Before you read any further: this module is different from Values and from Dreams and Aspirations. Those two are about the participant, what they value, what they're moving toward. This one is about the participant and someone else. It's the only module in the program that asks people to think about specific real relationships in their lives, which is exactly why it needs a steadier hand than it might look like it needs on paper. Keep two things in your head the whole session: no names, ever, only actions, and nobody here is being asked to fix or repair a relationship, only to notice their own part in it.
[Gather the group. Wait until you have most people's attention before starting.]
"Hi everyone, I'm [your name], and I'll be facilitating today's session.
This module is about the relationships in your life, and specifically about how trust actually gets built and broken. Not the big dramatic moments. The small repeated ones. Every action you take with another person either builds the relationship up, breaks it down a little, or doesn't change much either way. Nobody is walking around consciously counting. But you can usually feel roughly where you stand with someone.
Two things this is not. It's not a scoreboard, we're not working out who owes who. And it's not about fixing anyone else. It's about noticing what's in your control.
Here's how it's going to go. We'll sort twelve everyday actions into building a relationship or breaking one, at whatever pace this group needs. We'll look honestly at which of those you actually do, in a way that never leaves this room unless you want it to. We'll see how the exact same action can land completely differently depending on who's receiving it. And at the end, you'll walk away with something concrete: a declaration and one relationship-building action you can actually work on."
"I'm not here to tell you who to trust or how to fix any relationship in your life. I'm here to help you notice what's already happening, and how much of it is inside your control. Let's begin."
[Optional: if it feels natural to you, share a small personal example of your own. Keep it in your own words.]
Mandatory · 30–35 min
[The mechanic: 1. Bring up the Action Sort screen on the Group Relationships Board. 2. Read one action aloud at a time, everyone signals builds or breaks (thumbs up or thumbs down, or simply saying it aloud), tally the read on the board. 3. Expect this round to generate stories, not quick answers. Let a participant explain what they were picturing if they want to, that's the round working, not the round running long. 4. Wave 1 (actions 1–6) usually lands cleanly. Wave 2 (actions 7–12) is built to split the group, slow down here. 5. When the board's split marker appears, stop and ask one person from each side what they were picturing, don't resolve it, just hear both, then move on.]
"We're going to look at twelve everyday actions, and for each one you tell me whether it builds the relationship or breaks it. Thumbs up for builds, thumbs down for breaks, or just tell me. No right answers, just your honest read. One rule for the whole round, and it's the only one: we talk about the action, not about who did it. No names, not even initials."
"These first few are pretty straightforward. Just go with what you know."
[After action 6, the mid-point:] "Okay, halfway. Those were the easier ones, and I think we mostly agreed. The next six are going to be less obvious. If you find yourself thinking 'well, it depends,' that's the right instinct, hold onto it."
[On a split, in Wave 2:] "Okay, we're split on this one. What were you picturing when you picked yours?" [Take one from each side, without resolving it.] "So the same action, two completely different reads. Let's keep going."
[Watch for: a room that agrees on everything in Wave 2 usually means the actions are being read as abstract categories rather than real situations, ask one person what they were actually picturing and the split usually appears. If a participant tells a longer story behind their answer, let it run, this is often where the module's richest content shows up for this group. This is the module where names leak, catch a name at the first instance, before it becomes the group's norm.]
"There's no universal list of what builds a relationship and what breaks it. What just happened in this room, real splits across twelve actions, is closer to the truth than any rulebook could be. The people who get the most from their relationships build them up early, before they ever need to draw on them. Notice which of today's twelve actions you already do without thinking, and which ones you've been meaning to."
"Which action surprised you most, and why?"
[Optional. Use your judgment for your group, but it's worth considering after this first round.]
"Many of us carry a lifetime of relationships in this room, some that lasted, some that didn't, some we're still working out how we feel about. A round like this can bring up memories, or people, that have nothing to do with today. That's alright. Today isn't about deciding who was right or wrong in the past. It's about noticing what's still in your control, right now, in the relationships you have today."
[If this brings up grief, loss, or an estrangement someone hasn't resolved, that's not a sign the round went wrong. It usually means the round is working. Let it be said, don't rush past it, and check in privately afterward if it seems to be sitting heavily with someone.]
[Only if you're running Round 2.]
"So we've sorted twelve actions in the abstract. Now we're going to make it specific, and it gets a bit more personal, because you're going to look at which of these you actually do."
Optional · 20–23 min
[The mechanic: 1. Bring up the Pair Exchange screen. 2. Say the framing out loud before pairs start, not after: nothing from this round goes on the board, and nothing goes back to the group unless the participant chooses to bring it. 3. Give three minutes of silent individual thinking on three prompts, using the recommended time shown on the board and keeping time yourself. Don't fill the silence. 4. Pair up for 6 minutes each way, keeping time yourself using the recommended times shown on the board. The listener's job is just to listen, no advice. If the group is an odd number, make one group of three and give them 4 minutes each. 5. Bring the group back together and take two or three people sharing one insight, not the person it was about.]
"This one's in pairs, and it's the most personal bit of the module, so a couple of things first. Nothing you say in your pair goes on the board, and nothing goes back to the group unless you choose to bring it. And you can pass, on any of the three, no explanation needed."
"Take three minutes on your own to think about three things. One, a relationship-building action you already do. Two, a relationship-breaking action you'd like to be more aware of in yourself. Three, one thing you'd still like to say or do in a relationship that matters to you."
"Pair up. Six minutes each way, I'll tell you when to swap. Take your time, there's no rush. The listener's job is just to listen. Don't advise, don't diagnose, don't tell them what it means. You just listen."
"Two or three of you, what's one thing you noticed in that conversation? Remember, the insight, not the person."
[Watch for: self-criticism is the risk here, not distress. A participant who spends their whole six minutes cataloguing their own failures has misunderstood the round, the frame is noticing, not confessing. Redirect to the third item, the thing they'd still like to say or do. Also watch listeners who start advising, that's the habit this whole day is trying to break. If someone starts describing another person in detail during the group share, bring it back: "Let's bring it back to you, what did you notice about your own side of it?"]
[The pauses in this round are longer and more loaded than in Round 1, and it's tempting to fill them. Notice your own urge to rescue a silence, especially during the three minutes of individual thinking and the six minutes each way in pairs, and resist it. Those pauses are where the round actually works.]
"This round doesn't get written down anywhere, on purpose. What you said to your partner is yours to keep or act on, not something the room needs to see. Most people are naturally better at one of these three: building relationships up, noticing when they're breaking down, or actually changing how they act. Whichever one felt easiest to answer just now is probably the one you already lean on."
"Of the three things you just said out loud, which one are you actually going to do something about?"
[Only if you're running the next activity.]
"We've sorted the actions, and we've looked at which ones we do. Now we're going one level deeper, into why the same action lands completely differently depending on who's receiving it."
Optional, check first · 15–20 min
[Facilitator background, not something you read aloud. Check all five before letting a group start. If any one isn't true, send the group straight to Round 4 instead. Rounds 1, 2 and 4 are complete in themselves, a group that skips this round hasn't missed anything they need.]
[This round usually needs less explaining with this group than with any other. Most participants have already lived the insight that the same action lands two different ways, they don't need to be convinced of it. Feel free to move through the framing quickly and spend more of the round on the reflection and facilitation practice instead.]
[The mechanic: 1. Bring up the It Depends screen. 2. Walk through both worked examples with the group, a relationship-building action that can land badly (unsolicited advice), and a relationship-breaking action that can build trust (a firm boundary or a clear no). 3. Give a few minutes of individual reflection on the three prompts below, then time in pairs on whichever question they've got most to say about. 4. Run the facilitation practice: hold the key question on screen, keep time yourself using the recommended time shown, one person names an action, the other asks the question and listens without adding to it.]
"In Round 1 we sorted actions into building and breaking. Now we're going to break that sorting, on purpose. Offering someone advice is meant as relationship building, and it can land as intrusive, or controlling, or like you think they can't handle it. Setting a firm boundary, or just saying no, looks like relationship breaking on paper, and it can land as respect, because now the other person knows exactly where they stand with you. So the same action can go either way. What decides it isn't the action. It's the person, and what's already going on between you."
[Individual reflection prompts, read all three aloud:]
"There is one question that does most of the work in this whole module. Here it is: 'How might the other person experience that action?' That's it. It moves someone from what they meant to what actually landed, without you having to explain anything to them."
[Watch for: signals the group is ready, participants describe their own patterns without blaming themselves or anyone else, show curiosity, and can hold intention and impact apart. Signals to stop and go to Round 4, participants start diagnosing themselves or others, repeatedly assign blame, withdraw emotionally, or treat the metaphor as a calculation of who owes whom.]
[Watch the metaphor. If you hear "he owes me," "I've done so much for her," or anything that sounds like a balance dispute, redirect once:] "This isn't a ledger. What's the part that's actually in your control?"
[Don't let anyone leave with a label. No "toxic," "narcissistic," "avoidant," "traumatised," "people-pleaser," about themselves or about absent people. Use observational language instead: "That's a pattern you've noticed." / "What effect does it tend to have?" / "When does it show up most often?"]
"Every example on this board could have gone the other way, with almost no change in the action itself. What changed was who received it and what they needed that day. Before you act on someone else's behalf, especially someone you don't know well yet, ask how it might land instead of assuming they'll understand what you meant. A thirty-second check-in costs almost nothing: 'Is it okay if I bring this up?' or 'How do you want help with this?' can close most of the gap."
"Think of one relationship in your life where you'd want to check first instead of assume. What would checking actually sound like?"
"Okay, we've looked at what builds a relationship, what we actually do, and how the same action can land two different ways. Let's turn that into something you actually walk away with."
Mandatory · 15 min
[Use Back and Next on the board to bring up each reflection stage in turn, and read it out loud together before anyone starts writing. Hand out a large-print worksheet and a pen to each participant. The board never collects the private declaration, this part stays on paper. Give everyone quiet time to write privately, five minutes. Offer to write for anyone who'd rather dictate than write by hand.]
"One more thing before you write. You're responsible for your own contribution to a relationship, the actions you choose to take. You're not responsible for the other person's choices. And you're never responsible for keeping a relationship going if it isn't safe."
"Finish these two sentences. 'Someone I want to build a relationship with is ___, and I will ___ soon.' 'One thing I want to do or say to strengthen a key relationship is ___.'"
[Before they write:] "You don't have to use a real name on your sheet, 'my daughter' or 'an old friend' works just as well. And make it something you can actually picture yourself doing. 'I'll be a better mother' isn't an action, nobody can point to when that happens. 'I'll call her and actually ask about her week' is an action. If the relationship you're thinking of is a difficult one, and writing an action toward it doesn't feel right, don't. Pick a different relationship, or just sit this one out. That's completely fine."
[If you only have thirty seconds with a group in this round, spend it on this distinction: "I will be a better mother" is abstract, and nobody can point to when it happens. "I will call her and actually ask about her week" is observable.]
[The Non-Negotiable.] This is where the agency boundary you just said out loud gets enforced, not just stated. If a participant's relationship involves abuse, coercion, family violence, or is otherwise unsafe, do not ask them what relationship-building action they could make. The responsibility for maintaining an unsafe relationship must never be placed on the participant. Offer a different relationship, or let them sit the writing out entirely. Then follow the STOP protocol if anything was disclosed.
"Thank you for your honesty and effort today. Hold onto what you wrote, nobody needs to read it out for it to count."
"Revisit your action next time you meet. Don't grade whether it worked, ask whether it's become automatic yet. Relationships are built the same way trust is: through small actions, repeated often enough that they stop needing to be decided on each time.
No single gesture fixes or breaks a relationship. What builds up over months and years is what actually determines the shape of that relationship, whether people trust you, feel safe with you, and want to keep showing up. That means today's twelve actions matter less on their own than as a pattern you keep choosing."
[Close warmly. Thank the group for their honesty and effort today. You don't need a big speech, a simple and sincere thank you lands better than a long one.]