Thank you Chris for this clear statement about the value and benefits of a
single fee structure for constellation workshops.
It is a good reminder of how we communicate value by prioritizing and that all
of the details matter. Much appreciated.
Barbara
Sent from my iPhone
On 2013-03-14, at 4:46 PM, Chris Walsh <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Jack
It may be that you have created a self fulfilling prophecy by creating the
two different levels of workshop participation in the first place. In that
way you have devalued one level of participation in relation to the other.
This is reflected in the different pricing. Becasue that level has been
devlued people then feel justified in paying the lower price for that.
To have one leevel of participation with no guarantee of a participant
getting their own constellation would take courage on your part. You would
also have to put up with a period of low enrolments because of the
expectations that have already been set up in your clients. One way to
reduce the intensity of this response is to send out a brief but clear
explanation of the reasons behind the change. Also it would help to make
the charge for attendance somewhere between to current two levels.
I really think this is worth it as it would allow your workshops to flow
with greater integrity where you could really be open to selecting the
person who is truly ready to work rather than having to select someone who
has paid a higher amount to guarantee their own constellation. A nice side
effect is that out of necessity you will become more attentive to group
processes and to the benefits accrued by participants when representing and
when sitting in the holding circle.
Cheers
Chris Walsh
Melbourne, Australia
ph +61 (0)3 9487 4647
www.cwalsh.com.au
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 8:25 AM, jack blackwell <travelerjbjb@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
**
I want to thank all of you who have answered my call on this issue. For a
