Milton- Erickson- Institut Heidelberg Dr.med.Dipl.rer.pol.Gunther Schmidt

www.meihei.de mail: office@meihei.de

sysTelios- Klinik für psychosomatische Gesundheitsentfaltung

69483 Wald-Michelbach/Siedelsbrunn

www.systelios.de

The sysTelios-model: an attempt of a system organisation for

dignity, competence, cooperation, creativity and goal-effectiveness

Some basic premises:

Autopoiesis: living systems organize their experiences autonomously- the meaning and effect of a communication always is defined by the receiver- never by the sender! Consequence: an „intervention“, also a „leadership decision“ is created by the receiver- not by the sender of the message. In that way the original meaning of suggestion is dissolving. So we need feedback, feedback, feedback…

The sender can only make offers/ invitations which are accepted or rejected autonomously by the invited person. If somebody leads in this interaction at all it is the client with his feedback to these invitations.

In the same way also a person in a „leading position“ (which is a different role of course) has to respectfully pay attention to the feedbacks of his teams. The „leader“ is always at least as dependent of the „guided“ ones as these participants are.

In research many times proved assumption of Ericksonian therapy:

• The competences for a helpful and more healthy solution pattern are already „stored“ as experienced competences in the unconscious „archives“ of a • person and of a system. During the living of the problem patterns they are just dissociated but still existent.

• So the main task is to invite to and to support the re- association, activation and the long- lasting building in these competences into the contexts in which the person needs them.

• As brain research, priming research and all experiences of hypnotherapy and hypnosystemic concepts show: All experience is a result of focussing of attention on all sensory levels, consciously and unconsciously. • The therapy so gets the meaning of a „learning from himself“ for the client- • the therapist is the expert for supporting this „learning from himself“ and for invitations to focussing of attention which helps for that - not for knowing from the outside.

General goals of psychotherapy: • Strengthening of autonomy/ Self- responsibility

• Sence of coherence (salutogenesis Antonovsky)

• Self- confidence and experience of self- competence and competence to guide the own life and manage impulses in a constructive, healthy way

• Enlarging of possibilities of choices (H.v. Foerster)

• Appreciation of the way of living up to now (also for the „problem patterns“)

Transparent Meta- communication with the invitation to respectfully appreciate the intuitive answer of the organism „somatic markers“ which give feedback about which of the offers are fitting serves as a very effective way to: • learn about the autonomous intuitive competence • build up respectful cooperation with involuntary processes • strengthen the competence as meta- observer who can manage experience and impulses in a healthy way (not the content of a phenomenon but the relationship of the observer to it defines the effects)

•  Experience is produced second by second in a new way via processes of fokussing of attention, voluntarily and much more involuntary (and unconsciously) construction of networks

•  We create our experience ourselves- in inner autonomous self-determination!

•  VAKOG

• Every episode of experience (emotionally „loaded“) will be stored as network of experience in us and can be reactivated, e.g. already by activating just one or more of the elements of this „network“ in the present time (in the „here and now“).

• This activation can also happen totally on an unconscious level- and unconscious and involuntary processes are always quicker and stronger than voluntary processes.

• Hebb´s law = „cells that fire together wire together- and cells which are wired together are again firing together“.

• The direction of the focus of attention determines which network will be activated and also which ego state (what we usually call our ego/ „that´s me!“)- we are all „multiple personalities“ with multiple ego states.

The way in which a system is organised has intensive effects on the way how participants focus their attention and on the way how and which „networks of experience“ (experiential patterns) are triggered unconsciously and involuntarily. The „system“ is an tremendously important environment for the participants and simultaneously these perticipants create and re-create the system in interdependence- they are also always environment for each other and so in a circular way create themselves, contribute to the creation of the system which influences (invites) them…

The system can be understood as the everyday „trance-inviting context“ for the participants.

Prinziple of literalness

Total potentiality of experience: „The

cosmos of potentials“

Actual focus: „habituated reality“

Wanted focus of attention

competence- hypothesis

Goal always: to direct the focus of attention as much as possible towards wanted patterns of experience which are activated in this way

dream-process

The experiencing „observer“

Multiplicity

Meta- Position/ Dissociated/ Lucid

associated

Dr.G.Schmidt MEI Heidelberg

13

Ego 1

Ego 2

Ego 3

Ego X

„Director- Ego“ „Director-

Ego“

Ego 1

Ego 2

Ego 3

Ego X

Ecosystemic context

If we are „multiple personalities“ we also encounter other people not always in the same ego but depending on situations/ contexts/needs/topics- and the others are also encountering us with multiple egos.

Which of your ego´s /which of your „inner parliaments“ are just

interacting with which of the ego´s of other persons? In which context, related to which topics?

How it is

Way of description

Validation

Labelling

Explanation

Conclusions

Self-relation

Comparison with others

Construction of the antagonistic poles of experience („Problem“)

How it should be

Way of description

Labelling

Validation

Explanation

Conclusions

Self-relation

Comparison with others

Attempted solutions

Solution supporting Problem stabilizing

Emotions,Submodalities, Physiology, Body coordination

Emotions,Submodalities, Physiology, Body coordination

Observer associated? dissociated?

Experience/validation of own sensory signals

Experience/validation of own sensory signals

15

Therefore the central task is: To build up goal-serving systems

(on an interactional and internal level)

Instead of: „How is the system organised?“ to

„For which/ whose goals should the system be build up/ organised in

which way?“

16

But also:

„And how should we cope with the present (and past) system (e.g.

utilisation/ pacing, pattern-disruption, appreciation of it/

acknowledgement of loyalities etc.) would be goal-serving?

(Dwarfs on the shoulders of giants)

17

Goal- processes of a system „What for?“

Relevant paricipants

Processes of goal development

Rules of decision making/ rules of hierarchy

goal-communication

Development of goal serving steps

Rules for how and about what should be communicated

Definition of roles/tasks/ building of internal borders

Coordination of interfaces Rules for agreements/ balancing feedbacks

Rituals of appreciation, sponsoring-, motivation/ building up pf meaning

Informal „rituals“ for encounters

Borders and coordination of interfaces to the outside world (diverse stakeholders)

Interactions between executing managers and staff

Rules for managing differencest/ „conflict“-management

Optimizing of internal processes of participants / submodalities/ cooperation of the „optimal-egos“

Important basic needs of human beings in relationship systems:

•  Affiliation/ security in relationships

•  Orientation, transparency, to be included

•  Clarity of roles and tasks

•  Appreciation of the specific own contributions and simultaneously experience of being related to important „others“

•  Possibilities for own actions/ selbst-effectiveness/ meaningful experiences/ self-empowerment

•  Autonomous possibilities of choice and appreciation for the own definition of reality

•  Being challenged in a stimulating way, with clear, direction giving objectives,

è  Appreciation of ambivalences, utilized as informations about needs

è  Clear meta- communication of double-binds with focus on „tit for tat“ and a perspective on effects/ „role- perspective;

è  Focus on „patterns of success“, meaning-creating values which generate cohesion;

è Continuiously feedback- loops with acknowledgement for the „messengers of bad news“;

21

Situations of uncertainty, lack of orientation and of information, confusion are always rather more

associated with reactions of fear and/or anger or possibly (if escalated) with „freeze“-reactions

(amygdala- aktivity).

But anger, fear or freeze-reactions constrain thinking processes. The tendency goes more to fight

or flight, „either- or, all or nothing…“ etc.

22

Anger, fear, confusion, uncertainty are mobilising involuntary processes (also

hormon reactions, chnages of the immun system etc.) in a way that one becomes more

rigid, narrowed and impuls-directed.

If anger and/or fear is dominating, one becomes for these moments just more stupid

(and also often a little bit more paranoid.

(although one has much more competences and intelligence!!!)

23

That also means:

Leadership means important obligations for e.g. :

A person in a leading position is experienced as an „agent“, „an embodied model“, a

„screen for projections“ of helpful priming/ focussing of attention, e.g. in their teams.

They are whether they want or not,

„Directors of orchestras“ and „Context-architects“.

24

Context-architects can contribute acticely to contexts of:

v Appreciation

v Focussing on patterns of success

v Competence-focussing

v Goal development with optimal self- effectiveness of paricipants

v Encouragement, curiosity, joy of discovering

25

v Fostering/supporting of openness for learnings with respectful feedback of „mistakes“ and rewarding of joy and courage to experiment

v Activating challenging

v Communication which triggers powerful imaginations, goal developments and visions

v Consequent „I-messages“ and need-focussing feedback- culture

Additionally e.g. the SCARF-Modell (D.Rock) suggests:

Brain research shows that central context conditions for motivation, fulfillment of meaning,

supporting of accomplishments are obviously e.g.:

Status

Certainty

Autonomy

Relatedness

è Fairness

27

And:

Healthy and long lasting and motivating competence-development will only be able,

if the diverse important areas of

life-topics, interests and values of people

will be respected in optimal balance.

If one wants flow in relationships, it has to be taken care of a specific ritualistic creation of

contexts of encounters;

For that e.g. all participants (and also all ofd there „parts“- as impulses!!)

have to be accepted in there „being just so", in their needs and emotional reactions.

But: on the level of actions only those actions are accepted which

have constructive effects, which are goal-serving and do not harm

oneself or others.

www.meihei.de

www.systelios.de

Construction and maintainance of a „problem“

© Dr.G.Schmidt, Milton-Erickson-Institut Heidelberg, www.meihei.de

Experience „it is how it is“

1.

„How it is“

„How it should be“

2.

Attempted solutions

How it is

Categorizing (god/bad etc.)

Time of experience

Place of experience

How often

Intensity

Duration of phenomenons

More voluntary/ More involunatry

How it should be

Way of communication

Content of communication

Way/ Intensity of feedback

Style of dealing with „mistakes“

Validation/ awareness of wanted outcomes

Needs/ Longings which motivate

Reactions towards others (Validation/ giving of meaning/ behaviour

Ritualization of the problem/ of the solution

Observer: associated? dissociated?

Further elements of patterns

Reactions of others (Validation/ giving of meaning/ behaviour

Experience of time/ focus of time

Ideas about relationsships/ Expectations to them