Recomendaciones para la organización ejecutante y el director de proyectos

In pairs, trainees discuss the answers (do not divide trainees into pairs until part II is ready to begin).

Explain your answers to your partner. Do not interrupt your partner.

After you’ve heard the explanations, ask each other questions and answer them.

Try to draw up one joint definition on the basis of your and your partner’s answer to the third question.

This joint definition is presented to the other group members.

Part III: 120 minutes

The pairs’ definitions are clarified further in the plenary group without the others interrupting.

When all definitions have been explained, questions can be asked and an- swered group by group.

Finally, the whole training group is given the task of formulating one joint definition of safety from all the pairs’ definitions.

Execution

Part One. Now that the trainees were used to working individually on part of an assignment and had positively experienced that this may well produce an interesting result, they no longer hesitated about participating. Trainees in all groups worked intensively, focused and serious.

It emerged in Liberia that, when a text had to be copied, some (women more than men) had difficulty memorising more than two words at a time. And, occasional trainees (women, more often) had no idea how to answer the first three questions. Repeating my explanation had little effect. Fellow group members who had already finished their tasks helped the women who had reading and writing problems, without any mediation from myself. And so, these women, too had the minimum material with which to participate. This practical difficulty offered me insight into the impact of the long years when people had no access to primary education.

Part Two. As the randomly chosen pairs worked, the atmosphere of safety and mutual trust was noticeably improving. Most trainees observed the rule not to interrupt each other and listened without cutting in. They had mean- while experienced that this brought out the best in them all, and that every input deserved to be listened to; this experience had made an impression.

531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC Processed on: 8-5-2019 Processed on: 8-5-2019 Processed on: 8-5-2019

Processed on: 8-5-2019 PDF page: 114PDF page: 114PDF page: 114PDF page: 114

114

The pairs in the first six groups succeeded in assembling and formulating a joint definition. During this process I encountered occasional searching looks, but seldom any signs of resistance. Things were different in Liberia, however. The trainees with reading and writing problems did not understand what the task of discussing the definitions and then assembling one joint defi- nition asked them to do. This had to be explained to them a number of times. Part Three. The joint definitions were presented in a plenary meeting and again, the outcome surprised trainees. During the presentations it was the men in the pairs who ‘naturally’ spoke out. If I did not ask if this role division had been agreed upon, this was how things continued. If I did ask, the wom- en and youths were given/took the floor as well.

At the same time that the definitions gave the trainees an opportunity to engage in a lively discussion, a traditional expectation about the role of the trainer was overturned. I presented myself as someone who listens and asks questions about the trainees’ knowledge and accomplishments.

During the 13th step, the trainees asked each other tens of questions about the definitions given by the various pairs. Just as many answers followed, amply justified. The trainees now had experience with combining texts and they thus once again set about their task, with the assignment of the 14th step. One or two individuals, usually men, but occasionally a woman with a social position commanding respect, tended to hog the discussion. As this ‘normal’ behaviour kept recurring, it prompted me to look for a good mo- ment to question it. Because of the normalcy of the matter, this question had to arouse as little opposition as possible in the people concerned and in the other group members.

Following the debate, a staff member – who had trained to be a lawyer – was given the honour of choosing the words with which to formulate one group definition. When he had succeeded, he shared a newly-gained insight. ‘My colleagues and I did not act so wisely, after we had finished our academ- ic studies. We thought we had been trained to formulate solutions for land conflicts, for instance, and we made the parties involved agree with our solu- tions. I now see that things should be the other way around’. The other group members also expressed their surprise at the outcome because just as with the rules of behaviour, this group definition had come about without a cross word being spoken, and with everyone contributing.

531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC Processed on: 8-5-2019 Processed on: 8-5-2019 Processed on: 8-5-2019

Processed on: 8-5-2019 PDF page: 115PDF page: 115PDF page: 115PDF page: 115

115

In one or two groups, of the six definitions not one was left, but two. Train- ees there were inquisitively searching for clarity about the meaning of, and the differences and connections between ‘peace’ and ‘safety’. For me, this was an opportunity to ask by means of what activities people in this living en- vironment seek peace and with what activities do they seek safety? This no longer rekindled any misgivings or reserve in this group so my conclusion was that feelings of safety were on the increase. The groups in Liberia simi- larly reached a joint definition, albeit that they needed a little more assistance and structuring.

In answer to many trainees’ question how they had managed to achieve this result, I gave a smile, lifted my shoulders and held my palms open. Instead of lecturing about definitions of safety from literature, I used two words: ‘like this’.

Photo 6

531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC Processed on: 8-5-2019 Processed on: 8-5-2019 Processed on: 8-5-2019

Processed on: 8-5-2019 PDF page: 116PDF page: 116PDF page: 116PDF page: 116

116

Process reflection

A trainer trains the trainees in groups how to supervise and coach groups. This is, in effect, a recipe for the formulation of many more questions than can actually be asked within the limited time of the training. The (as yet un- polished) questions will then have to ‘wait’ in the group process until the right situation presents itself. Now, the trick is for the trainers (and later, the sociotherapists) to be able to recognise suitable situations and use them as a link to instructive questions. Most questions are doomed to remain in the trainer’s thoughts. This happened, for example, with the question that I thought up during the exercise on defining safety: ‘What did the trainees make of their diffidence about beginning on their own?’ One answer lay in the form of the positive experience this exercise had brought. But now that all diffidence had gone, I let the moment pass. In retrospect, I recognise the temptation of coming up with an answer myself. The training does not pri- marily state that the trainer has the answers but, rather, that s/he enables the trainees to find the answers for themselves. With hindsight, it would have been particularly relevant to ask why there was this reluctance to act and why it disappeared again. This melting reluctance illustrated an important moment of change.

It required more participation-boosting exercises for the trainees to discover that these are, time and again, about applying the sociotherapy principles in the development process of the phases.

Although I did not lecture about these phases and their key concepts, train- ees listened and spoke attentively and in a spirit of openness. The strength of the task of formulating a definition of safety lies in its relationship with the context and in the fact that trainees learn to observe what happens in the group as they do the task.

The prompt to look and think from different perspectives helped the trainees in their efforts to define safety. This process yielded matter for an entertain- ing and instructive dialogue, which again made the trainees feel that time was indeed flying when they were together. When I had facilitated subsequent training programmes I began to wonder if it is really this sensation that time flies that motivates the trainees to return the next day and continue the dia- logues.

Hesitation to make contact with colleagues decreased, and this was clearly visible during the comfort breaks. Trainees’ body language betrayed the in-

531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC 531236-L-bw-ASC Processed on: 8-5-2019 Processed on: 8-5-2019 Processed on: 8-5-2019

Processed on: 8-5-2019 PDF page: 117PDF page: 117PDF page: 117PDF page: 117

117