Setup:

Tavistock is one of the most powerful simulations around and has a long history of use, administration, analysis, and purpose.

The ideal number of participants is 15 to 24 – three groups of 5 to 8 participants each. More groups are possible, but the size of each group should be kept the same. Large groups tend to split into smaller sub-groups, and small groups tend to lack resources and diversity.

Assignment: Each group, at the end of the allotted time, is to give a presentation, as a whole group, about its process, as a group, in preparing to give that presentation [as a group.] 

If grades are relevant, add that each group will be graded as a whole (that is, everyone will be given the same grade.) Also state the time allotted to do the presentations (generally 20 to 40 minutes each.)

Participants should also be instructed, “to keep a journal” in order to properly “write an individual paper on the process.” The paper is due after the presentation. Each person receives an individual grade on his or her paper.

Some participants may not immediately process the paradoxical nature of the assignment. Write the assignment where everyone can see it.  

It is helpful to provide a handout to everyone summarizing concepts of group dynamics and ways people respond in group situations (the Group Life Handout, with Bion’s theory of group development and the Temperament model of group behavior, is quite useful.)

State clearly the experiences that each group will likely face: uncertainty about the nature of the task, desire to “get back at” or “depend on” the facilitator, the desire to choose a leader, the experience of having conflicting sides, and – perhaps most importantly – the likely creation of a “fake” task to avoid the real one. The purpose of the activity is to demonstrate the concept of “emergence” and each group will find its own way and “know” when it has reached this place.

Tell state that you have told other groups these things to expect, that all groups tend to forget them, (“and you will forget”) and that eventually most groups reach emergence.

Finally, add, “I will visit your group [each day, week, hour, whatever] to provide feedback and facilitate.”

Activity: 

First, the classic “fish bowl” exercise is a great way to start off the groups. Each group, before they meet for the first time, is asked, “here are the members of your group… you all have 5 minutes or so to represent on the backboard [or other medium] what you envision your role in your group is going to be.” The other groups watch the group in the fishbowl. Participants may be instructed to watch for affect, positioning, energy and comfort level, and so on.

After the fishbowl, groups should meet for a minimum of 7 or 8 hours, with meetings separated each hour by a period of “down” time (a day, a week, etc.) A private physical space should be provided for each group and the meeting times made clear. You may provide an itinerary of when you will visit each group. [Otherwise, some groups may do “field trips” which coincide with your visit.]

The facilitator should NEVER directly communicate in a CLEAR way with the group or communicate for more than a moment. Such action immediately re-anchors the participants back to being dependent on the facilitator and prevents them from becoming an emergent group. Even a “slight nudge” can have major negative consequences that are more severe than letting the group struggle (or remain frozen) on its own. If major intervention appears needed, then arrange for an inter-group meeting instead.

The facilitator should enter the group’s private area, sit comfortably at a distance, and observe without comment or response. (Some groups may want to disrupt the facilitator’s stance, and eventually, showing some sign of response such as laughter can be an important step to the group – but otherwise avoid reaction of any kind if at all possible.) The facilitator should remain for 5-15 minutes, and can facilitate at the end of each visit in several ways:

1)     Hand a “Farside”, “Calvin and Hobbs” or other “philosophical” cartoon to the group’s apparent functioning leader. Do not verbalize; just place the cartoon. This is a visual intervention.

2)     Verbally give a metaphorical statement of the group’s behavior. For example, “it is as if the mother is gathering her children,” or “it is as if the computer is looking for new peripherals to use, or “it is as if the earth wishes to orbit another star.” These metaphors reflect the current behavior of the group. Like the cartoon, each member who hears it will likely hear it slightly differently and provide a meaning.

3)     Write the number of a room or building location where everyone can see. The group will likely get up and visit this location. It should be a nonsense place – a room that does not exist, a women’s bathroom, a closet, a computer lab or class in session, a counseling center, and so on.

It is usually most effective to not intervene at all in the first 2 meetings, then intervene in the order above over the next 3 to 5 meetings. The next last meeting should never have an intervention, and the “room” intervention should always come last (the group will have usually thought itself independent of the facilitator by now, and will be miffed they have been “taken in” again.)

Sometimes it is useful to do “inter-group meetings.” Two or all of the groups are thrown together into a single room. At the start, each group is allowed into this common room one at a time, to a table with chairs sufficient for only the number of person’s in that group. Then the next group is walked in, and so on. The facilitator then engages the normal facilitation stance, but with responses to the whole group, not just one group at a time or in parts.

What happens when a participant comes to the facilitator outside the designated meeting times, such as in the hallway or during lunch? There is a simple response, the question or issue is met with, "This is something you will want to discuss with your group." Only in the case of the presence or absence of a group member during the final presentation, or similar critical issue, should the facilitator respond, and in these cases, it is usually enough to simply reiterate the directions given at the start. (Such as, "your group will be given one grade, as a group.")

Debrief:

Allow each group to give its presentation. There are several factors to assess “emergence”: honesty about their process including conflicts, energy level of the group, physical positioning of members, creativity and uniqueness of presentation, etc. A dry Power Point presentation, with members talking one at a one, about group behavior in general, is a likely example of a “failed” group. A live energetic extemporaneous re-enactment of their group’s process, or a video that all members contributed too re-enacting or framing the experience, or a skit or performance of their group’s “personality” are all examples of “emergent” groups.

When a presentation is over, the instructor should thank the group for their presentation and ask them, “Do not sit down yet, but remain for a moment, because there is more now. Your group has 2 minutes to prepare and 3 minutes to present another presentation, on the process of the presentation you just gave [as a group.]”

Alternate topics for the secondary presentation are possible, so long as they are unique to the journey or issues of that group. Examples of alternate topics include: giving a presentation as a missing group member would have given, or a presentation on your process in meeting one year from today, and so on.

It is this extemporaneous “mini-presentation” that is actually the measure of the group’s process.

When all is said and done, there are several take-home lessons.

• "Many of you have probably told friends or others about this group project. If they had been present to see your presentation, would they have understood the process you went through?” (Most say others could not understand.)

• “Notice how much easier the second group process was, even though you had only a few minutes instead of many weeks [or days or hours.]”

• "How many of you considered the end of the group presentations – the death of your group – as part of your process? Do you now?”

• "What is the process that all of you always necessarily engage in each day that is like this group process?” (Living life is the process we engage in. The facilitator is like God, the group is society, and so on.)

• "Consider other groups you are a part of, your organization, your family, etc… where are these groups in terms of their process?” (This is an opportunity to transform learnings from this activity to other areas of life.)

Individual papers can be evaluated in the same manner as the groups' presentations.

Facilitating with Psychological Type:

All of the type models - temperament, cognitive processes, whole type, and interaction styles - are appropriate. Furthermore, the human development model (aka type coaching model) is also appropriate to share with participants so they better understand their journey to emergence. The development model is about arenas or stages of development, and links to the arenas and stages of group development. A group can ask itself, which arena or stage are we working from right now?