by Mercè Martínez i Torres

This conceptual scheme originates from the first meeting in preparation of the III Regional Mediterranean Conference organized conjointly by the International Association of Group Psychotherapy (IAGP) and the Sociedad Española de Psicoterapia y Técnicas de Grupo (SEPTG) to be celebrated in Barcelona In February of 2008.

The meeting took place on June 1 and 2, 2007, with the participation of Malcolm, Juan, Hanne, Pere and myself, except Malcolm, all members of Grup d’Análisi Barcelona. The resonances of this meeting, in which this scheme appears for the first time, are a good example of the work done by this group of analysis (see RESONANCES).

We began the presentation “Building bridges between groups” with a question: What do two groupanalysts do when they are invited to share a conference? And, the answer is: they start to dialogue, if possible with a group, where to freely associate ideas and proposals and, later, to decide conjointly what can be transmitted in this space which all is to share. It is, then, a scheme or diagram which emerges from a group addressed to another group, which can be useful for conducting a interview, for revising one’s own trajectory on the path of groupanalysis, for revising the trajectory of a group, for planning the training of groupanalysts…

 I shall try to explain very briefly this scheme, advising beforehand that, although it has been created ad hoc for the encounter between Juan and Malcolm, it can serve for the reflection of any person who has been trained, works and lives in groups.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If we observe firstly the Gestalt or the whole, one of the images that emerge is an oval (group matrix), which could also be a spiral if the image was tri-dimensional. It’s not perceived as something static but something dynamic; the internal forces as well as the external ones can modify and transform it. Without a doubt, the “group of analysis” as matrix has a containing function, of limits, which permits that processes of learning, of growth and of change take place (between others).

If one more time we constitute ourselves as a “group of analysis” and if we ask ourselves how we work as a Group of Analysis, the answer should be: applying the Group Method of Analysis, making conscious what is unconscious to show the development of the task, the process, the change and, if the latter happens, at which levels it appears (the individual, the group or the cultural level…) and which are the resistances for it not to happen.

 

 

 

The internal / external is penetrated by history (personal, our environment, our culture, of the human species, etc.) and affects the “here and now” of the group matrix; and, without doubt, by a determined and complex socio-cultural frame of reference (languages, bonds, taboos, believes, prejudices…)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Inside, three spaces of change are proposed that really interact with one another. A real change, even if it only produces itself on the individual level, has to modify knowledge (elaboration, conceptualization, thinking…) as well as skills and competencies (to make and know how to make) and, without doubt, also produce a change of attitudes (to be). Within this frame of reference, and this is a personal perception, one of the important changes would be to pass from an individual attitude, competitive and hierarchic, to a group point of view, cooperative and of dialogical nature.

 

 

The real changes produce themselves specially in the realm of attitudes, and when change does occur not only on the individual level but on the group level, then it is a question of change of group culture.

As I said, it is a scheme which pretends to invite everyone to reflect on their personal trajectory and their way of positioning themselves.