Individual dysfunctions in the group | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Rob Sandelin (floriferous![]() |
|
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 15:02:05 -0700 (MST) |
Mary Sorehead, from Shadow Commons(teehee) listed a couple typical dysfunctions (I am including the post below for reference, not out of desire to make your mail boxes fill up). Yes, there are ALWAYS individual dysfunctions in a group process. From my experience as a facilitation teacher and consensus process trainer I used to teach strategies for setting up your process to work with these issues. Intervention is a key facilitator skill, and it works wonders on all of the issues brought up below, and many more that I can list. But, intervention is something few facilitators train in, think about, or implement. And without intervention, the results, as stated, end up highly unsatisfying for everyone involved, even the person with the dysfunctional behavior. This can be remedied, but it takes real work, study and commitment from the people who run your processes. And I would disagree about individual therapy. It has been my experience that folks with considerable dysfunctions can be worked with in such a way that they do not seriously impede the groups process. There are some good trainers out there, such as Tree Bresson, and Laird Schaub who can teach you some of the things you can do. There are also some good resources available in print. Several are listed on the group process webpage of the Intentional Communities Resource Pages. www.ic.org/nica click on the resources link Rob Sandelin Sky Valley Environments <http://www.nonprofitpages.com/nica/SVE.htm> Field skills training for student naturalists Floriferous [at] msn.com -----Original Message----- From: cohousing-l-admin [at] cohousing.org [mailto:cohousing-l-admin [at] cohousing.org]On Behalf Of Gary Kent Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 2:02 PM To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org Subject: [C-L]_Individual versus group needs and wants I love the theory and philosophy of consensus. Everyone is heard, all opinions are respected etc., etc., However........ How about a group member who sounds like a broken record - same thing over and over again. Things are complicated by the member not having a terrific memory for facts, resorting to hyperbolic language and often being out of the information loop (not on e-mail) by choice. I'm sure someone will tell me that the reason this is continuing to happen must be because the person obviously has not REALLY been heard, not listened to with respect etc., How about the person who knows they have been heard when the group does as they say, and until the group does the particular action or makes a certain decision they will continue to go on ad nauseum. I.e "I know I have been heard when the group does what I ask". What do you do then? Add to that new members who have not heard the cry before and when they see a member in this state immediately want to fix things for the person. Add this to the already challenging, risky, exhausting, time consuming and stressful development stage and you've got a perfect recipe for head banging. A good friend of mine says that Consensus is a call to maturity. I wholeheartedly agree. Self awareness is sadly lacking in our culture. In my experience using a consensus process when there is not much self awareness present can be extremely frustrating. I'm very much in favour of finding a new model of decision making and do believe that consensus and sociocracy are the models for the future, however..... I really do wish the process worked the way Gail Holmes expresses it: <If they are given space and respect then they will learn to give it back to the group. Things will flow. If they like red and everyone else likes green it still needs to be "heard" and understood. Maybe there is an interesting reason for it.> Sadly in my experience the interesting reason is some old wounding and nothing short of two or three years of intensive therapy will shift it. I'm sounding pretty cynical today I know, ah well where are those rose tinted glasses anyway? Mary Sorehead Shadow Commons Cohousing. Forgive the pseudonym, trying to avoid hurt feelings. _______________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org Unsubscribe and other info: http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.332 / Virus Database: 186 - Release Date: 3/6/02 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.332 / Virus Database: 186 - Release Date: 3/6/02 _______________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org Unsubscribe and other info: http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L
- Re: Individual versus group needs and wants, (continued)
-
Re: Individual versus group needs and wants Sharon Villines, February 11 2003
- Indiana Cohousing Group Forming Megan Moss, February 11 2003
-
Head-banging & our new "Round-tabling" Manual sbraun, February 12 2003
- Re: [C-L] Consensus and Sociocracy Sharon Villines, February 12 2003
- Individual dysfunctions in the group Rob Sandelin, February 12 2003
-
Re: Individual versus group needs and wants Sharon Villines, February 11 2003
- Re: Individual versus group needs and wants Tree Bressen, February 20 2003
- Re: Interpreting Sharon's" individual vs. group" statements Kay Argyle, February 18 2003
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.