From the author: I recently made a short presentation in which I very schematically outlined the main points of I. Yalom’s approach to group therapy. You can’t post presentation files here, so I had to get a little clever and make a mixture of an article and a presentation. Addressed to students and aspiring leaders of therapeutic groups. There is a lot of material, so it will be in several parts. In previous articles I wrote about how group therapy works. It is clear that the lion's share of the work is done by the group itself. But by itself it cannot become a truly effective mechanism for promoting therapeutic changes in each of the participants. I have seen the work of different groups and I can say with confidence that if you simply gather seven people and sit them in a circle, allowing them to talk heart to heart, no therapy will work. The leader must make some effort to make the group truly working. The group itself does not strive for this state, and sometimes quite actively resists. So, the tasks of the group leader are briefly outlined in the figure: The division into stages is quite arbitrary. The leader has to perform all these tasks at all stages. The only question is the amount of effort and emphasis. So at the first stage, most of the effort and attention is spent on the formation of group norms and on providing support. The first is necessary so that the group can subsequently solve therapeutic problems independently and do so effectively. The second is to create an atmosphere of safety and cohesion of the group. The formation of norms is pure behaviorism. Desirable behavior is demonstrated and reinforced (the leader is a kind of model), while undesirable behavior is not reinforced or (in some cases) punished. If you devote enough effort and attention to this activity, norms are formed very quickly. Support is a more complex and subtle activity, but necessary. Again from experience: the less frustration at the initial stage of the group, the faster it becomes cohesive and capable of solving serious therapeutic problems. Cohesion is an analogue of a therapeutic relationship. Establishing communications between participants is a task that the leader performs throughout the entire group. At the first stage, you have to do more of this, since the participants initially strive to communicate with each other not directly, but through the leader or other participants. If they are constantly directed to direct interaction, this norm is learned, and the leader can switch his attention to solving other problems. This is how Yalom draws two types of communications. Keeping the group in the “here and now” also requires some effort. Again, at the first stage you have to do this more actively. But even advanced working groups, no, no, and they strive to go “there and then,” especially if there is serious resistance in the group. So the leader works with this task all the time. One of the most difficult tasks is to keep the group in the here and now. Analysis of the group process is perhaps the only function that the group will not perform. Usually there are participants who take on the role of leader and quite successfully keep the group in the “here and now,” monitor direct communications, provide support, etc. But rarely anyone dares to analyze the process, since the group aggressively perceives attempts by other participants to do “the work of a therapist.” So the presenter solves this problem alone. At the first stage, relatively little time is allocated to process analysis. It must be soft, very careful - resistance is strong and rude interventions will be rejected or not heard. As the experience of the participants increases, the role of such analysis increases. Analyzing the process is the prerogative of the facilitator. The level of activity of the facilitator depends on the stage of the group and its format. If we talk about long-term groups, then at the very beginning the leader shows quite a lot of activity. He has his mouth full of troubles - forming norms, maintaining, establishing: