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

Julie's Ideas Blog 77: The Concluding of the Series – Part 8

1/8/2019

0 Comments

 
As I explained in Blog 70, when I reached 2011 I realised that most of my material after that was being published in open access publications, such as the IDTA Newsletter. I am therefore concluding this series of blogs by making it easy for you to click on links and read about any of the topics that interest you.

It seems appropriate to me to end this series number 77, as a double lucky number in some cultures, and as a coincidence with my age this year.

Here are the links to what I have written so far in 2019.

Informal Structures in Organisations- IDTA Newsletter 14:1 6-11
​​
The Autonomy Matrix - Birmingham: UKATA Conference Delegate Pack (now included as a download at juliehay.org)

TA Contributions from India - This will be appearing in the next issue of the International Journal of Transactional Analysis Research & Practice - watch out for it at www.ijtarp.org - free access for everyone 
© 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 76: The Concluding of the Series – Part 7

18/7/2019

0 Comments

 
As I explained in Blog 70, when I reached 2011 I realised that most of my material after that was being published in open access publications, such as the IDTA Newsletter. I am therefore concluding this series of blogs by making it easy for you to click on links and read about any of the topics that interest you.

2018

Designing a CTA Programme - IDTA Newsletter 13:1 8-19

What is TA Counselling – or is it Coaching? - IDTA Newsletter 13:2 7-25

The Icebergian Unconscious – IDTA Newsletter 13:3 11-17

Group Dynamics: C7P7A7 - IDTA Newsletter 13:4 7-8

Power Potentials – IDTA Newsletter 13:4 17-21

Psychological Boundaries and Psychological Bridges: A Categorisation and the Application of Transactional Analysis Concepts – IJTARP 9:1 52-81
​
​
​© 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 75: The Concluding of the Series – Part 6

4/7/2019

0 Comments

 
As I explained in Blog 70, when I reached 2011 I realised that most of my material after that was being published in open access publications, such as the IDTA Newsletter. I am therefore concluding this series of blogs by making it easy for you to click on links and read about any of the topics that interest you.

2017

Exam Techniques for TA Exams - IDTA Newsletter 12:2 15-30

TA Referencing – Back to the original Sources - IDTA Newsletter 12:2 30-31

Autonomy – some of the Early Material - IDTA Newsletter 12:3 16-21
​
Sailship Success – an update - IDTA Newsletter 12:4 6-10
​​

© 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 74: The Concluding of the Series – Part 5

20/6/2019

0 Comments

 
As I explained in Blog 70, when I reached 2011 I realised that most of my material after that was being published in open access publications, such as the IDTA Newsletter. I am therefore concluding this series of blogs by making it easy for you to click on links and read about any of the topics that interest you.

I am now beginning to think about what will I follow this series with – let me know if there is anything in particular you would like to be reading about.

2016

Why do we need to know about Research? IDTA Newsletter 11:1 3-11

Hay’s Organisational Cone IDTA Newsletter 11:4 19-20
​
​
​© 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 73: The Concluding of the Series – Part 4

6/6/2019

0 Comments

 
As I explained in Blog 70, when I reached 2011 I realised that most of my material after that was being published in open access publications, such as the IDTA Newsletter. I am therefore concluding this series of blogs by making it easy for you to click on links and read about any of the topics that interest you.

2015

Avoiding Conflict - IDTA Newsletter 10:1 4-8

Hay's Intervention Wheel - IDTA Newsletter 10:1 6-8

Using a time line for decision making - IDTA Newsletter 10:1 5-6

Transgenerational Script - IDTA Newsletter 10:2 7-11

Four Conceptualisations of the Concept of Script - IDTA Newsletter 10:4 3-6

​​© 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 72: The Concluding of the Series – Part 3

23/5/2019

0 Comments

 
As I explained in Blog 70, when I reached 2011 I realised that most of my material after that was being published in open access publications, such as the IDTA Newsletter. I am therefore concluding this series of blogs by making it easy for you to click on links and read about any of the topics that interest you.

Here are the relevant links for 2014.

Extending the donkey bridge for autonomy IDTA Newsletter 9:1 8

Windows on the World – some additions from China IDTA Newsletter 9:1 13

Time structuring, group imagoes – some ideas on application IDTA Newsletter 9:1 10-13

Permissions – An Essay – download

Back to the Future using Cocreative Spirals IDTA Newsletter 9:4 6-10
​​
​© 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 71: The Concluding of the Series – Part 2

9/5/2019

1 Comment

 
As I explained in Blog 70, when I reached 2011 I realised that most of my material after that was being published in open access publications, such as the IDTA Newsletter.

I am therefore concluding this series of blogs by making it easy for you to click on links and read about any of the topics that interest you.


Here are the relevant links for 2013:

Drivers – and Working Styles – an Essay – download

Personality Adaptations and AP3 – an Essay – download

Injunctions – an Essay – download

Analysing ‘people’ within organisations – IDTA Newsletter 8:1 3-5

Systemic Constructivist TA applied to Organisational Consulting – IDTA Newsletter 8:1 5-6

​© 2019 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 70: The Concluding of the Series – Part 1

25/4/2019

0 Comments

 
Blog 69 brought me to 2011. As I looked to see what came next, I realised that since then I have mostly published my ideas in ways that make them easily accessible online. Many of them are available on my website as free downloads, and many have been published within the IDTA Newsletter, which is also freely available to download, here.  

One exception being that I co-wrote an article about the TA Proficiency Awards which I project manage. This appeared in the Transactional Analysis Journal, which is of course only available if you, or your institution, pays for access. Although I can use the material in my own work, I am not allowed to post the article on a website – in fact, the publishers wanted $1500 a year just to let me show a link to it - and that was the reduced fee after I pointed out that it was a volunteer-run social action initiative. Fortunately, if you want to know about the TA Proficiency Awards, you can find plenty of information, here.  

I am therefore coming to the conclusion of this series of blogs. There seems no point in reproducing something that you may well have read already, and that you can have easy access to in any case.  So in this blog I am now giving you a list of topics that I published material about during 2011 and 2012.  Each topic is a link that will take you straight to the article – just click on the ones that interest you and happy reading!

My next blog will do the same for 2013 – and so on until we reach the present day.

Affect Script Psychology IDTA Newsletter 6:1 6-7
​
Positive Psychology IDTA Newsletter 6:4 5 & 7

Schema Therapy IDTA Newsletter 6:4 6-7

Transactional Analysis and Social Roles IDTA Newsletter 6:4 8

Multi-Party Contracting: A Prison Environment Example IDTA Newsletter 7:4 10-14

Deconfusion – Download of item posted on LinkedIn Transactional Analysis Group


​© 2019 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 69: Supervision – Part 6

11/4/2019

0 Comments

 
In the earlier parts of this series of blogs about supervision, I have been updating material that was included in articles and books that were published in 2004 and 2007 (Hay, 2004a, 2004b, 2007). Back then I was writing about supervision for coaches and for trainers within organisations; in Blogs 64-66 I adjusted the material so that it would apply to any helping practitioner.

Now I am moving on to later material that I produced that was specifically about how we can conduct supervision online (Hay, 2010, 2011).

E-Supervision
Back in 2010, I was writing about e-supervision using Skype – I still use Skype but I also now use Zoom as often there is a better connection in some areas of the world. I am sure there are other similar ways to connect. Whichever is used, using the Internet in this way gives us several advantages:

  • people in economically-disadvantaged areas of the world can still access supervision without incurring the costs of travel for themselves or the supervisor (and I operate a version of the discounting scheme that I introduced years ago to ITAA and EATA - for supervision with me that takes the form of my fee being 20% more than the supervisee is being paid for their own work)
  • the world benefits because we are not travelling and adding to our carbon footprints
  • the non-travelling benefits also extend to any interpreter that may be involved; in addition the interpreter can be anywhere in the world so it is not reliant on there being a suitably TA-experienced interpreter in the same country as the supervisee or supervisor
  • it provides an opportunity to provide input, develop supervisees, and therefore raise standards, in areas of the world where they would otherwise be limited access to TA professionals
  • it enables cross-cultural working, with all the benefits to supervisor and supervisee, of working with people with different perspectives, different working practice norms, different cultural scripts, different understandings of TA theory …….

Because the online services offer conferencing options, it also means that:

  • live supervision of live supervision can be conducted – I can observe the supervisee working with their own supervisee, and this can be done whether they are in the same place or whether the supervisee is working with someone in yet another place in the world
  • group supervision can easily be done – I prefer to conduct one-to-one supervision and then have a process review afterwards during which those who have been observing can discuss with me their analyses of what they have observed and can ask me questions about my internal processes whilst I was doing the supervision

In terms of theory related to supervision, in Hay (2010) I referred to the 3Ps – although I incorrectly referencing all of them to Crossman rather than Crossman (1966) for permission and protection and Steiner (1968) for adding potency.  I wrote then that:

  • "I am able to give permissions to those involved to develop their professional competence
  • I am able to provide protection by raising areas where there is a risk of infringement of professional practice guidelines or ethical codes
  • I am able to be potent enough to provide ‘good enough’ supervision which models ways of interacting that can appropriately be used also by the supervisee with the trainee (and in line with positive parallel process (Hay, 2007), by the trainee with their client)." (p.236) (underlining in original)

In Hay (2011) I referred to Goffman’s (1974) material on how frames and the concept of presence can aid an understanding of processes. I wrote that Goffman proposed that “we employ frames or schemata of interpretation that are socially shared and culture specific. Even coaches and supervisors who are unfamiliar with Internet communications will already have frames about telephone interaction and these will include the ‘real’ presence of the parties involved even though they are in different locations. The key is to add frames of reference about supervision to the mix so that we become engrossed in the supervisory process and take for granted the technology and software that allowing [sic] us to connect. When technical problems interrupt connection, we will be forced to shift to frames about the connection process and may need time to get our focus back onto supervision once we are re-connected. Effective use of e-supervision may, therefore, depend on the flexibility of our frame-making.” (p.246).

I also summarised some of the benefits and challenges. Although the lack of face-to-face contact is often stated as the principal challenge to e-supervision, paradoxically is also a significant benefit. “The lack of face-to face contact encourages both supervisee and supervisor to stay in the present rather than experiencing the full impact of transference and/or counter-transference… reinforced because the kinaesthetic connection is being modified or filtered by the technology. The supervisee is less likely to engage in strong emotional reactions or expect the supervisor to take over the problem.….The supervisor is less likely to feel drawn into rescuing (or persecuting or being victimised… less of a pull into a parent-child or co-dependency mode.” (p.242).

The context is also one in which mindfulness can occur more readily. “This ‘practice of being present with the immediate experience of our lives’ (Aggs and Bambling 2010) can be facilitated …..“ (p.242). This means that the supervisee, and the supervisor, are more likely to stay in the here-and-now with each other.

Finally, I pointed out that we may need to change our “channel of communication or lead representational system (Bandler and Grinder 1979). Many of us are accustomed to taking in information predominantly through sight; with fewer people using auditory as their main channel. However, unless we have a physical impairment, we will process both visual and auditory stimuli – plus of course kinaesthetic …… Working electronically means that we will focus much more on what we are hearing, including the words and what they might represent, tone of voice, any hesitations, sighs, laughter, the ‘music behind the words’, and what is not being said .…. if our own representational system is auditory we may function within each supervision session just as we do face-to-face. If our lead system is visual, we may need time and practice to pay more attention to our auditory channel; fortunately our neurology is such that we have the spare brain capacity to set up the necessary new neural pathways. In either case, we can still take in information through our kinaesthetic channel, although some of us will find that this is usually stimulated via our visual or auditory channel and may not serve us as well until we get used to the shift required.” (p.242-243).

References
​Aggs, Cameron & Bambling, (2010) Teaching mindfulness to psychotherapist in clinical practice: the Mindful Therapy Programme Counselling and Psychotherapy Research  10:4  278-286

Bandler, Richard & Grinder John (1979) Frogs into Princes, Moab UT: Real People Press 1979

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

Goffman, Erving (1974) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience New York: Harper Row

Steiner, Claude (1968) Transactional Analysis as a Treatment Philosophy Transactional Analysis Bulletin 7:27 61-64

Hay, Julie (2004a) Supervision for Coaches Self & Society 32:3 Aug/Sept 34-40

Hay, Julie (2004b) Supervision Train the Trainer, 11

Hay, Julie (2007) Reflective Practice and Supervision for Coaches Maidenhead: Open University Press

Hay, Julie (2010) Skype Supervision Chap 14 in Virtual Coach, Virtual Mentor David Clutterbuck (ed) USA: Information Age Publishing, 233-236

Hay, Julie (2011) E-supervision: application, benefits and considerations  Chap 19 in Coaching and Mentoring Supervision Theory and Practice Bachkirova, Tatiana, Jackson P & Clutterbuck, David (eds)  Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press  239-248

​© 2019 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 68: Supervision – Part 5

28/3/2019

0 Comments

 
Supervision is a shared process so, whether you are reading this as a practitioner or as an existing or potential supervisor, it is helpful to have a model for analysing the supervision process itself.  This allows both parties to engage in ongoing professional development – of their skills of supervision or of being supervised.

Analysing the Supervision Process

The following is a simplified version of C7P7A7, which I have developed for use when analysing group dynamics (see Blog 55).  For supervision, it began in 2004 as C4P4A4 and by 2007 it had become C5P5A5.  For supervision, there is a limit to what we can keep in mind, but the following can be considered roughly chronologically, in three categories:

  • C5 - Context, Contact, Contract, Content, Contrasts - what is happening as the supervision starts up.
  • P5 - Paradigms, Personal, Professional, Psychological, Parallels - applies once the supervision has moved into 'the work'.
  • A5 - Autonomy, Authenticity, Alternatives, Aims, Action - is relevant as the supervision is coming to a close.

Context
What is the context for the supervision?  What is the context for the work being supervised?  Are there any links? Are the boundaries clear?  Does the supervisee have adequate access to good structure, strokes and stimulation outside the supervision? 

Contact
How well are we making contact with each other?  At an overt level, are there signs of rapport being established?  Do we feel that we are truly connecting? What is the supervisor’s role here in providing the supervisee with structure, strokes and stimulation?

Contract
How clear is the contracting? Does the contract cover the procedural, professional and psychological levels?  Does it address the results intended, the allocation of responsibilities, and the relationships that will apply?  What contracts exist/should exist with other parties/stakeholders?

Content
What is the supervision about? Is this an appropriate topic?  Did the supervisee determine the content? Should the supervisor direct the supervisee to specific content? As the supervision progresses, are we staying with the content and not going off on tangents?

Contrasts
How are we different? How are we similar? How might our differences help or hinder the process? How might our similarities help or hinder the process? What cultural differences might there be between our maps of the world?

Paradigms
Are there significant differences in the paradigms, or models of the world, of supervisor and supervisee?  What is being done to understand and respect the supervisee’s paradigms, especially when they have a different cultural background to the supervisor?

Personal
In what ways do our styles differ and what impact might this be having? In what ways are our styles similar on what impact might this be having? How aware are we of our personal reactions? How are we sharing these appropriately with each other?

Professional
Is there an appropriate level of professional expertise, knowledge, experience? Is the supervisor respecting the professional competence of the supervisee (and vice versa)? What professional ethics and practices apply?

Psychological
How 'straight' are the interactions?  Are there ulterior transactions, discounting, psychological game playing? How are we handling the stages of dependence, counter-dependence, independence and interdependence?  What about transference and counter-transference?  How might we appropriately bring to the surface anything occurring at the psychological level?

Parallels
Are there 'parallel processes' in effect, where difficulties between practitioner/supervisee and client are replayed between supervisor and supervisee?  Are processes within the supervision a mirror of relationships the practitioner, or the supervisor, has in their personal or professional life?

Autonomy
Are we behaving in autonomous, script-free ways?  Are we aware and in the here-and-now?  What life positions, or windows on the world, are in evidence?  Is the supervision leading to increased autonomy for the supervisee (and supervisor)?

Authenticity
Are we using our ‘real selves’ in the supervision?  Are we accessing our emotions and reactions as sources of information within the supervisory process?  Are we owning our vulnerability and willing to share openly so that we can check what belongs to the supervision process and what does not?

Alternatives
Is a range of options considered before decisions are made?  Is there discounting occurring - are we ‘overlooking’ some aspects of the situation, its significance, the possible solutions, the skills available, the strategies for implementation, or the ultimate success factors?

Aims
Whose aims are we working towards – those of the supervisor or of the supervisee? How well are we working within the aims of the original contract for this supervision session? How well are we working within the long-term aims regarding the professional development of the supervisee?

Action
Is the supervisee being enabled to identify potential actions that will increase their competence with the client? And with clients in general? Are clear action plans being developed where appropriate, with measurable, manageable and motivational objectives?  Is the sequence one of decision, direction, destination?

References

Hay, Julie (2004a) Supervision for Coaches Self & Society 32:3 Aug/Sept 34-40

Hay, Julie (2004b) Supervision Train the Trainer, 11

Hay, Julie (2007) Reflective Practice and Supervision for Coaches Maidenhead: Open University Press
​

​© 2019 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 67: Supervision – Part 4

14/3/2019

0 Comments

 
Yet more on the theme of what I wrote about supervision in 2004 (Hay, 2004a, 2004b, 2007), in this blog I describe how I have experienced supervision formats over the years, followed by some ideas about how a supervisee can prepare for supervision so as to get the most out of it.

Supervision in Practice

Within the transactional analysis training community, supervision is typically provided by:

  • at least one ‘sponsoring’ supervisor who works with a specific supervisee over a period of time (and particularly so during the years preparing to become a certified analyst) – in this way, the supervisor is able to identify any general themes that impact on the work of the practitioner
  • by different supervisors who may each provide individual supervision sessions – in this way, the supervisee gets the benefits of exposure to many different styles and foci of attention during their supervision
​
Supervision is probably best conducted in time limited slots of about 20 minutes or so.  This ensures the supervision is focused and that the supervisee does not become overloaded with feedback.  If more time is needed, it can be negotiated although often a better option will be to raise any additional issues that arise as separate pieces of supervision.  The basic supervision slot may well be followed by a process review, during which the process between supervisor and supervisee is analysed (without going back into the content).  This will often increase the levels of awareness of both parties, and any observers, considerably.

In addition to one-to-one working between a supervisor and supervisee, supervision can also be conducted:

  • with a group of supervisees – this is particularly suitable for more experienced supervisees; the supervisee in question contracts with the group for what they want and individual members of the group accept responsibility for working within the agreed contract (or for staying silent if they have nothing to contribute)
  • as a cascade – one person supervises the supervisee, and is then supervised on that supervision by someone else, who may then be supervised on that supervision, and so on – this is a great way of identifying any parallel processes that may be in effect
  • peer group and cascade supervision may of course be undertaken with or without the eventual intervention of an overall supervisor

Preparing for Supervision

The preparation process is as follows:

  • ask for permission from clients/participants to record and to use the recordings for supervision – this can be explained to them as part of a process of quality control and also CPD record (audio or video) – you can also reassure them that only professional colleagues will hear the recordings, that their real names will not be shared, etc, as appropriate;
  • record (audio or video) as much of your work as possible - if you don’t do all of it, it seems to be a law of the universe that you’ll miss something really significant that you want to analyse and learn from;
  • while you are working, make a note if you can of any times when you are particularly pleased or doubtful about the way the session is going, so you can listen and analyse that part later;
  • afterwards, as well as reviewing the parts you noted, listen to the recordings generally as you will  be able to identify other segments that are good or not so good, that you were not aware of at the time;
  • take a specific segment of no more than 5 minutes and start listening to it in analysis mode.  You can do this using transactional analysis concepts such as ego states, transactions, strokes, psychological games, etc; NLP constructs such as representational systems, meta programs, language patterns, etc; behaviour analysis categories such as initiating, reacting, clarifying, etc; or any other psychological frameworks you and your supervisor are familiar with.  Listen to the same small segment repeatedly, with a different focus each time, so that you build up your awareness;
  • by the time you have done this, you may of course have worked out for yourself just what was going on, plus identified some alternative ways to proceed in similar circumstances in the future – so you will have completed some self-supervision;
  • for other segments, prepare to take them to supervision by producing a transcript (you can do it without but it helps a lot to keep track of the interactions on the tape);
  • decide what you want to get from the supervision so you can contract with your supervisor – examples might be: checking your understanding of the dynamics; developing your understanding of the dynamics (when you know something is going on but can’t quite work out what!); identifying options for ways to handle similar situations in future; identifying how much of what happened is due to you versus the participant(s).

You might also find it useful to work with a checklist or summary of information about the client/participant(s) and what you are working on with them – there is a TA-based Supervision Preparation Form at https://www.juliehay.org/article-downloads.html#forms which you are welcome to download and use.

References

Hay, Julie (2004a) Supervision for Coaches Self & Society 32:3 Aug/Sept 34-40

Hay, Julie (2004b) Supervision Train the Trainer, 11

Hay, Julie (2007) Reflective Practice and Supervision for Coaches Maidenhead: Open University Press
​
​© 2019 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 66: Supervision – Part 3

28/2/2019

0 Comments

 
Multi-Party Contracts and Supervision

Continuing my theme of what I wrote about supervision in 2004 and 2007 (Hay, 2004a, 2004b, 2007), I looked at what I saw as one of the key differences between psychotherapy and other forms of practice that are about helping people develop - the number of parties involved in the process.  I often joked with my colleagues that developmental applications of transactional analysis needed more skill than TA psychotherapy: for the psychotherapist there was often only them and their client, whereas those working developmentally as trainers, educators, coaches consultants, facilitators, and so on, often had to deal with the client, an organisation, an HR director, a line manager and maybe even more senior managers – or perhaps they had a classroom of children and also had to deal with the parents, the head teacher of the school, the education authority, etc, etc. 

I did recognise that psychotherapists also sometimes work with families, need to keep in mind that their clients often work within organisations, and they too sometimes work within organisations such as therapy centres, in-house services, hospitals, charities, etc.  Like other practitioners, psychotherapist may also be paid for by an organisation.

This adds to the complexity of the contract, both for the professional work and for the supervision. 

In addition to supervisor and supervisee, therefore, it may be important to take into account:
the organisation(s)
  • who pays?
  • who ‘represents’ the organisation(s) and what are their expectations of the practitioner? of the supervision?
  • is there more than one organisation involved e.g. where the client works, where the practitioner works, where the supervisor works?
the client(s)
  • who is/are the client(s)?
  • what responsibility towards client care does the supervisor have?
  • has the client given permission for the practitioner to present their work with them for supervision?
  • has the client agreed that the sessions with them may be recorded for later analysis?
the professional bodies
  • under the auspices of what professional body (bodies) is the practitioner’s work being conducted? what are the implications of this?
  • under the auspices of what professional body (bodies) is the supervision being conducted? what are the implications of this?
In addition to considering who else, apart from the supervisor and the supervisee, are ‘stakeholders’, the supervisor and supervisee need to consider:

  • How aware are the various stakeholders of the contract details between the other parties to that contract?  The greater the awareness, the less likely are there to be misunderstandings.
  • If something were to go wrong with the contract, how might that happen, and which parties might it involve?  Considering this beforehand allows action to forestall potential problems.
  • Who gets access to what information – what are the confidentiality arrangements necessary if the client is expected to talk openly about their problems and/or development needs?

Examples of complex multi-party contracts were shown in Blogs 21 and 22  and are reproduced below– and for each of these we need to imagine that there is an additional stakeholder – the supervisor – who has a connection with the practitioner and an implicit connection with all of the other stakeholders.
Picture
Supervision with multi-party contract - consortium (adapted from Hay 2007, p.117)
Picture
Supervision with multi-party contract - educational context (amended from Hay 2007, p117 - diagram corrected)
References

Hay, Julie (2004a) Supervision for Coaches Self & Society 32:3 Aug/Sept 34-40

Hay, Julie (2004b) Supervision Train the Trainer, 11

Hay, Julie (2007) Reflective Practice and Supervision for Coaches Maidenhead: Open University Press
​

​© 2019 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 65: Supervision – Part 2

14/2/2019

0 Comments

 
This blog is a continuation of my presentation of material that I had published (Hay, 2004a, 2004b, 2007) that related to coaches and trainers which I have updated to be relevant for a wide range of helping professionals. The topic for this time is contracting.

I am a transactional analyst and contracting is a key principle of TA – if there is no contract then TA is not being practised (even though TA concepts may be being applied).  Over the years, much of what has been written elsewhere about contracting has come from practices within the TA community that have existed for many years.

A contract may or may not be written but in many respects it resembles a formal legal contract – the parties must have entered into it of their own free will, it must be for a lawful outcome, it should specify clearly the rights and responsibilities of the parties and when these will cease to apply, and ideally there should be a clause about how the contract itself can be changed.

The 3R’s of Contracting
​
Over the years, I have developed a framework that helps supervisor and supervisee to set up a psychologically healthy contract, both for their overall relationship and for each supervisory session.  Being a fan of donkey bridges (those gimmicky ways we help people remember things by using alliteration or similar techniques), I call it the 3 R’s of supervision:
The 3 R’s
overall contract
sessional contract
Results
examples might be: to develop the supervisee as a professional coach; to develop specific areas of the supervisee’s skills; to prepare the supervisee for professional exams
what does the supervisee want to achieve; how will they know when they have achieved it; is achievement realistic in the time available; does the supervisor have the requisite competence
Relationship
how we will work together as equals whilst reflecting our differing levels of experience; how we will avoid a dependency relationship
how will we work together this time e.g. supervisee will play tape, describe situation etc – supervisor will ask questions, prompt, challenge etc
​Responsibility
the requirements of our respective roles; whether the supervisor is responsible for management of the supervisee; who is responsible for clients, for ethical behaviour by the supervisee
​remind ourselves that the supervisee will be responsible for whatever they decide to do after the supervision; supervisor is responsible for providing ‘good enough’ supervision
Levels of Contracting​

We can further clarify the contracting between supervisor and supervisee by considering the levels at which the contract operates, this time using the donkey bridge of PPP:
Level
Overall contract
Sessional contract
Procedural
​administrative aspects such as how often, when and where the supervision will take place; what financial arrangements; what notes will be kept and by whom
​how long for this session; will it be recorded (taped); who is involved (i.e. one–to-one, group)
Professional​
nature of the respective roles; responsibilities (e.g. to professional bodies or employers); overall purpose and boundaries of supervisory relationship
purpose and boundaries for this session; any specific professional considerations that apply; how this session fits within any overall contract
Psychological
​what might go wrong; raising awareness of potential dependency/ transference/ counter-transference issues
​checking aspects such as the supervisee taking responsibility for themself; avoiding Rescuing
In my next blog, I will be looking at what happens when there are multi-party contracts – when there are more stakeholders than just the supervisor, supervisee/practitioner and the client.

References

Hay, Julie (2004a) Supervision for Coaches Self & Society 32:3 Aug/Sept 34-40

Hay, Julie (2004b) Supervision Train the Trainer, 11

Hay, Julie (2007) Reflective Practice and Supervision for Coaches Maidenhead: Open University Press
​

​© 2019 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 64: Supervision – Part 1

31/1/2019

0 Comments

 
In 2004 I had articles published that presented ideas about supervision for coaches (Hay, 2004a) and for trainers (Hay, 2004b); a few years later Open University Press published my book entitled Reflective Practice and Supervision for Coaches (Hay, 2007).  This blog and those following it are based on those articles and that book, with further updates now so that the material will be useful for any ‘helping practitioner’, whether coach, trainer, educator, consultant, psychotherapist, counsellor. . . I know my thoughts

When I began my professional training in transactional analysis (TA), I had already been an organisational trainer for some years.  I had been trained in various approaches to people skills, leadership, teambuilding and so on, but had never experienced the type of supervision that was, and still is, routinely practised within the TA community. In my two articles during 2004 I explained that, for me, the word ‘supervision’ is really super-vision, as in someone who can see more than or at a different level to that at which others see.

Because TA began life as a psychotherapy approach, supervision was engaged in as a matter of course.  As TA extended into other fields of application, the potency of supervision readily became apparent to those of us in the developmental fields.  The requirement, and hence opportunity, to review our professional work through a process of self, peer and supervisor analysis leads to significant increases in self-awareness, ability to analyse ‘in the moment’, understanding of the process with clients, skills at identifying more options, and all of the extra competence this leads to.  Supervision is an extremely effective form of continuous professional development!

Defining Supervision
​

We can define the nature of supervision based on an idea by Brigid Proctor (1986):

  • normative – the supervisor accepts (or more accurately shares with the supervisee) responsibility for ensuring that the supervisee’s work is professional and ethical, operating within whatever codes, laws and organisational norms apply – examples might include paying careful attention to anti-discriminatory practices, or working out as a trainer what to do if a course member ‘confesses’ to a breach of company rules.
  • formative – the supervisor acts to provide feedback or direction that will enable the supervisee to develop the skills, theoretical knowledge, personal attributes and so on that will mean the supervisee becomes an increasingly competent practitioner – so this might cover any of the broad range of activities undertaken by practitioners, from analysis/assessment/diagnosis of client needs through design and planning followed by implementation and including evaluation.
  • supportive (Proctor calls this restorative) – the supervisor is there to listen, support, confront the supervisee when the inevitable personal issues, doubts and  insecurities arise – and when participants’ issues are ‘picked up’ by the supervisee – again a wide range, from encouraging a new practitioner who is about to run their first session through to being an empathic yet challenging listener for a practitioner whose session has been hijacked by an awkward client or participant in a group or classroom.

Choosing a Supervisor

As a founding director of the European Mentoring & Coaching Council (EMCC), I was aware at that time that coach/mentoring (so called by EMCC because so often the terms are used interchangeably) had become somewhat of a growth industry, with coaches being drawn not only from organisational trainers but also from a range of other occupations, including: retired managers and business people, occupational psychologists, and therapists and counsellors.  The latter were likely to have had experience of supervision only with a therapeutic bias, and the former often believed that supervision was something junior managers did when they oversaw the work of their subordinates.

In response to requests from members for advice on how to meet the EMCC Code of Ethics requirement to engage in regular supervision, I drafted an interim guidance statement (Hay, 2004a) that contained some criteria to help members evaluate potential supervisors. I recognised at that time that qualified supervisors were available in various fields (such as TA, where there is an international qualification) but there was a lack of supervisors who had been trained and accredited within specific professional frameworks such as coaching.

The guidelines reflected the fact that many qualified supervisors would have little experience of coaching, albeit they were experienced therapists.  Supervisees needed to consider how much they needed their supervisor to understand the nature of coaching, and how competent the supervisee would be at ‘converting’ the supervisor’s contribution across to a different setting.

Since then I have updated the suggested criteria to apply to a range of helping practitioners – trainers, educators, coaches, psychotherapists, counsellors, consultants . . .  anyone whose professional practice will benefit from super-vision.  Keeping in mind that the ‘perfect’ supervisor does not exist for anyone, the ‘good enough’ supervisor will meet as many of the following as possible but not necessarily all of them:

  • have experience as a practitioner of the same type as the supervisee
  • have experience of being supervised
  • has experience as a supervisor (not necessarily of practitioners in the same field)
  • works with a theoretical framework for their own practice that is also relevant to the practitioner’s own work
  • works with a theoretical framework(s) relating to supervision
  • has an understanding of the context of the professional practice of the supervisee
  • is aware of the impact of values, beliefs, assumptions of supervisor and practitioner, in supervision and in the supervisee’s own practice
  • is respectful of diversity in its many forms and alert to its potential benefits and pitfalls
  • demonstrates a capacity for self-regulation (as will need to foster this in supervisee)
  • shows commitment to CPD for themself and others
  • agrees to abide by an appropriate Code of Ethics (e.g. the same as applies to the practitioner) even if they are not a member of a body that requires this
  • there will be no dual roles (i.e. supervisor is not also line manager, business partner

References

Hay, Julie (2004a) Supervision for Coaches Self & Society 32:3 Aug/Sept 34-40

Hay, Julie (2004b) Supervision Train the Trainer, 11

Hay, Julie (2007) Reflective Practice and Supervision for Coaches Maidenhead: Open University Press
​
Proctor, Brigid (1986) ‘Supervision: A co-operative exercise in accountability’ in A. Marken & M Payne (eds) Enabling and Ensuring: Supervision in Practice Leicester National Youth Bureau/Council for Education and Training in Youth and Community Work. 21-23

© 2019 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 63: Three Levels of Reflection

17/1/2019

0 Comments

 
In my last blog I summarised some of the content from an article I wrote about making meaning (Hay, 2010). This blog is based on the last part of that article, where I wrote about how we need to pay attention to how we make meaning ourselves, if we are not inadvertently to cocreate in a negative way by having our own meaning-making ‘leak’ into our clients’ minds.
To become aware requires 2nd order cybernetics (von Foerster 1995), so we can step outside our frame of reference to review that same frame of reference. This is not easy – it is like asking a fish to understand water.

Hence, we need to develop our skill at reflection and we need prompting by others who are outside our frame of reference (i.e. in their own frame that differs from ours – so not our best friend who is likely to share a similar outlook to ours). We can achieve this by reflecting at three levels:
  • Reflection-in-action (Schon 1983) – what are we aware of whilst interacting with the client(s)?
  • Reflection-on-action (Schon 1983) – what do we become aware of afterwards, often with the aid of recordings that we can listen to when not engaged with the client?
  • Reflection-in-supervision – what do we notice when someone else challenges our inevitable discounting?

To finish, an example to illustrate how a DTA practitioner used the 3 levels to check the impact within their work of their meaning making processes.

In teaching a class (of managers or schoolchildren!) Pat (the unisex teacher), noticed (reflection-in-action) that Chris (the unisex student) was nodding and smiling a lot. Pat recognised feeling encouraged by this, of wishing that more students behaved like Chris, and of stroking Chris for being so engaged in class discussions.

Afterwards, Pat thought about the lesson (reflection-in-action) and realised that two other students had not contributed at all to the class discussions, that some of Chris’s comments had contained questionable elements (e.g. incorrect explanations), and that Pat had an unpleasantly familiar feeling of ‘here I go again’.
​
In reflection-in-supervision, Lee (the unisex supervisor) helped Pat to recognise the discounting involved, because of Pat’s need for strokes, how a different stroking pattern was needed outside the classroom to eliminate ‘stoke-dependency on students’, and how the ‘here I go again’ feeling might well be a premonition of a game switch to come (such as Chris or another student becoming Persecutor and Pat ending up as Victim).
References

Hay, Julie (2010) Making Meaning. IDTA Newsletter 5:2 7-9

Schon, D (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books

von Foerster, H. (1995). The Cybernetics of Cybernetics (2nd edition). Minneapolis: FutureSystems Inc.
​
© 2019 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 62: Making Meaning

10/1/2019

0 Comments

 
From 2010 onwards I began to write articles for the Institute of Developmental Transactional Analysis (IDTA) Newsletter.  Those newsletters are readily available for anyone to see on the IDTA website – www.instdta.org or if you want to go straight to the newsletters click on http://bit.ly/2rYizZS.  The following is therefore an updated summary of what I wrote in an article about Making Meaning (Hay, 2010). 

At the time, I had recently compiled a reflective enquiry project as part of my studies for an MSc in TA Psychotherapy. This got me thinking about how we do make meaning, and how our own versions of meaning-making may impact on our clients, whether these be in therapy, organisational or educational settings.

I was prompted to the choice of topic because I was moving from many years steeped in classical TA, where Berne told us to share the theory with the client, into relational TA, where the focus is on how we can work with the process that occurs when clients unknowingly seek to recreate their early scenes so they can reach a different conclusion. Although this sounds like it would only apply to psychotherapy, my organisational background meant that I could easily see how really listening to someone in an organisation could often make a huge difference to their perspective – hence the increasing demand for coaching – and how in an educational setting a teacher might easily have a therapeutic impact on a pupil just by listening to them.

When I had been told years ago that I was a post-modernist, I had to ask what that word meant!  I came to understand that it means that I am someone who believes that there are many ways to understand our world – as opposed to modernism where the belief is that there is only one truth. I realised that this explained my reluctance to apply diagnostic labels – not just because Berne cautioned against it but because it imposes on an individual the way in which the world is constructed by others. I knew, for example that there were many culturally based problems with the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder) and that diagnoses changed when the DSM was reissued, rather like the ways in which fashions change over time and between cultures.

In a special issue of the Transactional Analysis Journal (TAJ), Allen & Allen (1997) suggested that the constructionist therapist (constructivism being similar to post-modernism) would aim to help clients conceptualise themselves differently. They wrote of the 'last permission' which they described as being allowed to make meaning for ourselves rather than in the way that we were taught to do so as we were growing up. I add to this that it is also about enabling individuals to make meaning in their own way – it is not just that they make a different meaning but that they are able to change the way they approach the task of meaning-making.

It was many years later that Summers & Tudor (2000) extended Allen & Allen’s ideas into cocreativity – we help clients re-conceptualise through the creation of something new that comes into existence as we interact. This means, of course, that something new comes into existence in the practitioner’s head as well as in the client’s head.

In the original article, I went on to comment about the impact of culture and how our culture as practitioners might match or differ from the client’s culture, pointing out that we need to bring such differences into conscious awareness lest we over-identify with some clients or misinterpret the meaning-making processes of others.

I suggested that we asked ourselves the following questions:

  • How similar, or not, was our upbringing – including educational opportunities?
  • How similar, or not, are our work experiences – including size and nature of organisations?
  • How similar, or not are our personal styles – such as our personality adaptations, stroking patterns?

We need to pay attention to our own meaning-making lest it ‘leak’ into our clients minds as we cocreate.

In my next blog I will present the rest of the article, with my suggestions for how we need to develop our skills of reflection and how some of this needs to be done in supervision.

Reference

Allen J & Allen B (1997) A new Type of Transactional Analysis and One Version of Script work with a Constructionist Sensibility Transactional Analysis Journal 27 (2) 89-98

Hay, Julie (2010) Making Meaning. IDTA Newsletter 5:2 7-9
​
Summers, G &Tudor, K (2000) Cocreative Transactional Analysis Transactional Analysis Journal 30 (1) 23-40
​
© 2019 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 61: Transference and Countertransference: Part 4

3/1/2019

0 Comments

 
The final part of my blog about what I wrote in INTAND newsletter (Hay, 2003).
Organisations spend a lot of time and money on training and development activities that are designed to encourage employees to show initiative, or to prompt managers to empower their staff.  Transference and counter transference processes undermine these activities, yet they are rarely mentioned as part of the training.

There are several ways in which we can help people (including ourselves) to become aware of these processes so they can be eliminated:
​
  • analysis of ego states – we can use questionnaires, feedback from others, role-play or similar activities – anything that helps us recognise how much time we spend in Parent or Child ego states that are reflections of the past rather than being parent or child-like behaviours that we have chosen to use based on current reality
  • analysis of transactions – we can analyse examples of real interactions to check for any refracted, crossed or ulterior transactions – any times when we suspect that what seems to be communicated on the surface does not match the underlying dynamics.
  • analysis of stroking patterns – reviewing individual, group and organisational patterns of recognition will show whether these are healthy and positive, including constructive criticism as well as praise, personal interest as well as professional – or whether people are somehow generating negative strokes that reinforce not-OK beliefs and behaviours
  • checking our reactions through our responses to questions such as:
o   Who does this person remind me of?
o   How does interacting with them leave me feeling?
o   Are there things I want to say to them that I’m keeping to myself?
o   Do I feel drawn to reacting to them in a particular way?
o   Do I wish I could behave differently towards them?
o   Does the way I’m reacting to them have any similarity to ways I’ve behaved in the past with other people?  Is that significant?
o   Do I keep repeating unsatisfactory interactions with this person?  Why might that be?
o   Do I think this person is being childish?  or bossy?  or helpless?  or argumentative: or any other annoying way of being?
o   Do I get an urge to tell them what to do?  or take care of them?  or argue with them?  or let them take care of me?  or any other inappropriate way of behaving towards them?
Picture
Using Transference

It may seem strange to suggest we could use transference but therapists do this routinely to enhance their work with clients.  For example, a client who thinks the therapist is a good parent will be more likely to act on the therapist’s advice; a client who thinks the therapist is ‘bad’ can be allowed to work through their issues without being punished by the therapist.

Other helping professionals, and managers, can also use the transference process in a positive way, provided they are aware of it.  This awareness is the key – once transference and/or countertransference are recognised, the professional uses this knowledge to plan more effective ways of interacting, as outlined in Table 3.
​
Examples might be:

  • a manager realises that a staff member is behaving as if the manager is a father-figure – so the manager can act as a role model to let the individual learn positive ways of behaving – such as showing them how to deal firmly and fairly with an unreasonable colleague.

  • a manager realises that they are being regarded as a mother-figure – so can use a nurturing style to encourage the individual to be more confident about their own abilities – such as by expressing confidence in a nervous individual’s ability to make a good presentation

  • a consultant realises that a client is making unrealistic assumptions about shared views – so explains they will now play devil’s advocate as a way of prompting the client to consider other views

  • a professional spots the signs of a competitive transference by a colleague – and spends time clarifying the colleague’s ideas and options instead of falling into the (countertransference) trap of arguing with them.
Reference

Hay, Julie (2003) Transference INTAND Newsletter 11:1 1-8
​
© 2019 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 60: Transference and Countertransference: Part 3

27/12/2018

0 Comments

 
Refracted Transactions

In my very first blog in this Ideas series (Blog 1, October 2017), I reproduced the short item that appeared back in 1986 about refracted transactions. I wrote more about this in 2003, as you can read below.
This concept was developed by Julie Hay and Robert Orr during a TA in Education Workshop run on 16 November 1985 and described within a review of the day, written by the late Vivienne Gill, that appeared in ITA News No. 13, Spring 1986.  It is another way of understanding the process of transference.
​
In a refracted transaction, the frame of reference ‘distorts’ the perceived transaction, in much the same way that water refracts light, so that the transaction appears to emanate from a different ego state than that actually activated.

Figure 1 shows a typical example.  The new employee has just joined the organisation and has been given an instruction (1) by the supervisor – who, being a typical supervisor, is interacting from (Controlling) Parent to (Adapted) Child.
Picture
The new employee is keen to learn and wants to understand what is required – so asks a question about it (2 – shown as half dotted and half solid line), intending to interact from (Functional) Adult to (Functional) Adult.

The supervisor has transferred a child identity onto the new employee, so refracts the transaction as if it is coming from Child (3 – also shown as half-dotted and half-solid line).

Asking “why” is picked up as an inappropriate challenge from a child, so the supervisor thinks the new employee is misbehaving and responds even more firmly from Parent (4 - which would be a repeat of 1)).

Most new employees will, at this point, intuitively recognise that logical thought on their part is discouraged.  They will, therefore, desist from thinking in future – at least whilst they are at work!

The dotted sections of the transaction lines represent parts of interactions that are ‘ulterior’ or unknown to the individual on that side of the frame of reference; the solid lines are the transactions that are consciously known to the respective individuals.  The new employee ‘knows’ they interacted from Adult and has no idea the supervisor is perceiving it as from Child instead.  Likewise, the supervisor ‘knows’ that the employee transacted from Child and has no idea of the intended transaction to the Supervisor’s Adult.
References

Gill, Vivienne (1986) TA in Education ITA News, No. 13 p.1

Hay, Julie (2003) Transference INTAND Newsletter 11:1 1-8
​
© 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 59: Transference and Countertransference: Part 2

20/12/2018

0 Comments

 
​Following on from Blog 58, here are some examples of how the various transference formats may show up within organisational settings. 
Competitive transference

In the following examples, Chris would set up a Parent-Parent competitive symbiosis, while Vijay would set up a Child-Child competitive symbiosis.  Both create scenarios where there is an apparent rivalry over who gets to exhibit one particular ego state.

Chris had a tendency to take charge of project meetings, even when not in the chair.  Chris would display Controlling Parent behaviour, whilst at the same time believing that the chairperson was being overly controlling.  Chris would challenge decisions made by the chairperson, try to run the agenda and determine the time allocations for topics, push forward decisions without giving others chance to comment, whilst at the same time accusing the chairperson of being an incompetent control freak.

Vijay, on the other hand, would get into a competitive symbiosis with a co-trainer, Andy, about who was the most needy.  Whenever Andy talked about needing a break or asked Vijay to take the lead in a training session, Vijay would feel a similar need for a break and would want Andy to take the lead in the next session.  In this way, Vijay and Andy would end up competing over who was going to get taken care while the other one did the work.

Concordant transference

In the following examples, Lauren creates a false Parent-Parent empathy while Prakash opts for Child-Child empathy – in both cases the assumptions of being the same mean that the parties avoid certain topics, either because they think their opinions are the same or because they think they know how the other person feels.

Lauren worked as an external change management consultant.  When meeting new clients, Lauren had a tendency to assume that the client had the same values about how a healthy organisation should operate.  This would mean that Lauren made assumptions instead of checking thoroughly to establish client opinions and requirements.  With some clients, the assumptions Lauren made were close enough to reality for it to be virtually unnoticeable.  However, every so often Lauren would have major problems when it transpired later that the client had very different views.  Interventions designed by Lauren would then have to be cancelled or significantly amended in order to meet the true requirements of the client and their organisation.

And, of course, there are clients who assume the consultant shares their opinions, so they commission the work and then rely on trust rather than any accurate monitoring of how the interventions are conducted.  Such clients may also conclude that any shortcomings are caused by participants rather than the consultant being at fault.

Prakash was a mentor who would imagine that the mentee felt the same way, had the same emotional responses, wanted the same things in life, as Prakash did.  Prakash would therefore feel that a very high level of empathy had been established.  This would mean that Prakash avoided raising the sort of topics or feedback that Prakash would have found personally upsetting.  Because of this, the mentee was denied opportunities for increased self-awareness and development.

Mentees may operate the same kind of transference – they then avoid telling the mentor about anything that the mentor might find upsetting or embarrassing.  Instead, the mentee censors their own comments – and might, for instance, be afraid to use the mentor to help them review the pros and cons of leaving the organisation because they believe the mentor will be upset to lose their mentee.

Conflictual transference

Lim-lim has grown up with an overly-controlling caregiver, with whom Lim-lim had consistently behaved rebelliously (and been punished).  Lim-lim had also spent many years transferring these controlling characteristics onto teachers, so that Lim-lim was rebellious towards even the most easy-going teachers.  Lim-lim now did the same to managers, relating to them just as if they were the original caregiver.

This resulted in many Parent-Child interactions in which managers tried unsuccessfully to tell Lim-lim what to do and Lim-lim agreed and refused to comply.

Lim-lim works in a large organisation and has been transferred several times – Lim-lim’s current manager also grew up with a very controlling caregiver but has opted to copy that person so is unwittingly filling the parent role that Lim-lim seems to need to rebel against.

Pat had children and had adopted a very Controlling Parent way of behaving towards them.  When at work, Pat behaved as if other staff, especially Pat’s subordinates, were really rebellious children and needed to be treated as such.  This led to much conflict – even the fairly easy-going members of staff found themselves feeling resentful and rebellious over the way Pat interacted with them.  Pat, of course, saw these reactions as proof of the need to treat people as children.

When someone like Lim-lim ends up working for someone like Pat, they both feel that their views of how to treat people are validated.

Co-dependent transference

Due to circumstances, Alia has grown up without nurturing caregivers but had been aware that other children, especially those in films and TV programmes, seemed to have caring parents.  Alia was therefore yearning, out of awareness, for such a parent figure.  This led Alia to behave in a ‘helpless’ way, whilst transferring nurturing tendencies onto almost everyone who was older and/or more senior then Alia.

At the same time, Kim had grown up in an overly-nurturing environment and had somehow opted to adopt very nurturing characteristics.  Having practised with siblings and dolls, Kim was ‘programmed’ to take care of anyone younger or more junior – so would expect to adopt a Nurturing Parent role to their ‘needy’ child.

Once Kim and Alia started working together, they seemed to be locked into a Parent-Child relationship.  The symbiosis led each to believe they couldn’t function on their own – it needed both of them to create one full set of ego states between them.
​
Note that it is possible to have a healthy symbiosis for a real child with a real parent.  This is because such a relationship rejects reality and does not involve transference – the child really does need parenting until they reach a certain age.  Couples may also set up functional symbiosis.  For example, one does the gardening and the other cares for the house.  No transference is involved as long as both recognise these as choices – and know that they are capable of swapping tasks if necessary.
Reference

Hay, Julie (2003) Transference INTAND Newsletter 11:1 1-8

​© 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 58: Transference and Countertransference: Part 1

13/12/2018

0 Comments

 
​Earlier this year (Hay, 2018) I included some fairly brief information about transference and countertransference in an article about boundaries that included a section on professional boundaries.  In the second edition of my Transactional Analysis for Trainers book (Hay, 2009) included more information in the chapter about professional super-vision. Several years before that (Hay, 2003) I have related the same idea to trainers and facilitators working with groups of managers within organisations – this version is extracted from below.
Trainers sometimes find that groups of grown-up participants will behave as if they are children at school – not asking questions, whispering to each other, even treating the trainer as someone who may ridicule them if they give a wrong answer.

Facilitators sometimes find that group members will behave as if they are with their own family – acting as if the facilitator or group leader is a parent or grandparent, behaving like the children they once were, even engaging in displays of ‘sibling rivalry’ as they try to impress the leader.

We can understand these and similar situations by using the concept of transference.

Transference

Everyday use of English tells us that ‘transfer’ means something gets shifted across – as in footballers joining new teams.  From a TA perspective, transference is the term for what is happening when we shift across the characteristics of one person (ourself or someone else) onto another.

So we may project our own good or bad points onto somebody else, which will mean that we like them a lot because they seem to be just like us, or we dislike them a lot because we have invested them with our own failings – in this case we probably also manage to repress our own awareness of having the faults ourself.  This is why it is easier to get on with people once we accept that we are not perfect ourselves; once we recognise that we are still OK even with faults, we no longer have to project those faults onto others and can relate to people as who they really are.

Or it may be the characteristics of someone else that we transfer, as when we relate to authority figures as if they are one of our parents or caregivers, or to junior employees as if they are our children (or nieces or nephews or children of friends).  This accounts for the common pattern in organisations where each successive level of management relates to the level above as if they are the parent and to the level below as if they are the child.  An interesting reversal of this pattern is when a male manager relates to a female secretary as if she is his mother – often reinforced by her responding to him as if he really is a small boy who needs to be scolded into getting to meetings on time and so on.

Countertransference
​

Countertransference is the term used for the ways in which a therapist responds to the transference of their client.   However, what is thought of as countertransference will sometimes be simply the person’s own transference.  For example, managers will often claim on training programmes that they are forced to behave as parents because their subordinates behave so much like children – when their subordinates are on the training courses, they of course claim that they act like children only because their managers are incapable of behaving in any way other than as parents!

Professional helpers monitor their reactions for countertransference because this gives then valuable information about how to help their clients.  If a consultant recognises feelings of wanting to take care of the client, they can check whether this is a realistic, here-and-now reaction that is also an appropriate thing to do – or whether it is a reaction to helplessness being exhibited by the client.  For instance, if a course participant is clearly unable to deal with being bullied by their local manager, it may be appropriate (and an organisational requirement) for the trainer to report this to senior management.  However, a strong urge by a coach to intervene with the client’s manager over something like management interference in a project may be outside the contract, part of a game of ‘Let’s you and them fight’; and triggered by a combination of the client’s avoidance tactics and the coach’s Rescuer tendencies.
​
Categories of Transference

When we look more closely at transference, we can identify several formats.  Novellino & Moiso (1990) relate transferential relationships to three levels of impasse: monadic, where the client merges themself with the therapist; diadic, where the client projects all of the ‘good’ or all of the ‘bad’ that they believe exists within themself onto the therapist; and triadic, where the client projects their own Parent ego state (P2), the content of which has been copied from others, onto the therapist.  Clarkson (1992) writes of: complementary, where the client seeks a symbiotic relationship with their therapist; concordant, where the client projects aspects of themself onto the therapist so they seem to be alike; destructive, which is acting out or similar that means therapy cannot proceed; and facilitative transference, where the client chooses a therapist so the client can still use effective behaviour patterns from the past.

For developmental TA purposes, we can categorise on two dimensions:
  • projecting elements of our self or of someone else (a third party) onto the person we are transacting with
  • projecting so that we appear to get on well with the other person or so that we have a problem relating to each other
We can then show 4 options as in the Table.
Picture
In later parts of this blog I will provide some examples, show how a refracted transaction (Gill, 1986) is a form of transference, give some ideas for avoiding transference, and conclude with ideas for using transference.

References

Clarkson, Petrūska (1991) Transactional Analysis in Psychotherapy London: Routledge

Gill, Vivienne (1986) TA in Education ITA News, No. 13 p.1

Hay, Julie (2003) Transference INTAND Newsletter 11:1 1-8

Hay, Julie (2009) Transactional Analysis for Trainers 2nd edition Hertford: Sherwood Publishing

Hay, Julie (2018) Psychological Boundaries and Psychological Bridges: A Categorisation and the Application of Transactional Analysis Concepts International Journal of Transactional Analysis Research & Practice 9:1 52-81

Novellino, Michele & Moiso, Carlo, (1990) The Psychodynamic Approach to Transactional Analysis Transactional Analysis Journal 20:3 187-192
​
© 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 57: Coaching Transactions

6/12/2018

2 Comments

 
The ideas in the diagram below evolved during a workshop on developmental coaching and mentoring being run by Julie Hay (2002) and attended by Pauline Sagoe, Vivianne Naslund and Diane Richardson.

Between the four of us, we enjoyed producing a new donkey bridge for the ways that ego states interact.
​
For each transaction, we show the positive and potential negative result, plus the overall impact when Parent, Adult and Child are operating in an integrated way.
Picture
​Reference

Hay, Julie (2002) Coaching Transactions INTAND Newsletter 10:3 9
​

​© 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
2 Comments

Julie’s Ideas Blog 56: Cajun Team Meld

29/11/2018

0 Comments

 
The following is an activity that was designed during a TA training weekend (Hay, 1999).  It is an activity that will energise the group whilst at the same time increasing familiarity with the various forms of time structuring.  Note that we do not include psychological games – we chose only to demonstrate positive forms of time structuring.  Instead of games, we have added a time structure called ‘supporting’, where the stroking is partway between the level of intensity for activities and intimacy.
​
The activity is best performed to Cajun music – hence the name!  Country and Western music would also work.
Picture

​Have the group stand in a circle.  The following are the movements used to represent each time structure:

Withdrawal:  stand with backs to each other, with arms folded – to represent no contact, no stroking occurring.

Ritual: turn to face each, make Namasté (for those not familiar with this form of greeting, you press your palms together as you raise your hands in front of your face, whilst looking towards the person(s) you are greeting).

Pastiming: hold up your palms, facing towards the others, and rotate your hands (an optional extra here is to split your fingers as in the Vulcan greeting in Star Trek!).

Working or Playing (Activity): join by putting right hands into the centre to form a star, then move 8 paces to the right followed by 8 paces to the left (as in country dancing).

Supporting: cross arms and hold hands with those on either side of you, then all lean outwards to show you trust each other, and in this position repeat the movements of 8 steps to the right and 8 steps to the left.

Closeness (intimacy): all lean in a lot, and drop your hands so that you can hold hands with your neighbours.

Withdrawal: to complete the sequence of interaction, return to the position for being alone by stepping back, turning around, hold hands briefly then let go, step out one pace and fold your arms.

We had a lot of fun designing this activity.  We hope you too will enjoy it as a demonstration of the different time structures.

Reference

Hay, Julie (1999) Cajun Team Meld INTAND Newsletter 7:4 14-15


​© 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 55: Group Dynamics: C7P7A7

22/11/2018

0 Comments

 
In Blog 26 I presented C5P5A5 as a handy donkey bridge (Townsend, 1994) for remembering a list of factors to think about when we are analysing group processes. I traced my development of this from 1993 through to 2012 (Gobes, 1993; Hay, 1993, 2009, 2012).  However, I overlooked an alternative I had described in a publication I wrote for Fenman (Hay, 2004). Below, therefore, is a new version based on a combination of the two different versions of C5P5A5. This now has 7 factors for each, and has therefore become C7P7A7.

As before, we cannot keep all of these in mind at once so they can be considered roughly chronologically. C7 relates to what is happening as the group starts up. P7 applies once the group has moved into doing its work. A7 is relevant as the group is reaching the end of a task or a meeting.
​
 
Context – what is the context within which the group is functioning and how might this be influencing the group dynamics?

Contact – how well is initial contact being made between the group members; are they taking time to create relationships?

Contract – what is the contract, or agreed remit, of the group; are group members clear about this?

Content – is the content of the discussion related to the contract; are group members focusing on appropriate content?

Creativity – is there evidence of creativity; are new ideas welcomed?

Commitment – do all group members seem equally committed to the work of the group; are they all contributing?

Contrasts – how are group members using any differences between them (e.g. cultures, styles, etc) rather than these leading to unhelpful conflict?

 
Personal – is the group process respectful; are they listening to each other and communicating effectively?

Professional – are the group at the performing stage (Tuckman, 1965); are they working on the issues in line with their professional roles?

Psychological – is the process clean, with a lack of hidden messages; are the group avoiding game playing?

Power – is there an absence of power plays; are more senior group members encouraging others to play a full part?

Paradigms – whose maps of the world are being operated within; are group members being open-minded enough about the perspectives of others?

Parallel – is the group functioning in the here-and-now and avoiding any sense of parallel process (Searles, 1955) dynamics outside the group (such as replaying conflicts between their managers)?

Performing – has the group reached the performing stage?

 
Attachment – have the group reached the stage where they are close and open with each other?

Autonomy – are group members managing to be autonomous and offer their own views rather engaging in groupthink?

Authenticity – are group members being genuine about their feelings and opinions rather than holding back?

Alternatives – is the group generating alternatives and choosing from a range of options rather than closing down too quickly?

Actions – are practical actions being generated or identified, accompanied by enough details about plans for implementation?

Accountability – are the group members allocating/accepting responsibilities to specific group members for ensuring actions are implemented?

Aims – do the outcomes relate back to the original aims of the group?
 
 
References

Gobes, Landy (1993) C4P4: A Consultation Checklist Transactional Analysis Journal 23:1 42-44

Hay, Julie (1993) C4P5A3: A Donkey Bridge for Group Processes Groupvine Winter 11-12

Hay, Julie (2004) Analyzing Group Behaviour Train the Trainer, Fenman 13

Hay, Julie (2009) Transactional Analysis for Trainers 2nd edition Hertford: Sherwood Publishing

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

Searles, Harold F. (1955) The Informational Value of the Supervisor’s Emotional Experiences Psychiatry Vol 18 pp. 135-146 (later reproduced in Collected Papers on Schizophrenia and Related Subjects, H. F. Searles, Karnac Books 1965)

Townsend, John (1994) Making Messages Memorable Training and Development January

Tuckman, Bruce (1965) Developmental sequence in small groups Psychological Bulletin 63 384-399
​

​© 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 54: Group Imagoes and Interaction Charts

13/11/2018

0 Comments

 
​In Hay (2004) I produced an issue in Fenman’s Train the Trainer series that was about groups.  In that, among other things, I wrote about interaction charts and group imagoes.  I also included a warning.
A word of warning

Analysing and feeding back group behaviour can leave some people feeling threatened, especially if they are not used to thinking about how they behave and the impact they have on others.  Make sure you set up adequate groundrules for the process – think about some of the frameworks in this issue and apply them to the group in terms of its task being to review its own process.  Facilitate in a way that provides appropriate stages of group development for the review.  Don’t assume that, because the group were effective at their work task, there is enough trust and openness for doing something quite different.
​
​Analysing individuals in groups

As well as looking at group dynamics, we can usefully analyse individual behaviour within groups.  For instance, we could simply note the number of times each participant interacts with each other participant and use this interaction chart to review what is happening – there will almost certainly be patterns emerge that demonstrate clearly when alliances form or arguments develop, who is treated as the group leader and who is not really involved.  Or we can add to this by analysing styles of behaviour (e.g. assertive, aggressive, acquiescent), types of interactions (e.g. questions, opinions, ideas), personality indicators (e.g. introvert or extravert, thinking or feeling).
Picture
Interaction Chart
Group imagoes

An alternative to Tuckman is the notion of group imagoes proposed by Berne.  He suggested that we all have some form of image, or imago, of a group, usually out of our awareness, that this imago goes through recognisable stages, and that this heavily influences our behaviour in groups.  If we were to capture our imagoes on paper, they might look like those in Figure 1 (although they might look quite different – this is a very personal thing!)

Changing the names of the stages to make them more memorable, we have:
​
  • the anticipatory imago – as we arrive at the group, we probably have a slot for a leader (which may be filled by someone we already know but may instead be an imaginary leader who is made up of a combination of all the leaders we’ve known in the past, or the worst or best of them …); some slots for people we know will be there; and an undifferentiated slot for ‘all those other people’ we expect to be there but haven’t yet met;
Picture
  • the adjusted imago – in which we have slots for each person (once we’ve met them and chatted a bit) and in which - hopefully but not always – we’ve updated each slot to better reflect reality.  A potential snag at this stage is that we fail to update and continue to relate to others as they are in our imago – so we treat the leader like a teacher, or other group members as if they are our siblings;
Picture
  • the adapted imago – by now we’ve sorted out in our minds who we think is in charge and how the pecking order works – so mentally our imago may have a hierarchy built in, with the relative positions having significance.  We may also have arrived at a democratic imago, perhaps with a circle of equals around a co-ordinator;
Picture
  • the attached imago – hopefully we finally arrive at an imago in which we feel close to others, able to contribute without fear of ridicule, with a sense of genuine attachment to the group;
Picture
  • however, we may fail to reach attachment.  If we decide at the adjusted stage that we don’t want to be in the group anyway, but can’t actually leave, we may create an imago of alienation.  And if we can’t satisfactorily resolve the control issues at the adapted stage, we may end up with aggression!
We can analyse group behaviour by inviting group members to sketch out their imagoes at the various stages and then to review these with each other.  This can be a powerful way of bringing into consciousness some of the assumptions and prejudices we all carry.  Seeing people for who they are rather than what we unwittingly imagine them to be can significantly improve our relationships.  And don’t forget that you too, as trainer/facilitator, are running your own imagoes – which may contain slots for that ​participant who always causes trouble, or asks too many questions, or sulks, or whatever else you regularly find hard to deal with.
​
References

Hay, Julie (2004) Analyzing Group Behaviour Train the Trainer, Fenman 13
​

​© 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

Blog 53: TA in Organisations - why is it like a pickaxe?

8/11/2018

0 Comments

 
In 1997 I provided an article about TA in organisations, in which I explained why it is like a pickaxe.  The publishers did not use my title but they did keep the mention of the pickaxe within the article (Hay, 1997), as I show below. They also deleted my sub-headings, which I have put back for this version as it makes it easier to read. And they edited some of my wording and I have chosen here to retain the original words.
​
Transactional analysis was originally developed by Eric Berne as a therapy model - which has been its strength and yet also the source of its problems when too many people saw it as a quick fix and tried to transfer it, unchanged, into organisational settings.  Fortunately, there have been many developments over the years, so that we now have variations that have been specifically tailored to the needs of individuals within organisations - and to the organisations too.

Why the pickaxe?

The robustness is, of course, still there and indeed one way you can see TA is like using a pickaxe to release physis. This refers to an underlying principle of TA:  that all human beings have within them physis, which is the basic urge to grow and develop.  Regrettably, many of us have our physis buried under a metaphorical layer of concrete, put there by well-meaning grown-ups who pointed out our limitations when we were young.  The trainer who comes equipped with a pickaxe can create enough cracks in the concrete for us to behave like plants and grow up through the gaps towards the light!

This basic premise is highly relevant to current organisations, where it is essential to capitalise on the innate potential of all employees.  It is equally relevant to the employees, who need to grow into new roles and responsibilities.  They also need to respond positively to change - and if they are sensible they want continued professional development in order to maintain their ‘market value’.

The psychological contract

Much has been written recently about the changing nature of the psychological contract between organisations and employees.  TA offers an extended model of contracting that helps make this clearer and that also has considerable relevance for trainers.  The basic model is of a three-cornered contract, between organisation, trainer and participants.  The key is ensuring that all parties have shared expectations.  Imagine a triangle with eyes in each corner - each party should have a clear perspective of the contract between the other parties.

Often this is not the case.  The organisation may have unrealistic expectations of what the trainer can achieve (especially when they only allow half a day!).  The participants may be there unwillingly and believe that the trainer will be trying to force them to change.  And the trainer may think so too - or may see their role as saviour to the downtrodden participants and agree with them about the shortcomings of management.

Awareness of the three-cornered contract allows a trainer to check that the organisation is expecting something feasible; that the participants recognise their own responsibilities for their learning; and that they as trainer are competent to do the training.  This will mean that the psychological distances between the parties are balanced - so that the roles of Persecutor, Rescuer and Victim are avoided.
TA Principles
​​
  • We assume that people will want to grow and develop, even when they may have forgotten this themselves.
  • We also assume that humans want and need to connect with others.  The aim is therefore to provide awareness so that we can identify more options for interacting effectively.
  • All applications of TA involve contracting - using TA models for growth and change is done by agreement and is not something that is imposed.  Trainers who seek to enforce ‘cathartic experiences’ are not using TA appropriately.
  • IOKYOK versus SHNOK - the underlying attitude is I’m OK, You’re OK rather than Somebody here’s not OK.  We may object to someone’s behaviour but still regard them as a valued human being.
  • Many of our key decisions about life were made when we were too young to have adequate data.  We are capable of redeciding - of changing our minds.
TA frameworks

There are far too many TA frameworks to give more than an overview in this short article.  Some are well known, such as:

Ego states and transactional analysis proper   -   analysing of transactions between people using ego states.  Note that various misunderstandings have crept in here because Eric Berne’s original models were misinterpreted by early organisational trainers.  When Berne emphasised the use of Adult ego state, he meant any behaviour that was grounded in the here and now.  He did not restrict this to logical behaviour but included appropriate nurturing, emotional reactions, and having fun.

Trainers may unwittingly adopt a Parent ego state; participants often slide promptly into Child ego state as soon as they enter a classroom because they ‘regress’ to their childhood.  Those who were naughty at school may then repeat the pattern; trainers who have shifted to Parent are likely to find themselves wishing they could give detentions!

Strokes and life positions - strokes are the ways we let others know that we recognise that they exist; life positions are our existential attitudes.  Strokes are a biological necessity - and the ways in which we are motivated (or not) at work.  We vary in our stroke preferences; some of us like work-based strokes while others prefer personal strokes.  Our life positions determine how we react to strokes:  in I’m OK, You’re OK we accept them positively but in not OK positions we distort the strokes so that even positive ones may be perceived as negative.

What you stroke is what you get!  Trainers who persist in giving negative strokes will often find that the behaviour commented on gets repeated rather than extinguished. Learning and behaviour change are increased when people are given positive strokes that reinforce what is wanted.

Psychological games - games people play is probably the best-known TA phrase ever (and was also the title of one of Berne’s bestselling books).  Games are those predictable, repetitive interactions that seem to progress inexorably to a negative outcome that comes as no real surprise.  Rather like a stage drama, the game players take on roles as Persecutor, Rescuer and Victim - and then switch places for maximum impact. 

Trainers may start out as if they expect to Rescue participants and finish up feeling like Victims when their efforts are rebuffed.  Participants may act like Victims who don’t want to be on the course, and then switch to Persecutor and blame the trainer.

Working styles and drivers - these are five identifiable styles that are our strengths, or characteristic working styles, and become our weaknesses, or drivers, when we are under stress.  Stress causes us to do more of whatever we were doing already, as when we shout at foreigners as if that will make them understand our language.  When this fails, we may become compulsive, or driven, to do even more of the same.

Trainers with Hurry Up style get more and more impatient; Be Perfects become increasingly pedantic; Please People become paranoid about displeasing anyone; Try Hards try harder and harder whilst getting nowhere; and Be Strong types become increasingly stoical and monotonous.

​Competence curve and cycles of development
- the curve shows how competence levels go up and down when change occurs.  Based on a child development model, it helps people understand why change is often stressful and yet could be a more positive experience.

Trainers can use this model to plan training formats that make it easier for people to settle in and gain maximum benefit.

The individual and the organisation

The concepts above were described from an individual perspective.  They can equally be applied to an organisation to identify limitations. 

Ego states - managers, like trainers, may adopt permanent Parent whilst employees feel obliged to stay in Child.  Departments may take on a persona:  Accounts may be the organisation’s Parent, making sure no-one spends money; Sales may be the Child, having an exciting time; Engineering may regard themselves as Adult, engaged in logical problem solving.

Strokes - you can analyse the organisational stroking pattern by considering questions such as:  how are success and failure identified and stroked; do average performers get any strokes (usually not, because they are taken for granted - poor performers get much more management attention); what strokes are there when people join, transfer, leave?

Games - the amount of game playing within an organisation is a reflection of the stress levels!

Working styles - organisations often have their own styles, which may owe a lot to the style at the top!  Examples are newspapers as Hurry Up, creative agencies as Try Hard, accountancy firms as Be Perfect, emergency services as Be Strong, and social services as Please People.  Note that in unsuccessful organisations these become drivers, so that the style itself becomes part of the problem.

Competence curve - this can be used to analyse and improve the ways in which organisations implement change.  It can also be used by managers to check their own contributions to (or shortcomings in) helping employees adjust to new circumstances.

Applying TA competently

TA is deceptively simple.  It is also extremely potent when used effectively.  The key is to apply it to yourself before you attempt to apply it to others. TA uses a system of training and supervision which focuses on self-awareness and skill development. Accredited transactional analysts have typically spent at least four years developing their awareness and skills before taking an international exam that involves both a dissertation and a panel that reviews their work. 

It is said that the best way to learn something is to teach it to others.  TA trainees are encouraged to do just that and to bring the results (on audio or video tapes) to a TA supervisor for review.  The trainees themselves will analyse the interactions on the tapes with help from the supervisor.

Of course not everyone will want to obtain the full qualification.  Many trainers use relatively small amounts of TA alongside their other skills.  It is still well worth getting some professional coaching.  There are now modular TA programmes available that are specifically geared to organisational applications and that allow individuals to opt in for specific sessions.  Most are at weekends to suit trainers’ busy diaries.  And those who have attended them confirm that the increase in their competence generally is well worth the investment of time and energy.

References

Hay, Julie (1997) Talking TA Management Skills & Development April 66-67
​
© 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
<<Previous
    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