Each relationship type has a type describing the converse relationship. For example, the converse relationship for “Parent Company” is “Subsidiary.” When a user creates a new relationship in InterAction, InterAction creates both “sides” of the relationship – one using the forward type and one using the converse type.
For example, if you create a Parent Company relationship between TeleNorth and Justus Software, InterAction automatically creates a Subsidiary relationship between Justus Software and TeleNorth.
This is necessary to ensure that users can find and view relationships from either direction when using Windows Client and the Web Client. When you create a new relationship type, you create the converse at the same time.
A relationship type can be the converse of itself. For example, the converse of “Acquaintance” is “Acquaintance.” For more about choosing the wording for the converse, see What if I Can't Find a Converse Relationship Type That is Always Correct?
When you create a converse relationship type, all of the same settings apply as do for the “forward” relationship. For example, if you set a relationship type as a Key relationship type, the converse will automatically be set as a Key relationship type.
When you edit a relationship type, you also edit the converse type. The following settings always match on both relationship types:
- Category
- Key Relationship Type
- Valid For
- Weighted Order
- Permission
- Status
- All Former Settings
- All Strength Settings
For example, if you change the status of a relationship type to Inactive, the converse also automatically changes to Inactive. You cannot have different statuses in relationships that are the converse of each other.
Also, the Person to Company and Company to Person attributes must complement each other. If you add the Valid For setting of Person to Company to a relationship type, the converse adds Company to Person.
After you have created a relationship type, you cannot change which relationship type is set as the converse.
What if I Can't Find a Converse Relationship Type That is Always Correct?
For most relationship types, identifying the converse is straightforward, and you can be fairly certain that it is always correct. For example, the converse of Acquaintance is itself (Acquaintance) – if Jane Tarnoff is an acquaintance of Brad Faulkner, then most likely Brad is also an acquaintance of Jane. Similarly, if the company Telenorth is the parent company for Justus Software, then you know for certain that Justus Software is a subsidiary of TeleNorth.
This isn’t the case with some relationships. For example, the user Ed Roberts might indicate that he “knows” Jane. This doesn’t necessarily mean that Jane thinks that she knows Ed, so making the Knows relationship type a converse of itself could create inaccurate data in some cases.
To get around this, you can use a passive version of the relationship type as the converse. In the case Knows, this means that the converse is Known By. If Ed knows Jane, then Jane is known by Ed. The converse relationship (Jane is known by Ed) is always correct.
The only relationship type in a default installation of InterAction that uses this convention is the Knows/Known By type, but it is a useful technique to consider when creating your own relationships.