|
IPN: A USER's GUIDE
Introduction
For many people, the hardest thing to grasp about the Independent Practitioners Network is that is a Network: an organisation without a centre or periphery, a top or bottom. Although this closely resembles the universe, it is a way of organising which is not common in our society; it calls for a shift of attitude which can be painful. For example, although participants in IPN take on certain tasks, often there is no one whose job it is to meet our needs or respond to our requests. If we want something done, we frequently have to do it ourselves. Equally, in many situations there is no one to tell us what to do or not to do. We have to make our own choices, and take responsibility for what we decide. In many ways, IPN is as much a culture as an organisation: an attitude of mind rather than a set of rules.
Having said this, though, IPN is not completely shapeless and haphazard: many aspects of its practice follow from the Principles and Procedures, which is the single authoritative document about ‘how IPN works’. By participating in IPN, we are each agreeing to be bound by what the Principles and Procedures say - although we may of course try to get people’s agreement to change them. The P&Ps are necessarily couched in general terms, and one purpose of this document is to clarify what they mean in practice, and how IPN has generally agreed to understand them. (If by some fluke you haven’t seen the Principles and Procedures, you can find them at www.ipnet.org.uk or get a copy from your Regional Contact Person.)
Beside the P&Ps, at any given moment IPN works according to decisions made at Gatherings. These decisions do not have the same force as the P&Ps, and certainly cannot contradict them; but on the whole IPN participants try to abide by them, especially the people who have taken on particular tasks. There is more about this below.
So what follows is an attempt to describe how IPN is structured through the Principles and Procedures, and also through the current set of Gathering decisions. It is intended for the benefit of new participants; but also, to try to remedy our unfortunate tendency to make decisions and then forget them! Some of what you find here may come as a surprise to existing participants. (One participant, John Talbut, systematically disagrees with most of it: see his article ‘Keeping IPN peer’ in the Winter 2001 Net Comm.) Therefore I have tried to document the decisions involved by referring to the relevant section of the P&Ps or issue of Net Comm, the IPN newsletter.
To state the obvious: this document in itself has no binding force or status. It simply tries to describe what IPN has decided to be - so far.
1. Who makes up IPN?
The fundamental ‘unit’ of IPN is the member group (P&P 7). At any given moment IPN consists of a number of member groups connected to each other in a network of links; together with other groups aiming to reach this status, and a number of individuals who may or may not be actively trying to form or join groups.
Hence, there are four types of involvement in IPN (P&P 8-10):
· Individuals, who have every right to involve themselves in the Network on every level, to attend Gatherings, express their views, etc. However, individuals cannot claim to be ‘members’ of IPN, to be accredited through it, etc.
· Forming Groups: two or more individuals who have got together with the hope or intention of becoming a member group, and who have filled in a form to let the Network know of their existence.
· Prospective Member Groups, which have offered the Network (through Net Comm) an identifying name for the group, names of its members and a contact address; a copy of the group's code of practice/code of ethics or equivalent; and some information about its history and its members' work. In other words, a PMG has decided that it has reached a degree of stability, and that its members are ready to stand by each other’s work.
· Full Member Groups: as well as the above, FMGs have agreed to link with two other groups, and have published this information in Net Comm. They must have at least five members, and is discouraged from having more than ten. (This is not completely explicit in the current P&Ps, but is generally understood, and is implied in 7 and 11.)
A full member group which either loses a link, or falls below five members, retains its status conditionally for up to 6 months, so long as it informs the network via Net Comm or the database holder (P&P 11). This period of grace is renewable by agreement at a National Gathering (Net Comm Spring 2001, 11).
2. ‘Standing By’
A key element in all this is the concept of ‘standing by’. What creates an IPN group is the willingness of its members to stand by each other’s work (P&P 3-4). This does not (of course!) constitute a guarantee of that work - everyone makes mistakes. But it means that, in the event of a conflict arising, the group members promise to commit themselves to sorting out whatever has gone wrong. In order to make this commitment, group members must clearly have achieved some degree of understanding about what each other does, and positive feelings about it.
There is no set procedure for reaching a position of ‘standing by’. Every group does this in their own way. For example, some use fairly formal methods, whereby each person writes an account of their work, and other people ‘rattle and shake’ this account until they feel satisfied. At the opposite pole, other groups simply develop an informal sense of each other as people and practitioners, through interacting and perhaps group supervision.
Linking between groups happens in a parallel way (P&P 6). In order to agree a link, each group has to be willing to stand by the other group’s process. In other words, they are not standing by the work of each member of that group; but they are agreeing that, if the other group hits difficulties, they will commit themselves to sorting out whatever has gone wrong. Again, this implies that the group has satisfied itself that its link group is operating OK - for example, it is meeting regularly, its members have engaged in appropriate processes in order to stand by each other’s work, and so on.
The sorts of situations in which a link group might become involved include a conflict between a member of the other group and one of their clients; or a conflict within the group itself. Clearly, a link group will normally depend upon the other group to inform it that its help is needed.
3. Joining a group
This is a very good example of what I was saying in the Introduction about the shift in attitude which IPN involves. Quite often, new participants expect that IPN will furnish them with a group to belong to. Occasionally this is possible - there happens to be a group in the immediate area which is open to new members. More often, though, you will need to be proactive. As well as putting your name and contact details on a list of people looking for groups, you will at the very least need to look at that list and contact other people near you, to see whether they are interested in getting together.
Beyond that, you may well need to ask friends and colleagues whether they are interested - to sell them the idea of IPN; even to advertise on local notice boards. It makes sense to attend gatherings, both national and regional; if your RCP is not currently organising a regional gathering, why not encourage them - and offer to help with the work involved? IPN is not an easy ride.
4. Structure and decision making
As I have already said, there is no centre or top to IPN: no single place from which decisions and instructions flow. However, there is one occasion on which decisions can be made: the National Gathering, which takes place generally three times a year, over a residential weekend. The Gathering is open to anyone who turns up, and everyone has an equal voice. Decisions taken, if of any significance, are passed on to the next Gathering to be ratified; hence anyone who reads about a decision they don’t like in Net Comm has the opportunity to come to the next Gathering and argue against its ratification. This system clearly relies on our common sense in not constantly ping-ponging back and forth from Gathering to Gathering on particular issues. (P&P 17-19.)
IPN’s aim is to make decisions not by vote but by consensus (P&P 18). In other words, everyone present needs at least to accept a given decision, even if they don’t agree with it - if they are in a small minority, for example, they may gracefully bow to the general preference. Sometimes, it may be possible for both or all positions to be accepted - for more than one way of doing things to coexist. So far we have done pretty well with this approach, but it is certainly time-consuming, and minorities are occasionally steam-rollered.
The special status of National Gatherings means that no significant decisions can be made between Gatherings - possible for up to four months. Sometimes things need to move faster than that. In practice, what happens is that someone who becomes aware of the need for some sort of action will probably contact several other IPN participants and run ideas past them. If there is general agreement as to what needs to happen, people will act on their own initiative and responsibility. (P&P 16). As an example, out of discussion at the Autumn 2002 National Gathering I offered to draft the document you are reading. I then sent it to various IPN participants for their comments, and incorporated them into a second draft. [When we decide what happens next, that should be incorporated into the text at this point!]
Various people volunteer to carry out the decisions made at Gatherings (P&P 20). This can mean filling a role for a period of months or years - e.g. treasurer, Regional Contact Person, database holder, Net Comm collator - or carrying out a more specific task, like process watching or mediating in a particular conflict (see section 6 below). It has been suggested more than once that some of these functions could be taken on by a group rather than an individual, but this hasn’t happened much.
· Regional Contact People There are currently seven RCPs, covering Scotland, North, West and Wales, South West, East, Midlands, London and South, and Ireland. An RCP takes on several functions, and carries them out in their individual style. These include responding to enquiries by sending out an information pack; publicising and facilitating IPN in the region, including holding regional gatherings; acting as the first port of call for client-practitioner conflicts.
· Net Comm (Short for ‘Network Communication’) This is the IPN newsletter, and has a crucial role in sharing information throughout the Network. You will see many references in this guide to different kinds of information which need to be published in Net Comm. It usually has a deadline for contributions about a month after each Gathering, and will include reports of what happened at that Gathering along with everything else submitted. Except in extraordinary circumstances, all submissions are printed.
· Database Information about IPN participants is kept on a Microsoft Access database, which is used to generate lists of the different kinds of groups and of individuals who want to be part of a group. These lists are published in Net Comm and made available to new participants.
· Information forms New participants fill in an initial information form about themselves and their involvement, which goes to the RCP and then to the database holder. A fee is required for initial inclusion on the database and the Net Comm mailing list. Each year, Net Comm includes an annual renewal form which all individuals and groups need to return to the database holder, together with a voluntary financial contribution if they choose to pay this. Anyone who doesn’t return the form receives a warning letter; if there is no response, they are removed from the database. (P&P 15)
· Email list A number of IPN participants are part of an internet mailing list, set up so that any message to the central address is automatically copied to all list members. This list has at times been enormously useful in circulating information and getting feedback. However, it has no power to make decisions for IPN - that is, it is not an electronic equivalent of a National Gathering. The email list has generated some hostility from non-users of the Internet; as a result, each issue of Net Comm identifies significant messages from the list which can be made available to any IPN participant for a small charge. The atmosphere of the list - as often happens with email lists of all kinds - has at times become heated and vituperative, while at other times there is virtual silence. Anyone can join the list by going to <http://lists.webarch.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/ipnlist>.
5. Accreditation
IPN sees its function as being primarily to develop accountability rather than accreditation: it is not in the business of rubber-stamping. However, it has been agreed (Net Comm Spring 2001, 6) that members of Full Member Groups are entitled - for example, in applying for jobs or advertising their work - to say that they are accredited through the Independent Practitioners Network.
No one else has this entitlement. Obviously, anyone is entitled to give an accurate description of their involvement; for example, ‘a participant in the Independent Practitioners Network’, ‘part of a prospective member group of the Independent Practitioners Network’, etc.
6. Conflicts, complaints etc.
One of the core functions of IPN is to facilitate the resolution of conflicts arising from its members’ work, particularly conflicts with clients. These are very often framed as ‘complaints’, although IPN as a culture is not enthusiastic about this sort of language. Our goal in this situation is not to render a legalistic verdict of ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’, but to reach, if possible, a sense of resolution which is shared by all parties involved. However, this is obviously an ideal which cannot always be achieved.
If a client/practitioner conflict arises which involves a group member, that group has several responsibilities to IPN. It must inform IPN, via Net Comm, that the conflict exists (Net Comm Spring 2001, 6). It must also offer the dissatisfied client IPN’s help in resolving the conflict, whatever other procedures the practitioner involved is bound by (P&P 9).
If the client takes up this offer, and the problem cannot be resolved easily and informally within the group itself, then they are put in touch with the Regional Contact Person (see section 4 above). The RCP then finds someone - maybe themselves - to act as Process Watcher: that is, to make sure that things actually happen - that whatever methods are developed to resolve the conflict are carried out speedily and effectively, deadlines are met, promises are fulfilled, etc. The Process Watcher will be identified in Net Comm, and will eventually report back to IPN through Net Comm. They are not primarily involved with the content of the conflict (although the line is sometimes hard to draw). (Net Comm, Spring 2001, 6, 10; Winter 2001, 6).
Groups which have agreed at least one link will call on their link group(s) for help in resolving conflicts. Unlinked groups need to find a mediator - either an individual or another group willing to help; they can ask the RCP to assist with this. Experience strongly suggests that the client and the practitioner also each need someone who will support them through the process. These people may be found through the group, the link groups, or the RCP; ultimately the Process Watcher needs to make sure that these roles have been successfully filled.
If a full or prospective member group excludes one of its own members - a possible outcome of an unsuccessful conflict resolution process - then it must report this in Net Comm, together with any additional information it chooses to share (Net Comm Spring 20012, 11)
Any IPN participant who feels an involvement in a particular conflict can contact the Process Watcher, the group or its linked groups for more information. This is a tricky area, since the demands of confidentiality have to be balanced against the need for transparency. Each situation is unique, and will need to be negotiated on its own terms.
7. IPN and the wider world
No individual or group can claim to speak for IPN (P&P 16). However, any individual or group can act freely as an IPN participant, and can publicise the existence and culture of IPN - preferably making it explicit that they are speaking as an individual. The statement in P&P 16 that ‘the Network as a whole has no power to constrain its member groups to any course of action, or to prevent them from any course of action’ has sometimes been taken to mean that member groups can operate in whatever fashion they choose. However, in order to be a member group, they have to meet the requirements laid out above and in the P&Ps.
IPN does not have a collective organisational position on issues like registration and regulation of psychotherapy. Many individuals within IPN are active in campaigning on these issues, but IPN itself is not a campaigning body.
8. Difficulties of IPN
· Participating in the Network demands quite a lot of energy and attention. The requirements to become a full member group are a lot more difficult to meet than was originally expected; it quite often happens that someone leaves a group at a crucial moment and everything feels back to square one. We have not yet come up with any way to make it much easier, without abandoning key elements of the IPN structure.
· Different participants in IPN can have very different pictures of what is important. For some people, their own group is what counts, and they are not particularly interested in the overall structure. Other people emphasise the role of National Gatherings as the place where we can directly encounter each other and process Network issues; they often cannot understand why so few people usually attend Gatherings. (An ongoing push to make a certain amount of attendance at Gatherings a requirement for full member group status has so far not been accepted.) These differences seem to correspond quite closely with polarities that emerge in all sorts of organisations.
· It is not yet clear whether IPN is capable of effective conflict resolution management. Our track record so far is probably not great; and this is a key issue by which we will be judged, as an organisation which stresses practitioner accountability. It seems that there is every bit as much charge around the question of ‘complaints’ inside IPN as in the general community of therapists and counsellors.
Conclusion
I hope that this document makes it easier for people to navigate their own route through IPN and form their own relationship with it. It is as accurate as I can make it; but obviously any account, even one based on references like this, will be subjective and individual. That is in the nature of IPN.
One further controversy that has emerged in some recent discussions has been about how much of the way IPN works is up for negotiation. On the one hand, in deciding to participate in IPN one is perhaps choosing to accept the sort of beast that it is. Otherwise one might as well choose a different organisation in the first place. On the other hand, nothing is written in stone, and IPN needs to be open to new people, new ideas, new ways of doing and seeing things. No doubt the creative tension between these points of view will continue!
Nick Totton
January 2003
|
