Why We Make Each Other’s Reactions Worse: Understanding Team Dynamics

Someone tells you about a difficult experience, and the response is: “Well, at least…” At least something good came out of it. At least it wasn’t worse. At least there’s a way forward.

Sometimes that is exactly what we need to hear. A different perspective can help us find hope or see beyond the immediate difficulty. At other times, it feels as though the other person hasn’t heard us at all. The intention may be reassuring, but the impact is quite different.

This is one of the reasons conflict can become so frustrating in teams. People often respond to difficulty in ways that make complete sense to them, without recognising that their response may intensify the very behaviour they want to change.

Three different responses to difficulty

The Harmonic Groups are an established framework in Enneagram literature, described by Don Richard Riso and Russ Hudson. They offer a useful lens for understanding three broad tendencies in how people respond to problems, disappointment and conflict. These are not fixed rules about behaviour, but patterns that can help explain why people sometimes respond to the same situation in very different ways.

Positive Outlook types (2, 7 and 9) tend to look for what is hopeful, reassuring or still okay. They may reframe a problem, emphasise the positives or look for possibilities. This can be invaluable when a team is discouraged, but it can also mean moving past a difficult reality before others feel it has been acknowledged.

Competency types (1, 3 and 5) tend to focus on handling the situation effectively. They look for the facts, analyse what has happened and work towards a sensible response. Their clarity can help a team move forward, but their focus on solving the problem may feel detached to someone who needs the emotional or interpersonal impact recognised first.

Reactive types (4, 6 and 8) tend to respond with intensity and want the seriousness of an issue to be recognised. They can surface concerns that others would prefer to avoid and insist that difficult matters are addressed. But when they feel unheard, their response may become more forceful, making it harder for others to stay engaged.

How well-intentioned reactions create a repeating cycle

Imagine a team member raising a concern: “This is a serious problem. We need to deal with it.” A colleague responds, “Yes, but let’s not overreact. There are some positives here.”

The first person hears minimisation and pushes harder to communicate the seriousness of the issue. The second experiences that increased intensity as unnecessarily negative and tries even harder to calm things down. Neither is necessarily trying to be difficult. Yet each person’s response makes the other more likely to double down on their usual approach.

The same thing can happen when a colleague responds to someone’s frustration with a rapid list of solutions. The solutions may be sensible, but if the concern has not been acknowledged, the frustrated person may repeat it more forcefully. The problem-solver may then become increasingly impatient because, from their perspective, they are already trying to help.

Over time, these interactions become predictable. One person feels dismissed, another feels attacked or overwhelmed, and both leave the conversation convinced that the other is the problem. The issue is no longer just how each person reacts; it is what their reactions trigger in one another.

How to interrupt the pattern

The useful question is not simply “Why does this person always react like that?” It is “What happens between us that makes this reaction more likely?” That shift creates more options for everyone involved.

With someone who tends towards Positive Outlook, acknowledge the value of their perspective while making room for the difficulty: “There are positives here, and we also need to look carefully at what isn’t working.” The aim is not to remove their optimism, but to ensure it does not become a way of avoiding the issue.

With someone who tends towards Competency, start with the facts and the problem to be solved, then deliberately include the human impact: “We have a sensible plan. Before we move on, what has this meant for the people involved?” This makes space for both effective action and the experience of those affected.

With someone who tends towards a Reactive response, first demonstrate that the concern has been understood. Then help focus the conversation: “I can see why this matters. What is the specific issue we need to resolve?” Acknowledging the seriousness does not require agreeing with every conclusion or matching the intensity.

These approaches are not only about managing other people. Each person also has a responsibility to notice their own default. The Positive Outlook colleague may need to stay with discomfort longer; the Competency colleague may need to remain connected to the emotional impact; and the Reactive colleague may need to recognise when increasing intensity is making their message harder to hear.

What this means for team dynamics

In teams, the cost of these cycles goes beyond one uncomfortable conversation. Concerns can remain unresolved, people may stop raising issues directly, and colleagues can begin anticipating each other’s reactions before a discussion has even started. What looks like a communication problem may actually be a repeating interaction pattern that everyone is helping to sustain.

Enneagram type is only one lens, and it cannot predict exactly how someone will behave. But recognising these different responses can help a team move away from blaming individuals and towards understanding the dynamic between them.

The next time a difficult conversation starts going in circles, notice not only what each person is saying, but what happens immediately afterwards. What does one response invite from the other? And what could someone do differently to interrupt the cycle?

Further exploration

If these dynamics feel familiar, the free 4-minute Team Dynamics Risk Diagnostic offers a starting point for exploring patterns that may be affecting how your team works together. It won’t tell you about anyone’s Enneagram style, but it will help you identify some underlying dynamics that may need attention.