Teaching Systemic Thinking

David Campbell, Ros Draper, Clare Huffington, David Campbell, Ros Draper, Clare Huffington

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN: 9780367327378
• eBook ISBN: 9780429919862
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: History & Theory in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

Therapists recognise that the practice of systemic family therapy is as much about the way one thinks as it is about what one does, and this book was the first in this field to address specific ways of teaching people to think sytemically. It discusses the way people learn; the components of a successful teaching event; and many exercises which have proven helpful in changing the way people think. The book is based on seminars and courses given by the author over a twelve year period, and it is clearly and methodically written so the reader can easily apply the exercises to their own practice and teaching. Since systemic thinking is a growing field being applied to many different areas of work, this book has been enjoyed by a wide readership of people who work with families as well as large and small organisations.

II

Components of Teaching

1.Theoretical Input

We tend to teach theory in several ways. We have found it is very effective to link a theoretical discussion to an exercise. For example, an exercise about formulating the family as a system can be followed by a discussion during which we might elaborate the concept of the interconnectedness of meaning and behaviour by referring to the experiences which the participants had during the exercise. This is a powerful method of conveying ideas.

We also like to have periods of general discussion in the large group, and from the questions raised, one of us might go to the “blackboard” to make a diagram, or outline some points which help to clarify a theoretical point. During each of our workshops we would inevitably present the theoretical framework which underpins our own thinking and the concepts presented during the workshop. This presentation usually takes about an hour, as it is accompanied by diagrams and key words and phrases whenever possible.

The content of the the theoretical framework is slightly different each time we present because we are inevitably influenced by the most recent discussion or case we have taken part in and also because changing the approach keeps us fresh and interested in our own presentation. There is nothing worse for a teacher than to become bored by the sound of his or her own voice.

However, there are some theoretical concepts we find very helpful for participants grappling to develop their own systemic thinking.

1. A system is any unit structured on feedback. We emphasize the importance of creating and observing feedback processes in every situation which requires systemic thinking.
2. Feedback over time becomes identified as pattern.
3. The identification of the pattern introduces the concept of the observer of the pattern. No pattern exists without someone on the scene who punctuates events in such a way that they are seen as a pattern (see Maturana, 1978).
4. Pattern creates its own context, and it is only through context that events or behaviours acquire meaning.
5. Meaning and behaviour have a recursive or circular relationship. We voluntarily behave as we do because we have certain beliefs about the context we are in, and our beliefs are supported or challenged by the feedback from our behaviour.
6. Meanings which are attributed to behaviour can be arranged in a hierarchical structure. Some meanings come from more inclusive and more abstract levels such as religion and culture, whereas other meanings come from lower order, more specific levels such as dyadic relationships (see Cronen and Pearce, 1985).
7. Symptomatic behaviour arises from an individual’s attempt to create a new relationship or a new pattern of feedback in response to perceived changes going on within or around him.
8. When this individual behaviour is observed and responded to by members of an interconnected system, the feedback loop acquires meaning from a larger context than originally constructed by the individual. In this way a problem is only a problem if it is labelled as such by some observer (or observing group).
9. Concepts such as ‘problem’, ‘badness’, ‘strangeness’ describe an interactive process between the ‘observer’ and the ‘observed’. And as these people interact they become a system and their behaviour has meaning for the laiger system around them.
10. What’s important about problems is understanding the meaning which underlies the relationship created between the ‘problem bearer’, and the consequences for the wider system of seeing things that way.
11. We assume that families approach therapists because they feel something important is changing. The change frightens some family members, and they want the therapist to change the way things are changing.
12. The aim of therapy is to create a context in which the family and individuals can think differently about the problem behaviour.
13. The therapist does this by introducing differences to the way people think by listening carefully to understand their beliefs, and then posing questions which subtly shift those beliefs or behaviours into new contexts.
14. There are many interviewing techniques, such as circular questioning, which are invaluable tools in this process; however, they will be discussed in the next paper in the series.
15. Therapists get stuck when they have only a partial view of the system - if they lose sight of the family’s wish to change or remain the same. For this reason we present many ideas about the family’s struggle to achieve a balance between stability and change.
16. The referring person, the family members and the therapist and his/her team are all a part of a ‘problem-determined system’ (see Anderson et al., 1987) which assumes the same features of interconnectedness and balance between stability and change which are characteristic of any application of systems thinking.
17. Finally, the view which a therapist and team take of the family will be affected by the context in which the therapist finds him or herself. For example, in some contexts the therapist must act directly to protect children; in other contexts the therapist can leave the responsibility for change with the family.

2

Group Discussion

We see discussion as a means whereby the system interacts and creates new information. It is also an expression of the connectedness in the group over time. For the teachers, managing a discussion means managing the balance between the needs of the group and the needs of individuals. The same question from one person has a different meaning when asked by somebody else in the group who has a different history. We ask ourselves, “What does this question represent for this person? What has precipitated this question in this person’s struggles in their own work?” We try to answer in a way that allows them to reflect back on that context. If the question seems disconnected from the systemic process and is asked in a didactic way, we might be more cheeky and challenging: “What difference would it make to your thinking if we answered this question?”

We listen to see how people have been affected by our feedback to them. People start asking questions based on premises presented by the teachers. Sometimes people seem not to have been part of the group process and ask questions based on the premise they came with.

When this happens, such a question will often be answered by another question asking them to think about the system of relationships or ideas which generated that question in the first place.

In order for an answer to a question to be useful to participants, the teachers need to get them to look at how they are learning. How will the answer contribute to the process of their learning?

3

Video Presentation and Live Family Session

Video presentation creates a context in which people can match their expectations of what they see people do and don’t do in family therapy. It allows people to become engaged through learning what is safe. They are able to put their own learning into that context by asking themselves what do they do that you don’t, and so on.

A visual experience like this can be very powerful if the participants are asked questions in such a way that they place themselves in relation to the video material.

Questions

1. In a group, look for 3 ways in which verbal and nonverbal material confirms/disconfirms the hypothesis.
2. What is the interaction between the hypothesis and the feedback from the family that would lead you to be stuck as the therapist? Give 3 examples.
3. What contradictions are emerging from the questioning in the belief system and behaviour of the family?
4. What issues need to be addressed in an intervention?

It is not possible, in our experience, to remain engaged with video for longer than about 10 minutes.

Live families can be more engaging than video presentation in that participants feel galvanized by the riskiness of not knowing what is going to happen. In this context, people can get involved in creating a system around the therapy as it is going on. The kind of question we ask observers of a live family session would be: “In terms of the development of your epistemology or technique, what questions would you like to have answered in the family session today?”

A great deal of attention is paid to how the participants observe and they will have questions to answer, hypotheses to watch for, and things to look for.

Reading And Writing - Homework - Taking Notes

We think of these next three chapters as interventions, in that they involve an explicit attempt to challenge the participant’s ecology of ideas.

4

Reading and Writing

(A) Reading

Our general approach to reading is to ask people how they have been challenged by what they have read. In this respect, it is congruent with the feedback process, modelling the theory of the relationship between beliefs and behaviour. In order for behaviour to change, beliefs must be challenged, leading to the creation of a new context in which alternative behaviours are possible. We start by asking, “What difference has it made to people to read this paper or book?”, “Which ideas does it threaten and which does it validate?” We are far more interested in the effect the paper has on the reader’s thinking than in clarifying the meaning of the paper as intended by the author. We find that clarification questions arise out of the participants’ attempts to answer the questions about what difference the paper has made. We then spend some time asking, for example, what Karl Tomm means when he is talking about ‘reflexive questions’, and whether he means this or that particular thing.

We organize the reading from the key references found at the end of this booklet. We have found the following references most helpful under each of these general headings:

1. Developing systemic thinking
   • Bateson, G. (1973) ‘The cybernetics of “self”: a theoiy of alcoholism’, in Steps to an Ecology of Mind. London: Paladin, pp. 280–308.
   • Keeney, B. (1983) Aesthetics of Change. New York: Guildford Press.
   • Watzlawick, P. et al. (1968) Pragmatics of Human Communication. New York and London: W.W. Norton.
2. Differences among models of family therapy
   • Hoffman, L. (1981) Foundations of Family Therapy. New York: Basic Books.
   • Liddle, H.A. (1968) ‘On the problem of eclecticism, a call for epistemological clarification and human scale theories.’ Family Process, 21, pp. 243–249.
   • MacKinnon, L. (1983) ‘Contrasting strategic and Milan therapies.’ Family Process, 22, pp. 425–437.
3. The Milan approach: overview and basic concepts
   • Campbell, D. et al. (1983) Working rnth the Milan Method: Twenty Questions. London: London Institute of Family Therapy.
   • Palazzoli, M.S. et al...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Teaching Systemic Thinking
• Introduction
• I VIEWS ON THE TEACHING & LEARNING PROCESS
• II COMPONENTS OF TEACHING
• Conclusions
• References