Anxiety and incompetence in the large
group: A psychodynamic perspective
Richard Seel
Journal of Organizational Change Management 2001 Vol. 14, No 5, pp: 493-504{To download a Word version, click here.} Keywords: Large groups,
Organisational change; Klein, Facilitation, Anxiety.
Abstract
Insights
from psychoanalytic thinking have been widely applied in the field of consulting, training
and facilitation; small group theory has also been influential. Perspectives from median [1] and large group work have been
less commonly applied. In this paper I explore some of the mechanisms which underlie large
group dynamics and show how they can help to illumine some of the destructive processes
which may occur when more than about a dozen people meet together. Insights derived from
large group perspectives will be used to help explain the dynamics of an organisational
event in which a group of experienced consultants were reduced to feelings of profound
incompetence and helplessness. Finally I will suggest some ways in which the negative
effects of large group dynamics may be ameliorated.
Introduction
Organisational change is not something
which can be directed, controlled or even managed (Seel, 2000). It is the
emergent result of changes in the relationships between the people in the organisation. If
these relationships get stuck, change will also get stuck.
One result of the growing recognition that
change cannot be imposed is the increasing desire to get the whole system in the
room in order to facilitate organisation change. Approaches such as Open Space
Technology (Owen, 1997) and Future Search (Weisbord, 1992) mean that consultants,
facilitators and other change agents are now dealing with larger groups of people in their
change interventions. The different dynamic of the larger group requires new insights and
approaches; otherwise there is a danger of paralysis and disengagement which may lead to
the discrediting of the whole change process (see also Gilmore, 1997).
Change provokes anxiety in most of us. Even
in smaller groups people sometimes behave in surprising and even disturbing ways. Many
writers find it helpful to postulate that this is the result of unconscious or out
of awareness influences deriving from the psyche of the individuals involved. In
particular, attention has focused on the anxiety which is often engendered in group and
organisational environments. The work of Melanie Klein, who suggested some infantile
mechanisms for dealing with extreme anxiety, has been applied widely in organisational
theory and informs the practice of a number of consultants. Her insights were derived from
individual analysis but have been extended to cover the small group and also the larger
group with more than a dozen or so members.
The contribution of Klein
Melanie Klein extended Freuds
theories about the childs psychological development backwards in time to speculate
about the infants mental life. She argued that the first external object the
new-born encounters in any sensible way is the mothers breast. Because of the
satisfaction it gives, the breast is perceived as being good. However, there
are also times when the breast is not offered when required or is not able to satisfy the
infants needs. At these times it is perceived as being bad. Klein
hypothesised that the infant is not able to cope with the extreme anxiety caused by having
the same object be both good and bad at the same time. Instead, as a defence against this
anxiety, it splits its feelings of love and
hate and projects them onto a good
breast and bad breast respectively.
Simultaneously, the infant introjects or internalises its relationship to the
good and bad breast, so that their influence remains. Other objects such as
the mothers smile are similarly internalised. These objects become, for the infant,
the repository of all that is helpful and gratifying or frustrating and persecutory.
(Klein, 1952/1997:63)
A further defence, known as projective
identification, was identified by Klein in her paper, Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms. Writing of the
infants desire to project out the bad parts of itself onto (into) its mother she
writes, In so far as the mother comes to contain the bad parts of the self, she is
not felt to be a separate individual but is felt to be the bad self (1946/1997:8). In a later paper
(1955/1977) she explains the concept thus:
Projective identification can also be seen
as a form of communication since the person at whom the projection is aimed
can often find themselves feeling and acting in ways which are not authentic to themselves
but actually derive from the projected characteristics which they have unconsciously
assumed. Gilmore and Krantz (1988) argue that awareness of these mechanisms can offer the
consultant another dimension in diagnosing a client system.
These primitive mechanisms are postulated
to remain with us as we mature, even after we have learned to accept that good and bad may
both reside in a single object. When adults are faced with strong anxiety they may revert
to may infantile ways of behaving, and many writers assume that the perspectives of
individual psychodynamics can be applied analogously to groups or organisations. Thus Bion
writes:
Writers such as de Maré et al (1991) have
argued that culture in the group is the analogue of the mind in the individual. They
maintain that many insights from individual psychology can be applied to assemblages of
individuals since culture also has both conscious and unconscious aspects and the
unconscious aspects of both culture and mind are often expressed through myth, symbol and
ritual behaviour.
The small group
Change in organisations has traditionally
taken place through the medium of small steering groups or project
teams, typically with between five and ten members. The results are frequently
unexpected. Psychoanalytic writing on the small group has been used to help explain some
of the surprises in group behaviour and to offer consultants approaches to improving their
effectiveness (e.g. Jarrett and Kellner, 1996).
The work of Bion (1961) has been
particularly influential in the small group arena. He notes that all groups have some kind
of task; they all, however casual, meet to do something (1955/1977:442). This
activity is related to reality and its characteristics are similar to those attributed by
Freud to the Ego. Bion also observed that, Work group activity is obstructed,
diverted, and on occasion assisted, by certain other mental activities which have in
common the attribute of powerful emotional drives (1955/1977:444).
Bion hypothesises that these drives spring
from some assumptions common to the whole group. He identified three of these basic
assumptions, all of which have the function of attempting to deal with anxiety. The
first is that the group has met in order to be sustained by a leader on whom it depends,
the second is that two of the group (not necessarily of opposite sex) are to pair off and
produce hope, perhaps in the form of some Messiah figure or symbol. The third basic
assumption is that the group has met to either fight something or else to flee from it.
It is prepared to do either indifferently (Bion, 1955/1977:448).
These underlying, usually unconscious,
assumptions may have a profound effect on the work of the group, especially in areas
relating to the management of time and the development of the group (Bion, 1955/1977:453).
Bion also notes that the basic assumptions of the group may change, sometimes several
times during a group session, even though the work group may continue on the same topics.
Observation of these rapid changes led Bion
to question how fundamental the basic assumptions actually are. He came to the conclusion
that they are actually all manifestations of primitive mechanisms of response to psychotic
anxiety, especially splitting and projective identification as identified by Klein
(1955/1977:457).
The large group
As noted above, organisational change is
now increasingly involving larger groups. When the size of a group gets above about twelve
people, unconscious forces can become even more significant. The commonality implied by
Bions notion of assumptions basic to the whole group seems no longer to apply. [2] Turquet notes that, One
of the characteristics of a large group is that many of its members remain in the
singleton state, unable, possibly unwilling, to join in and so to go through a necessary
change of state. (1975:94) Main offers the following explanation:
Patrick de Maré and his colleagues put it
this way: It might be said that the larger the group to begin with, the more
primitive are its responses, so that the larger group displays features similar to the
unconscious of psychoanalysis. These features include a facility for splitting,
projecting, introjecting... (1991:20).
An example of splitting in the large group,
which I have observed on a number of occasions, occurs when someone says that everything
has got too intellectual (or possibly too emotional, but its usually the
former) and people need to start responding from their feelings. The observation may be
justifiable but often leads to a major polarisation with some people in tears and others
getting ever more cerebral. Value judgements start being made about which of the two is
more authentic and the group ceases to pay any attention to task. At least
half the group withdraw completely at this point and it needs a major shift to get the
dynamics unstuck.
Projection also comes into play in the
large group not onto another person such as the leader, but onto the group itself.
This has two consequences: firstly it simplifies relationships, absolving the individual
from having to engage with a large number of other people; secondly it reduces the
possibility that the individual will suffer attack from others (Main, 1975:68).
The effect of this simplification can be
dramatic: individuals who withdraw from personal relationships with other group members
are alone and find themselves much more subject to the pressure of inner anxieties and
more likely to project unwanted aspects of the self onto the group. This, in turn, can
lead to a loss of self-esteem as the self is depleted as a result of the projection:
The felt need to make Nobel
Prize quality contributions inhibits many people in the large group because they
fear that their words will seem silly or inadequate. As a result the flow of offerings
which are the stuff of good conversation dry up and there is a sense of
stuckness and lack of cohesion in the group. Productive change becomes
impossible and the status quo is reinforced by default.
The case study
In order to demonstrate the powerful
influence of large group dynamics I will introduce an account of an event which led to
about twenty consultants, including myself, becoming almost totally disabled and
incompetent. Because I was a participant I will include data about my own feelings as I
recall them although I am aware that my memory is sometimes a bit unreliable when I
have experienced strong emotions.
Background
The incident described took place at an
assessment day in 1998 run by Directions, a Birmingham-based consultancy (the
name of the consultancy and other individuals have been changed). The day came about
because they had recently been successful in gaining a number of large contracts and had
placed an advertisement seeking more partners and associates. A large number of freelance
consultants responded, all of whom were invited to the assessment day. A few people,
including myself, had had some previous contacts with Directions but for the majority this
was their first involvement.
The invitation from Directions
offered some broad objectives for the day:
As a scene-setter this list of objectives
could immediately set up some anxieties for the freelances. The most important objective
for me (and, almost certainly, for the other respondents to the advertisement) was to
explore the potential for working together. Yet this is only third on the list of Directions
stated objectives. There is a dissonance here which could lead to a loss of clarity and
confidence in the participants.
Many top-down change programmes fall into the
same trap. Staff are bombarded with well-intentioned communications about customer
service, greater efficiency, more humane ways of working and so on. All are laudable and
doubtless sincerely meant but the key issues for staff: Will I still have a
job?, Does this mean Ill have to move house?, Will I get
more money or even I suppose Ill have to work for Fiona now! are
rarely addressed. Anxiety levels immediately go up, infantile responses kick in and adult
to adult communication becomes difficult, of not impossible.
Brutal honesty is an alternative: We
need to lose about fifty jobs, Everyone will have to move to Newcastle,
or even We arent sure but it looks like Fiona will be heading the
division. It is seldom popular at first but once the initial anger has passed
it does permit the possibility of dialogue.
The event
I arrived at 9:30 at the Directions
offices. The room was already packed with people. Jeremy (the UK director) greeted me and
explained that the actual event would be taking place at a venue up the road. After
coffee, orange juice, some snatched fragments of conversation and much noise and confusion
we walked to the new location. As we crossed the road someone remarked that it felt like
being in a school crocodile again. Others nodded and murmured agreement. On
arrival we went into a room with a large mirror on one wall. It soon became clear that
this was one-way glass and that the room was a studio, used for observing and recording
marketing focus groups (there was also a video camera permanently installed, though not
recording).
The initial gathering at the Directions
offices served to increase the anxiety. Arrival often permits a release of tension
gathered during the journey. Here the arrival was only temporary. Tension could not be
released but was, if anything, enhanced. The remark about the school crocodile was
indicative of a sense of regression to more infantile anxiety states. Looking back I can
remember identifying with the remark and starting to feel myself slipping into a
dependency mode where I was prepared to let things happen to me.
I can also remember the frisson of mixed
shock and fascination when I realised that the large mirror was actually one-way glass. I
sought out the observation room and watched as people settled themselves down, some still
unaware of the nature of the room. At a rational level it was a satisfactory venue but
emotionally it felt uncomfortable and added to my sense of unease. Several others
commented on it with a slightly forced jocularity which I suspect masked similar feelings.
Companies recognise the need for good face to
face communications during change. But too few pay much attention to setting and
environment. The road show approach, now so popular, where managers
present to staff can infantilise staff and reinforce divisions. Exploring more
relaxed approaches, such as a café society where people sit around small tables and
listen and have conversations with one another could be more productive.
There was just enough room to sit in a
large circle around the walls of this room. There were about twenty people present, five
of whom were Directions consultants. Jeremy led a round of verbal introductions
and then explained that he didnt want to say too much about Directions at
that time and that after a couple of initial exercises there was no planned agenda but the
space was available to see what might happen.
The introductions were the usual kind and I
found that I forgot nearly every name almost immediately. Even worse, I wasnt clear
who were Directions consultants and who were freelancers. One of the defensive
tendencies people have in the face of anxieties in the large group is to retreat into
depersonalisation. This hinders the development of real work but reduces the perceived
risk of attack from others in the group. The somewhat cursory and, for me, uncertain
introductions helped create (and certainly did little to prevent) conditions where such
depersonalisation could occur. The announcement that there was only available
space later in the day also provoked some fairly anxious feelings for the group (at
least, it did for me).
After an energising exercise
led by Sarah, another Directions consultant, Jeremy suggested that we contract
with each other to consider what we wanted from the day and to set some ground rules. We
broke into small groups, each with one Directions consultant, a setting which
immediately felt safer and more personalised.
On return to plenary the ensuing discussion
was, to my mind, shallow, predicable and avoided the real issues such as
wanting or needing employment. There was talk of the need to be collaborative rather than
competitive unrealistic in the circumstances, but yet another way of trying to
reduce anxiety. One of the freelancers facilitated this session, using a number of
degenerative interventions (Heron, 1975); in particular benevolent
takeover and oppressive overteach. This may have been his natural style
but may also have been triggered or enhanced by introjecting some of the perceived power
and competence of the Directions approach.
This marked the end of the prepared agenda
and Jeremy invited contributions from the group. Dull panic descended; I was aware of a
massive reluctance to perform and a feeling that nothing I could possibly do
could be good enough for a room of fellow professionals, let alone the critical gaze of
the Directions consultants. In Kleins
terms, I had split my competence from my incompetence and projected it out into Directions. By then identifying my competence with
them I was clearly unable to act effectively. Since no-one else acted either, I suppose
that similar processes were going on for others.
Similar outcomes can occur in large meetings
such as briefings or road shows when people are asked for questions or comments. The
majority will project assumptions of omniscience (and possibly omnipotence) onto senior
management theyve got all the answers so why ask us? Others will do the
reverse, assuming total incompetence on the part of the senior team and taking on the role
of saviour of the group. Neither the silence of the majority nor the garrulous invective
of the minority should be taken as representative of real feelings or reactions.
Sensing the panic, Jeremy eventually
suggested a couple of exercises to help bring in some containing structure. One of these
invited people to align themselves across the room as an analogue of how keen they were to
facilitate a session. Feeling a little better, I placed myself in the middle of the room;
only to discover that nearly everyone else was behind me and that I was amongst the most
eager!
As a result I and three others agreed to
work with John, a Directions consultant, to
prepare the next session. He fairly quickly took charge of this, suggesting that we
facilitate a review of the morning so far, using mime. I misunderstood his intentions at
first, supposing that he was merely offering suggestions as in a brainstorm. However, when
I suggested another approach (the use of drawings to capture feelings and impressions) I
was firmly rebuffed and told that collaborative activity was needed. Again, this may have
been his normal style but I suspect that he was affected by having introjected the massive
projection of competence, almost omnipotence, which the freelancers had put into the
Directions group. The exercise itself went quite
well and took us up to lunch time.
When we reconvened after lunch the
composition of the group had changed. Three people had left, including one Directions consultant, and two people had
arrived. Apart from a passing reference, there was no attempt to introduce the newcomers
or to accustom the group to its new composition. Yet this change in membership was, from a
psychodynamic perspective, no trivial matter and re-affirmed all the pre-lunch unease and
anxiety. de Maré et al note that, Experience in the median group [around 20
members] shows that there is a difficulty in developing sufficient fellowship for the
group to be able to affirm positively the advent of a new member and to differentiate this
arrival from the intrusion into the family of a new-born infant. (1991:24)
Certainly, the afternoon progressed badly.
No-one wanted to take the space as Jeremy put it. When one person eventually
did, he was clearly all at sea; unsure of what to do or how to do it. I found myself
retreating almost totally into myself, saying nothing at all for over an hour. Mains
(1975) description of the effects of projection in the large group seems to fit my
experience very well:
This characterised most of the afternoon.
One or two suggestions were made but sank like stones into the apathetic narcissism which
prevailed. Eventually someone suggested asking the Directions
consultants some questions. This suggestion was enthusiastically accepted by the majority.
I remember feeling that it was a cop-out but had no energy or courage to voice this
feeling to anyone else while in the large group.
I believe that the general acceptance of
this exercise was based on a number of factors. Firstly, it did address some work
group issues since the first stated objective in the invitation was to find out more
about Directions. Secondly, it was safe since
the focus moved away from the freelancers to Directions.
Thirdly, it fitted with the projected competence from the freelancers to
Directions and, for me at least, had overtones of
supplicants sitting at the feet of the master (although this may be purely my personal
fantasy I havent had the chance to check it out with anyone else).
Inviting staff groups to ask questions is a
common approach during change initiatives. It seems like a good way to get participation,
to ensure that everyone has understood. Yet these sessions rarely serve their
stated purpose. Instead they fill up the time, help people avoid real interaction and
reinforce the split between them and us. Finding ways to
facilitate real dialogue is much tougher but much more productive.
Further discussion
With the benefit of hindsight, the Directions event could have been managed better.
We can draw the following lessons for anyone designing and facilitating a large group
event:
Conclusions
The large group is more than the small
group writ large. It has its own traps and pitfalls but also its own potential
for work of a kind which cannot be done in other forums. As de Maré argues, the large
group is where issues of culture can be explored and which provides, a setting in
which we can explore our social myths (the social unconscious) and where we can begin to
bridge the gap between ourselves and our socio-cultural environment
(1991:10).
A knowledge of the unconscious forces which
can affect this environment can help a consultant to make sense of what is happening and
to devise appropriate structures and processes which will enable participants to make the
most of the large group experience.
Notes
1. de Maré et al (1991:16) make
a (somewhat fuzzy) distinction between median groups, with perhaps 15 to 30 members and
large groups with more than 30. There is some evidence to suggest that large groups behave
more like small groups than median groups: Hopper and Weyman (1975) report that some
psychotherapists find that groups of 50 to 75 evince many of the characteristics of those
with fewer than ten members. 2. There is actually some
disagreement about this. Turquet (1975:116, 130) denies that basic assumptions are present
in the large group; Whiteley (1975:193) claims that they still apply in groups of 50 or
so. Lawrence et al (1996), drawing on their experience of large group work in the
Tavistock/Leicester Working Conferences on Group Relations, argue that they increasingly
come across a new basic assumption that of Me-Ness. People acting under
this assumption, act as if the group had no existence because if it did exist it
would be the source of persecuting experiences. Thus, although they assert that
commonality can occur in the large group, they suggest that it is a commonality of
individuality. References
Bion,
W. (1961), Experiences in Groups and Other Papers,
Tavistock, London. Bion,
W. (1977), Group dynamics: A
re-view, in Klein,
M., Heimann, P. and Money-Kyrle, R. (Eds.), New
Directions in Psychoanalysis: The Significance of Infant Conflict in the Pattern of Adult
Behaviour, pp. 440477. Karnac, London. (Original work published 1955) de Maré, P., Piper, R.
and Thompson, S. (1991), Koinonia: From Hate,
through Dialogue, to Culture in the Large Group, Karnac Books, London and New
York. Gilmore,
T. (1997), The social architecture of group interventions, in Neumann, J., Kellner,
K. and Dawson-Shepherd, A. (Eds.), Developing
Organisational Consultancy, pp. 32-48. Routledge, London. Gilmore,
T. and Krantz, J. (1985), Projective identification in the consulting relationship:
Exploring the unconscious dimensions of a client system, Human Relations, Vol. 38 No. 12, pp. 1159-1177. Heron,
J. (1975), Six Category Intervention Analysis,
University of Surrey Human Potential Research Project, Guildford. Hopper,
E. and Weyman, A. (1975), A sociological view of large groups, in Kreeger, L.
(Ed.), The Large Group: Dynamics and Therapy,
pp. 157-189, Constable, London. Jarrett,
M. and Kellner, K. (1996), Coping with uncertainty: A psychodynamic perspective on
the work of top teams, Journal of Management
Development, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 52-66. Klein,
M. (1977), On identification, in Klein, M., Heimann, P.
and Money-Kyrle, R. (Eds.), New Directions in
Psychoanalysis: The Significance of Infant Conflict in the Pattern of Adult Behaviour,
pp. 309-345. Karnac, London. (Original work published 1955) Klein,
M. (1997), Notes on some schizoid mechanisms, in Envy & Gratitude and Other Works 1946-1963,
pp. 1-14, Vintage, London. (Original work published 1946) Klein,
M. (1997), The emotional life of the infant, in Envy & Gratitude and Other Works 1946-1963
pp. 61-93, Vintage, London. (Original work published 1952) Lawrence,
W., Bain, A. and Gould, L. (1996), The
fifth basic assumption, Free Associations,
Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 28-55. Main,
T. (1975), Some psychodynamics of large groups, in Kreeger, L. (Ed.), The Large Group: Dynamics and Therapy, pp. 57-86.
Constable, London. Owen, H. (1997), Open Space Technology: A Users Guide,
Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco. Seel,
R. (2000), Culture and
complexity: New insights into organisational change, Organisations &
People, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 2-9. Turquet,
P. (1975), Threats to identity in the large groups, in Kreeger, L. (Ed.), The Large Group: Dynamics and Therapy, pp. 87-144.
Constable, London. Weisbord,
M. (1992), Discovering Common Ground,
Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco. Whiteley,
J. (1975), The large group as a medium for sociotherapy, in Kreeger, L. (Ed.),
The Large Group: Dynamics and Therapy, pp.
193-211. Constable, London. © 2001 mcb Press This article is indexed here. |
Send mail to richard@new-paradigm.co.uk
with questions or comments about this web site.
|