 ‘No matter how much we may think we have an accurate sense of ourselves, we are stymied by the fact that we are using our own interpretive filters to become aware of our own interpretive filters – the pedagogic equivalent of trying to see the back of one’s own head while looking in the bathroom mirror.’ (Stephen Brookfield) Critical reflection can enable a coach, and a client, to move beyond addressing an immediate issue – say, a challenge or an opportunity – that lays before them to consider themselves, the context(s) in which they find themselves and how it impacts on their relationship(s), what they (and others) perceive, how they (and others) construe it, what value they (and others) attribute to it and what they (and others) do (Pockett, Lindsey & Giles). We could think of this as a bit like stepping outside of a circle, the circle representing that which we have agreed – in the sense of giving conscious or subconscious assent – defines the nature, focus, scope and meaning of an issue, to explore what lays above, below and around that circle. A challenge lays in how to do this, how to disengage and disentangle ourselves enough to view ourselves, the context and the issue through fresh eyes. To assist us in this venture, Fook offers critically-reflective questions to enable us, and others, to step outside of the box. Here are some examples: What am I/the client assuming? How am I/the client influencing the situation? What preconceptions do I/the client have and how might these influence what I/the client do or interpret? How is my/the client’s presence making a difference? What sort(s) of power do I/the client have? Touching further on broader and embedded issues of power and privilege, Smith invites us to pose critical questions such as, Who benefits in this situation? and Whose voices are being omitted? Chan and Mak identify the potential for paradigm shifts and earthquakes in social-political structures if this is applied to practice: ‘(It) can liberate people from oppressive ideologies and empower them to resist social injustice.’ What have been your experiences of critical reflective practice? How did you do it? What difference did it make?
14 Comments
 ‘We're fascinated by the words – but where we meet is in the silence behind them.’ (Ram Dass) I remember my first experience of haggling over the price of a leather belt in a Palestinian marketplace. I was a teenager at the time and I found this approach to buying and selling novel and entertaining. The smiling street vendor played the game skilfully. I asked, ‘How much?’ to which he responded, '$6.’ ’$6?’ I replied, ‘I could get the same belt at another stall for $1. How about $2?’ ‘$2?’ He replied, ‘Please don’t insult me. It cost me more than that to make it. As a special deal, however, I’ll give it to you for $5.’ ‘$5?’ I replied, ‘The most I would pay for it is $4.’ ‘$4?’ He replied. ‘Don’t you realise I have a family and children to feed?!’ He grinned. We closed at $3. To a Westerner, where buying and selling is typically more transactional than relational, this toing and froing can feel like a manipulative game; frustrating, bordering on dishonest and time-wasting. That’s mostly because we tend to miss the underlying cultural meaning and purpose to this type of engagement. I met recently with an international team from USA, Netherlands, Jordan and South Africa. They are part of a Christian organisation and were keen to identify and work through some cross-cultural and relational challenges. I decided to share a short passage from the Bible with them, then to invite them to discuss what sense they made of it: “Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, ‘Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.’ Jesus did not answer a word. So, his disciples came to him and urged him, ‘Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.’ He answered, ‘I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.’ The woman came and knelt before him. ‘Lord, help me!’ she said. He replied, ‘It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.’ ‘Yes it is, Lord,’ she said. ‘Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.” And now to the critical closing: “Then Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.’ And her daughter was healed at that moment.” (Matthew 15:21-28) To the Westerner who views language and transactions in literal, linear, straight lines, Jesus’ initial responses to the woman are shocking. We take his opening action as his definitive stance. We don’t see the smile on his face or the glint in his eye, or understand the movement as the interaction progresses. We may assume the story is written to affirm the woman’s perseverance. We may think she has changed his mind. We are likely to miss the Semitic ritual of building or navigating a relationship. The Jordanian participant saw this immediately. The others looked surprised. (I must confess I didn’t understand this, too, until a Kurdish-Iranian friend had explained this dynamic to me). The cross-cultural implications are clear. If I judge your actions by unknowingly mis-inferring your intentions (being influenced subconsciously by my own cultural assumptions), all kinds of misunderstandings and tensions can arise. It cautions me-us to approach people and groups from different cultures with an open mind, a spirit of curiosity and a great deal of humility. Bottom line: We’re not only negotiating a price; we’re also negotiating a relationship.  ‘Intuition is like reading a word without having to spell it out.’ (Agatha Christie) I had the privilege of training an inspiring, cross-cultural group of participants in South Africa, Rwanda and the UK this week who work in different roles in the same international non-governmental organisation (INGO). This online Action Learning Associates programme was designed to enable them to facilitate Action Learning sets (that is, groups) confidently and effectively. (If you’re unfamiliar with the concept of Action Learning, it’s a semi-structured, small-group, peer-coaching process that’s used widely in leadership and management development programmes and as part of wider organisation development (OD) initiatives). One of the areas we touched on during the training event is the value of drawing on intuition when facilitating groups. We could consider the facilitator’s role simply in terms of a series of tasks, e.g. introducing a meeting; leading a check-in; contracting ground-rules; guiding the group through the sequential steps of an Action Learning process; facilitating a review at the end. These are important elements that we learn to handle skilfully. At a deeper level, however, we can learn to tune into our intuition. This will help us to discern, for instance, unspoken issues; underlying group dynamics; or when a person-group is stuck or ready to move on. Intuition can feel mysterious, a sense of ‘knowing’ that we may experience bodily or as a feeling rather than as a rational concept in our mind. One of most mysterious experiences I had was when training a group of church and community leaders in Action Learning facilitation. When I first encountered one of the participants, the word ‘Ruth’ kept coming to mind. I mentioned this to him very tentatively and he looked astonished. Apparently, he was about to complete a PhD study on the book of Ruth in the Bible. I had no idea. For me, spiritual discernment sits close to intuition. I always pray deeply before coaching or facilitating a set. How do you draw on intuition in your own life and practice? I’d love to hear from you!  ‘Sleight of hand, of course, is not magic, but a skilled use of distraction to keep the ‘mark’ from noticing the real act that is being done. It takes advantage of a natural tendency to follow the obvious and to miss the more important thing that is carefully obscured.’ (Colin Harris) Geopolitics is like a game of chess in which half the pieces are invisible and nothing is what it seems. Like a magician that tricks by misdirection, we can find our attention drawn to the person or the issue that lays immediately in front of our eyes and miss the vital background. In WW2, why did the USA use devastating nuclear weapons against Japan? To prevent further loss of American lives by avoiding having to invade the Japanese homeland? Maybe. To fire a shot across the bow of Stalin and the rapidly-expanding Soviet Union? Almost certainly. On 9/11, why did Al Qaeda attack the twin towers and other symbolic targets in the USA? To strike a blow against the ‘Great Satan’? Maybe. To provoke an over-reaction from the USA that would, itself (they hoped), radicalise Muslims worldwide against the liberal West? Almost certainly. In 2003, why did the USA and its allies invade Iraq? To remove Saddam Hussein? To eliminate an imagined risk of ‘weapons of mass destruction’? Maybe. To secure US' and allies’ future oil supplies against a rapidly-developing China and its projected energy demands? Almost certainly. In 2022, why did Russia brutally invade Ukraine? To restore the power and prestige of the Soviet empire? To defend pro-Russian East Ukraine from ‘Ukrainian aggression’? Maybe. To fire a shot across the bow of an eastward-expanding NATO and EU? Almost certainly. On October 7, why did Hamas attack Israel so murderously? To punish Israel for its oppression of Palestinian people? Maybe. To provoke an over-reaction from Israel that would, itself, stop Saudi and other Muslim states normalising relations with Israel? Almost certainly. Why has Israel since retaliated against Gaza with such overwhelming force? To destroy Hamas and its military capabilities? To secure the release of the remaining Israeli hostages? Maybe. To fire a shot across the bow of Iran, an ever-increasing threat in the Middle East? Almost certainly.  ‘Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was the suspect.’ (Steven Wright) Action Learning facilitators sometimes feel anxious if there are prolonged periods of silence in a group, or if an individual is particularly quiet. They may assume, for instance, that the person is uninterested to engage with the group or the process. I had that experience once (online) where a participant sat throughout a round wearing headphones, nodding and swinging in his chair as if to music. When I asked if he had any questions, he clearly had no idea what the presenter had been talking about. I addressed this with him directly after the round, checked if there was anything he would need to be and feel more engaged, then agreed that he would leave the set. That said, there are a wide range of potential factors that may influence if and how a person engages in a set meeting and, at times, different reasons for the same participant during different rounds. I will list some of them here as possibilities: if a person has been sent to a set, rather than has chosen freely to join it; if there is formal or cultural hierarchy within the group; if there has been insufficient attention paid to agreeing ground-rules for psychological safety; if building relational understanding and trust has been neglected; if a person doesn’t like someone else in the group, or fears negative evaluation by others in the set; if a person lacks confidence. There are other possibilities too: if a person has an introverted preference and processes thoughts and feelings internally; if a person has a reflective personality and needs more time to think; if a person doesn’t feel competent with the language or jargon being used; if the person can’t think of a presenting issue or a question; if last time the person spoke up in a group meeting, it was a difficult experience or had negative consequences; if a person is preoccupied with issues or pressures outside of the meeting; if a person is distracted mentally or impacted emotionally by something that happened before the meeting, or is due to happen after it. So, what to do if a person is completely silent in a set? Here are some ideas, to be handled with sensitivity and, if appropriate, outside of the meeting: take a compassionate stance – there may be all kinds of reasons for the silence of which you are unaware; avoid making judgements – silence does not necessarily indicate disengagement; be curious – ask the person tentatively, without pressure, if any issues or questions are emerging for them; avoid making assumptions – ask the person what the silence means for them and if there’s anything they need; have an offline conversation with the person – if their silence persists for more than one meeting. |
Nick WrightI'm a psychological coach, trainer and OD consultant. Curious to discover how can I help you? Get in touch! 
Like what you read? Simply enter your email address below to receive regular blog updates!
|
RSS Feed