About the Imago Virtual Town Hall Process

Educators and Coaches (DialogFirst)

(Version date – Nov 28)

The Virtual Town- Hall is a dialogue process designed specifically for our large community spread across the world, making face-to-face meetings impractical.

It is built on the principles of dialogue – with a “divergent” stage where surveys and other discussions are used to collect the range of perspectives. All perspectives are respected as valid – and are brought for discussion to a phone-bridge where community members and the board can join in a “convergent” stage where options would be generated and discussed.

The first stage of the process was to run a survey, and also monitor discussion on ImagoShare.  The perspectives shared from that are summarised in sections 1 to 6 on this webpage.   You can also visit the survey to see the detailed results

The first phone-bridge was held on Nov 28^th at 1.00 Eastern – 646 519 5883 2150#   This is summarised in section 7 below

1. Vision

Survey respondents all liked the vision that the Board is working on that “We look forwards to being in a world where Dialogue is the language of relationship and connection. People listen to each other, respond consciously, and develop the skill of understanding. Connection is restored in all places and at all levels of relationship”

However through ImagoShare discussions we have heard a very strong view expressed by many we should solely focus on couples therapy – and have a narrower vision, perhaps “We are the premiere couple’s therapy”

The majority of those who responded felt that training educators helps us towards this vision. But there are some who feel we should just train psychotherapists.

2. Problems with current educator training

Most respondents recognize that we currently train Imago Educators, alongside therapists. They see several problems with this. These include that

• There need to be clearer ethical boundaries for non-therapists
•  
• It should be clearer what educators can and can’t do
•  
• It should be clearer to the public who is a non-therapist
•  
• The training should be more tailored to what educators do with it
•  
• There should be tougher admission requirements for educator training
•  
• Many expressed quite strongly their perspective that any educator training should not be for couples work – but only for other fields of application
•  

3. Key options going forwards

Over 90% of respondents support proceeding with a substantially revised non-therapist training. Very few felt that we should only train therapists in dialogical techniques. However many feel quite strongly that the training should exclude working with couples. Some of the ImagineShare commentators felt strongly that we should not train educators at all (unless they are a therapist’s partner), however none of the survey respondents expressed this perspective.

4. Key features of a non-therapist training in dialogical skills

The most important features for people seem to be:

• Based in a set of ethics which create a strong boundary between therapy/ non-therapy
•  
• Create partnerships between therapists and non-therapists
•  
• Base the training on a clearly defined set of tools
•  
• • For some these should be tools for developing fundamental dialogue skills
  •  
  • Where they cover applications of dialogue– some feel this should exclude working with couples
  •  
• Target the training to the needs and applications we have in mind – and that these applications should be relatively broad – Some feel this should exclude working with couples
•  
• Have a distinct brand name /identity which distinguishes it from Imago Relationship Therapy

5. General feelings about a non-dialogical training (DialogFirst)

• There are strong reservations and concerns about Relationship Coaches offering a poor service to couples who really need therapy.
• Many felt that there was a place for a DialogFirst training – but not for couples
• There are concerns that its difficult enough already to get clients – why would we want to create coaches who compete

• It could bring awareness of living in the relational paradigm to a much larger group
• The term Imago or DialogFirst Coach should only be used by those who have a recognised coaching qualification (1 comment)
• Therapy and Coaching are a very different paradigm. How can anyone tell which is best for the couple. Does the coach decide? They are biased.
• There is less difference between therapy and coaching than people realize – and that its really impossible to stay out of the therapy field when working with a couple
• You need a psychological background to work with couples, even if you try and keep the dialogue in the present, you need to be aware when the couples are trying to take it somewhere else.
• There was a concern expressed that this process is not actually a dialogue. Others felt that the survey itself was biased, and were offended by what they saw as manipulation.
•  
• Some used the open- question box which asked for them to share their own personal perspective to say that they felt that the survey did not give an opportunity for people to say what they were really thinking.
•  
• One perspective is that we should find a way to simply train couples who can use dialogue when they wish - ie existing Imago therapists might lead programs in Churches, schools, community groups to train people in basic dialogical skills - rather like the Peace project does with Communalogue. (Added – and the weekend workshop)
•  
• Many on ImagoShare expressed the view that there is still much work to be done to help Imago Relationship Therapy become the premiere brand for quality, and we should focus all our energies on that
•  
• There are other general dialogue trainings around like NonViolent communication. Maybe we have nothing unique to offer in the field of dialogue – and should focus all our energies and resources on couples therapy.

6. Applications of Imago Dialogue outside of the field of therapy

Some asked “What do educators do with their training?” The following is a list collected from meetings with existing Imago educators earlier this year:

• Relationship coaching – with couples
• Organizational development/ Human relations
• Coaching teams in companies
• Employee relations
• Conflict resolution in business
• Couples who work together
• Educating parents about developmental stages, and what to do in each stage
• Link with an Imago therapist and provide support
• Restorative justice – dialogue between perpetrator and victim http://rjp.umn.edu/
• Divorce mediation
• Parents/ children
• Organize dialogue/communologue follow-up groups for couples after the workshop
• Provide a service to the therapist community – helping with the organization of workshops, and helping therapists feel safe to refer couples to the workshops
• Providing an Imago section within a larger recovery workshop – 4 hours in a 2 day workshop
• Early childhood educators – daycare, high-school– working with children, caregivers and parents
• Collaborative law
• Used in Family estate planning
• Palliative care – families with peaceful death
• Present 3-hour Imago Connects workshop and Connects DVD, to create interest in Imago workshops and therapy in the local community

7. Note from the Think Tank phone-call held on Nov 28th

There was a strong attendance from the community, including many Board members.

(Maryrita Wieners, Sara Boxnboim, Sophie Slade, Virginia Thomas, Bill Brennan, Ron Clark, Bob Patterson were amongst the board members present)

Sections 1 through 5 were shared with the attendees, and then Maryrita led a group dialogue with each person being mirrored.

Comments included:

• Excitement from a therapist about what was happening beyond the field of therapy
•  
• A comment that “The Mindful Brain” by Dan Siegel has some insights into dialogue in our lives which extend beyond therapy, and recommendation that we all read it, and then come to hear him at the Imago Portland Oregon Conference, Nov 6-8
•  
• An Educator who felt like a second-class citizen in the Imago community, and invited us to have a big vision for the world, not a small one for education. She wanted there to be communion between therapists and educators
•  
• We should look at how we can best train people for dialogue work – and maybe even build an adjunct faculty
•  
• Concerns about educators seeing couples, although using Imago dialogue in business seemed OK
• If we were educated in Imago from an early age – maybe we wouldn’t need therapy at all! Therefore it feels important to spread the Imago dialogue in the broadest way. In a sense we are living the conscious relationship model with everyone, and may need the fundamentals of Imago everywhere to help us do this
•  
• Maybe we can separate the two approaches with the name Imago Relationship Therapy and Imago Relationship Theory
•  
• A story was told of an area where one car dealership moved in – and soon there were 8 thriving in the same road. Think not of scarcity but richness. The more people speak Imago the better – we shouldn’t be afraid of competition
•  
• We should give the best possible dialogue training – because people are going to pick up some form of communication technique anyway
•  
• Imago dialogue is a core work in the world
•  
• Acknowledge the difference between therapists and people with other skills. A therapist can only see a certain number of couples, and its best they see the ones that really need therapy. Then others can work with the couples who don’t. As more people are exposed to Imago – more will come to therapy
• Even marital therapists do a bad job sometimes – and that gives therapy a bad reputation. Many people need something deeper than coaching. How would it work if coaches keep saying to couples “I can’t help – you need to go to a therapist”
•  
• Educators shouldn’t work with couples (This is from a coach who teaches coaching)
• Insurance won’t pay for couples to see a coach. (But a therapist pointed out its rare to find insurance that will pay for Imago therapy too)
•  
• Couples can learn dialogue outside of the context of therapy – just as a great communication skill

Therapists might have a lot to learn from educators and coaches

If the "Getting" workshop is so good - how is that so few therapy clients attend it?

Virtual Town-Hall ending with Think Tank meeting - 7 May

A summary is given below - for the full results from the survey follow this link

Nearly all Imago therapists encourage some or all of their clients to attend a workshop

• It’s an incredible growth experience for couples
• It makes therapy much more effective

Most couples who attended a workshop made much better progress in therapy

• Few couples discontinued therapy as a result
• Some of these came back later for help
• Most of the couples appear to have liked the workshop

Most therapists find it difficult to persuade their couples to go to the workshop

• Couples are reluctant
• They don’t want to reveal their private lives to other couples
• They can’t fit it around family obligations
• They can’t afford it
• They feel they are being “sold” another expensive service
• They don’t understand the difference between therapy and the workshop and what it would offer them

Most therapists knew and trusted the workshop presenters in their area, although nearly a third did not.

Ideas from people on the Think Tank Call – May 7

Helping therapists refer to the workshop

• It’s cost effective for couples – worth 3-6 months of therapy
• Good to mention in the first phone-call, the workshop is part of the program, so they expect to go sooner or later
• Invite therapists to attend for free and re-experience the workshop
• Use regional group meetings
• Send brochures several tim es a year to therapists who refer. (It doesn’t seem to pay off to send them to past attendees)
• Message to clients “If two-days of intensive work don’t make a difference – an hour at a tim e in my office probably won’t either”
• Concern from some therapists who refer – they don’t get a thank you back

Suggested Actions:

1. Provide Therapists with better information for couples to help them decide to come to the workshop. This should help therapists present convincing arguments – “its cost effective, worth 3-months of therapy, it’s different etc:”

· Printed materials

· Online resources

2. Raise the consciousness among therapists that the combination of the workshop and therapy appears to be more effective that either one alone.

• Conference
• Mailing
•  

3. Encourage Workshop Presenters to invite therapists to re-take the workshop to be reminded of what an incredible experience it is.

4. Suggest codes of practice that Workshop Presenters can share with therapists so they can feel safe and good about referring. Include recommendations for appreciating those who refer.

5. Encourage workshop presenters to regularly mail their workshop schedules to therapists in their region.

6. Encourage regional groups to work together on partnering therapists with workshop presenters and ensuring there are referrals both ways – including of Workshop attendees back

Community Dialogue about Same-Sex marriage

During the summer of 2010 the Community Dialogue process was run to establish the community's perspective on whether IRI should make a statement about same-sex marriage.

Two think tanks were held:

1. To bring out the diversity of perspectives held

2. To explore the underlying values which unite us

The conclusion was an addition to the Core Values - these can be found at the end in the statement about Relationship Opportunities for Diverse Populations.