the making of a President…

Posted on Wednesday 4 February 2009

Group Psychology is a fascinating topic. It’s more that that for Group Therapists. It’s the key to creating a Group Milieu that can become a powerful force for change instead of a "mob." What follows is my own paraphrasing of the ideas of Winfred Bion, a British Psychoanalyst from the School of Melanie Klein who worked with therapy groups.
  • The forces mobilized in groups are suprisingly strong and predictable. Initially, there is no insurance that the group will be safe. As people begin to interact and the inevitable tensions begin to build, one or more people will begin to frustrate others. Sooner or later, the group will begin to scapegoat on or several members. If left alone, this weaker member will be driven from the group. That’s a disaster, because the group has become a "killing" group, organized around shared hatred.
  • The purpose of the leader is to keep this from happening. Since the whole task of group formation is to create an atmosphere of safety, the leader must protect the weaker members. It takes skill to allow these vulnerable members to learn how not to frustrate others and keep the group from expelling them.
  • If the leader is able to keep the group from scapegoating members and becoming a dangerous group, again, sooner or later, the aggression of the group will be focused of the leader, usually around some mistake he/she has made.
  • All the leader has to do is survive the attack, not by power but by admitting the mistake,and not being overly defensive.

Once the group has been prevented from scapegoating members and killing off its own leader, it becomes safe. Groups that make it through the process become working groups and can be an extremely powerful force for change. Such groups last for a long time. When a new member is added or an old member lost, the group usually goes through an abbreviated version of the same process.

How’s he doing?
  1.  
    February 4, 2009 | 10:52 PM
     

    I think Obama’s saying on TV today, “I screwed up,” in reference to Daschle’s vetting, was just what you’re talking about: the leader survives by admitting his mistakes. He was about to be attacked for the mounting “tax problems” in his apponitees, but he defused the issue by admitting it.

    And actually it’s not clear that he did screw up. Supposedly Daschle did not report on the tax problem until well after his nomination had been announced. I’n not sure when Daschle himself was made aware of it.

    It may also be an example of Daschle’s closeness to Obama (he was a co-chair of his campaign, I believe) made him less carefully vetted than might have been otherwise.

    But more generally in answer to your question, I think Obama is doing a good job of being a leader. He’s even going pretty far in keeping Republicans from being scapegoated.

  2.  
    February 4, 2009 | 10:54 PM
     

    Re Daschle: I don’t think his tax problem was as big a concern as his wealth accrued in large part from the medicine-related industry and consulting and his quasi-lobbyist activities, even though he technically wasn’t a registered lobbyist.

  3.  
    February 11, 2009 | 10:44 AM
     

    […] on Wednesday 11 February 2009 the making of a President… By […]

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.