Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Clarkson Group Imago
Clarkson Group Imago
Clarkson Group Imago
The author wishes to thank Charlotte Sills for her editorial assistance.
Abstract
This article emphasizes similarities between Berne's concept of group imago adjustment and the stages of group development as
conceptualised by Tuckman (1965) and Lacoursiere (1980), highlighting the most relevant tasks of group leaders at different phases
of a group's maturation. Feedback from practitioners and trainees is used to identify useful group leader behaviours at different
stages. The article focuses on how developmental phenomena related to the group as a whole can be understood and used as
adjunct to individual psychotherapy in the group, not as a substitute for it. Particular factors in the blending of individual and
group psychotherapy are also discussed.
Group psychotherapy generally adheres to one of two models: One focuses on the group as a whole, represented by Foulkes
(1951), and the other emphasizes doing psychotherapy with individuals in the group. This latter model was popularised by Pearls in films
that show him doing Gestalt therapy with individuals in a group context. Another combination popular with therapists who blend group and
individual treatment is transactional analysis and some form of individual psychotherapy.
TA offers a unique method of using a group to help individuals work through script issues. The analysis of transactions, games,
and ego states usually conducted between the individual client and the psychotherapist, can be greatly aided, focused, and enhanced by
utilizing material from relationships between group members as well as between group members and the therapist. Just as the individual
externalises his or her intrapsychic object relations in the client / psychotherapist dyad, each group member externalises intrapsychic object
relations in the matrix of the group. Thus, material from here – and - now interactions with other group members can be interpreted,
explained, and confronted psychotherapeutically. This was certainly the basis for Berne's (1964) most popularised work, Games People
Play.
Berne's (1963) concept of the developing stages of the group imago provides a framework for understanding both reenactments of
early family life that occur within the group setting and subsequent corrective experiences and their potential for healing. This article
compares Berne's concept of group imago adjustment with the stages of group development as conceptualised by Tuckman (1965) and
Lacoursiere (1980). It uses Berne's diagrams of group dynamics to explain the nature of the processes involved at different stages. In
addition, it considers relevant tasks of group leaders at the different stages - be they trainers, organizational consultants, or group
psychotherapists. Finally, the article explores constructive and destructive group leader behaviours at different stages based on extensive
surveys gleaned over more than a decade from hundreds of practitioners and trainees in the fields of group work, organizational consulting,
and group psychotherapy.
P P
A A
C C
Although many authors have considered the stages, phases, or cycles in the formation of a well - functioning group, most
emphasize that these stages should not be seen as discrete or separate.
Most groups and the individuals in them can be considered as going through a sequence of developmental stages during the
group history or life cycle. These stages - like most psychological and social processes - blend into each other to some extent so that where
one divides one stage from the others, and how many divisions are made, depends partly on one's purposes, on how one views the data and
so on. (Lacoursiere, 1980, p. 27)
However, in groups brought together for a specific purpose - such as training or task groups - with the same membership from
beginning to end, the phases of group life are often quite recognisable. Such predictable patterns can be perceived by a trained observer
over the course of a three - year training, or an hour – and – a - half committee meeting. Knowledge of these phases is therefore relevant
and potentially useful for anyone who is either a member or a leader of a group.
In a closed psychotherapy group, these predictable stages can also be observed when the membership of the group remains
reasonably stable. If, on the other hand, new members join a group, it will usually regress to earlier and less developed levels of
functioning, and the group leader may need to help the group recycle through the various phases again. Likewise, when two families are
combined into one "step family," they almost invariably need to rework issues of identity, conflict management, rules, and values before
they can function effectively.
Understanding the stages of group development can help therapists think more clearly about sometimes baffling group dynamics
and to be more discriminating in their choice of techniques and interventions. Further, linking these stages to the concept of the group
imago helps clarify how the group's experience connects with the individual's.
Group
Leader
S “Those
elf Others”
Figure 2 Provisional Group Imago Diagram (Based on a diagram in Berne, 1966, p. 154)
Group Imago
Berne (1963) defined group imago as "any mental picture, conscious, preconscious or unconscious, of what a group is or should
be like” (p. 321). The group imago exists in what Berne called the private structure of the group, which is based on each individual's
personal needs, experience, wishes, and emotions. Therefore, it is perceived differently by different members at different phases of the
group. Imago adjustment is the process manifested in the observable stages in a group.
Psycho-
therapist
(unavailable
mother?)
Assistant
Leader
(uncaring
caretaker?)
S Hostile
elf rejecting
others
Figure 3 The Script Behind Stewart’s Provisional Imago (Based on a diagram in Berne, 1966, p.155)
Leadership Tasks. The process by which the provisional group imago is changed is influenced by member characteristics, but also
by leadership tasks and behaviours. In this stage the leader’s most important task is to deal with the external group process and to define
the major external and internal boundaries (Berne, 1963, p.55). Secure, stable physical and psychological external group boundaries need
to be established in order to ensure the group’s survival. Symbolically, the group therapist must create a container within which energy can
be focused on internal healing processes (safeguarded from external pressures). It is crucial to have clear contracts between group members
and the group leader, group members and each other, and the group leader and his or her supervisor, co-workers, and/or agency (Berne,
1963, p.55).
The external boundary includes the physical space in which the group has its life. The unexpected arrival of the police at a séance
is one of Berne’s (1963) most vivid examples of how pressure on the external boundary of the group can lead to its disintegration.
Although Berne was describing an actual external boundary, it is important to remember that this boundary has also psychological
implications. According to Gurowitz (1975) the external boundary is largely a function of the internal boundary, which he equates with the
leader’s potency. Therefore, one of the leader’s tasks is to create a strong and clear internal boundary which the group then experiences as a
barrier warding off external intrusions. “In groups with a weak IB, the EB is seen as a fence confining members in an unsafe space”
(Gurowitz, 1975, p. 184). One important factor in defining the major internal boundary is the psychological state of the group leader or
therapist.
Other essential tasks of the leader in this phase are to clarify who is in and who is out of the group as well as who is in charge.
These considerations also define and safeguard the external boundary. Almost any group which meets regularly will, with seemingly
relentless energy, focus on absent members until all are properly accounted for. Only then can the group settle down to its task.
It is equally vital for the group therapist to define the boundary between leadership and membership, that is, which decisions and
responsibilities are to be shared and which are the responsibility of the leader. Clarifying issues of leadership and power are important
because often people call a group undemocratic in the false belief that democracies have no leaders. However, leadership needs to be
balanced in such a way that eventually facilitates the empowerment of members. Leaders cannot responsibly avoid being leaders if that is
the psychological need of the group in its initial phases, just as parents cannot abdicate all structuring and decision making to an infant
without endangering it. The task of the responsible leader at this stage involves, therefore, ensuring the establishment of rules, safety, and
boundaries. It is necessary to establish dependency before resisting it. Like a parent, the group leader must have the courage to allow
himself or herself to be loved, knowing that the ultimate goal of growth and development leads to the loss of this love.
Because group members are often so anxious in the beginning that they do not hear what has been said, experienced group leaders
have learned they may have to repeat things later, when people are more relaxed. On the other hand, excessive anxiety in the leader can be
disruptive and needs to be managed in psychotherapy or supervision that addresses both archaic personal issues and counter transference.
The group psychotherapist often embodies the cohesive forces of the group and may have excessive investment (e.g., because of fear of
loss of reputation of income) in continued survival of the group.
The group leader’s task is to find an optimal level of anxiety for the group, that is, level of arousal or investment which is
conducive to maximum risk-taking and learning and yet not so extreme as to lead to incapacitation, retraumatization, or the reinforcement
of a pathological system. It is interesting to note that what may look like a lack of structure (e.g., over-long silences, undiscriminating
refusal to explain) may actually be the imposition of a damaging covert process, one that may even lead to the appearance of psychosis.
Some casualties of encounter group and T-group experiences in the sixties no doubt resulted from the tyranny of structurelessness. Indeed,
Berne (1963) defined structure hunger as one of the basic hungers of the human being (pp. 215, 327) and leadership hunger as the need for
the leader to provide structure for the group within which individuality and creativity can flourish (p. 216). In this way, as in others, the
group leader’s role is similar to that of a parent.
Time is one of the most significant boundaries affecting safety and trust among human beings. Carelessness around time is
frequently reported as one of the more destructive group leader behaviours. Those who are concerned with psychological-level
communication (Casement, 1985; Langs, 1978) corroborate the severe repercussions of confusing time boundaries.
In terms of complimentary counter transference, group leaders may need to monitor their tendencies toward over-dash nurturing or over-
control in the beginning stages of a group session or in the initial stages of forming a psychotherapy group.
Table 1 – based on feedback collected over several years with hundreds of organisational, psychotherapeutic and social work
group leaders – identifies the leader behaviours most frequently listed as destructive or constructive. Any of these behaviours may be
relevant at any stage of group development. Also, most constructive behaviours can be destructive if used poorly, inappropriately, or if
mistimed.
Table 1
Summary of Destructive and Constructive Behaviours at the Provisional Group Imago Stage
(Forming)
Figure 4
The External Group Process
Group Cohesion versus External Disruptive Forces
(Based on a diagram in Berne, 1963, p.38)
Likewise many of the behaviours listed here as destructive may at times or in certain circumstances be useful, provocative, or
creative. It should be noted that these results are offered in order to stimulate further thinking about this subject and to act as a supervisory
aid and a tool for self-exploration; they are not meant to be a set of rules.
Figure 5
The Major Internal Group Process
Individual Proclivity versus Group Cohesion
(Characterized by agitation across the leadership boundary)
(Based on Berne, 1963, p. 38)
Archetypally, the effective leader at this stage is reminiscent of the “firm and fair” teachers some of us remember from school.
Experienced teachers and group leaders often report that their relationship with the class or group can be made or marred in the first
session. Group leaders can misguidedly avoid overt storming by exploiting their own fears and vulnerabilities. For example, a leader told a
group “I hear you don’t like me”; rescuers in her group told her what a nice woman she was but gossiped to others that they did not really
mean it.
Storming frequently appears to be about the nature of the task, but psychologically it is about the ability of the group leader to be
effective. Is he or she strong and secure enough to survive members taking power? The storming phase is a necessary precursor to later
effective group functioning, and is probably as important as is effective resolution of the rebellion of a child’s “terrible twos.” Storming
should not be viewed as a distraction from the group’s central task, but as a necessary stage in establishing the most efficient ways of
conducting that task. This is a time when an “I’m OK, You’re OK” life position really gets tested.
Case Example. During the storming stage of the group, Stewart’s energies went into finding out where he stood in relation to the
group leader. He continued to be superficially friendly with other members, but did not make much good contact with them. On the
contrary, he was unusually exclusive in his attention to the group leader and performed much of the group’s storming task for them by
challenging and testing. The therapist guessed that in the children’s home he often took the challenging role on behalf of the children
because of his perceived special status. In this stage, Stewart’s internal work was on allocating the slots in his imago to the leader and
members of the group.
Psycho-
therapist
(unavailable
mother?)
Assistant
Leader
(uncaring
caretaker?)
S An Hostile
John rejecting
elf n
others
Figure 6 Stewart’s Adapted Group Imago (Based on a diagram in Berne, 1966, p.155)
Leadership Tasks. At this stage the leader’s task is to keep leadership boundaries and the group task intact while still allowing
individual group members maximum opportunity to test. At a psychological level the group leader has to survive. The leader needs to
withstand verbal attacks from the group without punishing or collapsing in response, neither becoming punitive nor apologetic (e.g., “I’m
only trying to please you”). Feedback on leadership factors is reliable at this stage than at later stages because contaminated projections
colour respondents judgement. Later in the development of the group, feedback from group members to the leader can be enormously
valuable, but at this stage it is helpful for group pshychotherapists to give themselves the benefit of the doubt while seeking both support
and confrontation in supervision. It is important that the leader not appropriately seek support from group members and perhaps reinforce
second-order structural symbiotic patterns, that is, patterns which might invite the client to take care of the leader in the same way that
some children become “caretakers” of their parents.
Table 2
Summary of Destructive and Constructive Behaviours at the Adapted Group Imago Stage
(Storming)
Conflict and polarisation between members occurs in response to adjusting their own needs to the group task. Fight or flight might
be predictable responses to anxiety and threat. In psychotherapy group this conflict or withdrawal may appear as resistance to change, over-
adaptation, or other passive behaviours.
In groups where the leader is perceived as too frightening or too fragile to test or question, premature conflicts and polarisation
may erupt between group members. Especially vociferous and apparently irreconcilable differences between group members in the initial
phases of a group often mask unsatisfactory management of the storming phase by the group leader. Although not impossible, usually
groups in the beginning stage are involved in rituals with each other and not serious games. “In a psychotherapy group, an adaptable
member will not begin to play his games until he thinks he knows how he stands with the leader. If he is arbitrary and not adaptable… he
may act prematurely and pay the penalty” (Berne, 1963, pp. 224-225).
Individual group members, unless seriously disturbed, will tend not to engage actively in second – or third – degree interpersonal
games before having established the group leader’s boundaries vis-à-vis themselves. For example, a group of adolescents may test the
group leader by coming late, verbal abuse, or swearing. How group leaders or unit managers deal with these early testing situations will, to
a large extent, determine how group members subsequently use the therapy or activity group.
Psycho-
therapist
Assistant
S An
John Chris Lilly
elf n
Figure 8 The Differentiated Group Imago (Based on a diagram in Berne, 1966, p.155)
This last phase is one of mourning (Lacoursiere, 1980) or adjourning (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977). The collective group focus is on
termination. Psychologically, the group has to say goodbye and to negotiate the relevant grief processes.
Case Example. In this stage, Stewart realized that, in addition to mourning the end of the group, he was carrying a great deal of
grief for the father he never had. His leave-taking of his fellow group members was warm and intimate. He said that he had never felt so
close to friends or peers before.
Leadership Tasks. The most important leadership tasks at this stage is to keep the group focused on saying goodbye and not to let
them “run away” from dealing with these issues at intrapsychic, interpersonal, or group levels. Often people try to avoid the pain of this
period by making the group “bad, “ “blemishing” the group leader, and/or prematurely disengaging, for example, by physically getting
sick, or psychologically be denying that the group was important to them.
According to Worden (1983) the four major tasks of mourning are: 1) to accept the reality of the loss, 2) to experience the pain of
grief, 3) to adjust to a changed environment, and 4) to withdraw emotional energy and reinvest it in another relationship. As the group
terminates, the leader’s task is to facilitate the working through of such processes as they are manifested in the collective consciousness and
avoidances of the group.
Table 5
Summary of Destructive and Constructive Behaviours at the Clarified Group Imago Stage
(Mourning)
Kübler-Ross (1969) identified five stages that occur in grieving a loss – denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance.
Analogous phases of the grief process can be observed in the collective preoccupations of group members during the termination phase of a
group. For example, idealisation as part of denial prevents dealing with the sad feelings of separation by creating romantic ideas of
reunions. Feelings that need to be dealt with at this stage include anger, fear, sadness, and appreciation. The leader can give information
about the process of grieving, but he or she also needs to help the group grapple emotionally with the implications of termination.
The leader must participate in the termination process personally – with integrated Adult emotions – as well as intellectually if this
phase is to be resolved effectively, just as a parent must experience the ambivalence that accompanies letting a child go, including sadness
at losing a certain kind of closeness as well as pleasure at the child’s independence. It is not uncommon for survival issues to emerge again
at this stage, and predicting that possibility can be useful. Every time people say goodbye, or separate from meaningful connections with
others, they have the opportunity to relive archaic separations in more healthy or creative ways, thus helping to heal wounds of the past.
Termination is often both deeper and more effective if the group has been successfully managed. Group members let go of their
group imagoes in moving from the third to the fourth stage, so mourning in the final phase is for real intimate relationships, not the
fantasized ones of the original imago. And ultimately the hope is that their next provisional group imago will be based to a greater degree
on trust in their own capacities and in other people’s rational good will.
The effective group leader helps individuals handle grief in their own ways. It is important that the leader not participate in group
denial (collusion) or work out problems with endings vicariously through the group. It is also vital not to behave defensively at the
blemishing stage, but to listen and receive feedback: to support realistic plans for the future connected with endings; and to predict varied
reactions and to allow ambivalence to be expressed. Group leaders must let members know well in advance of a definite finishing time,
and one of their tasks may be to provide or facilitate leaving structures and rituals that are congruent with group norms.
Table 6
Summary Table of Stages of Group Development
Conclusion
The study and practice of psychotherapy includes attention to and understanding of the developmental stages of the individual
from conception to death. Whenever a psychotherapist and a client meet, a further elaboration of developmental theory emerges. Whether
or not a therapist works with groups or individuals, he or she is also involved in some form of group therapy. This article draws together
various perspectives on these observable developmental stages of groups. This article offers an integration of some of the observations of
Tuckman, Berne, and Lacoursiere with my own ideas in order to help psychotherapists to become as aware of group life and group needs
as they are of those of each of their individual clients. I hope this article will also encourage greater attention to writing about and research
into the essence and evolution of groups. Already colleagues, trainees, and friends have started updating my contribution – for example
Sue Fish’s inclusion of an initial stage which she calls performing.
Petrūska Clarkson, M.A., Ph.D. (Chartered Clinical Psychologist), A>F>B>Ps.S., TSTA, is the Director of Clinical Training at metatonoia
Pschotherapy Training Institute in London. She was on the ITAA Board of Trustees and is Chairperson of the Gestalt Psychotherapy
Training Institute of Great Britain for Integrative Psychotherapy. Please send reprint requests to Dr. Clarkson at metatonoia, 13 Norh
Common Road, London W5 2QB, England.
REFERENCES
Anzieu, D. (1984). The group and the unconscious. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Berne, E. (1962). In treatment. Transactional Analysis Bulletin, l(2), 10.
Berne, E. (1963). The structure and dynamics of organisations and groups. New York: Grove Press.
Berne, E. (1964). Games people play. New York: Grove Press.
Berne, E. (1966). Principles of group treatment. New York: Grove Press.
Casement, P. (1985). On learning from the patient. London: Tavistock.
Foulkes, S. H. (1951). Concerning leadership in group-analytic psychotherapy. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, l, 319-329.
Gurowitz, H. (1975). Group boundaries and leadership potency. Transactional Analysis Journal, 5, 183-185.
Jongeward, D. (1973). Everybody wins: Transactional analysis applied to organisations. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Kapur, R., & Miller, K. (1987). A comparison between therapeutic factors in TA and psychodynamic therapy groups. Transactional
Analysis Journal, 17, 294-300.
Kübler-Ross. E. (1969). On death and dying. New York: Macmillan.
Lacoursiere, R. (1980). Life cycle of groups. New York: Human Sciences Press.
Langs, R. (1978). The listening process. New York: Jason Aronson.
Steiner C. M. (1984). Emotional literacy. Transactional Analysis Journal, 14, 162-173.
Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental Sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384-399.
Tuckman, B.w., & Jensen, K. (1977). Stages of small group development. Journal of Group and Organisational Studies, 2, 419-427.
Worden, J. W. (1983). Grief counselling and grief therapy. London: Tavistock Publications.