s needs within your means, and reviewing and upholding boundaries instead of leaning fully into one of these roles.
Much like in the Drama Triangle, the way out of triangulation may be to notice and acknowledge, rather than to ignore and tolerate, the triangulator’s actions. It could help to understand the triangulator’s intentions, and how the addition of the third, impacts upon you, others and the situation in various emotional and practical ways.
Once you do, if possible, you could take steps to keep or reconvene the issue back to between the agreed involved parties, if you have the power to. Doing this may reduce the risk of further confusion, through avoiding whatever solutions or processes the third may attempt to initiate.
In situations where the triangulator or third person holds more power due to their role or relationship with you, it may help to find a trusted person that stays outside the situation. They may help you recognise what’s happened and help you manoeuvre, the aim being for you to avoid disruption, harm and recover mental and emotional clarity.
If you become aware that you are in fact ‘the third’, notice if you feel surprised or confused about the reasons you have been included or invited into a situation. It could be helpful to be attentive to the reactions of the others involved and whether they expect or welcome your involvement.
Sometimes, unwittingly colluding with the triangulator’s emotional purpose for involving you as the third, is hard to avoid if you are diligently trying to fulfil a professional role or responsibility, or are responding to a request or need with intentions of being helpful. In such situations, once it becomes clear to you that your involvement feels ‘off’, it is okay to review your boundaries and involvement.
If you are still unsure about triangulation, and whether you are perhaps a victim or triangulator, consider this: Triangulation is not the same as seeking emotional or practical support from a third person or entity, with appropriate transparency, confidentiality and boundaries with the other person or people involved, to minimise the risk of introducing confusion or chaos into a situation.
In situations where your boundaries or communication have been poor, it may accidentally land as, or lead to similar complicated and chaotic results to triangulation, even when that was not your intention.
Triangulation is sometimes not a simple experience to navigate in a family or organisational context if the original issue is emotive or high stakes. So getting advocacy and support from someone trusted and truly on your side, with minimal conflict-of-interest risks, matters. (This could be a therapist, an advocacy service or friend).
© 2026 Lorraine Welch. All rights reserved
Related further reading
acuriousroute 