When faced with challenges which of the two sounds more like you? 
<ul>
<li>You switch into fixing mode. You like taking control of things, make to-do lists and finish the tasks in the lists as soon as possible, and you like giving out advice; or</li>
<li>You pull back, plead assistance from anyone who would give you the time of day, you hope that other people will take responsibility.</li>
</ul>
If you're the former, then you're more likely to be an overfunctioner while the latter, an underfunctioner.

Overfunctioner vs. Underfunctioner

The relationship between an overfunctioner and an underfunctioner translates into dangerously reinforcing each other's habits: The overfunctioner takes on more than their fair share of responsibility from housework to finances while only reinforcing the underfunctioner's dependency. 
A relationship like this often curdles that could to lead to fighting or nagging. This applies not only to romantic relationships but it could also be happening at work and between family members.

The Reinforcing Trap

In situations as such where nagging becomes constant and it's unbearable to stand, Harriet Lerner, suggests that the overfunctioner needs to take a step back and do less. 
The overfunctioner should potentially allow bad things to happen. This is called the "hanging in" method.

The Reinforcing Trap: Breaking The Pattern

‘Once you learn of the OF/UF pattern, it’s hard to avoid seeing it everywhere’<figure><picture itemprop="contentUrl"><source srcset="https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/482018998951ff78213e18c54172319ddd2dbff2/0_0_1667_695/master/1667.jpg?width=620&amp;quality=45&amp;auto=format&amp;fit=max&amp;dpr=2&amp;s=f8353f83d167ea71406acb68407f899b 1240w, https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/482018998951ff78213e18c54172319ddd2dbff2/0_0_1667_695/master/1667.jpg?width=605&amp;quality=45&amp;auto=format&amp;fit=max&amp;dpr=2&amp;s=548813e2708417d76d89acb1534186a0 1210w, https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/482018998951ff78213e18c54172319ddd2dbff2/0_0_1667_695/master/1667.jpg?width=445&amp;quality=45&amp;auto=format&amp;fit=max&amp;dpr=2&amp;s=fb1c210017cb8b080565c83bb22bbcc8 890w" sizes="(min-width: 660px) 620px, 100vw" media="(-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 1.25), (min-resolution: 120dpi)"><source srcset="https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/482018998951ff78213e18c54172319ddd2dbff2/0_0_1667_695/master/1667.jpg?width=620&amp;quality=85&amp;auto=format&amp;fit=max&amp;s=5cf3db2c1ae21f651a4938ca927ba371 620w, https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/482018998951ff78213e18c54172319ddd2dbff2/0_0_1667_695/master/1667.jpg?width=605&amp;quality=85&amp;auto=format&amp;fit=max&amp;s=bc00c9fe5f1d4f8d259adc7700ccade1 605w, https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/482018998951ff78213e18c54172319ddd2dbff2/0_0_1667_695/master/1667.jpg?width=445&amp;quality=85&amp;auto=format&amp;fit=max&amp;s=15c398e68925a7541b4d391cef91911b 445w" sizes="(min-width: 660px) 620px, 100vw"><img alt="Illustration by Thomas Pullin" src="https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/482018998951ff78213e18c54172319ddd2dbff2/0_0_1667_695/master/1667.jpg?width=445&amp;quality=45&amp;auto=format&amp;fit=max&amp;dpr=2&amp;s=fb1c210017cb8b080565c83bb22bbcc8" height="282" width="678"></picture><figcaption dir="auto"> Illustration: Thomas Pullin for the Guardian</figcaption></figure><img src="https://i.guim.co.uk/img/uploads/2017/10/09/Oliver-Burkeman,-R.png?width=300&amp;quality=85&amp;auto=format&amp;fit=max&amp;s=b75b6e33bbe0ff7d111e8c7785e84577" alt="Oliver Burkeman" width="60" height="60"><div><label for="dateToggle">Fri 13 Nov 2015 10.00 EST</label></div>Last modified on Tue 19 Jun 2018 07.33 EDT<div data-testid="long-share-count" aria-hidden="true">1,378</div>Whenever someone claims there are “<a href="http://2kindsofpeople.tumblr.com/" data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr">two kinds of people in the world</a>” – extroverts and introverts, realists and idealists, optimists and pessimists – you can be pretty sure they’re oversimplifying. But here’s one that’s useful nonetheless: in your relationships with other people, you’re almost certainly an <a href="http://www.willmeekphd.com/overfunctioning-underfunctioning/" data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr">overfunctioner or an underfunctioner</a>. Faced with a challenge, you either switch into fixing mode, taking control, attacking the to-do list, and offering supposedly helpful advice; or you pull back, pleading for assistance, hoping others will take responsibility, and zone out. Put that way, it sounds like OFs are the productive (if slightly irritating) ones, while UFs are freeloading losers. But the true situation’s much murkier, and more interesting, than that.The problem – according to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Bowen" data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr">Murray Bowen</a>, the psychologist who developed the distinction – is that OFs and UFs get stuck in a mutually reinforcing trap. The OF takes on more than his or her fair share of responsibility for (say) housework, parenting, or finances, because otherwise they don’t get done. But that just reinforces the UF’s dependency, so now those tasks really don’t get done, and the OF must do even more. The relationship curdles, each accusing the other of either laziness or nagging. Once you learn of the OF/UF pattern, it’s hard to avoid seeing it everywhere: not only in marriages, but in the sulky teen who gets more passive the more his parents anxiously try to instil a sense initiative, or in the micromanaging boss who’s surprised to find that the more they meddle in their underlings’ work, the more they need to, because they have taken on their responsibilities.If you’re reading this, and if you’re interested in these kinds of questions in general, the chances are you’re prone to overfunctioning, like me. (Let’s face it: making suggestions in a newspaper about how others ought to live is basically just pathological overfunctioning.) The thorny part is that it’s hard to perceive overfunctioning as a&nbsp;problem at all. OFs and UFs alike tend to think of OFs as the people whose lives are in order, who get things done, while UFs get defined as the “problem child”, the difficult partner in a&nbsp;relationship, or the insufficiently motivated employee. Yet taking control is how OFs soothe their anxiety – just like accepting that control is how UFs soothe theirs. “For overfunctioners,” <a href="http://www.nottobetrustedwithknives.com/2011/11/02/on-being-vulnerable-and-connecting/" data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr">says Brené Brown</a>, “it’s easier to do than to feel.”<img src="https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/5a0b99b6ce82fa1cd14e89841511c42847bbd5fc/380_0_1159_695/master/1159.jpg?width=460&amp;quality=85&amp;auto=format&amp;fit=max&amp;s=13c31b6cc3c93531a585ab8e54e09729" alt="" width="140" height="84">Breaking the pattern is tough, because the OF needs to step back and do less, which means potentially letting bad things happen and tolerating the resulting anxiety. (Harriet Lerner, who popularised the OF/UF idea in her book <a href="https://bookshop.theguardian.com/dance-of-anger.html" data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr">The Dance Of Anger</a>, calls this “hanging in”: neither taking on the other’s responsibilities, nor checking out emotionally.) And don’t expect the UF to approve at first, either, since being pushed toward more responsibility is anxiety-inducing, too. Still, it’s the only way. To quote the psychologist <a href="http://videos.simonandschuster.co.uk/dr-carin-rubenstein-the-superior-wife-syndrome/34355265001" data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr">Carin Rubenstein</a>, overfunctioners need a new motto: “Be less than you can be!”

‘Once you learn of the OF/UF pattern, it’s hard to avoid seeing it everywhere’

Understand yourself and those around you.

psychology

Psychology

personaldevelopment

Personal Development

communication

Communication

loveandrelationships

Love & Relationships

‘Once you learn of the OF/UF pattern, it’s hard to avoid seeing it everywhere’

Last modified on Tue 19 Jun 2018 07.33 EDT

W henever someone claims there are “<a data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr" href="http://2kindsofpeople.tumblr.com/">two kinds of people in the world </a>” – extroverts and introverts, realists and idealists, optimists and pessimists – you can be pretty sure they’re oversimplifying. But here’s one that’s useful nonetheless: in your relationships with other people, you’re almost certainly an <a data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr" href="http://www.willmeekphd.com/overfunctioning-underfunctioning/">overfunctioner or an underfunctioner </a>. Faced with a challenge, you either switch into fixing mode, taking control, attacking the to-do list, and offering supposedly helpful advice; or you pull back, pleading for assistance, hoping others will take responsibility, and zone out. Put that way, it sounds like OFs are the productive (if slightly irritating) ones, while UFs are freeloading losers. But the true situation’s much murkier, and more interesting, than that.

The problem – according to <a data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Bowen">Murray Bowen </a>, the psychologist who developed the distinction – is that OFs and UFs get stuck in a mutually reinforcing trap. The OF takes on more than his or her fair share of responsibility for (say) housework, parenting, or finances, because otherwise they don’t get done. But that just reinforces the UF’s dependency, so now those tasks really don’t get done, and the OF must do even more. The relationship curdles, each accusing the other of either laziness or nagging. Once you learn of the OF/UF pattern, it’s hard to avoid seeing it everywhere: not only in marriages, but in the sulky teen who gets more passive the more his parents anxiously try to instil a sense initiative, or in the micromanaging boss who’s surprised to find that the more they meddle in their underlings’ work, the more they need to, because they have taken on their responsibilities.

If you’re reading this, and if you’re interested in these kinds of questions in general, the chances are you’re prone to overfunctioning, like me. (Let’s face it: making suggestions in a newspaper about how others ought to live is basically just pathological overfunctioning.) The thorny part is that it’s hard to perceive overfunctioning as a problem at all. OFs and UFs alike tend to think of OFs as the people whose lives are in order, who get things done, while UFs get defined as the “problem child”, the difficult partner in a relationship, or the insufficiently motivated employee. Yet taking control is how OFs soothe their anxiety – just like accepting that control is how UFs soothe theirs. “For overfunctioners,” <a data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr" href="http://www.nottobetrustedwithknives.com/2011/11/02/on-being-vulnerable-and-connecting/">says Brené Brown </a>, “it’s easier to do than to feel.”

Breaking the pattern is tough, because the OF needs to step back and do less, which means potentially letting bad things happen and tolerating the resulting anxiety. (Harriet Lerner, who popularised the OF/UF idea in her book <a data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr" href="https://bookshop.theguardian.com/dance-of-anger.html">The Dance Of Anger </a>, calls this “hanging in”: neither taking on the other’s responsibilities, nor checking out emotionally.) And don’t expect the UF to approve at first, either, since being pushed toward more responsibility is anxiety-inducing, too. Still, it’s the only way. To quote the psychologist <a data-link-name="in body link" dir="ltr" href="http://videos.simonandschuster.co.uk/dr-carin-rubenstein-the-superior-wife-syndrome/34355265001">Carin Rubenstein </a>, overfunctioners need a new motto: “Be less than you can be!”

Do you overfunction or underfunction in a relationship?

Overfunctioner vs. Underfunctioner

The Reinforcing Trap

The Reinforcing Trap: Breaking The Pattern

CURATED BY

Related collections

More like this