In 2002 I was busy combining ideas from NLP with TA and wrote about how we might think of our scripts as metaphors. The following are some extracts from an article I had published then (Hay, 2002).
What do these three have in common? They each have within them an implicit assumption that the speaker’s map of the world is the one that matters – they discourage the listener from even thinking about the underlying pre-suppositions within the statements. They have an hypnotic effect – the project manager is likely to find that people focus totally on time, probably at the expense of quality; the trainer finds that at least one participant in each group will become so nervous that they actually refuse to do the role-play at all; and the co-ordinator runs a scheme where the mentees’ distress at being refugees is compounded by culturally insensitive mentors. We can get a better understanding of how the statements create the impact they do by considering them as metaphors and paradigms. A dictionary (Times, 2000) search for these labels gives us:
Our maps have more meaning than we may realise In a metaphor, we substitute one thing for another, with all the connotations that brings. Metaphors add richness to our maps, enabling us to convey a lot of meaning in a few words. At the same time, our metaphors are representations of paradigms, in which exist some powerful but implicit boundaries. Again, the paradigm enables us to convey these boundaries in a few words. Put the two together and we create a map of the world that has much implicit meaning within it and clearly implied boundaries around it. Taking our three examples:
Everyday Maps We operate on numerous everyday metaphors and paradigms, generally without realising we are doing so because so many of them are shared. Prompted by Molden (1996), we can identify several other models of time in addition to money:
Molden suggests that we could instead think of time as an investment, so that we focus on: planning how best to invest time; evaluating our gains from our use of time; building an investment portfolio comprising activities such as learning and developing, building relationships, enjoying life. O’Connor (1998) provides examples related to leadership that conjure up some amusing imagery if you consider them literally: larger than life, on a pedestal, ahead of the field, hands-on, having the common touch, out of touch. Many organisations have ways of talking about different maps as if they equate to wars, with people using phrases such as: winning and losing, shooting down other’s arguments, attacking the weak points, being right on target, gathering ammunition. And how often have you been accused of moving the goal posts; throwing out the baby with the bath water; expecting to have your cake and eat it? Or had the advantages of being a high-flyer or star performer; operating on a level playing field; getting all the ducks in a row? Identity Maps We often use metaphors to define ourselves; again these contain implicit limitations. At the professional level, we may consider ourself to be:
In Part 2 of this blog I will relate these ideas to life scripts (Berne, 1972; Steiner, 1974), to the six process scripts (Kahler, 1979), and to my 5E model. References Berne, Eric. (1972) What Do You Say After You Say Hello? New York: Grove Press Hay, Julie (2002) Metaphors and Paradigms – Whose Map of the World? Organisations & People 9:4 2-8 Kahler, Taibi (1979) Process Therapy in Brief Little Rock, AR: Human Development Publications Molden, David (1996) Managing with the Power of NLP London: Financial Times/Pitman Publishing O’Connor, Joseph (1998) Leading with NLP London: Thorsons Steiner, Claude (1974) Scripts People Live New York: Bantam Times (2000) Times English Dictionary London: HarperCollins Publishers © 2018 Julie Hay
Julie is a fan of open access publishing so feel free to reproduce any of these blogs as long as you still attribute it to her.
0 Comments
During 1998 I was busy running workshops about dealing with difficult people, including sometimes at Wembley Conference centre where I was able to make a recording that is still available for sale at Sherwood Publishing. A key point that I made was the importance of curiosity – and of believing that everyone you meet is bringing you a message. Below is what I wrote then (Hay, 1998). Dealing with Difficult People is the sort of headline that always attracts. There can be few of us who have never felt the need, whether the difficult person is a colleague or a customer, a client of our services or our manager, or even a friend or family member. Much training is provided in various approaches to interpersonal skills but somehow the problem seems to remain. Recent developments, including some interesting results from research into how the brain works, have generated some new techniques. A useful belief to have if you want to get on better with people is that everyone you meet brings you a message. This is a variation on the belief that the universe acts in purposeful ways, even if these may seem random to mortals! Whether the belief is true or not, acting as if it is will definitely improve your relationships. This is because our brains work on a self-fulfilling prophecy basis. We have all had the experience of being in a bad mood, and then feeling sure that our next interaction will result in an argument. And then it does - because we unwittingly emitted body language signals that indicated we expected trouble. The other person then felt threatened or annoyed so they in turn became irritated and responded accordingly. This process can be sidelined if we cultivate a heightened sense of curiosity. Instead of becoming impatient or annoyed with another person, we can concentrate on finding out why the universe has sent them to us. To do this, we have to ask questions. As we ask these questions, the other person feels flattered that we are so interested in them. They therefore respond in a positive manner and we find ourselves realising that they are quite a reasonable person after all. Another benefit is that we often realise that their comments are actually quite useful. Instead of dismissing them, we listen properly and can hear the parts that are relevant to us. We can improve this process still further if we learn the skills of paraphrasing. If we genuinely paraphrase rather than ‘parrot-phrasing’, we generate several advantages, including:
References Hay, Julie (1998) Dealing with Difficult People: The Power of Curiosity Training Matters Spring 5 © 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. Over 20 years ago (Hay, 1996) I wrote an article about how there were some unfortunate myths about how the process operated for getting TA qualifications. My focus then was on the ways that trainees were misinformed about the requirements for anything other than psychotherapy (then known as clinical TA). I am re-publishing some of that as a blog now because the same myths are still circulating, and I am now aware of them operating internationally too. What I wrote then was that: I regularly talk to clinical trainees who have realised that they do not want to become therapists. Often, they had not realised that there are other options available to them - namely the organisational, educational and counselling fields of application of TA. Several of them have switched over to a non-clinical field that better matches their interests and experience. At the ITA [ITA has since become UKATA – UK Association for TA] Annual Conference this year I was disturbed to hear several myths about such training in the non-clinical fields of TA. I am concerned that these distortions may be preventing people from identifying their options. The most worrying of these were comments, from several sources, to the effect that:
NEITHER OF THESE COMMENTS ARE TRUE The accurate facts are that: Organisational, educational, counselling and clinical [psychotherapy] TA training are all based on the same requirements - as detailed in the EATA Training Manual - currently [i.e. in 1996 – and I show changes in 2018]:
There are additional requirements that apply within the UK [and in some other countries] for clinical [psychotherapy] training only - so that candidates who wish to be psychotherapists will also meet UKCP (United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy) requirements [or the equivalent in other countries]. There are currently no equivalent extra requirements for the non-clinical applications of TA [although there are nowadays for other fields in some countries]. It is up to you to decide what additional specialist qualifications you will need in order to be accepted as a competent professional in your chosen field. There are plenty of people who can give you suggestions and advice about this if you need it. ALL fields require trainees to have as much therapy as they need to deal with any issues that might prevent them from performing competently as transactional analysts. Becoming a CTA in a non-clinical field takes about the same length of time as it does to become a therapist - about 4-5 years depending on your own levels of experience and ability. The procedures for written and oral examinations are identical for all fields of application [procedures are the same; questions are different; assessment criteria are different]. When I wrote the above in 1996, I added that I owned my obvious vested interest in presenting the information because I was currently the only specifically Organisational TSTA in the UK. I was expecting to be joined soon by Trudi Newton and Susannah Temple as Educational PTSTAs and some time later by another Organisational PTSTA, Anita Mountain. My own training programme had been running since 1986. It consisted of a series of self-contained modules that cover a range of TA concepts each year. I wrote then that you could join at any time; and that training and supervision of your non-clinical work that you have already received from clinical trainers can be counted towards your total hours requirement. You can devise your own programme, combining a mix of some of my modules, some from clinical trainers who are nearer your home, and some at conferences. This all still applies and now I offer international webinars that provide the equivalent hours and learning for those who cannot get to workshops. I am also now TSTA Psychotherapy as well as Educational and Organisational – and expect soon to take my CTA Counselling exam (which I could not reach recently due to the terrible floods in India). So, if you need any advice about any of the fields of application of TA, feel free to arrange to chat online with me by going to http://bit.ly/JHBOOKME and booking a convenient slot. References Hay, Julie (1996) Dispelling the Myths – The facts about Training in the Non-Clinical Applications of TA ITA News 45 26-27 EATA Training and Examination Handbook can be accessed at https://www.eatanews.org/training-manuals-and-supplements/ ITAA Training and Examination Handbook can be accessed at https://itaaworld.org/itaa-training-examinations-handbook © 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. By way of introduction, if you would like to see what Eric Berne and other early TA authors wrote about autonomy, I have provided a summary (Hay, 2017) as a free download – go to https://www.juliehay.org/article-downloads.html and look for Autonomy – Early Material. Generally autonomy is described as having three elements, which Berne referred to as awareness, spontaneity and intimacy, although he described the third element in terms of the first two. In Hay (1995) I changed some of the words so that they all began with the same letter (to make them easier to remember – but feel free to change them back if you prefer – misery is optional). I added another element, so that I had awareness, alternatives (instead of spontaneity), attachment (instead of intimacy) and authenticity. Since then I have added a fifth element – accountability (Hay, 2014). I described these as:
In 1995 I also suggested some reminders to help us maintain autonomy as we interact with others: These three valuable keys to autonomy are all easier to achieve if we do as the American Indians suggest – walk in the other person’s moccasins for a while. If we put ourselves in their shoes and do our best to share their frame of reference, we will be better able to connect with them. References Hay, Julie (1995) Donkey Bridges for Developmental TA Watford: Sherwood Publishing Hay, Julie (2014) Extending the Donkey Bridge for Autonomy IDTA Newsletter 9:1 8 Hay, Julie (2017) Autonomy – Some of the Early Material IDTA Newsletter 12:3 16-21 © 2018 Julie Hay
Julie is a fan of open access publishing so feel free to reproduce any of these blogs as long as you still attribute it to her. |
Categories
All
Archives
August 2019
|