|
Participating in a Self-Observing Collective: Experiential Learning in T-Group Settings |
D. P. Dash
Xavier Institute of Management, Bhubaneswar 751013, INDIA, Email: dpdash#ximb.ac.in
Suggested Citation: Dash, D. P. (2005, July). Participating in a self-observing collective: Experiential learning in T-Group settings. Here & Now (Newsletter of the Indian Society of Applied Behavioural Science), 19 (3), 6-10.
1. Introduction
This is a report on my experience of attending two of the behavioural learning programmes conducted by the Indian Society for Applied Behavioural Science (ISABS, http://www.isabs.org) in 2004 and my subsequent reflections on them. I have presented it in the form of an article for any interested reader, who might like to find out about the types of learning experience possible through such programmes.
There are many difficulties in presenting such an account as I have set out to write. First, there is the difficulty of articulating the holistic experience of such laboratory learning in a textual medium, without the possibility of presenting also that which goes with the text, the con-text. Second, the learning happens to be at the level of awareness, helping one to connect one’s experience, thoughts, feelings, and actions. Different meanings and implications continue to arise as one keeps reflecting on the learning; different thoughts and actions continue to emerge from this. It is quite difficult to point out what the learning have been, in black and white, while also being truthful to what is happening inside oneself. Despite these difficulties, I have still put this together because I consider these programmes very important and worth discussing in different forums. If reading this article interests some of you in finding out more about the ISABS programmes, I would consider this article worth the effort.
(i) Basic Laboratory on Human Process (BLHP), Jaipur, 17-22 May 2004
Objectives of BLHP (taken from http://www.isabs.org/a.shtml)
(a) Become aware of own patterns of behaviour
(b) Know the impact of own behaviour on others
(c) Know the impact of others’ behaviour on oneself
(d) Improve one's own effectiveness in interpersonal interactions to derive greater mutual satisfaction
(e) Discover one's own potential to live more effectively and meaningfully
(ii) Advance Laboratory on Human Process (ALHP), Agra, 7-12 Dec 2004
Objectives of ALHP (taken from http://www.isabs.org/b.shtml)
(a) Enhance and consolidate learning of the BLHP and afterward
(b) Reinforce, by practice, the new behaviour assimilated in the BLHP and afterward
(c) Identify and develop greater awareness of interdependent human processes
(d) Explore options to work on the dilemmas faced in perceived situations
(e) Discover one's own potential for greater effectiveness in organisations and society
(f) Practise listening and intervention skills and develop sensitivity towards human processes
Although, these programmes could leave different kinds of impact on different people, let me acknowledge that both these programmes have been quite enjoyable and enriching for me. There were of course several moments of puzzlement, stress, and frustration. On the whole, the programmes have made me more aware of myself as a person and they have substantially enriched my appreciation of human relationships. At some level, the programmes have struck an internal chord with me, which has led me to accept their usefulness for me. These have helped me prepare a learning agenda for myself. I have also gained a perspective on human development from these programmes that ought to be of some relevance to my own academic practice.
I would first like to make some general comments on the nature and relevance of such programmes, followed by some specific points relating to my own personal learning. I would then conclude with a section highlighting some implications for my academic practice.
2. Nature and Relevance of Such Programmes
These programmes utilise the principle of experiential learning through facilitated group dialogue, following the T-Group format developed at the National Training Laboratory for Group Development, USA (now called the NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science, http://www.ntl.org/). This approach to self-understanding and human development is inspired by the pioneering work of Kurt Lewin (1890-1947), the founding father of social psychology and group dynamics, who was also a pioneer of the notion of 'action research'. Earlier, I had the opportunity to review the work of Lewin for my doctoral work, for which I was comparing different forms of research in which the researcher is interested in some intervention, change, or development, in conjunction with the traditional goals of understanding, explanation, prediction, etc. (Dash, 1999a; 1999b). (I have given some references to the academic literature, including some of my own academic writings, to alert the reader to the academic discussions and debates concerning this type of experiential learning programmes.)
A T-Group usually brings a small group of people together into an experimental setting, where they participate in a research-like process, in the presence of a facilitator, who is experienced in such small group processes. This research-like process is aimed at greater understanding and explanation of one's own behaviour, as well as exploring the possibility of change in one's behaviour. However, in a significant departure from the more common frames of research, one is both the researcher and the researched in this setting. One revisits reflects upon one's own notions of oneself, in the light of the observations made by others. This becomes a process of self-discovery aided by a process of observation and feedback given by others. One also provides feedback to others, contributing to their own processes of self-discovery.
In other words, it is an interaction among observers, in which the observers' actions (e.g., participating, not participating, giving feedback, suggesting hypotheses, etc.) make new observations possible. In addition, it also leads to the formation of a special type of collective (or system) in which membership implies one is prepared to maintain one's dual status as observer and actor. I have come across descriptions of similar collectives or systems in the academic literature of systems sciences, e.g., those relating to observing systems, learning communities, shared information spaces, etc. (Cariani, 1993; Glanville, 1993; Pask and De Zeeuw, 1992; De Zeeuw, 1993a; 1993b).
In the ISABS programmes I attended, the facilitator's task seemed to be focused on ensuring that participation and observation are maintained in a non-threatening atmosphere, maximising the opportunity for everyone to engage in meaningful self-reflection. Facilitators also suggested possibilities for behavioural change by helping members articulate the options before them to be different from what they have been so far. For example, a member may say, 'But, I have always been like this', to which the facilitator may say, 'I have always been like this so far, but... (pause).' Generally, facilitators are people with extensive training and experience in dealing with such processes. They usually deploy a vast repertoire of skills in dealing sensitively with people who are willing to work on understanding and transforming themselves.
These programmes provide a splendid opportunity to recover and repossess our personhood, which tends to be ignored by people and systems around us, and more damagingly, sometimes also ignored by ourselves too. Frequently, we reduce the multiple facets of our personhood to one or two dimensions. In the course of our day-to-day living, we learn to play by the rules set by some system, strive to fulfil expectations, measure ourselves by external standards, and crave for recognition. This renders us into puppets in the hands of others. It naturally generates stress in us. How we cope with that stress defines our habits, interactions, and our state of peace. It so happens that many of us invent coping strategies, which are unhelpful in the long run. It can drag us deeper and deeper into the quagmire of dissatisfaction, discomfort, and disapproval of ourselves. Clearly, this is not a healthy state of being. It can affect our actions and interactions negatively. It can impair our professional and personal lives. Experiential learning programmes, when they are effective, can help us diagnose our own situations and identify healing practices that are right for us. Consequently, such programmes can give us the capacity to manage our own lives towards greater freedom, satisfaction, and fulfilment.
As we learn to manage our own selves, we also learn to respect others as equally legitimate beings. If we have not been doing it already, it would involve a change in outlook. This change in outlook usually transforms our interactions with others. We learn to listen and appreciate 'where one is coming from'. We become conscious of any oppressive or otherwise damaging relationship we might have developed towards others. This not only liberates us from that role, it also liberates our relationships from a progressively deteriorating mode to, possibly, a healthier and developing one. It can help improve personal relationships, teamwork, and organisational outcomes.
Therefore, these programmes are for those who wish to recognise their multi-faceted personhood and liberate themselves towards a fuller and more satisfying life, to be shared and celebrated with other free persons around them.
3. My Personal Learning
Either by temperament or conditioning, perhaps both, I had not paid sufficient attention to my emotional experiences earlier. Consequently, I had also been ignoring this dimension in other people. Attending these ISABS programmes has brought this neglected dimension to clear view. I feel more human now and, as a result, more free. I am also more ready to appreciate the multi-dimensional nature of the people around me. As a result, sometimes, I am able to relate with others around me.
Some of my learning is based directly on the feedback I received in these programmes and my reflections on the same. Some of my learning is also based on my attempt to relate to the situations and issues brought in by the other members. In the following paragraphs, I present my specific learning from the two ISABS laboratories I attended in 2004.
3.1. Learning from the Basic Lab. (BLHP, Jaipur, 17-22 May 2004)
Even though I have attempted to present my learning in distinct points, under separate headings, these are nevertheless quite thickly related with each other. I am also aware of the difficulty a reader may face in understanding the points without a detailed account of the context in which these points make sense to me. But I still invite you, dear reader, to introspect and indulge, and draw whatever meanings seem appropriate.
(i) I had a blind spot that made it difficult for me to observe some of my own feelings. I was denying these feelings to the extent of thinking that they do not exist. I was quite surprised to find that others could notice some of my feelings, even before I came to terms with these.
(ii) I lacked in congruence, i.e., the state of balance among experience, awareness, and expression. I need to address this to understand myself better and examine the difficulties I face in my relationship with others.
(iii) Sometimes, I feel helpless if I cannot react to a situation. I need to reflect on this helplessness.
(iv) I still find it difficult to recognise others’ feelings and deal with it. I also found it difficult to understand others’ emotional needs. I am learning to improve in these areas.
(v) I found myself rejecting compliments and friendly gestures. I learnt to change this and practice reciprocation and gratitude.
(vi) Although, intellectually I understand the ‘problem of induction’ very well, I still had a tendency to generalise even when there is insufficient basis for it. I am alert to it now.
(vii) Interacting with people at a human-to-human level involves some risk. But, I realised, this is a risk worth taking.
(viii) I became keenly aware of certain fears within me, e.g., fear of rejection, fear of embarrassment, fear of humiliation, fear of being hurt, etc. These fears were inducing behaviour, which had no rational basis.
(ix) I learnt that, due to my flexible attitude and my avoidance of disagreements, I could be seen as a person of no clear understanding or no clear views.
(x) My approach of avoiding rejection, embarrassment, etc., can prevent me from doing things that would help in my growth. I have to examine this more carefully.
(xi) I have been withdrawing from problematic situations and taking flights of fancy into multiple avenues of security, such as philosophy, music, Internet, academic interactions, etc. This approach is equivalent to not confronting a situation and escaping from it. I need to understand what it is doing to me.
(xii) I had put too many barriers around me to make it difficult for people to know the real me. I was doing it out of my own insecurity and it was proving dysfunctional in promoting self-learning.
(xiii) It is possible that, sometimes, I talk to impress, rather than express myself. This, together with my tendency to dramatise, indicates that I might be putting up a façade. No wonder, sometimes people see me as unnatural or artificial. (This also relates to my tendency to smile even when it was unnecessary.)
(xiv) I became aware that other’s response to my initiatives is very important to me. In fact, these responses determine my future interaction with them. This makes me too much dependent on others.
(xv) I realised that, while I am in a group, I tend to seek support. I have started examining this tendency and the possible drivers behind it.
(xvi) I was quick to point out errors, evaluate, and advise. I would like to examine this need in me to play the teacher. Am I under the influence of a ‘self-imposed theology’, i.e., do I carry a self-image that is worth worshipping, underplaying other images?
(xvii) I found a huge difference in the way I behaved in the presence of the facilitator and in his absence. This gave me some insight into how I related to authority figures. I need to process this and explore other options.
(xviii) I realised the importance of identifying the options before me in any given situation, including options concerning my future, i.e., what I want to become as a person.
(xix) A big take-away for me was this quote: ‘Others will not care how much we know, until they know how much we care.’ (Anonymous)
3.2. Learning from the Advance Lab. (ALHP, Agra, 7-12 Dec 2004)
The ALHP is methodologically similar to the BLHP, although the objectives are somewhat different (as stated in Section 1 above). The fact that the ALHP participants have gone through a similar process earlier makes a significant difference to how the event unfolds. As for me, I had some very specific goals to fulfil from the ALHP. The goals were in the area of congruence, listening, confrontation, empathy, and dealing with fear. I got ample opportunity to practice my learning in these areas. Besides, I also identified a few other areas for future work on myself. I present this learning below.
(i) I need to look more closely at my own journey of individuation. How have I become what I have become as a person?
(ii) I have experienced aggression in my childhood and humiliation in my youth. This has led me to harbour a negative image of the world. This has dysfunctional implications for me. I need to let go of the there-and-then and respond to the call of the here-and-now.
(iii) I seek freedom. When I find my freedom thwarted in the everyday domain, I tend to take off (or escape) into a different domain (e.g., philosophy, music, etc.). I should explore more effective coping strategies.
(iv) I find it difficult to trust anyone or anything. I have a need to doubt. Is it coming from the there-and-then?
(v) Usually, I operate from a need to be friendly with everyone. This prevents me from stating my position clearly and concisely, disagreeing with someone, etc. I have made some revision in this regard.
(vi) I got a feedback that I accept all kinds of feedback given to me. Is this because I want to appear reasonable? Am I really processing the feedback I am receiving?
(vii) I have a tendency of imposing my own views, concepts, and values upon others. I can explore the approach of letting a person discover his/her own views, concepts, and values.
(viii) My listening is poor. I listen only to the spoken words and form judgements immediately. I need to practice more empathetic listening and being less judgemental.
(ix) By my normal mode of interacting in a group, I can make some people feel uncomfortable and therefore withdraw. I have to look into this.
(x) I used to think of spontaneity as a desirable quality. I learnt that spontaneity could be of functional and dysfunctional types. I have realised how spontaneity can be dysfunctional in a learning situation. I need to reduce this type of spontaneity.
(xi) I also experienced a need to prevent people from what I consider ‘erroneous thinking’. Do I really have to be everyone’s guardian angel, whether or not they desire it? In my role as a teacher, I can help people develop their own thinking (rather than pushing my thinking down their throat, as it were!).
(xii) The concept of feedback became clearer. A feedback is different from suggesting, evaluating, inferring, analysing, etc. It is more like the reflection in a mirror; the feedback giver acts like a mirror to the person for whom the feedback is meant, projecting only what is seen or perceived.
(xiii) Feedback can be solicited or unsolicited. If I wish to give unsolicited feedback, I need to be sensitive to the other person’s internal world. In any case, I need to be prepared to deal with the consequences of the feedback.
(xiv) When I present a hypothesis, there has to be that tone of tentativeness in my voice and in my words.
(xv) In an experiential learning situation, I need time to concretise my insights and reach a state of balance and readiness to go further. This also seems to be true of others. I have to be patient with people’s own pace of coming to terms with their insights. It may not help if I explore, articulate, and make choices for someone. (Sometimes, silence is a virtue!)
(xvi) While mentoring or facilitating a learning process, my desire to help a person grow should become my sole motive.
4. Implications for Academic Practice
4.1. Implications for Teaching Practice
Many of the learning points mentioned above have a direct relevance to my practice as a teacher and mentor. Each person comes into a learning context coupled with his/her experiences, expectations, emotions, and a bundle of internal mechanisms through which he/she records experience, assimilates information, builds concepts, and replaces old ideas with new. Learning therefore is a highly individualised process. It has to be appreciated and treated as such.
If I look at my own practice as a teacher or mentor, I find a lot of scope for improvement. The most basic step for me would be to start respecting every person’s freedom to learn at their own pace, in their own style, and arrive at their own legitimate conclusions. I have to reconsider my tendency to impose my own conclusions on others, without giving adequate opportunity for them to explore the topic or issue at hand, based on the information and reasoning available to them. Of course, I can facilitate others’ learning process in various ways.
To take away someone’s joys of exploring and inquiring can be seen, in the extreme, as a form of violence one can commit on that person. I think I may have been guilty of that kind of violence. I would like to reconsider my teaching/mentoring style, towards developing an approach that takes into account the other person’s internal world and the person’s right to exploration and inquiry.
4.2. Implications for Research Practice
Here I wish to share some of my reflections, which are to be treated as invitations for further discussion.
Often, I tend to reflect on the nature of knowledge practices (i.e., practices related to knowledge production, knowledge acquisition, knowledge management, etc.). In these practices, although human perceptions and experiences often provide the basis for constructing and revising knowledge, still there is a tendency to avoid the ‘messy’ human dimensions from the results. In some limited research areas, the results have indeed been remarkably separated from the human processes and human dimensions that must have been involved at some stage. An example would be the laws of nature described in the physical sciences.
However, in the contemporary discussions on the ‘sociology of knowledge’, ‘experimenter effect’, ‘ill-structured problems’, etc., it has become clear that the classical type of separation of the results from the human processes involved in their creation is not always possible. This leads to the question: What kind of research can be carried out in such domains? Any claim to objective knowledge in such domains is rather dubious.
My earlier studies in this area indicate that some form of research may still be possible in such domains, provided we are prepared to extend our notion of research, while not losing sight of its distinctive qualities that made it so revered as a social enterprise in the first place (e.g., Dash, 2004). One such form of research would involve the construction of a locally stable entity that serves as a local resource, while being improvable, extensible, and replicable in general. To me, the ISABS approach to learning and discovery approximates one such form of research, where the local resource created is in the form of a self-observing collective.
The methodology of research in this type of practice makes full use of the emotional dimension of the persons involved--something the classical methodology of research has abandoned as too random and too difficult to handle. Feelings and emotions serve as an error reduction mechanism here, helping to maintain the collective. If an action provokes too much emotional imbalance in some members, the collective takes it as something to be addressed, so as to restore a state of wellness. This is the self-conserving side of the process. However, there is a self-transcending side too. This operates when members facilitate each other’s growth towards their known and unknown potentials. This type of work, with a focus on human well-being and human development, seems to be an important exemplar of a new form of research.
Acknowledgements
I gratefully acknowledge the contribution of my learning guides in the above programmes (for BLHP: Mr Paul Siromoni and Ms Wasundhara Kanbur; for ALHP: Ms Rekha Bharadrwaj). I am grateful to all the co-participants in those programmes, who not only helped create the context in which learning was possible, but also gave copious feedback and suggestions to me. I would also like to thank Xavier Institute of Management, Bhubaneswar (XIMB), for sponsoring me to these ISABS events. Finally, I thank my colleague Prof. Snigdha Pattnaik for inspiring me to embark on the ISABS journey.
References
Cariani, P. (1993). To evolve an ear. Systems Research, 10(3): 19-33.
Dash, D. P. (1999a). Vocabulary of agency: Development and assessment of a generic conceptual framework to guide action-oriented research in multiple domains (PhD Thesis). Lincoln, United Kingdom: University of Lincoln. Retrieved 8 January 2005, from http://www.ximb.ac.in/~dpdash/PhD.htm
Dash, D. P. (1999b). Current debates in action research. Systemic Practice and Action Research, (Erstwhile Systems Practice), 12(5): 457-492.
Dash, D. P. (2004). Second-order creativity in research: Exploring the action-oriented perspective. In A. K. Giri (Ed.), Creative Social Research: Rethinking Theories and Methods (pp. 297-307). Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books.
Glanville, R. (1993). Pask: A slight primer. Systems Research, 10(3): 213-218.
Pask, G., & Zeeuw, G. de (1992). Interaction of actors: Theory and some applications (Monograph). Amsterdam: Centre for Innovation and Co-operative Technology, Universiteit Amsterdam.
Zeeuw, G. de (1993a). Improvement and research: A Paskian evolution. Systems Research, 10(3): 193-203.
Zeeuw, G. de (1993b). Increased competence as a process of surviving in shared information spaces. Systems Practice, 6(2): 155-172.