Karlstad Group update SOLWorld 2009 conference Texel

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by An Baert on July 1, 2009 at 7:31

Considering we are finding ways to get people to know and to acknowledge SF - both people in the professional field and in the larger field of customers applying SF - I think it might be useful to look at the very positions where fellow practitioners of other traditions on the one hand, and customers/users on the other hand, stand and look from.

In the first place for us to discover what is possibly standing in between us and them. Or for us to learn about what has a good chance to invite them to take a first step in our direction.
Or for us to find out what we’d better stop doing that has been confusing them all along. And for us to find out which things might be helpful doing in order for us to really see them, and in order for them to really see us.
Also for us to discover what is about to work well, what is actually working well and what has worked well already.
And then for us to decide which actions we are going to take first, and next, and next, in order to get closer to our (maybe common?) goal.

I’m in the UK this summer and I offer to facilitate a constellation on that, so that we can look at these questions. I’ll be in Bournemouth from August 2nd till 9th, and nearby London from August 10th till 14th. Who would attend such a session?

Permalink Reply by Hans-Peter Korn on July 2, 2009 at 16:41

Reading this: "In the first place for us to discover what is possibly standing in between us and them. Or for us to learn about what has a good chance to invite them to take a first step in our direction." it sounds for me a bit like an "evangelicalism".
As long as we expect, that the others should do "a first step in our direction" it will be difficult to have an open dialogue. And as long as we ask "what is possibly standing in between us and them" we are thinking in terms of "constellations of positions and impediments". And we will try (or the others think that we will try) to defence our positions and to eliminate the impediments from OUR side like doing an invasion.

So, I would prefer to start such dialogues by stopping to talk about "labelled positions" standing for "traditions" or "schools" (like "SF" or "NLP" or "systemic" or "Gestalt" or ... ... ...) and instead of it to share our experiences how we work with our clients in specific issues - and how we know, that it was useful for our clients.

Permalink Reply by Mark McKergow on July 2, 2009 at 17:10

I have been asked to do a book chapter on complexity and sfbt with Gale Miller... we will be working on it over the summer.

Permalink Reply by Hans-Peter Korn on July 4, 2009 at 9:02

That's a really great chance to underline SF (and not only SFBT as a therapeutic "discipline") with one of the most important theoretical aspects!

Permalink Reply by An Baert on July 3, 2009 at 21:45

Thank you for your replies. Mark, nice to learn about this chapter on complexity and sfbt!
I understand Hans-Peter is not attending either, for other reasons. It may be useful that I clarify some things about me and my work. The metaphors I'm using apply to the positioning and proces work which is done in structural and organisational constellations work. On the other hand, I happen to be very much into doing and into experiencing what works. Debriefing afterwards and planning what to do next, are also interactions that appeal to me. Unfortunately I have less expertise, and thus less accuracy, when it comes to theoretical discussions. That kind of exchanges are in a way not that appealing to me. And the new suggestion, about describing cooperations with clients that have been useful to these clients, is also an activity that would not really empower me. So I'm glad to let collegues who really enjoy this, have all the fun with it.

Permalink Reply by Hans-Peter Korn on July 4, 2009 at 9:36

Reading in your reply, An, this: "I understand Hans-Peter is not attending either, for other reasons." I am not clear about the meaning of it: Did you mean, that you will be in UK in the next weeks and you offer to do some constellations about this: "to look at the very positions where fellow practitioners of other traditions .... .... .... discover what is possibly standing in between us ... ... ... invite them to take a first step in our direction." ?
If this is your offer: Yes, I will not attend because 1st I am not in UK this summer and 2nd I think, as I have written above, instead of dealing with positions and with impediments between the positions I prefer to forget such "labelled positions" standing for "traditions" or "schools" (like "SF" or "NLP" or "systemic" or "Gestalt" or ... ... ...) and instead of it to share our experiences how we (as "unlabelled persons") work with our clients in specific issues - and how we know, that it was useful for our clients.

BTW: I have learned a lot about systemic constellation from Insa Sparrer and Matthias Varga von Kibéd and in the course of my psychodrama-training. And I also have directed a lot of SF constellation work myself. And I experienced, that sometimes such constellations tend to enhance the "thinking in positions" due to the fact, that in constellations such positions become very visible.
To show the connections (instead of the borders) between us and other "traditions" or "schools" I would prefer as a constellation something based on Moreno's "social atom": SF (as the focus) is surrounded by several representatives for different "sources" of SF like constructivism, systems theory, complexity science, neuroscience, ... ... ... And the connections from SF (the focus) to each of this representatives is symbolised by a rope. And SF feels like a spider in the middle of his web which is hold by the different sources. And the focus (as SF) now can compliment in some words each source for its contribution to SF.