Carl Roger and Facilitation

Carl Roger and Facilitation

?

(Steve Correa[i], based also on reading Carl Roger)

?After reading my recent posts on Process Work, a friend reminded me of Carl Rogers and his approach to facilitating what he called ‘encounter’ groups.

?Before I discuss Carl Roger's process facilitation style, allow me to share a bit about him and his approach.

?Carl Rogers on the Person-Centred Approach to Counselling

?His ideas originated in 1940. His work, popularly called Rogerian, was disliked by the author. He would rather prefer?the Person-Centered Approach instead.?

?Roger posited that his childhood experience was a reaction to his upbringing of being unheard and judged. He wanted to create an environment where the client?felt heard, listened to, and cared for.

?Being exposed to his father’s farm during his childhood, he began to appreciate the need for scientific enquiry and research.?Paradoxically, his person-centred approach is the exact opposite of science. Initially, he began with Clinical Psychology.

?As he began to get into treatment interviews, he discovered a few new things:?

?For one, he discovered that there was no ‘problem child, just problem parents’; there was a great problem with parents. He discovered, working with the mother, that she was ‘rejecting’ the child all the time. On deeper enquiry, the mother poured out a case history quite different from what was shared earlier. He came to the insight that rather than show he had expertise, he should focus on deep listening and understanding the source of the pain. To continue to stay in the process with curiosity.

?Soon, Carl Rogers began to articulate a few new and radical principles.

?Carl posits that the role of a counsellor is to be a ‘midwife’ to the personality. He advocated the need for?‘unconditional positive regard’. If one can be genuinely understanding, be oneself, and listen deeply and well, that’s a deep commitment the coach brings to the conversation. If that situation can emerge, not forced, but deeply authentic. This is quite different from friendship, which focuses on the friend. Counselling is a far more intense relationship than friendship: while friendship is valuable, it differs from psychotherapy's sharp focus.??

In group therapy, other members become facilitative as well.?

?The process is somewhat the same: individuals reveal data about themselves. Instead of feeling ‘awful’ about revealing, it feels accepted. Groups tend to, given the time that they have, to bring ‘closure’. They try to commit to whatever they can do in the time available. This social support is hugely helpful. It is to be remembered that age, background, and gender make no difference to the effectiveness of groups. Groups have a ‘wisdom’ that emerges naturally. Selection of group is overrated, says Roger.

?The good life, as described by Rogers, is characterised by:

?1.?????An acceptance of all experiences, including those that are new.

2.?????An existential lifestyle in which each moment is appreciated and lived to its fullest.

3.?????A trust level with one’s own decisions.

4.?????Increasing freedom of choice

5.?????Creativity and adaptability without necessarily conforming.

6.?????Reliability and constructiveness in their dealings with others.

7.?????A preference for living a rich, full life.

?His approach to facilitating encounter groups

?Carl R. Rogers describes his approach to facilitating encounter groups in a highly personal and reflective manner. He begins by acknowledging the diversity of effective leadership styles and focuses solely on his own. Rogers trusts the group process, believing that groups naturally move toward growth and healing when provided with a supportive climate. He views the group as an organism capable of self-correction and development without a facilitator’s explicit direction.

?Rogers outlines his style as one that avoids imposing specific goals or structured exercises, instead allowing the group to find its path. He emphasises creating a psychologically safe environment where individuals feel valued and heard, and he listens with empathy and sensitivity. He aims to validate each person’s experience, focusing on the meanings and feelings behind their words rather than the content of their statements.

?He stresses the importance of being genuine, expressing his own feelings and reactions, and shifting between the roles of facilitator and participant. Rogers believes in the group's therapeutic potential and relies on the group members to support each other, even in challenging situations. He avoids manipulative techniques, planned procedures, and interpretive comments, which can hinder the group’s natural development.

?Rogers also shares his awareness of his limitations, such as difficulty expressing anger and physical spontaneity. He concludes by cautioning against non-facilitative behaviours like manipulation, judgmental interpretations, and a lack of emotional involvement. His approach reflects a deep respect for the autonomy of group members and a belief in the organic growth that emerges from authentic, non-directive facilitation.

?Carl Rogers outlines seven behaviours he believes are non-facilitative for a group facilitator:

?1. Manipulation and Control: A facilitator loses effectiveness when manipulating the group, setting rules, or directing it toward their hidden goals. Such behaviour can erode trust or make members overly dependent on the facilitator.

?2. Judging Success by Dramatics: Evaluating a group based on emotional displays, such as counting tears or intense reactions, results in an unreliable and superficial assessment of success.

?3. Overemphasis on Hostile Confrontation: Facilitators who see constant confrontation as essential are not recommended. While hostility should be expressed when genuine, many other feelings are equally important and should be valued.

?4. Centering the Group on Personal Issues: A facilitator whose own problems overshadow the group’s needs is ineffective. Such an individual may need to participate in a group rather than facilitate it.

?5. Frequent Interpretations of Motives: A facilitator who interprets members’ behaviour or motives risks causing defensiveness or harm. Even accurate interpretations can be detrimental if they strip away an individual's defences.

?6. Introducing Exercises as Mandates: Facilitators who enforce activities or exercises without the option to opt-out manipulate individuals, making it hard for them to resist or express genuine feelings.

?7. Emotional Aloofness: Facilitators who remain emotionally detached or act as expert analysts show defensiveness and disrespect towards the group. This behaviour sets an undesirable standard, encouraging members to emulate this distance rather than fostering openness and spontaneity.

?Rogers emphasises that while these behaviours may be present in group members, they are problematic when exhibited by the facilitator, as they set a negative norm for the group.

?What are some thoughts you have left on reading this? Do share

[i] ??Steve Correa is an Executive Coach and Author of The Indian Boss at Work, Thinking Global, Acting Indian???