Key Concepts | Types of relationships

Across our personal and professional lives, we likely hold a number of different types of relationships. Having language and frameworks to identify and name these different types of relationships can be a useful first step in thinking about how we can do more to centre them. 

In this post, we share three frameworks which help to articulate different types of relationships. 

Organisational / community relationships

Within a community or organisation, there will likely be a number of different types of relationships, each of which plays a different role or has a different purpose. Spending some time mapping these out, reflecting on their purpose, and thinking about the attributes those relationships need to have to make them effect can be a useful exercise. (See this article on the difference between transactional relationships and deep relationships) 

Your organisation, service or community group will likely have relationships with its employees or volunteers; with its service users or those it works to support; with organisations or other groups that it works with, or alongside; and with the entities that fund, regulate or commission it.

And within each of these types of relationships, there will be relationships between people or entities playing similar roles. Volunteers will have relationships with one another, for example, and the organisations you work alongside will also likely have relationships between themselves. The nature and quality of these relationships can directly or indirectly impact your work, and your own relationships so being aware of these dynamics is important. 

Reflection exercise

What other types of relationships does your organisation or community group hold?

Reflecting on the relational scale (below), which of these need to be deep relationships, and which can function well as transactional relationships? 

Circles of support

To lead a happy, fulfilling life in which we feel well-supported, able to manage crises and make the most of opportunities, we need to have a number of different types of relationships.

The concept of Circles of Support originated in Canada and spread to the UK in the mid 1980s. It has been primarily used in the social care sector to identify how individuals/services can help disabled people accomplish personal goals and take more control over their own lives. Other applications have included offender rehabilitation.

The circles are the community around an individual, with each circle playing an important contribution to the individual’s well-being.

The outermost circle represents people we don’t know, but whom we encounter in our day-to-day lives – such as a fellow dog walker or commuter. These types of relationships give our daily lives texture (for more on this, see Gillian Sandstrom’s work on the power of small talk). 

The next circle describes the people we have a paid relationship with – doctors, dentists, hair dressers etc. These relationships can provide us with critical support, but they can’t substitute relationships in othe circles. 

The circle of participation depicts people we know and do things with – like the people we play sports with, or worship with, or whose children go to the same school as ours. These relationships help us feel part of a community and, together, make up the fabric of civic life. 

The two innermost circles are made up of our friends and family. These are the relationships which are the deepest and which, when they are working well, offer us support, love and companionship. 

Reflection exercise

If you are working alongside somebody in the sphere of exchange, how might you support them to develop relationships in the sphere of participation? Are there people or groups you could introduce them to? 

 

How might you foster conditions for participation and/or friendship amongst your users, even though your primary operations are in the sphere of exchange? What would be the benefits? 

Bonding, bridging, linking

The bonding, bridging, linking model helps us think about different types of relationships at a local or community level.

Within any community or place, there are groups that are bound together by shared interests and a shared sense of identity. We call this bonding capital. Examples might include members of a local sports team or volunteering group, or members of a religious group. 

Where good relationships exist between two groups who have different identities or interests to one another, we call this bridging capital. Typically, bridging capital can be more difficult to establish and maintain than bonding capital. An example of bridging capital would be two different faith groups working together towards a shared goal.

The third type of relationship described in this diagram is that of linking capital. Linking capital refers to the relationship between local groups and authority figures, like the local authority. An example of this would be the relationship between a mutual aid group and the local authority. This type of capital is important because it enables flows of information and resources between grassroots groups and formal institutions.   

Reflection exercise

Within your community, where is bridging capital not as strong as it might be? Who might you join forces with to strengthen these bridges? (Take a look at our community bridgebuilders programme for inspiration)

Which groups within your community have strong linking capital and which don’t? What might this mean from a fairness and justice perspective, and how might you support groups to build stronger linking capital? 

More key concepts…