Continuing my contribution to Fenman’s publication called Train the Trainer, here is what I wrote about stroking and also some answers I provided to questions that were being asked about TA at the time – and still are! Strokes
Human beings need contact with other humans. Children who lack positive recognition will often misbehave in an unwitting attempt to get attention - something that teachers then tend to provide in the form of punishment. These same naughty children may grow up to be the employees who are always being disciplined (and hence, paid attention to) by the manager. Berne coined the term stroking for the process of giving human recognition. A stroke is a unit of recognition, which is anything we do that lets another person know that we recognise their existence. Strokes vary in intensity, from a simple glance through a conversation and up to physical contact. They may also be positive, or life and growth encouraging, and negative, which are life and growth discouraging. Many of us will settle for negatives if we cannot get enough positives, as if we know at some deep level that we must get a minimal amount to maintain human functioning. The strokes associated with learning have a significant impact. Those of us who enjoy learning have usually been accustomed to a pattern of positive stroking at school. Teachers will have shown a genuine interest in us, will have encouraged us to see mistakes as opportunities for learning, and will have let us know how pleased they were when we learned. Unfortunately, many people were not so fortunate and will have come to associate school with a diet of negative strokes. Don’t get trapped in regression When we enter a training situation in the present, most of us regress to schooldays, albeit momentarily. If, as so often happens, the trainer has also regressed and is now behaving just like a teacher from their own past, the stage is set for potential problems. The best case scenario is of a confident student with a caring teacher . The worst case scenario is a belligerent student with a punitive teacher, so that the whole thing becomes a battle for control. Trainers can avoid becoming trapped in regression by paying attention to their own stroking needs and their approach to training. They need a good pattern of positive strokes from other people, such as colleagues and friends, so they are not tempted to rely on students to meet their recognition needs. Trainers also need a variety of role models, so they can select the most effective training styles to suit the student and the circumstances. They will then be able to offer appropriate strokes to students, across a range that encompasses and balances praise, encouragement, reassurance, challenge, constructive criticism and facilitation of self-directed learning. Trainers will tend to succeed at this to the extent that they are able to stay in the here-and-now and choose how to behave rather than automatically modelling themselves on their recollections of teachers past. Check your own stroking pattern Check the health of your personal stroking pattern by making a chart with a column for each of your colleagues, plus leave a spare column and add in whatever training group(s) you are currently working with. Add rows so you have space to respond to the following questions for each column:
Questions and Answers Didn’t TA disappear back in the sixties? When TA was first developed, it spread rapidly and an international association was set up that reached 14000 members around the world. However, it then became virtually a pop psychology for many years, whilst serious TA practitioners continued their work and the development of the theories in a low profile way. Over the years, a European association was set up – and became bigger than the international association. Between them, they have recently combined their examination processes and created the Transactional Analysis Certification and Training Council. There are now TA associations in over 60 countries. Isn’t TA really about psychotherapy? Originally developed by Dr Eric Berne as a psychotherapy, it is now also used extensively in organisational and educational settings – with suitable amendments to the theoretical models and the style of application. Most of these concepts are just as useful for developmental TA as they are for psychotherapeutic TA – they just need adjusting so the focus is development rather than cure. It has been possible for some time to obtain international accreditation in 4 different fields of application – psychotherapy, organisational, educational and counselling. There are an increasing number of practitioners and trainers in these developmental TA fields. Can I teach TA without being qualified? Anyone can teach TA - and the models are simple yet robust enough that people will often understand and benefit from them even if the trainer does not know TA that well. On the other hand, unqualified trainers may limit their own impact if they have not practised using TA to understand their own issues and the impact of these on their work. There are now several developmental TA trainers around the UK; options include introductory courses run to an international syllabus, skill building workshops, international accreditation and postgraduate certificate, diploma and MSc programmes. References Hay, Julie (2003) Transactional Analysis in the Classroom Train the Trainer, Issue 1 © 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.
0 Comments
Back in the noughties I contributed several issues to a Fenman publication called Train the Trainer that was issued as a binder of material on a range of topics. Below is an extract from one I wrote about TA in the classroom. In this blog I include what I wrote about ego states and contracting – in Part 2 I will present what I wrote about stroking and also add some answers to questions that were being asked about TA at the time – and still are! Transactional Analysis (TA) is an approach to understanding what makes people tick, a collection of interlocking theories, and a philosophy that incorporates a belief that people want to grow and develop. The original TA (now called TA proper) consisted of the analysis of transactions, or interactions between people, using the notion of ego states. However, many more concepts were developed so that the term ‘transactional analysis’ is now used to refer to the whole collection. In addition to teaching this range of concepts to participants, we can use most of them to analyse our own behaviours and interactions in the classroom
Ego States Eric Berne, who developed the TA version of ego states, declared that we have Parent, Adult and Child ego states systems of thinking, feeling and behaving. If we consider only the behaviours (because we can see these but cannot truly know what someone is thinking and feeling) we can work with a personal styles model (Hay 1992, 1995). There are five personal styles with which we interact with others – each has positive and negative aspects. Controlling Parent firm, sets clear boundaries domineering, opinionated Nurturing Parent caring, helps others develop smothering, invites dependency Functional Adult logical, problem solving, reasoning may be cold, unfeeling, analyses jokes Adapted Child courteous, fits in with others over-compliant, sulky, rebellious Natural Child friendly, curious, spontaneous selfish, over-emotional, immature Trainer Styles There is a risk that trainers automatically adopt a Controlling or Nurturing Parent style, while participants unconsciously expect to operate from Adapted or Natural Child. If this happens, the training/learning process will not be very effective. The best trainers are skilled at using all five personal styles. In this way, they encourage the learner to do the same. This also helps the learner to take responsibility for their own development, through:
The Three-Cornered Contract Contracting is a key element of transactional analysis, and refers to the process of creating a clear agreement around expected outcomes and responsibilities. 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. When used effectively within the training process, a good contract will mean that ‘problem participants’ cease to exist! This is because contracting ensures that the requirements of the organisation are both clear and realistic, that the trainer has the relevant competencies, and that the participants understand the link between the training and the work performance. Trainers in organisations are usually involved in contracts between at least three parties – the trainer, the organisation (or a representative of it) and the participants. Levels of Contracting Contracts operate at different levels - all levels need to be clear to avoid unwitting sabotage.
The first stage of the contracting will generally be between the trainer and the organisation. Typically, they will agree on the training objectives and the course design. At this stage as there may well be no involvement by the participants. Subsequently, the trainer and the participants arrive in the classroom. Unless the joining instructions have been atypically informative, the participants and the trainer may have somewhat different ideas on what is going to take place. At worst, the participants may by there for the wrong reasons. Contracting in the Classroom We can avoid problems by using the three cornered contract in the classroom. It takes only a few minutes at the start of a course to draw the triangle on the flipchart and talk the participants through it, inviting them to add their part. We can explain that our contract with the organisation is similar to their contract with the organisation. We are being paid to do our job and so are they. As part of this, they have implicitly agreed to attend training courses if the organisation requires it. In return, the organisation pays them, and usually continues to pay them during their training as they are learning how to do their job even better. Although we will of course include the procedural and professional levels of the contract in this process, the more significant reason for contracting like this is to take care of the psychological level of the contract. We bring the secret agendas and covert concerns into the open, where they can be discussed and dealt with. Participants hear from us the details of what the organisation has asked for, and what we are prepared to do. They can be honest about their concerns, which may well include some fantasies about how we are going to ‘fix’ them on behalf of then organisation. Explaining the contract reassures them that there is a professional purpose to the training and it is not simply a management plot! We can then go on to establish a contract between us, which is likely to include agreement on aspects such as: trainers teach – participants learn
trainers structure – participants get involved trainers facilitate – participants share their reactions trainers provide theory – participants bring real-world issues to work on References Hay, Julie (1992) Transactional Analysis for Trainers Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill, (republished 1996) Watford: Sherwood Publishing 2nd edition published 2009 Hay, Julie (1995) Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA Watford: Sherwood Publishing 2nd edition published 2009 Hay, Julie (2003) Transactional Analysis in the Classroom Train the Trainer, Issue 1 © 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. In Blog 15 I wrote about Solution Stroking (Hay, 1992) and in Blog 24 about organisational stroking patterns (Hay, 1993, 1996). Below is what I wrote more generally about strokes for a publication called Nurturing Potential (Hay, 2003). And of course there is a lot more about stroking in my books (Hay, 2009a, 2009b). Probably the most widely known theory about expressing appreciation and motivating others is the concept of stroking. This idea was developed during the sixties by Dr Eric Berne and the term is now used throughout the world. A stroke is a ‘unit of recognition’, or an interaction between people. It is anything we do that demonstrates in some way to another person that we recognize their existence. This may be something as simple as glancing at someone or as intense as hugging them - with talking to them coming somewhere in between in terms of intensity of the stroking. Strokes may also be positive or negative. Dr Berne pointed out that strokes are a biological necessity. Human beings experience great difficulty in living without them. Babies do not develop properly if they are not given strokes, as has unfortunately been demonstrated in recent years in orphanages where children have been neglected. People kept in solitary confinement also experience high levels of stress due to the lack of human contact - this is probably why we use this as a punishment. Only a few of us can manage to become hermits. Most of us need human contact - and some of us need a great deal of it. We still do not know for certain whether this is due to nature or nurture. However, we do know that individuals vary in their need for strokes. The more we can match the individual need in a positive way, the better the person will be able to function. Positive and Negative Strokes In order to stroke people effectively, it helps if we understand the different types of strokes that we can give. The most significant distinction is whether the stroke is a positive or negative one. Please note that this is not the same as saying that the stroke is something that sounds nice or something that sounds unpleasant. A positive stroke may be a compliment but it can be many other things too, such as: a routine greeting (this would be a low intensity stroke); asking a question to find out about the other person or their views; sharing something about yourself with them; or inviting them to join you for coffee. A positive stroke is, in fact, any form of interaction that invites the recipient to feel OK about themself and about others. A negative stroke is an interaction that invites the recipient to believe that someone is not OK - this may be them, another person, or both. These definitions are important. They mean that constructive criticism is a positive stroke. We are not saying, therefore, that you should never criticize someone. Obviously, this may well be necessary if their performance is not satisfactory. However, there is no need to give destructive criticism. Instead, your remarks can be phrased in a way that concentrates on what they need to do to perform better. This format of constructive criticism lets the person know that you believe they are competent and that they can improve. You might like to think about how you feel when someone gives you feedback in this way, compared to how you feel when they make purely negative comments about what is wrong with what you have done. The positive and negative definitions also mean that praising someone by comparing them to someone else will generally be a negative stroke. This is because that kind of comment usually invites the recipient to feel that they are somehow better than the other person. This is psychologically unhealthy for them. So, comments like “You do that so much better than your colleagues can ever hope to do.” or “I wish that Kevin were as good at this as you obviously are.” are only likely to lead to arrogance on the part of the person you are stroking. This type of stroke may also create bad feelings within their team, especially if it gets repeated to the people who are being described as less effective. Conditional or Unconditional Strokes Another classification for strokes is whether they are conditional or unconditional. Conditional strokes are interactions that occur on condition that someone has done something. Unconditional strokes are given without any conditions. Conditional strokes, therefore, tend to be those strokes which are about things that the person has some control over. Examples of this are performance, the way they are dressed, whether they are late to work, comments about specific behaviors, and so on. The key here is that the person is only given the stroke if they have actually done something to deserve it. Conditional strokes may be positive or negative. Unconditional strokes, on the other hand, are given for something over which the person has no control or simply because the person exists. Unconditional strokes are much more powerful than conditional strokes as they are about the person. Some people will find that unconditional strokes are a bit too powerful - they may prefer not to feel quite so close to someone. You may notice that they only seem comfortable when they are accepting conditional strokes. Unconditional strokes include examples such as telling someone you enjoy working with them, commenting on aspects of their appearance that they cannot change (like the color of their eyes or their height), asking them questions about themselves as human beings. Stroking Patterns Because strokes are such an essential part of life, we all establish patterns of interactions so that we can be sure that we will get enough recognition. What happens is that we tend to establish relationships with a fairly limited number of people who tend to provide the types of strokes that we are used to. We will, of course, have contact sometimes with other people but it is quite likely that the strokes they give us are rather like a bonus on top of our regular diet. We may have several patterns in different areas of our lives. Most of us, for example, will have a stroking pattern established at work that is based on the colleagues that we have most contact with. We are likely to have a separate stroking pattern based on our family - although if we are not in regular contact with family members then we will seek to make up the deficit elsewhere. We may also have several different stroking patterns associated with our friends. Perhaps we have one set of friends that we play sport with, another that we invite to our home for parties, and maybe others that we do not see very often. Or we may have no clear boundaries so that all of our friends meet each other, and perhaps they meet our family and work colleagues as well. All of this will depend on our individual preferences. Whatever our personal patterns are, we will seek to have enough people involved in them so that we receive the appropriate quantity and types of strokes. This is why some people have such a wide circle of friends while others seem to manage with very little contact. Neither is right or wrong; people are different. We suggest you take some time to check out your own stroking patterns within your work team. Note down who is in the team, when do you stroke them, what format do your strokes take, what are the strokes about? Do the same in reverse – as well as reviewing the strokes you give, check out the strokes you get. Who did you include in the pattern? Did you include only people that you like? Did you include your manager - it is surprising how many people do not think of their own manager as someone they work closely with. Did you have any difficulty in thinking of enough people to include - perhaps you need to consider how you can widen you circle of contacts. When and how often you give strokes to the people in your chart. Do you give strokes fairly regularly or are there some people where you have trouble remembering the last time you gave them any significant recognition? How much intensity and impact do you think your strokes are likely to have? Are you doing little more than ritualized greetings and, if so, what does this do to your relationship? Or are you giving very powerful strokes - and could these be more intense than the recipient feels comfortable with? Are the strokes you give positive or negative? Be honest with yourself! Are you sometimes giving negative strokes, perhaps when you feel stressed or when someone else has been nasty to you? If your strokes are all positive, check whether any are constructive criticism. What are your strokes about? An effective stroking pattern will have variety - the strokes will be targeted to the individual recipients. If your strokes are all much the same, check that you are not simply giving out the type of strokes you like to receive. What evidence do you have that you are giving strokes that are appreciated - do people accept your strokes or do they try to push them back at you? Finally, what prompted you to give the stroke? Was it something the other person said or did? Perhaps they offered you a stroke and you responded by giving one back. This can be okay at times but check that it is not a customary reaction because it can make your strokes seem artificial. Check also that your stroking pattern is not influenced unduly by your own moods. We all know people who only praise others when they themselves have been praised - and managers who come to work in a bad mood and then find fault with everyone around them! Improving your pattern Now that you have analyzed your stroking pattern think how you might improve it:
References Hay, Julie (1992) Transactional Analysis for Trainers Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill (currently published as 2nd edition, 2009, Hertford: Sherwood Publishing) Hay, Julie (1993) Successful Workaholism The Minneapolis Papers ed. N. James Minneapolis: Omnipress 139-144 Hay, Julie (1996) Stroking Patterns INTAND Newsletter 4:3 1-2 Hay, Julie (2003) Stroking People to Success Nurturing Potential 2:5 www.nurturingpotential.net/issue8/stroking.htm Hay, Julie (2009a) Transactional Analysis for Trainers 2nd edition Hertford: Sherwood Publishing Hay, Julie (2009b) Working it Out at Work -Understanding Attitudes and Building Relationships 2nd edition 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. In Part 1 of this blog, I showed how I had been combining NLP with TA (Hay, 2002) and wrote about why it is important to realise that our metaphors may carry more meaning than we intend. I also wrote about everyday maps and identity maps. Below is another extract from the 2002 article, where I link these ideas to script and present my 5E model for checking metaphors. Berne (1972) and Steiner (1974) went further and suggested the notion of lifescripts. Berne refers to our use of fairy stories - people unwittingly become characters such as Little Red Riding Hood, Robin Hood, Prince Charming or Cinderella. We may instead become one of the other players in such stories, especially if we have decided not to be too important. Having heard the story that seems to fit our experiences of the world at a young age (before seven), we decide to be that character and then grow up with no conscious awareness of our decision.
‘Cinderella’ may well work hard for many years while her (or his – these are unisex) manager (wicked stepmother) and colleagues (ugly sisters) take all the credit – until one day a mentor (fairy godmother) ensures that Cinders gets to present at the annual conference (ball) and the senior manager (Prince) finally recognises just how good Cinders is and promotes her/him (marries and takes to castle). Or Robin Hood may adopt a role as official or unofficial staff representative (outlaw) and spend time arguing (fighting) with a manager (Sheriff of Nottingham) on behalf of the workforce (peasants), both overtly through open attacks and covertly by awarding perks that are outside the rules - until one day the Chief Executive (King Richard) makes a visit and sees what has been happening and demotes the manager and promotes Robin. The modern version of this lifescript process may well be that children choose TV programmes or films instead of fairy stories. Perhaps we will now have people who live like characters from Star Trek, no longer boldly going but leading through involvement, or being totally empathic, or operating very rationally and without emotions – the programme offers many choices. Berne also referred to Campbell (1973) who had identified that there are only a limited number of themes to fairy stories around the world, and that these also fit Greek myths. Kahler (1979) developed this to identify some characteristic ways of behaving that encapsulate the lifetime themes within single interactions. Thus, we may unwittingly reinforce patterns that comprise:
Monitoring our Maps Whether we are functioning as managers, facilitators, mentors, coaches, trainers, etc, it is important that we become aware of our own metaphors and paradigms so that we do not impose these unwittingly on others. It can also be useful to check out a few of our maps – we may well find some common themes. The following are some suggestions for the aspects to check once we recognise that we are operating within a metaphor or paradigm:
References
Berne, Eric (1972) What Do You Say After You Say Hello? New York: Grove Press Campbell, Joseph (1973) The Hero with a Thousand Faces Princeton: Princeton University Press Hay, Julie (2002) Metaphors and Paradigms – Whose Map of the World? Organisations & People 9:4 2-8 Kahler, Taibi (1979) Process Therapy in Brief Little Rock, AR: Human Development Publications Steiner, Claude (1974) Scripts People Live New York: Bantam © 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. |
Categories
All
Archives
August 2019
|