2.1.3 A Note On Design

We generally associate the word design with clothes, cars and other consumer items. The late Steve Jobs, the founder of Apple Computers, said once that ‘design is not just what it looks like – design is how it works’. I associate the word design with beauty!

Let me propose that there are two kinds of design. One I will call static design, that applies to clothes, cars, computers, buildings etc. and the other I will call dynamic design, that applies to living things – i.e. nature.

The living world is active, constantly changing and beautifully designed. Every living creature from tiny microscopic bacteria (or viruses) to the elephant or blue whale has its place. All living things are interdependent and have developed ingenuous ways of survival even in the harshest conditions. And if one species becomes dominant, nature has a way of ensuring that its dominance doesn’t harm the overall system.

(As an aside, it could be argued that homosapiens is the only species that has a negative effect on the design of the living world, as we have, for the last few millenia, controlled nature not only for our survival, but – mostly – for our comfort and convenience).

The reason that I call such design dynamic is that it can change and adapt to emerging needs. A living thing doesn’t have to be instructed to change – it does so by itself – or dies out. One of the most famous examples of this is the one of the peppered moth that turned black during the Industrial Revolution in parts of England. If it hadn’t adapted it would have died out.

But even dying out – if it happens – is part of the overall design, as something more suitable and better equipped, with a new energy, takes its place. (This is manifest in the legend of the phoenix).

And design is also very important in the way that we live our lives day-by-day!

Crucially – in a living entity, if something works well less energy is used. So when I say very important in our lives I mean that if we design our lives well we will save a lot of energy. The dynamic part of this is that we have to keep adapting to new situations as they emerge and challenge us.

And added to the factors that are important in survival in the non-human world are our unique attributes of altruism, inspiration, creativity, idealism, generosity, compassion etc.

For example, one good design feature of living is to have a job we enjoy.  Another one is to spend a little less than we earn.  Yet another is to keep our life as simple as possible.  All these save valuable energy. And in respect of our survival, a lot of evidence shows that if we are generous or compassionate in our lives others will be generous and compassionate towards us – more good design!

So, what relevance has all the above in our organisation that supports families in distress?

Let us use a long river as a kind of metaphor. Let us say that we have the ambition that the water that enters the ocean from the river is pure and pristine. In order to ensure that this happens we have two choices.

1: We can prevent harmful and toxic substances entering the river as if flows from its source as a small stream to a wide estuary, or

2: We can allow towns, cities, factories, farms and businesses along the river pump anything they want, untreated, into our river and then clean it up at the estuary.

Which, would you think, is the better design? To quote Steve Jobs, what would work better? Obviously, if we protect the river by prevention we will have beauty, health and harmony along its course and won’t need hugely expensive clean-up at it’s outflow.

In everything in nature, (as indeed in our built, or constructed world), beauty and harmony are ubiquitous.

Why can we not have beauty in resolution of social problems such as crime and child protection?

What would harmony look like in social/community type work?

How could we ensure that beauty, health and harmony prevailed over harmful and toxic influences along the course of our river of life?

I believe that it diminishes me as a human being if I have to leave the qualities that I mentioned above (altruism, inspiration, creativity, idealism, generosity, compassion) – the qualities that I believe are to the psychological world what symmetry, form, structure, colour are to the physical world – outside the door when I arrive at work.

And crucially, because people love to be creative, good design involves allowing creativity to flourish!

I first began to think about design in family support work when Bedford Row Family Project started up.  I was not directly involved in the early days (1999) but I was visiting Limerick Prison as part of other work that I was doing and I met the early staff (of Bedford Row) in the waiting area – the Hospitality Centre – where they offered refreshments and a listening ear to family members visiting their loved ones in prison.

I thought it was a beautifully simple idea.  It was a bit like street-work – meeting people where they are at, under their conditions.  There was undoubtedly a lot of pain and distress, often hidden, but there was not a lot of doom and gloom.  In fact people seemed to have a bit of fun together and enjoy themselves. 

The one thing that struck me about the Hospitality Centre in those early days is that people were at their ease there.  The relationships built were, on the surface, quite casual, but at another level, very deep.  I believe that this depth came from the trust created by the environment – i.e. the naturalness of the workers and the cup of tea.

So I began to make some sort of correlation between the good enough parent and the good enough family support project and thoughts began to form in my head that the reason why the good enough parent is successful (if you don’t mind me using that word) is that s/he does not try to be perfect.

Yet almost all agencies with their protocols, policies, procedures, standing orders, rules and regulations, etc. do! In other words, they try to eliminate all the chaotic elements that might get in the way of good work.

Now this is a perfectly logical course of action, and it is hard to argue against it.  Yet one of the hallmarks of the good enough parent is that s/he is forgiving of mistakes, manages chaotic unexpected events, allows different personalities and, above all, tolerates members’ illogical, uncensored views and off-the-wall expressions on their journey of growth.

In other words – accepts some dysfunction rather than be frightened by it, trying to eliminate it fully.

Of course there are rules in families, many unspoken, there are rituals and cultures that are peculiar to that family, and often the rules are challenged, broken, and then adjusted to fit a new situation.  (These are manifestation of what I will call root foundations of growth that will be described in Section Three in the Chapter on Universal Theory of Change).  All growth has a certain amount of randomness and chaos inherent in it but in a good enough context growth moves steadily in a positive direction within that randomness.

In a good enough family kindness of members and compassion for the wrongdoer, inclusion of the one that is different and doesn’t fit in, (done within reasonably healthy but not rigid boundaries), are all present.

The hoped for outcomes for this good enough family are children growing to maturity with good enough physical, mental, emotional and spiritual health.

The family is, truly, creativity in action. This is not surprising because parenting itself is full of creativity.

When we face problems that seem beyond us, we create, and we can come across such problems when parenting! And I believe that if we are not allowed be creative, we get frustrated. 

Creativity, (which I consider to be of such importance that I devote a full Chapter to it) is about doing something that is unexpected and because it is unexpected it usually involves trial and error, in other words the inclusion of chaos, and possibility/probability rather than certainty.

When parents are creative, children will naturally learn creativity!

In fact, creativity is probably the most important element that is modelled in parenting.  If it is not, then the family may not be good enough and problems are seen as things that cannot be surmounted, rather than opportunities for growth and development of the individual within the family and indeed the family itself.

Another element of good design in the family is compassion.  I was at a conference many years ago and someone made a lengthy speech on compassion as if it was a commodity that could be taught.  And I’m not saying it can’t be taught.  But I believe that it is taught by modelling, not by reducing it to bite-size sections so we can learn it and then do an exam and pass it and get first class honours in compassion!

Like creativity, the teaching, (or imparting) of compassion is hugely augmented by modelling.

Finally, I believe that the fear that can be sometimes present in child protection and caring for vulnerable people in general comes from the fact that we have such poor design.  (And the opposite is also true – i.e. fear can cause us to accept, or endure poor design).

On the other hand, good design (incorporating the root foundations referred to above) allows us to see both the nature and the extent of the problem at lot clearer and thereby leads to far better and more cost effective outcomes!

This will be revisited throughout the blog but particularly in the Chapter on Energy.

It is important to recognise this if our goal is for our organisation to be good enough – and have the courage to name it.

I often feel very fortunate that my first influences in the world of helping people in distress were formed in Southill Outreach which I mentioned already.  I spent a few years working in the children’s charity, Barnardos, where I learned loads too. A substantial amount of flesh was added to the bones of those influences by working in Bedford Row Family Project.

For some reason I’ve always been interested in design and the first day that I arrived in Bedford Row I noticed that the Project contained many unique design features. 

For example:

1. I sensed that the Project was as much a way of being as a traditional family support project.

2. The sense of autonomy and self-efficacy was tangible.  Allied to this was a strong sense of determination to do it for ourselves because no-one else is going to do it for us. What I mean by this is that there seemed to be an intuitive acceptance that while outside assistance was always going to be very welcome – the spark to do anything creative or innovative was going to come from within.

3. I noticed a healthy scepticism towards Government type grand plans and/or new initiatives, such as the quick-fixes that I will be mentioning in later Chapters – and a willingness to say it like it is!

(And, I believe, most important of all)…….

4. While a fair amount of formal support work was going on (e.g. therapy groups, counselling, personal development classes etc.) the non-formal work that was done was as highly esteemed as the formal work.

Through all the above what struck me most was the embracing of imperfection!

There were some characteristics of the Project that might be more at home within a family situation than a working environment.  While, of course, there were (and still are) very good and rigorous policies, procedures etc. there were also norms and routines factored in when decisions were made that were a little different to those that would prevail in a mainstream family support project.

In this, I observed that, without really naming it, the Project utilised phenomena that are part of the natural world, (there’s that term again) and applied them to the age old problems of crime and imprisonment. (Some of these phenomena I refer to as root foundations in a later Sub-Chapter).

The unpacking [1] (though not, I hope the reducing) of them will be an important part of this website.  They manifest in characteristics (for example warmth, genuineness, idealism, consistency, immediacy, patience etc.) which the casual visitor often perceives and indeed frequently comments on.

However the maintenance of such characteristics cannot be taken for granted and requires deep reflection not to mention attendance to many essentials on an ongoing, day by day, basis.

[1]. Unpacking means identifying the elements that have influence and significance in the overall entity.  It is different to reductionism which I will be describing in the Chapter on Cause and Effect and Nurture in Section Two.

The unpacking of the phenomena mentioned in the previous post will involve exploring elements that are a common part of our day-to-day physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual experience.

I propose that they have been woven into our consciousness since time immemorial.  I also propose that they are all the more powerful because we take them for granted.

We don’t really, consciously, notice them as we live day by day but their influence on us is profound nonetheless.  (I have already described this as high impact-low noticeability and I will be referring to it again).

I mentioned Bedford Row Family Project already and I believe that many of the features found their way into the Project because:

Firstly – the families affected by imprisonment who trusted the Project in the early days had the courage to get involved and be forthright about their and their families’ needs.  (Courage).

Secondly – the early leaders were wise and farsighted enough to allow people to both be and be themselves. (Wisdom).

Thirdly – the then Governor and Officers of Limerick Prison embraced this very unique model in an era when they got little encouragement to do so from the powers that be, and when, on the surface at least, there was little in it for them! (Compassion).

In identifying, naming, and describing interconnected elements that are a common part of our above-mentioned day-to-day physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual experience, my intention is to ensure that:

1. The characteristics (i.e. the warmth, genuineness, consistency, etc.) manifest (and prevail), and

2. The process of steady growth towards autonomy and independence can be better understood in the context of the elements identified, named, and described.

It is intended that 1 and 2 above will be better understood as the blog is read.

Now there is a danger inherent in all this – and I will mention it now.

In what I am describing, maybe there’s no theory – it just is!  The fact that practice might be transferable from and/or determined by a theory or theories (and/or vice-versa) is a risk that I am taking. (Much more on this later, in the Chapter on Research and Evaluation)!

My fervent hope is that through the naming and understanding of the theoretical framework on which the warmth, congruence, consistency, etc. is built, it will be understood better so that it can be rigorously examined, challenged and if effective, replicated.

In doing this – reframing – it is helpful to think of the work being more process than solution. There may be solutions hidden within, and/or we may stumble on them, but they are by-products of process. In fact, constant searching for solutions is, so to speak, barking up the wrong tree!

Think of it like a child growing. It is a long process with loads of successes (solutions) along the way. If there was a solution to a child growing – it would probably be adult maturity.

I like to think of it another way too. That is, the framework just mentioned, on which a new paradigm is built takes things that traditionally were seen as problems and turns them into opportunities – just like parents often do rearing children!

To sum up, and all the above being considered, I strongly believe that:

1. The time is now ripe for a fresh look at design, i.e. methods that we use to support those who are always ignored until they cause us trouble, using concepts and ideas not always associated with this challenge, originating in our natural world.

2. The emotional dimension to human problems almost always plays second fiddle to the cognitive analyses of which there are so many that they overwhelm the emotional.

Having been lucky enough to be in a time and space in the evolution of helping modalities, (where the head of neuroscience is meeting the heart of traditional wisdom), I feel that those of us who are working in this field have a responsibility to bring these gifts to the world.

Anyone who aspires to propose an alternative paradigm to the mainstream must describe it as rigorously and as thoroughly as those who wish the current one to prevail [1].

And as for myself – I believe that I am a suitable person to write this website because I often take the road less travelled [2] myself!

[1]. This is a kind of paraphrase of Martin Luther King’s encouragement to us that those of us who want peace must pursue it as vigorously as those who want war.

[2]. The Road Less Travelled is the title of a best-selling book by M. Scott Peck.