• Home
  • Blog
    • All
    • Julie's Ideas Series
    • Occasional Series
  • Back To JulieHay.org

Julie’s Ideas Blog 43: Names of Games

29/8/2018

1 Comment

 
Following on from my last blog about games reminded me that several years ago I renamed some games to get away from the negative connotations that would not have been recognised in Eric Berne’s time.

It seemed to me that we should not be referring to names such as Rapo, Now I’ve Got You, you Son of a Bitch, and Wooden Leg - for reasons that are obvious now.

Hence, I suggested that we changed them as follows:

Rapo became Rebuff (Hay, 1993), which still captures the same essence of appearing to offer something and then reacting negatively when someone begins to take what they think has been offered – but without restricting this to sexual activities and without any implied suggestion that rape victims somehow ‘invite’ what happens to them.

Rebuff can be illustrated with examples such as Person A within an organisation who points out that someone could avoid paying an external printer if they use the printing machine in Person A’s office – but then when Person B arrives to do that Person A complains that they are much too busy printing their own work. The domestic example might be that someone offers to babysit any time but then gets angry when they are asked to do so and says they are much too busy and would have needed far more warning.

NIGYSOB (using the initials only as if it is a word does not change the fact that it involves referring to someone as a bitch) became Gotcha (Hay, 1993) – the same dynamic is suggested without the politically incorrect insult.

Wooden Leg became Millstone (Hay, 1995), using the metaphor of ‘having a millstone around my neck’ and hence avoiding reference to a real physical disability.

Before the changes above, I had already renamed Argentina as Can You Guess – or CYG -(Hay, 1992) because I found that people struggled with the name as the theme was not clear. The new name captures the same dynamic, whereby the teacher asks the class for an answer and then keeps telling them they have the wrong answer before triumphantly announcing the correct answer. In Berne’s case he used pampas grass as the correct answer to what is Argentina famous for, and trainers often do something similar when they think they are getting participant involvement but they already have in mind what answer they want.  They fail to realise that it is obvious to the students – especially when the teacher then uncovers something they have already written on the board or shows their pre-prepared PowerPoint or otherwise uses something that they prepared earlier.

How long will it go on?

As I write this blog, I am shocked to realise that it is now over 20 years since I suggested that we should pay attention to the language we use within the TA community – and yet still many authors continue to use the original terms. It is difficult enough to have to explain to people that the early TA literature was written in line with the culture at the time, when awareness of discriminatory language was not developed. It is not helpful when we continue to use the same outdated terminology. I am sure that if Berne had lived longer, he would have been changing his own material, and I invite you to help me by using the new names in your own TA work.

And let me know if you think there are any other game names that need the same kind of attention.

References

Hay, Julie (1992) Transactional Analysis for Trainers London: McGraw-Hill

Hay, Julie (1993) Working it Out at Work Watford: Sherwood Publishing

Hay, Julie (1995) Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA Watford: Sherwood Publishing


​© 2018 Julie Hay​
 
​Julie is a fan of open access publishing so feel free to reproduce any of these blogs as long as you still attribute it to her.
​
​If you’re interested in learning more TA, Julie runs regular workshops and webinars –  we currently have an offer of a free place on one of our webinars. You can use these toward your CPD and as credit hours in pursuing professional TA qualification
​

1 Comment

Julie’s Ideas Blog 42: Games – Velcro-covered Cartwheels

23/8/2018

1 Comment

 
In Hay (1995) I introduced the idea of using Velcro to illustrate games. My thinking was that we engage in games because we have the relevant ‘hooks’ that will connect with the ‘hooks’ of whoever is our game-playing partner at the time. Rather than wonder about the differences between what Berne (1972) called the con and the gimmick, I prefer to think of it as being like what happens when we close two sides of Velcro together – the ‘hooks’ connect to each other very tightly and it is difficult to pull them apart. The way in which they suddenly come apart, with an interesting sound effect, also seems to me to be a useful metaphor for what happens as the players take their payoffs from the game.

Also in 1995, I drew a cartwheel to illustrate the ongoing nature of games. This was based on an article by Jenni Hine (1990) in which she described how the end of the game often tended to be the beginning of the next game – when asking a couple how their game had started, each one blamed the other for something that had happened previously, until they had more or less arrived back at their honeymoon.

This prompted me to use the metaphor of imagining that each of us is a cartwheel, and we are rolling around until we come into contact with another cartwheel. On the surface of each cartwheel are various hooks depending on the particular games we have learned to play as we were growing up. These hooks can be thought of as different colours of Velcro (to make this metaphor work, please ignore the fact that you know that all Velcro is formed in the same way regardless of the colour 😉)

If we come into contact with a cartwheel that has no hooks that correspond to our own, we will not engage in game playing with that person. We are unconsciously seeking those who have the matching hooks, especially when we are desperately in need of strokes and are unknowingly going to settle for negatives because they are easier to generate than positive strokes.

This metaphor can also be useful when someone decides that they will stop playing games. Having identified again that they now realise they have been playing, it is still not easy to simply stop. This is because the other person – the other cartwheel – has become accustomed to the fact that we have the right hooks, or Velcro, so there will be an automatic connection whenever our cartwheels come close enough to each other.
Picture of Cartwheel with Velcro
A Cartwheel with Velcro (Hay, 2012, p.52)
​Metaphorically, when we decide to stop playing a game, it is not enough to do the equivalent of fixing Sellotape over the Velcro.  That will work for anyone that we are meeting for the first time because they will not then recognise that we have those hooks. However, for someone who already knows us, they expect the hooks to be there. When the connection does not happen, they will escalate the game. What this means metaphorically is that they will move back slightly and then roll their cartwheel even more forcefully towards us – and the extra momentum will probably mean that they burst through our Sellotape and connect with our hooks - in other words, we may play an even harder version of the game.  This is why we may need to avoid our familiar game-playing partners for a while when we decide to stop playing a game. We need enough time for us to remove our Velcro so that we will be presenting a ‘clean’ area of cartwheel.
​
​References

Berne, Eric. (1972) What Do You Say After You Say Hello? New York: Grove Press

Hay, Julie (1995) Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA Watford: Sherwood Publishing

Hay, Julie (2012) Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA 2nd edit Hertford: Sherwood Publishing

Hine, Jenni (1990) The Bilateral and Ongoing Nature of Games Transactional Analysis Journal 20:1 28-39
​
​© 2018 Julie Hay​
 
​Julie is a fan of open access publishing so feel free to reproduce any of these blogs as long as you still attribute it to her.
​
​If you’re interested in learning more TA, Julie runs regular workshops and webinars –  we currently have an offer of a free place on one of our webinars. You can use these toward your CPD and as credit hours in pursuing professional TA qualification
1 Comment

Julie’s Ideas Blog 41: Script Release Stories

16/8/2018

0 Comments

 
​In Hay (1995, 2012) I wrote about how there were stories in the early TA literature that were metaphors intended to help people shift out of script. My descriptions of the stories are below. I followed them with a story that I had invented when I realised that the ‘monkey story’ will appeal to someone who processes kinaesthetically, the ‘parrot story’ would work for someone who processes through the auditory representational system, and there was nothing directly targeted at anyone who processes visually. Obviously, all of us can hear the various stories and imagine using visual, auditory and kinaesthetic channels but it seemed to me that it would be good if we had a story that was written to prompt visual processing.
​Eric Berne’s (1968) version refers to a monkey. 
Picture
There is a young boy (or girl, or child) whose parents tie a monkey onto his chest when he is very small.  They do this to be helpful  - indeed most of their friends do the same thing for their children.  It restricts the boy’s movement so there are some things he cannot do.  However, he trusts his parents so he learns to work around the restrictions or to fit in with them.  And the monkey keeps him safe and stops him doing things that his parents believe are dangerous.
However, when he grows up he begins to notice that some people seem to have no monkey.   They can do whatever they like.  So he thinks he will see about getting the monkey removed.

He goes to a doctor, who looks carefully at the knots in the string holding the monkey in place.  The doctor then says that the knots are very complicated and will take many months to unravel.  The man decides that sounds too expensive and decides not to bother.

Time goes by and the man gets more and more uncomfortable about the restrictions imposed by having the monkey.  So he goes to another doctor.

This doctor examines the knots very thoroughly.  The doctor then says that the knots are very complicated, and have been there a long time.  They may even take years to unravel.  Again, the man decides not to bother, although this time he feels disappointed.

More time goes by.  Eventually, the man goes to yet another doctor.  This one takes out a large pair of scissors and cuts the string.  The monkey bounds free.
​

Brian Allen (1971) provides a similar story, except that instead of a monkey there is a parrot. 
Picture
Suzy (or Shipra, or Sophie) was a small girl who had an older brother Simon (or Servaas, or Suliman).  Suzy’s parents were busy so they told Simon to take care of her.  Simon was still quite young himself so this was a big responsibility.  So he listened carefully to what their parents said to Suzy about how she should behave.  He then taught the parrot to say the same things, such as “Don’t answer back”, “Look after other people” and “Be a good girl”
Simon then put the parrot onto Suzy’s head.  Now he could play and read and do whatever he wanted to do without having to pay attention to Suzy all the time.  The parrot did it for him.
​
When Suzy grew up, she still had the parrot on her head telling her what to do and what not to do.  This interfered quite a lot with her life.  The parrot often objected to her making friends or being confident or enjoying herself.  Suzy often felt miserable when she followed the parrot’s instructions. 

One day, Suzy went to a doctor and asked for help.  The doctor told her it would take many years to cure her and gave her some pills.  Suzy felt even more depressed.

Eventually, Suzy went to another doctor for help.  This time, the doctor said all Suzy needed to do was get rid of the parrot.  Suzy was doubtful about this because she was used to having the parrot there.  She thought also that the parrot’s claws were tangled into her hair and it would be painful to pull them out.

However, this doctor smiled and said Suzy just needed a little help.  Then the doctor reached out, grabbed the parrot and threw it out the window.  It squawked once and flew away for ever.
​

Berne’s story has a kinaesthetic base - the monkey metaphor invites the listener to connect the story to the way they feel.  Allen’s story relates directly to our auditory channels, as we recognise the voices in our heads that we replay from the past.
Picture
A visual version might be to have the grown-ups keep the child in a special protective bubble.  This bubble is intended to ensure that the child does not have to face unpleasant facts of life.  Although done originally to keep the child safe, the bubble means that vision is interfered with.  Sometimes the bubble will make things look nicer than they are but most of the time it will distort the view.
​In this story, the first doctor would want a lot of time to work out how to remove the bubble.  They will need to look at it from many different angles, and to understand the potential consequences of removing it.  The second doctor would know that the bubble can be burst without any ill effects.  The person will then be able to see reality clearly, good and bad.
​
Note that for a story to represent the casting aside of script messages, we need something that does not belong.  The monkey, parrot and bubble are obviously not naturally attached to people.  If the visual story were based on special spectacles, or even a hood, it would not be as effective because people do really wear these.

It is also important to word the stories so that the grown-ups are providing these imaginary objects to be helpful and protective.  However unskilled and misguided parents are, they do the best they can.   We can help people feel free of the limitations without any need to blame someone for what happened in the past.
​
References
​

Allen, Brian (1971) Suzy and the Parrot Transactional Analysis Journal 1:3 36-37

Berne, Eric (1968) (writing as Cyprian St Cyr) The Gordon Knot Transactional Analysis Bulletin 7: 25 35

Hay, Julie (1995) Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA Watford: Sherwood Publishing

Hay, Julie (2012) Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA 2nd edit Hertford: Sherwood Publishing

© 2018 Julie Hay​
 
​Julie is a fan of open access publishing so feel free to reproduce any of these blogs as long as you still attribute it to her.
​
​If you’re interested in learning more TA, Julie runs regular workshops and webinars –  we currently have an offer of a free place on one of our webinars. You can use these toward your CPD and as credit hours in pursuing professional TA qualification
0 Comments

Julie’s Ideas Blog 40: M&Ms

9/8/2018

0 Comments

 
Having been reviewing the original edition of Donkey Bridges (Hay, 1995) for ideas that first appeared then, I realised that I had written about M&Ms previously but only briefly within an article about ‘donkey bridges’ (Hay, 1993).

As far as I can see, the first time it appeared in more detail in a publication was the 1995 version, with the same wording appearing in the 2nd edition of that book (Hay, 2012).
Picture
M&Ms were suggested by me as an alternative to the ubiquitous SMART, often presented as standing for specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, time-based, seemed to me to include duplication - how is specific different to measurable, and how is achievable different to realistic?
​
As an alternative, I stayed with the idea of the small sweets but shifted them from Smarties to M&Ms on the basis also that M&Ms can be lined up with ego states. As with Smarties, it is possible to buy small bags of M&Ms that can be given to participants – if you do this, avoid the ones with peanuts in case any of your participants have a nut allergy. And have supply of some other sweets just in case any of your participants do not eat chocolate.

​What I wrote to explain the connection with action planning and ego states was:
  • ​Measurable - if we do not state the objective in a way that can be measured, we never get the satisfaction of knowing we have achieved it.  ‘Give more strokes’ is too vague;  ’Give 3 positive strokes a week to Mohammed’ allows our Parent to check that we are doing our homework  - and to reward us.
  • Manageable  - there is often a temptation after a training course to attempt to change ourselves totally.  Instead, we need to tackle manageable amounts.  Our Adult can work out what is realistic.  Giving 50 more strokes a week would be a strain for most people; it is better to aim for 5 and achieve it than 50 and fail.
  • Motivational  - if our Child is not invested in the action plan, we are unlikely to achieve it.  We therefore need to check WIFM - what’s in it for me?   If we hardly ever see Mohammed, perhaps a better working relationship will not seem that significant to us.  However, if Mohammed is our manager an improvement in our stroking pattern may be very beneficial.
I also explained that the M&Ms manufacturers also make plastic dolls, hats and other merchandise with the letter M on the front.  These can often be found for purchase at airports. They make a fun ‘prop’ for training courses.  I have used the baseball caps to wear a series of three as I explain what each letter M stands for.  Alternatively, a set of three of the small figures can be used. The manufacturers also make larger figures with a movable arm; as you pump the arm up and down the other hand gives out small quantities of the sweets. This can be great fun as participants line up to get their reward for having written their action plan using the M&M guidelines – I often add to the fun by insisting that another participant must have checked out their action plan and confirmed that it really is worded to fit MMM.

References

Hay, Julie (1993) Eselsbrücken INTAD Newsletter 1:4 3

Hay, Julie (1995) Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA Watford: Sherwood Publishing

Hay, Julie (2012) Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA 2nd edit Hertford: Sherwood Publishing

© 2018 Julie Hay​
 
​Julie is a fan of open access publishing so feel free to reproduce any of these blogs as long as you still attribute it to her.
​
If you’re interested in learning more TA, Julie runs regular workshops and webinars –  we currently have an offer of a free place on one of our webinars. You can use these toward your CPD and as credit hours in pursuing professional TA qualification
0 Comments

Julie’s Ideas Blog 39: Levels of Contracting

2/8/2018

1 Comment

 
In Blogs 21 and 22 I wrote about multi-party contracting.  In this blog I am writing about the different levels at which we might think about contracting (Hay, 1995, 2012), and how we might link these in to the well-known 3Ps (Crossman, 1966: Steiner, 1968).
​
Contracting is a basic principle in TA - if no contract has been established we are not truly applying TA.  Contracts may or may not be written down.  A verbal contract is still a contract.  The main point is that we discuss and agree why we are interacting when we plan to use TA to help someone grow.
​
I first introduced the following ideas in the first edition of my book entitled Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA; below is how I have developed the ideas a bit further for the second edition of that book which came out in 2012.
​P6 Levels

Contracts operate at different levels - all levels need to be clear to avoid unwitting sabotage.

  • Procedural - administrative details, such as when shall we meet, where, how often, who keeps notes, what are the payment routines, cancellation procedures?
  • Professional - what am I offering as professional analyst, trainer, consultant, mentor, coach etc., what does the client need, how competent am I to meet those needs, how much will they be paying for my services, what is the client prepared to do to contribute to their own development?
  • Purpose - why are we coming together, what do you and what does the client want to achieve, how will we know when it has been attained?
  • Personal - how will we relate to each other, how friendly or remote will we be, what is an appropriate interaction style e.g. nurturing, challenging, problem-solving?
  • Psychological - what might occur outside our awareness, how might either of us sabotage the process?
  • Physis - how does the purpose fit with the client’s overall growth and development, is it ecologically sound for them, how does the work fit with my own urge to develop my potential as helping professional?

The Eyes in the Corners
​
Diagram of 'The Eyes in the Corner' - Triangle with an eye in each of the three corners
The Eyes In The Corner

​A key point of Fanita English’s (1975) article on the three cornered contract was that people fantasise about what the other parties have agreed between them. To demonstrate this, I draw eyeballs in each corner to emphasise that each stakeholder should have knowledge of the contracts between others (this may not include the content of what then gets done).

Protection, Permission and Potency
​

We can link the contract levels to:

Protection

Permission

Potency

-  procedural - clarity rather than misunderstandings
-  professional - only what I am competent to offer
-  purpose - you can achieve it
-  personal - we can interact like this
-  psychological - is brought to the surface and kept clean
-  physis - will provide the impetus for growth
Diagram of Potency, Permission and Protection Pyramid
Potency, Permission & Protection

References

Crossman, Pat (1966) Permission and Protection Transactional Analysis Bulletin 5:19 152-154

English, Fanita (1975) The Three Cornered Contract Transactional Analysis Journal 5:4 383-384

Hay, Julie (1995) Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA Watford: Sherwood Publishing

Hay, Julie (2012) Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA 2nd edit Hertford: Sherwood Publishing

Steiner, Claude (1968) Transactional Analysis as a Treatment Philosophy Transactional Analysis Bulletin 7:27 61-64
​
​
​© 2018 Julie Hay​
 
​Julie is a fan of open access publishing so feel free to reproduce any of these blogs as long as you still attribute it to her.
​

If you’re interested in learning more TA, Julie runs regular workshops and webinars –  we currently have an offer of a free place on one of our webinars. You can use these toward your CPD and as credit hours in pursuing professional TA qualification
1 Comment
    Picture
    Picture

    Categories

    All
    Announcements
    Book Reviews
    Ideas Series
    Occasional Series

    Archives

    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017


    RSS Feed


    Creative Commons License
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

​Click here if you want to
arrange ​an appointment
to talk to Julie
Julie Hay
​+44 (0) 7836 375 188
​Contact Form

​Privacy Policy

​Cookie Notice

​​© 2018 Julie Hay

  • Home
  • Blog
    • All
    • Julie's Ideas Series
    • Occasional Series
  • Back To JulieHay.org