5.4.7 A Window Of Opportunity

As a follow on to the Sub-Chapter on Supervision (and in particular the abstract) I will describe a tool that assists self-awareness known as the Johari Window.

The Johari Window is a symbol of what we are, how we are, where we are at times and stages of our lives. However, even though it’s not a real window, it’s a good word because it describes, in a way, how people can see through us.

Some people love diagrams and some don’t – I’m one of those that do – and that is, I suppose, why it appeals to me as a learning tool. I am aware, however that it’s a very square representation of things that are emotional, i.e. felt rather than thought about so you’ll have to use your imagination a little as the Sub-Chapter is read.

I first came across it many years ago – and I was intrigued in one way at how simple it is – but how complex (and important) its implications are for a practitioner who aspires to be responsible and reflective.

I remember speaking with a social worker some years ago who told me that she’d had just one hour-long lecture on her four-year course on it whereas she’d had lectures over an entire semester, and then an examination, on legal matters.

As it is all about self-awareness I was interested that so little time had been assigned to it in a course that aimed to train people to help families in deep distress and protect children whereas legal matters were afforded far more attention.

There may, of course, be other self-awareness tools on such courses but thinking about the way things are I wonder are they making a lasting impact on the average practitioner?

I’d like to stress that this Sub-Chapter is only a written description of the Window.

The best way to learn about it is to actually do an experiential workshops on it in a Group with good facilitation and an atmosphere of trust where people know each other well and are willing and able to be honest and open.

The Johari Window was developed by two psychologists, Joseph Luft and Harrington Ingham in the USA in the 1950’s.

It is a combination of their two first names, Joe and Harry.  I only found this out many years after I had first come across it, and it was a major disappointment to me, because I thought that Johari was some sort of Indian Maharajah and the window was a philosophical eye into a more spiritual and mystical world.

Despite its less than exotic origins I was drawn to it as I believe that it is a very useful tool for raising awareness of self and how our actions impact on others – and their actions on us.  On the diagram you can see Four Panes (1, 2, 3 and 4) which I will describe in the following posts.

Here is the diagram – I have no source – I just Googled images of Johari Window. I think that it’s a fairly good representation. I don’t know where the diagram originated, i.e. who uploaded it. If the person who uploaded it is reading this please let me know so that I can credit you. Whoever or wherever you are – thanks!

You will see two dotted red lines, one vertical and one horizontal. These move (that’s why they are dotted) as we become more self-aware (or less, as the case may be) as will be explained in the following posts.

And I will include the diagram in each post so you won’t have to flick back to this post as you read about the different Panes! 

The public pane (Pane 1) contains what is known to us and to other people. It is depicted in the Top Left of the diagram.

Pane 1 can be thought to be shared knowledge.  When we communicate on a superficial level we use this Pane. In our day to day dealings with others this is usually quite sufficient.

However if we aspire to take up a role as a helper of others we need to increase our effectiveness in the area of communication.  This is more important if we are helping people in acute distress – and wish to build a relationship based on genuineness, (congruence) trust and warmth.

Like a lot of other things I mention, (yes – you’ve guessed it) the work of some professionals who have a role as helpers (for example, teachers or nurses) will undoubtedly be enhanced by attending to effective communication, but it is an added bonus.

But for anyone who works with people in acute distress, on a long term basis, it is absolutely essential that effective communication is attended to continuously.

This is where good supervision comes in, because effective communication is enhanced when we work at increasing the size of Pane 1.

The way to increase the size of Pane 1, while decreasing the size of the other panes is through:

Self-disclosure:  Self disclosure means sharing information about the real me with others and thus increasing their knowledge about me.  (Have another look at the picture above). Self-disclosure is the yellow box with the arrow pointing down on the left-hand-side. When we self-disclose the red dotted line goes downward a little – meaning that people get to know us better as we have more open area and less hidden area.

And

Inviting feedback: Getting open and honest information about us from those who are close to us i.e. at work and elsewhere.  This is the yellow box at the top with the arrow pointing to the right hand side.  (I will refer to feedback again when I am describing Pane 2). Inviting feedback – or, indeed, listening to what others say about us or see in us causes the red dotted vertical line to move to the right, also widening Pane 1. That is, again, allowing others to get to know us better.

Self-disclosure has, of course, to have relevance and too much self-disclosure [1] is actually very unhelpful.

Appropriate self-disclosure, however, encourages feedback from others. The amount and quality of feedback we get is dependent on what vibes we give out about how open we are, i.e. to not only hearing the feedback but taking it on board and if necessary acting on it.

We are continually receiving verbal and non-verbal information from others.  How (or indeed if) we perceive this information, and then act on it, determines the size of Pane 1.

[1]. The nature and extent of self-disclosure (and pondering on the appropriateness of it) is very good material for supervision.

After the initial post on Pane 1 we are now getting to a slightly more challenging area – what we call our blind spots.

These are contained in Pane 2, and are known to others but not to ourselves. It is represented in the Top Right of the Window.

The thing about blind spots is we are not consciously aware of them.  (If we were they would not be blind spots)! In Pane 2 we are sure that we are right, that is, we do not (consciously) know that we do not know.

For people who work with families in the Focus Group this is potentially a very dangerous area.

At worst Pane 2 represents the part of us that is frightened to engage in open and honest communication and leads us to play games, trick others, hide our true self, and behave out of fear. As meaningful relationships are heavily dependent on openness, honesty and trust a big Pane 2 may prevent us from developing such relationships.

We risk engaging in behaviours that focus, unknowingly, on our own needs.  As all behaviours involve decision-making, what we are doing is continually making decisions to satisfy needs that we have but are not aware of.

For example, we may need to be the centre of attention so we self-disclose too much, or we fear genuine relationship so we don’t self-disclose at all.

However, others will probably be intuitively aware of our needs and due to their perception of our non-awareness they will feel insecure and ungrounded.

There are various outcomes of those of us who work with people in distress not attending to their Pane 2.  These outcomes might be that people:

• Simply drift away from us and/or our organisation.
• Assume that a state of unawareness is healthy because an expert modelled it!
• End up more hurt than they were prior to meeting us.
• Take legal action against our organisation for professional incompetence if things turn out bad.

Feedback was mentioned when we were describing Pane 1.

Willingness to listen to, and take on board, honest feedback is vital for reducing Pane 2, as is monitoring our emotional state in the company of trusted others.  This will give us closer self-perception and thus will match what others around us perceive about us and feed back to us.

What about positive feedback?  This may also give us an insight into blind spots.  They could be good things about ourselves that we might not be aware of.  It’s amazing how many people who are resistant to hearing feedback that is negative can often also dismiss feedback that is positive.  (What does he want from me)?

Sometimes our blind spot is called our shadow. As I mentioned in this post where I described the beauty and benefits of darkness, our shadow is not always negative – it can contain positive aspects to our personality and/or behaviour too – it’s just that they may be hidden, or partially hidden from us.

The most difficult feedback of course can be that which is spontaneously directed at us in a flash of anger!

Yet there can be great learning opportunities in this if we do not dismiss it all – and allow for the possibility that there might be a little truth amidst all the angry feedback.

Integration, wisdom, maturity, and above all empathy widen the public area (Pane 1) and reduce the blind area (Pane 2).

All of Pane 3 will be known to us but not to the people we deal with. This pane is sometimes called the mask or the façade. It is on the Bottom Left of the Window.

However it can also be a positive part of us – there will always be areas that are private to us that we do not wish to disclose to others.  This is necessary for our protection.  It may also be good for others’ protection.

For example if I, as a parent, disclose everything about myself without any sense of appropriate boundary, it may be harmful to my child’s growth.

Let us consider Pane 3 in the context of Family Support Work.

We can reduce its size through self disclosure.  (This is the yellow box on the left with the arrow pointing down). That is, the extent to which we are willing to share information about ourselves with others, i.e. the information that is not normally shown to the world.  If it was, it would be in Pane 1! (As I said when I was describing Pane 1, the dotted red line moves downwards).

It differs from Pane 2 in that we are making a conscious decision to share (or not share) the information. In that way it’s not a blind area. We know that we are sharing/not sharing and we usually know why too.

So it will often have an emotional dimension.  (That is, there is an element of risk, emotionally, in sharing the information).

This is the area that is not consciously known to ourselves or other people around us. It is displayed in the Bottom Right of the diagram. It can be thought to be an area of either great destruction or great creativity.

While it is not consciously known, it is usual that people (both self and others) sense it intuitively.  We can reduce the size of this unknown part of ourselves by engaging in self-discovery, reflection, listening to others’ opinions without judging them, and, I believe anyway, by being curious about our emotional reaction to things.

If we do the opposite, that is, assume that our emotions are things that we can do nothing about, Pane 4 may increase in size. If we go through life reducing our self-disclosure and rejecting feedback) Pane 1 (PUBLIC) becomes smaller.

Distancing ourselves from our emotional state might lead to the banana skin, that is, the self-destructive accident.  We do not know (nor does anyone else) why it happens but it happens! We might say we took our eye off the ball. It appears to be more likely to happen if we are narcissistic, and consider ourselves to be very important, and we get paranoid about power or fame slipping away.

There is also a body of thought that suggests that psychosomatic illnesses are linked to expansion of Pane 4. We may find honest feedback difficult to take and while we might always be complaining we find it hard to truly share difficulties that we have with a trusted other – or even acknowledge to ourselves that we have difficulties at all.

But by far the most interesting thing is that as Pane 4 is reduced (by courageously accepting feedback and taking the risk of self-disclosure) the amount of creativity seems to increase – things seems to go better, and better luck seems to come our way. [1]. Good things begin happening in our lives and as we increase resilience we develop resistance to knock-backs.

So we can consider Pane 4 to be a potential source of great personal creativity and other resources or potentials which we do not know that we have.

[1]. Much research into effectiveness of therapy points to factors outside the client or therapist as being important in respect of healing and returning to wellness. Is this due to us being more open and trusting, as well as becoming consciously aware of positive things in our lives that we previously ignored or deemed to be unimportant?

Normal, healthy development, particularly in teenage years, involves us exaggerating our individuality to break free of our parents and be independent autonomous adults in our own right.

Looking at the Johari Window, Pane 1 can decrease in size as we develop a huge resistance to disclosing what is going on inside and in parallel with that we become very resistant to any form of helpful feedback.

This is healthy as we need to begin to trust ourselves (and even do things that are a bit risky) so that we will learn what our own limits are.

Good enough parenting at this stage involves allowing a teenager to have their own privacy and independence while still monitoring it at a safe distance.

Adolescence is usually not an easy time for either parents or teenagers but the foundations are laid down by parents before the child is born and then modelling a big enough Pane 1 in their communications with each other as the child is an infant, a toddler, and then through to adolescence.

The Johari Window can be applied to raise our awareness in general and in particular when we are are in relationship.

It is also very useful in a therapeutic space if we are open to change. And like many tools, its efficacy depends on our openness to engage with it.

That is why it is suitable for training courses; when we are anxious to learn!

I cannot leave the Johari Window without mentioning an aspect of it that I find fascinating!

Usually, in our culture, children are born and many families begin as a result of two people falling in love so (as a website that has the protection of children at heart) it might be interesting for us to explore it a little here.

When I fall in love the extent of my self-disclosure suddenly becomes very high, and Pane 1 expands.  I have no secrets, and I tell the person with whom I am in love things that I never told anyone else.

Pane 3 reduces as my private space becomes smaller.  Very often falling in love happens at the same time as, or shortly after, the adolescent resistance to self-disclosure to parents so I have the feeling that at last I have someone who understands me.

This is a very powerful feeling at that time of life.  (Of course falling in love is not confined to late adolescence or early adulthood but it is the most interesting time to consider in our case as we have not reached anywhere near full maturity at that time of our lives).

When I fall [1] in love I actually lose my sense of self as I am swept away on a seemingly unstoppable wave of enthusiasm for the other.  I seem to be able to take any type of feedback whatsoever, and I often change my values, habits, and even fundamental ways of being to accommodate the needs of the person with whom I am in love.

Pane 2 also reduces as I take on board feedback, learn things that I did not know about myself but the other can spot, and undergo a period of change to accommodate the other person’s needs.

However this is an unreal type of experience.

During it I cannot see anything wrong with the other person and my assessment of my situation is done from a place of total immersion in the experience.  (It is interesting that in common usage, an infatuation with anything or anyone is sometimes called the honeymoon period).

Now the reason that this feeling of being swept away does not last too long is that all humans have a need to be grounded in reality.  And since we are all imperfect, eventually the imperfections of the other become apparent to me, and my imperfections become apparent to the other.

If we are healthy, emotionally, we will both have enough self-confidence to 1): continue self-disclosure to get to know each other more fully, at a more mature and complex level, and 2): give and accept honest feedback so that we can learn more about each other’s blind spots.  This sets up a reasonably healthy process of growth and maturity. 

Of course, over time, the urge to retain our sense of self, and indeed the norms of our family of origin, some of which may have been unhealthy, may cause us to default to the familiar, actually decrease self-disclosure, and become resistant to feedback.

In normal, relatively healthy, long-term relationships the amount of self-disclosure and ability to give and/or receive feedback levels out to a point that both parties are content with.  Children growing up in such a family get to know the rules from an early age and grow up and develop in a reasonably healthy environment.  While it might not be ideal or perfect it is good enough, and is probably the way that the vast majority of families live their lives.

However the reality, for some couples who fall in love, is a lot different.

Sadly (and relevant to our work in family support) resistance to honest feedback coupled with increasing unwillingness to self-disclose often creeps in unknowingly and becomes worse over time.

Instead of the healthy good enough level referred to above, an unhealthy, even toxic relationship develops, which is intolerable for all, in particular children.  Parents can sometimes get so angry with each other that they cease to communicate and the public area (Pane 1) gets smaller and smaller to the extent that they might start forgetting good things that they once knew about each other.

This is then modelled to children with the result that they, too, learn to close their ears to advice which they may need growing up and treat even constructive criticism from a significant figure in authority (e.g. parent, teacher, Garda, etc.) as a personal attack on them.

While intellectually (in their head) they know that the giver of the information may be correct, emotionally, (in their body) they have not matured sufficiently to take it on board.

And it is interesting that it appears that those who, many people feel, would benefit most from feedback are often those who resist it the most.

[1]. Fall is a very appropriate word here – and we seem to be totally unaware of what will happen when we land!

Continuing our exploration of the Johari Window, parents are, of course, very important models of healthy communication to children. It is equally important that practitioners are too!

And if we practitioners are parents ourselves, our first responsibility is to our own families and children. Particular attention needs to be given to this on training courses and the Johari Window is a very good tool for opening up this challenging area in an encouraging and supportive manner.

It is important to remember that one reason for including people who are affected by imprisonment – very often the wise and strong people referred to in this post – in our training courses is to optimise the propagation of pro-social activity, responsibility and desirable traits in communities. This will have a multiplier effect, and go some way towards addressing the issue of the need always being greater than the resource that I referred to a number of times. Since the family is central to community, it is important to make it easy for participants to explore the dynamics both of families of origin, and current families, and how being in training is impacting on same.

And this almost always throws up some surprises and new challenges. Such exploration increases the likelihood that our family members will be the first (albeit indirect) beneficiaries of the training undertaken by us. If people in distress were benefiting greatly while our own family was not it would be incongruent – and that would not be a desired outcome.

In respect of our Johari Window Pane 2, family members – including children – need to sense that if they give feedback to us that has a lot of energy, (for example being angry with an aspect of our work) that we will take it on board and not dilute and/or dismiss the anger. This is good modelling because, undoubtedly, it is when people are angry that the most energetic feedback is given and received.

In the reduction of Pane 2 we become aware of our blind spots – whether we are in family situations or we are at work. Relationships are enhanced if people who come looking for assistance perceive us, in general, to have a large Pane 1.  That is, an atmosphere of openess that facilitates healthy and open dialogue.

Our organisation, just like individuals, (because as we have already said, organisations are just groups of individuals) will have a Private Space (Pane 3) where what we do not want to disclose is held.  However this does not mean that we are obsessive about secrecy. 

People need to feel that we are open and transparent in dealings in so far as it is possible for us to be.  This is where good-will is most important.

Most organisations will state, with some conviction, that it is highly unethical to consciously put up barriers to both receiving feedback and self-disclosure.

We are interested in the area of unconscious barriers. The big challenge is to design in willingness to accept feedback and honest self-disclosure into our day-to-day work which will extend into our family lives.

If we are a responsible organisation – like a responsible parent – we know that we don’t know everything about what we should know and furthermore we know that we need to explore the implications of our ignorance.

Let us look now at our Family Support Shamrock in the context of the Johari Window.  Remember, the Family Support Shamrock contains three elements, Inclusiveness, Boundedness and Creativity.

Inclusiveness:  A decrease in our private space (Pane 3) and a willingness to accept honest feedback (Pane 2) will undoubtedly encourage people who are hurt to be associated with us.  Empathy is optimised by willingness to self-disclose.  Someone who has found it hard to be included in mainstream society may lack confidence and can either withdraw from contact or become apathetic, or even sometimes aggressive, and alienate those who might be there to help. However if our organisation gives out the vibes that it is safe to feed our imperfections back to us, and we are courageous enough to take the feedback on board, we will be perceived as willing to acknowledge our blind spots. That is, someone can take a risk and be confident that he will still be included.

(This could be the customer-with-attitude – the person who changes our organisation for the better).

If, however, we listen to feedback but nothing changes, or we give solely logical explanations in a defensive tone, it will become apparent that (spoken or written [1]) willingness to accept feedback is a bit of a sham and the person giving the feedback while still perhaps linking in with us, will not really feel heard or included.

They will not experience that extra bit, the genuine hearing of feedback that has a warmth and acceptance about it.

Boundaries: Obviously Pane 2 and Pane 3 (blind spots and private space) are important here also.  In our willingness to increase Pane 1, to increase inclusiveness, we do not give all our private space away.  Naturally we have a part of our organisation that is private to staff.  We have files and records that are not in the public domain.  We don’t leave money lying around.  We may keep the door shut, turn off our phones (or go somewhere we will not be disturbed) for important meetings.

If someone gives us feedback that is in conflict with our ethos, and/or places unreasonable conditions on their involvment with us, while listening respectfully, we try and tease out the deeper meaning behind their stance.  If someone walks in and is abusive to one of our members of staff there will be consequences also.  Just like parents in a good enough family, who also have boundaries, we look to the boundaries to put a healthy structure on the organisation and thereafter the work done by us.

In training courses, course leaders have a responsibility to be flexible within the boundary as this is what we want to model.  While there are always a number of aspects to training that are fundamental to the learning which cannot be changed, feedback received during courses will (or at least, should) awaken blind spots in the designers/leaders.

Creativity: Pane 4 is where our creativity lies.  This is the unknown part of our Window.  (Unknown to us and unknown to others).  Obviously, once it becomes known, it ceases to be unknown, and we can make use of it.  But (I believe anyway) it is harmful (or maybe even impossible) to force creativity out.  We can set up the conditions to optimise creativity, but it often happens in an unplanned fashion.  In fact, creativity might be thought to be like the butterfly that lands on us when we stop chasing it.

How do we encourage creativity?  This is an important question as we wish to do this in families.

We can expand creativity in an organisation – and therefore in individuals in an organisation – by encouraging a tolerance of uncertainty and (acceptable) risk taking.  Spontaneity is very important, and why not or just do it attitudes.  Creativity usually involves taking a risk.  As we stated already elsewhere, creativity is attractive to people who are in distress because many people who have had very difficult experiences in their lives are angry with what they perceive as bureaucratic obstacles that are placed in their way for – from their point of view – no apparent reason.

Another enhancer of creativity, and thinking outside the box, is to encourage democracy in an organisation, where people feel heard, and have a genuine, felt, sense of belonging.  If someone fears expressing an opinion in case s/he will be ridiculed or punished, Pane 1 will be reduced.

We mentioned supervision above and a good way to foster creativity is to encourage/enable external supervision for staff, either individual or in small group. 

Creativity encourages self-disclosure and facilitates constructive feedback so Panes 2, 3 and 4 decrease as Pane 1 expands.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To summarise the Johari Window we can consider:

Pane 1 is the part of ourselves that we see and others see.

Pane 2 is the aspect that others see but we are not aware of – it contains our blind spots.

Pane 3 is our private space, which we know but keep from others.

Pane 4 is the most mysterious, in that the unconscious bit of us is seen by neither ourselves nor others.

On a final note on our Johari Window I often wonder do we become partially aware early in life how much suffering we can endure (and/or what we deserve), and this – unconsciously – governs our decision making.

[1]. For example it could be in a Mission Statement posted on our wall!