I was intrigued by the Tavistock method, especially because I had heardso much about it, not just from studying Freud and Bion but also from hearing of actual participants’ testimonies, which ranged from “this is deep learning” to “it was a horrible experience and I felt lost.” I signed up to a group relations conference in Boston organized by the A K Rice Institute.

Its objective was very appealing even without revealing anything about the actual methodology: A GRC [group relations conference] is an intensive and experiential learning event that provides the rare opportunity to study one’s own behaviour as it happens in real-time, without the distractions of everyday social niceties, workplace pressures, and established protocols. In the unique environment of a GRC, hidden aspects of one’s motivations, behaviours, and work-life are brought to light. Once available for conscious examination, GRC participants are assisted in learning what supports or detracts from one’s effectiveness, particularly how leadership and authority are manifest (A K Rice Institute, 2022).

Personally, I felt that the group dynamics intervention began the moment I received the invitation, because it said that some of us (without saying who) would have to share a room with others (who were strangers), some would have a room with their own bathroom and some would have their own room but would share a bathroom. This made me nervous about where and with whom I would end up sharing a room, and I wondered whether it would be decided randomly or based on any specific criteria.

The event was held in an old-fashioned house. On arrival, we were greeted by the administration staff, who showed us our rooms and gave each of us a binder that was basically empty and only included the structure of each day (five days in total) in terms of starting and ending times and the room of each meeting, session or meal. Nothing else. No content.

At one point I discovered that there were 111 people and 10 facilitators. I ended up in a room on my own with my own bathroom, which made me wonder again what the criteria were.

The first day started with a plenary, where one of the facilitators outlined the objectives of the conference as a whole. The objectives were to produce opportunities for learning from a group perspective and learn about leadership and authority from experience. The structure would provide a playground for conscious and unconscious connections and the focus would be on the system and not the individual. The methodology included a large study group (all members) and smaller study groups (of around eight people each). We would learn from experience as things unfolded from the ‘here and now.’ Examining and linking what we learned would be left to the individual and would not be prescribed. The facilitator then stopped talking and did not speak again for the whole session.

One characteristic of the Tavistock method is a quasi-religious devotion to timings. Even if somebody was talking, when time was up, all 11 facilitators would stand up simultaneously and leave the room. This, of course, has an impact on the dynamics of the group, depending on people’s prior exposure to the method. People vary in how this affects them personally (indeed, that’s where the learning lies).

Every day began with a plenary meeting, followed by smaller group meetings. We would have a short lunch break and dinner at the end of the day, where the facilitators would eat separately from us. We were free in the evenings to do as we wished. Of course, though, the group dynamics processes continued during our free time. The themes that emerged over the course of the week were rich and included safety, need for belonging (to varying degrees), authority, all of the ‘isms’ (sexism, racism, etc.), privilege, rejection, accepting (or not) new members, cohesion, vulnerability and risk-taking, and how subgroups develop.

On the last day, in our smaller groups, the facilitators supported us on a personal level in relation to our learning and insights. However, it was still up to each individual how deep they would go. When we packed our suitcases and left the building, despite the deep learning, I felt a sense of relief because of the intensity of the five days and the sense of institutionalization I had gained.

I would do it all over again if I had the chance, and I definitely recommend the conference to anyone who wants to learn about groups. However, I would suggest that anybody who attends should afterwards take their learning and insights to their personal support network (therapist, coach, etc.) to ensure they get the best out of their experience.

Excerpt from Group-Dynamix – Investigating team dynamics, from leaders to corporate Gatekeepers’, (2022) published by LID Publishing (UK).