Processwork invites us to view the group as an energetic information force-field in which a variety of activity takes place some of which we, as group members, may be aware and understand and some of which we will not be conscious. Fields shape or organise the behaviour of its constituent parts. For example, a magnet creates a magnetic field and when placed under a piece of paper, aligns iron filings placed upon it. The orbiting moon’s influence on the movement of the tides is another illustration of a larger field in operation. Fields extend beyond a given group’s sense of identity, boundaries or edges. Awareness of group field forces and how they exert their influence enables the group to have more freedom and choice of response.

Groups differ - identity: The group is more than the sum of the individuals in it – it seems to have a mind of its own (self-organising) and to generate a dynamic of its own that differentiates it from others. The group is alive and needs to grow, change and renew itself. Groups also form identity, purpose and goals and will often try to repress features that do not fit with or disturb its identity or purpose. Groups tend to use negative feedback to reduce dissonance and conflict created by these features or it may try to marginalize them, or forget or ignore the cracks that appear in its identity. In this way an “edge” develops at the groups acknowledged sense of identity, separating what the group identifies with and owns from what it rejects or marginalizes. A group edge is the beginning of the unfamiliar or the unknown for the group and is often experienced with unease, discomfort or even excitement.

Individuals can be seen as comprising different parts or sub-personalities that are orchestrated by a centre of awareness and choice that we call “I” which enables the person to function with a level of cohesion and identity in the world. Groups are like people in the sense that they have different individuals and sub-groups within them who may have different or multiple goals. Groups may be unlike individuals in that they may lack an “I” – a meta-communicator - as Processwork terms it, which enables the group to reflect on itself, to function and act cohesively. This lack of a meta-communicator often creates confusion and contention. This is particularly so of leaderless groups and a facilitator or leader may be needed to enable the group become self-aware and align/act in a more cohesive way.

Levels of group experience: Processwork sees “process” as the flow of experience in oneself, the group and the environment. Processwork differentiates the flow of experience in groups as if there were at least three different levels on which we can experience them. The level of consensus reality is concerned with what is agreed by the majority as real or “objective”, e.g. structure, roles, rules, membership, task, etc.; the non-consensus reality level of the group is concerned with our subjective dreamlike experience that is not generally consented to as real and often marginalized. e.g. with those forces acting on and shaping the behaviour of the group or with that which has been repressed – all of which may appear as complementing or opposing the consensus reality experience. It is often below the level of group consciousness. The essence level is the core myth or shared root/ prime mover of the group and a source of unitary experience and again often, though by no means always, below the level of group awareness.

Much conventional group work is focussed on the consensus reality level (what people predominantly agree on) and entails clarifying the social roles, mutual expectations and communication, policy, roles, rules, task, etc. Belonging to the group at this level confers certain advantages to members but demands compliance to certain norms and requirements to maintain membership. However, the benefits of membership and the promise of support only lasts as long as we believe its ideology or story. Support may stop if we challenge or change too much! Consensus reality solutions are therefore concerned with modifying behaviour, clarifying mutual expectations, communication skills, etc.

In the Processwork view, groups like individuals, are seen as having specific/ identifiable communication forms or patterns, both intended and unintended. Groups are seen to have primary (foreground) and secondary (background ) processes. Primary processes are those that the group predominantly identifies with – usually the intended behaviours, espoused purpose, beliefs, identity, etc. Secondary processes are reflected in unintended behaviour, unconscious norms or beliefs (culture), repressed or marginalized energies which express themselves in indirect ways. For example, those who speak most tend to be identified with the identified primary processes, the more silent ones, with the secondary processes often not identified. Repressed, marginalized or disavowed aspects of the group tend to show up in the secondary processes or become projected on to other groups in the field.

Non-consensus reality level of experience is dreamlike and includes sentient feelings, fantasies and projections that influence group behaviour but are hard to define. This level of experience shows itself in the secondary processes and unintended behaviour of the group and may be resisted, experienced but not valued or difficult to articulate. Much of the work with this level entails attending to secondary process signals which are usually non-verbal, unintended, partial/incomplete and need to be unfolded and amplified so they can be understood and integrated. Much conflict stems from unintended messages that underlie intended consensus reality level of communication and can be experienced as double messages which disturb consensus level conversation and relationship.

At non-consensus reality / dream level, events are all interconnected and multi-level, boundaries and edges blur, but this may run counter to or disturb the experience at consensus reality level where the boundaries or edges of the group are more clearly experienced and which form its identity.

At the essence level groups are held together by shared dream, values, ideology, or story that embodies its hope and unifies/generates group cohesion and shapes its identity. It creates a magnetic /morphic field, a myth which may sometimes operate below the level of consciousness. We may sense the psychic force of the ideology/ myth even though we may have difficulty defining or articulating it. This essence level enables the group to preserve its identity and cohesiveness despite diverse/ changing/ interacting identities within it. When group members are disconnected from this dream or essence the group may lack cohesiveness and experience internal tension and fragmentation. Individuals may believe in the ideology or feel connected to the group essence but not be part the group at consensus reality level.

Information float – group garbage: Groups repress or marginalize certain ideas or behaviour to preserve their identity or because they are unable to deal with it/ adapt to it. Beliefs and behaviour that run counter to the group norms or culture make it difficult for the individual and the group to function, may be experienced as dissonant and conflictual and may be repressed or marginalized. Repression and marginalisation interfere with communication in the groups creating a kind of psychic garbage, incomplete communications, sometimes described as information float, which clogs up or distorts communication at consensus reality level and which needs to be processed through unfolding its secondary/unintended signals. This helps the group connect to all its parts which it needs to function effectively and remain healthy and vibrant.

In the Processwork view, conflict is partly explained as an excess information float – unprocessed energy - repressed or rejected information that is clogging up the field and information flow. e.g. we pick up some messages, we block others or receive incomplete or double messages. Rejection of threatening messages by the group creates an ecological mess - undiscussables which disturb the group atmosphere or communication system and which may be experienced in the form of emotional tension, paranoid imaginings, disturbing or incomprehensible behaviour that generate friction and conflict.

Groups prefer to dump, ignore, or keep such disturbing facets out of sight but they pollute the group atmosphere and create turbulence. The garbage/ information float, includes for example, feelings of oppression, inadequacy, loneliness, anger, troubled atmosphere which have an enthropic impact on group but also has the power to revitalise and connect when brought into awareness, recycled/ processed and integrated. However, this garbage and its processing is often not welcomed and may be resisted by the group and may leak out in unintended often destructive ways. Unconscious information seeks attention! If we do not bring it out it will eventually breach the threshold itself and may overwhelm the group at that point.

Roles: The group tends to differentiate itself into different roles, (functions, factions) which need to be filled for group to function effectively as a group – self-organisation. Roles can be understood in terms of typical social roles such as leader, mother, or it could be understood as an internal role such as internal critic or saboteur or as capitalist, oppressor or victim. A role is separate from the person who happens to fill it. Individuals are greater than the role they fill and may switch between roles or fill several roles. However roles may exert a controlling influence on the individual and they may not be able to step out of it especially if they are not conscious of being in it.

Roles can often be understood as reactions to other roles. E.g. when a victim appears, this implies there is an oppressor present. We ask who or what might be oppressing? All roles need to be filled for the group to flourish even though group members may not want to fill some roles especially where there is negative sentiment toward them. Ghost roles are used to represent forces/ figures who are referred to/ influence the group process but are not physically present i.e. in consensus reality. The group may be aware or unconscious of roles operating in the group.

Facilitators and leaders: Groups, in order to function effectively need to be aware of, own and engage with of all of it parts. Arising from the processes described above, groups tend to be more aware of their primary processes and less aware of their secondary processes and tend to have an edge or resistance to becoming aware of or identifying with them/ accepting ownership or responsibility for them. The group experiences moments of high and low awareness and communication. Friction and conflict tend to heighten awareness, forcing the group to notice its own edges, tendencies, polarities, behaviour, etc. through the various channels, individuals, relationships, sub-groups, group as whole, interfaces and so on. However, the group may need a leader/ facilitator/ meta-communicator to enable it become aware of itself, its resources and communication difficulties – to go over its edges and connect with itself.

A difference between an individual and group, as mentioned earlier, is that the group has no natural meta-communicator or equivalent of the organising “I”, especially when group is not aware of and reflecting on itself. Developing the capacity to consciously occupy and represent different roles/ ghost roles is a form of awareness-raising and group leadership. The facilitator/ leader acts as a meta-communicator and aids the group in reflecting on and getting to know itself. The facilitator/ leader role can be occupied by any one in the group though usually by the one closest to power or ideology. Conflict between parts, between whole and parts, between group and another group need a facilitator who can identify with/stand for all parts or run the risk of exacerbating insider-outsider dynamics and making conflict difficult to resolve.

What is needed for resolution is already present in the group: The Processwork view is that everything needed for resolution of the problem or conflict is already present in the group field. Awareness of and engagement with all of its parts is what is needed – awareness of what people are consciously or unconsciously doing and of what is trying to happen. The facilitator’s role – acting as meta-communicator on behalf of all parts of the group - is to help the group to become aware of what is trying to happen and enable it. Awareness is not needed by everyone in the group, all the time, or in all groups – just sometimes necessary for some people in some groups.

In articles 2 and 3 in this series we will take a closer look at conflict and how to work with it within the Processwork view. ( For a deeper understanding of the topic see Arnold Mindell’s Year 1: Global Process Work with Planetary Myths and Structures; The Leader as Martial Artist; and Sitting in the Fire on which these articles are based – while care has been taken to reflect the Processwork view, the presentation and interpretation are mine)

* Processwork, sometimes called Process Oriented Psychology is an evolving body of knowledge and practice developed by Arnold Mindell and colleagues from a Jungian base and currently applied in diverse settings such as therapy, group work, diversity and leadership training, organisational and community development.