Hi All,
I have been experimenting with the `chair' work with the client at
the beginning of a constellation and I am interested in any
feedback. I attended Bert and Sophie's training in Pichl in July
last year and was very impressed with the way Bert starts with one
representative and then follows the energy to introduce further
representatives. I have been practising that over the last year.
More recently I have been treating the client as the initial
representative in their constellation. I want to thank Francesca
Boring here for her observation that the constellation starts before
the group meets which is influential in my approach.
Last month I was facilitating a group and the client came, sat in the
chair, said nothing, then started crying while she looked up towards
the other side of the room. Looking around I saw that one of the
participants had a lot of energy so I asked her to stand in the place
where the client was looking. The constellation continued from
there. There was no verbal exchange between myself and the client so
I didn't have any idea at the time what the issue was. The
constellation was blind to the facilitator (me), the representatives,
the participants and maybe even the client.
This last Saturday in a work shop I co-facilitate with a colleague,
Robyn Mott, I continued that approach. In the first constellation I
facilitated I placed a representative on the ground where the client
was looking. Again the client hadn't said anything and appeared to
be in a trance. In the next constellation Robyn repeated the
process, placing a representative where the client, who hadn't said
anything, was looking.
All of the constellations we did in this blind chair format were very
profound and deeply affected the client.
Reflecting on this way of working I came up with some questions to
which I invite responses.
Do any of you work in this way, and if so, what is your experience?
Does Bert do this? I get the feeling I have seen him working in a
similar way.
Why do we (the facilitators) need to know the issue? Is it for our
benefit? Does a clearly formulated issue benefit the client? If so,
how? Not being able to formulate/articulate/express the issue could
be the issue. Does a clearly articulated issue restrict the movement
of the constellation? Does not having an articulated issue allow a
greater freedom and greater access to what I call a deeper
intelligence? Is naming an issue part of the problem as in
continuing the story?
Hunter Beaumont at the International Training in Germany last year
asked, "What does it feel like not to know when facilitating?" and
added, "When we embrace that not knowing then surprising ideas
emerge." I hope you will forgive me, Hunter, if I have misquoted
you. I find it very freeing not to know at the beginning of the
constellation, and not being held by an idea of what the issue is
about opens me to being surprised.
Does there need to be energy in the issue? I know some facilitators
won't work with a client if there is no energy. Isn't the lack of
energy itself part of the issue? The client's willingness to come to
the chair is already evidence of intent.
Many facilitators, including me, will ask a client to look at them in
order to ensure they are present, for one reason. Does the client
need to be present to us, the facilitators? It is my observation
that requiring the client to look at me breaks them out of the trance
they are in when they sit in the chair.
I look forward to your responses.
Jonathan Hooton
jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
