Transactional

Analysis Journal
http://tax.sagepub.com/

RANI: A New Approach to Relationship Analysis

Oswald Summerton
Transactional Analysis Journal 1979 9: 115
DOI: 10.1177/036215377900900213
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://tax.sagepub.com/content/9/2/115

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

International Transactional Analysis Association

Additional services and information for Transactional Analysis Journal can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://tax.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://tax.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://tax.sagepub.com/content/9/2/115.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Apr 1, 1979

What is This?

Downloaded from tax.sagepub.com by Ana Farcas on May 22, 2014

III. OK ness in the Family

RANI:
A New Approach to Relationship Analysis
Oswald Summerton

Summary
RANI is an instrument for analyzing
relationships. Five relationships or transactional patterns are considered: ParentParent, Adult-Adult, Child-Child, ParentChild, and Child-Parent. The stroking
combinations are identified, providing a
new approach to stroke analysis in which
positive and negative, unconditional and
conditional strokes are linked together to
model the way strokes are given in practice.
Relationship Analysis is tackled by Berne
in two ways: The analytic, which describes
analyses of transactional patterns (Berne
1962), and the descriptive (Berne, 1970).
In the second approach Berne takes several
words commonly used to describe relationships and studies them through transactional analysis. In the earlier approach
Berne used complementarity of transactions to analyze relationships. He proposed a qualitative and quantitative
analysis. This article describes RANI, a
new approach to relationship analysis. It is
based on what Berne wrote of qualitative
differences in relationships and makes use
of a new insight into stroking analysis.
What is RANI?
RANI is an acronym standing for
Relationship Analysis Instrument. RANI
consists of five diagrams (Figure I) each
one of which shows one relationship or
transactional pattern. When someone wants
to analyze a relationship with another
person, he or she considers the transactional patterns: Parent-Parent, AdultAdult, Child-Child, Parent-Child, and
Child-Parent. These five are chosen rather

Figure 1
RANI
than nine possible transactional patterns
because it is believed by the author that, in

Vol. 9, No.2, April 1979

115
Downloaded from tax.sagepub.com by Ana Farcas on May 22, 2014

OSW ALD SUMMERTON

practice, these are the ones commonly

found. Each of these transactional patterns
is identified according to the kinds of
strokes, or, stroking combinations usually
given in them.
What are Stroking Combinations?
RANI makes use of stroking combinations, and as these have not appeared in the
TA literature, a word about them is in
place. Usually, the four main kinds of
strokes are: positive and negative, unconditional and conditional. Briefly, unconditional strokes are those given for Being,
while conditional strokes are those given
for Doing (Goulding, 1972). Conceptually,
it is difficult to justify that any stroke can
be purely unconditional or purely conditional. I have not yet found one in practice.
It is concluded that strokes form a continuum with unconditionality at one end
and conditionality at the other end. Positive strokes may be seen as pleasant and
supportive of the individual whereas negative strokes are unpleasant and destructive
of the individual in some way or other.
These four kinds of strokes may be linked
so as to form the following stroking
combinations (Summerton, 1979).
+ U + C: positive unconditional positive
conditional; + U - C: positive unconditional negative conditional; - U + C: negative unconditional positive conditional;
- U - C: negative unconditional negative
conditional. Here the code is: + ::= positive; - ::= negative; U b unconditional;
and, C = conditional.
The stroking combinations are described
colloquially. + U + C = I like you and I
like what you do. + U - C = I like you
and I do not like what you do. - U + C = I
don't like you but I like the way you do
things. - U - C = I neither like you nor
what you do.
Qualitative Division of Relationships
Berne writes, "Qualitatively there are
at least four possibilities in a relationship:
some people get along well together; some
enjoy fighting or arguing with each other;
some cannot stand each other; and some
just have nothing to say to each other"
(Berne, 1962). He names these, respectively:

Sympathy, Antagonism, Antipathy and

Indifference. The words are capitalized
here to indicate that they do not have their
usual dictionary meanings and are specific
notions. These descriptions fit neatly into
the stroking combination. For example,
( + U + C) describes the kind of relationship existing between friends who enjoy
one another's company in whatever ego
states they may be. ( + U - C) describes the
friends who, whenever they are together
are arguing, teasing and fighting and
whenever they are apart are waiting for the
time when they will be together again; it
can also describe a relationship between
friends at a period when they are having a
difference of opinion. (- U + C) describes
what goes on in a lot of polite society,
in the work situation, in the classroom
where appreciation is given for performance and where there is no desire for a
deeply personal connection. Finally
( - U - C) represents what is going on when
one person is destroying another whether
by commission or omission, where one
ignores another completely or refuses to act
in a way productive of recognition. Figure
2 summarizes relationship qualities ana
links them with symbols and stroking
combinations.
Relationship
Type
Sympathy
Antagonism

Symbol

Stroking
Combination

NVVVVVVVVVV

Antipathy

Indifference

( +U+C)
(+u-C)
(-u+C)
(-U-C)

Figure 2
Quantitative Analysis of Relationships
To indicate the intensity of each relationship Berne suggests that the vector used
to represent them can be made with double
lines or can be thickened when the relationship is being drawn. Another approach
is to invite the client to assign weights
between 5, for most important, and I, for
least important. Thus the client indicates
the importance or intensity each relationship
has for him or her.
Transactional Analysis Journal

116

Downloaded from tax.sagepub.com by Ana Farcas on May 22, 2014

RANI

RANI and Change

Santosh, a lawyer married to Leela, said
he felt something was wrong in their relationship and he wanted to do something
about it. In answer to the question "Whenever you and your wife interract between
your Parent ego state and her Parent
ego state, whenever for example you dis.uss bringing up the children, politics,
ethical values, etc., what kind of a relationship do you experience?" He replied,
"She listens to what I say and agrees to it."
"What kind of stroking combination are
you using?" After a lot of thought he
replied, "I see now that it is Indifference;
and I know what I will do." "What will
you do?" "I will tell her what I have discovered and I shall ask her for her opinions,
and I shall listen to her and respect her
viewpoint." When asked did he want to
continue the analysis, Santosh said he did.
He went ahead and found that AdultAdult was a relationship of Indifference
also. The relationships Child-Child, ParentChild, and Child-Parent were ones of
Sympathy. Santosh stuck to his decision to
change the Parent-Parent pattern of interaction because of his concern for his
children.
Amla is a teacher married to a teacher.
Her relationship analysis revealed the following: Antipathy f'or Adult-Adult,
Parent-Parent, and Child-Child; and Indifference for Patent-Child and ChildParent. When asked where she would
begin to change her relationship, she said
she wanted to change them all to Sympathy.
She was asked to assign weights to each of
the relationships to help her decide to
change one of them first; she said the relationship Parent-Child was most important
to her, and, she would change her stroking
of her husband so that the Parent-Child
relationship would be one of Sympathy in
place of Indifference. Six months later she
described the relationship as comfortable.
John wanted to analyze his relationships
with Ted, his fellow-worker and friend. He
prefaced his analysis with the statement
that though he got on well with Ted at the
social level, underneath it all he felt dissatisfied with their way of working together.

His analysis indicated that each relationship was one of Sympathy; he was dissatisfied with the total relationship and he
smirked as he said this. He was invited to
do the analysis from another point of view,
basic life positions. He came up with the
following results: for Adult-Adult and
Child-Child he diagnosed his attitude as
I'm alright and you're alright with me;
for Parent-Child and Parent-Parent he
diagnosed I'm OK and you're Not OK;
and, for Child-Parent he assigned I'm Not
OK with me and you are. John decided to
change the Parent-Parent relationship, and
his smile was different as he said he would
change his own attitudes and behavior.
Some Observations

(1) Relationship analysis is made from

one person's point of view. In doing the
analysis, Amla looked both at her ways of
relating to her husband and at her idea of
how he related to her. She found and owned
that she has the power to change her side
of the relationship and does not have to
wait for her husband to change.
(2) The analysis is of transactional
patterns. By this is meant that in relationship analysis we take a kind of global view
of the way in which we interract and have
interracted over a long period. Thus relationship analysis goes a step further than
the analysis of unit transactions (TA
Proper) or the analysis of transactional
sequences or blocks of transactions (timestructuring and especially Game analysis).
(3) Relationship analysis has been found
useful for behavioral change and specifically for changing stroking combinations.
It is also useful for change at the level of
basic attitudes of mind towards self and
others. John shared that when he got started
on the analysis using stroking combinations, he was cynical; when he used basic
life positions he was struck that he could
change his attitude towards Ted by using
the stroking combinations.
(4) The advantage of assigning weights
for each relationship on a scale of 5 (most
important) to 1 (least important) is that
clients focus on one goal for change rather
than dissipate their energies on several
goals at once.

Vol. 9, No.2, April 1979

117
Downloaded from tax.sagepub.com by Ana Farcas on May 22, 2014

OSW ALD SUMMERTON

(5) When partners are present together,

they have experienced benefit from first
doing the analysis the way each of them
sees it, and then doing it the way they think
their partner sees it. They then compare
notes and negotiate behavioral change.
(6) Sometimes clients find it necessary to
go to second order descriptive analysis of
ego states to identify the problem area.
Then the analysis is refined further as the
individual looks at his or her functioning
from Nurturing Parent, Controlling
Parent, Adapted Child and Free Child
(Karpman, 1971).
(7) RANI is also useful for analysis of
one's relationships to one's group or organization, as well as between groups and
organizations.
(8) In general, RANI has been found
effective at the level of ego state function.
Its use at the level of ego state structure
has still to be investigated.

Conclusion
RANI is the Hindi word for 'queen'
and, as is well known, queens produce neat
princes and princesses.

Oswald Summerton, CPTM, lives in

Delhi, India. He is vice-president of the
TA Society of India, and conducts training
programs mostly in India and the Far East.
REFERENCES
Berne, E. Transactional analysis in psychotherapy.
New York: Grove Press, lnc., 1961.
Berne, E. Sex and human loving. New York: Simon
and Schuster, 1970.
Goulding, R.L. New directions in transactional
analysis. In Progress In Group and Family
Therapy. Eds. Sagar, C.l. & Kaplan, W.S. New
York: Brunner/Mazel, 1972.
Steiner, C. Scripts people live. New York: Grove
Press, Inc., 1974.
Summerton, O. An operations research approach to
transactional analysis. Cleveland: Irvin Publications, 1976.
Summerton, O. Transactional analysis - An introduction to basic concepts. New Delhi: Manohar, 1979.

Transactional Analysis Journal

118

Downloaded from tax.sagepub.com by Ana Farcas on May 22, 2014