Brain Food for Pioneering Spirits: What are the classic formats of reflection? Dr. Yasemin Yazan and Marc untangle the terminology — from coaching versus supervision versus intervision, to why Marc reframed “seeing a psychologist” as “hiring a coach” to finally get moving, to whether ChatGPT itself counts as a modern reflection format…
Note: This session was recorded live in German as part of the Deep Talk Club, so the video above is German-language audio only. What follows is an English translation of the conversation, lightly edited for readability — the back-and-forth between the moderator and participants is preserved, but the original timestamps and speaker names have been left out.
A very good morning to you. So, I hope this works now. This morning I was just surprised by a Clubhouse update. And it looks a bit different once you’re on the page. So it took a bit to even get this view here, to even open the room and get to this view. That means, let’s not click around too much today, otherwise we might end up somewhere we don’t want to be. Oh, wonderful. World-class. Yes, so, with that let’s start this morning. Reflection formats is our room, our room topic today, and we want to engage with the question, what are actually the classic formats of reflection, and maybe also look together at what the differences are. And a few aspects, just to point in that direction — I already mentioned this yesterday — what do I mean by reflection formats? So this would be things like self-analysis in conversation, or a dialogue, or coaching, supervision. There might be more formats here, and let’s just look together at what formats we actually know. Maybe also look together at what the differences are, especially with things like coaching and supervision, for those who might not know the differences, to go into that together, to consider what formats there are, where I can apply reflection, practice it, so to speak, and in that sense just gather and think together about what comes to mind. So you’re all really, really warmly invited to join in and enter this exchange too. And then we’ll see together how the room develops. Tomorrow we’ll engage with forms and types of reflection. And then we’ll get into methods too. So I’m really, really curious how we’ll draw the lines between formats and forms and types, and then afterward the methodology, so to speak. And yes, another reminder, we record the room the entire time. Anyone who joins automatically agrees to that. We understand that it gets published. And we have three small room rules: a profile picture where you’re recognizable, first and last name, and at least one sentence in your bio. And anyone who doesn’t agree with that, or doesn’t feel like it, can of course also just use the chat to enter the exchange here. A very good morning, dear Marc. Was that a challenge for you too this morning, with the update?
Yes, I’m actually having a challenge right now too. Good morning to the group. I just got a message in the back channel that apparently no hand is shown here either. And I’d just like to ask — that of course makes things easier for us too, and so Yasemin doesn’t think nobody’s interested in the topic — if you’re listening right now and you don’t see a hand icon on your own screen at all, meaning you’d have no way at all to come on stage, give some kind of sign. Because then we could rule out that this is maybe an isolated case. Is there anyone else in the room where the hand icon at the bottom right doesn’t show up at all anymore?
Okay, if nobody responds, it could of course also be, just a guess, that the other icons don’t show up anymore either. Then people also can’t give a sign, but that just interested me too. Good morning, this is… What was it for you, Marc, instead of the hand signal? Was there something else?
Yes, actually, I did have the hand signal. I had the…
Ah great, it seems to be the case for Sabine too then, probably. I just got the message that someone asked me, I don’t have a hand at all. That of course means the person has no way at all to come up on stage with us, which would be a real shame.
Yes, absolutely. Exactly. Sabine, maybe you can write in the chat, or join in, or give a hand signal, to see if you have one. So, this morning — ah yes, look, Sabine has a hand signal, she can at least give one. So you can turn it off again if you don’t feel like joining. Otherwise it’ll flash and I’ll bring you up. So, you can see, because we just had this update, there might be a few challenges or different views today, where we might get surprised. So don’t be surprised if someone suddenly stops talking or something, it could well be that someone suddenly ends up in a different view and can’t get back, or something like that. I had actually opened the room but couldn’t immediately get this view, and really had to search for where this view even was. That’s why it took a bit longer too. So, this morning there might be small challenges here and there, until we get used to the new update. I’m sure it’ll be just as easy as always. But if you get surprised right at 8am, that’s of course a bit annoying, because you don’t have the time or opportunity to maybe go into a different room first and practice a bit. Yes, Marc, what are your first thoughts on this reflection format?
Yes, good morning to the group now. This morning I’d already reflected, since I talked with my partner like every morning. And she always asks me, really interested, what topic we have this morning, because we exchange about that too. And then this topic came up, and since she can’t come on stage herself, she told me, oh, that’s interesting, formats of reflection, the inner monologue immediately comes to mind for me. And I said, oh, I hadn’t used that word, so self-reflection, but the term “inner monologue” didn’t come from me at all. And then second, since she teaches German, a literature example immediately came from her — oh, that’s totally interesting, we haven’t debated that or had it on stage here yet. Namely, she said, for example Anne Frank — so in literature there are also a lot of people who wrote down their thoughts in an inner monologue, what moved them, what situation they were in. And because they wrote these thoughts down, in the form of a diary entry or in the form of private notes, these were, at some point, published, or even after death. And this publication, this dialogue and this body of thought led, in retrospect, even though these people are no longer alive, to there being discussions about it again too, and it also contributed to a better understanding of what actually happened in that time, what these people felt, and so on. So I found the aspect of the inner monologue, with the notes of a diary, or also with writing a complete book, really exciting and interesting too.
Yes, wonderful, thank you so much. With the aspect of the inner monologue, that’s basically maybe a different term instead of talking to yourself. That would be one question I’d have about that, and we can gladly look at that together too and think about it. And with the aspect of the diary, we can look again at whether that’s really the format, or — that’s why I named the rooms for the next few days like this — or whether we’d rather include that under forms and types of reflection. That means, tomorrow when we look at that, things like painting or symbolism, questions, and so on come up. And there, the diary, for example — writing would classically be the format, maybe, and the diary would then, so to speak, be the form and type of expression, and would be included there, under forms, types of reflection. But it’s sometimes not so easy to differentiate the terminology there either. We can gladly look at that together again too. That’s why I find it so exciting. It doesn’t all have to be perfectly separated. The main thing is that once we have all three rooms, we’ve first gathered everything that comes to mind, and then it might be easier to look at this differentiation or classification again, and derive a result from that, how we’d structure it. And it’s not about the terminology for me either. I’m calling this formats today. Some might rather call it settings, others might have a different term for it, but that we essentially have some kind of guardrails, so we can imagine what I mean by this room today. Marc, would you like to build on this too?
Yes, ChatGPT, at least for me, also thought that under formats, diary-keeping came up first too, and I reflect on that of course, because writing in a diary also makes it possible to reflect on thoughts afterward. And I personally don’t keep a diary, and I’d still like to refer again to our biologist friend with the photo app. I know, or I’ve reflected, that we’re 90 percent feeling-driven and emotion-driven. And I use the diary now in the form of a phone entry, a conscious phone entry, not to keep a diary of what I did, so, today I was here or there, but for me it’s basically my personal substitute for a photo app — that when I have days, and I certainly have those too, where an assignment didn’t come through, or something else happened. There are days where I’m just not doing that well. Sometimes it’s justified, sometimes not. And if I then manage, with my finger, in my day view on my phone, so in the calendar view, to go back, where I’ve entered just one personal term each day for something that was nice — so diary-keeping in the sense of, what was especially nice for me on this day. It doesn’t have to be anything special, it can really just be the sun, like Patrik, the happyologist, said too, that we learn to look at what puts us into a positive emotional state. That could be a phone call with someone from this group here, that could be an unexpected call from a friend, it could be unexpected events, it could sometimes just have been a smile someone gave me on the street. But if I flip through that and go back five days, and each time I only see one or two words, that leads to me having a smile on my face again too, and immediately reflecting, hey, today isn’t so bad, dot dot dot. The other days were great, and maybe this day will turn out great too. So that I manage to get out of the negative — this diary, or this entry, and reading it and reflecting, leads to shifting me into a different emotional state. Sounds easier than it is. It doesn’t always work, it also doesn’t work in two minutes, but with reflecting and recalling nice memories, it mostly works.
Yes, wonderful, thank you so much. I don’t think it was your intention, but when you mentioned ChatGPT, a thought actually occurred to me too, and I’m really grateful it did — whether that doesn’t also represent one of the new, modern reflection formats. Because ChatGPT is ultimately, and I’m convinced of this, and maybe not everyone realizes this yet, a sparring partner you can use and apply here. So suddenly, and I’m convinced of this, that it belongs to the future skills, this kind of communication between human and machine that’s newly emerging here too. And especially against the backdrop that we’re increasingly using such systems too, whether that’s ChatGPT or something else, so basically it’s about AI tools I can use to reflect with too, so to speak. That’s also a form of reflection, and in that sense possibly a format too, at that point, and I’m curious what you say about that — where we interact not with a person but with a tool, so to speak, to generate insights, get ideas. A sparring partner on, let’s say, a technical level, possibly still limited in certain ways, but is also still learning further at the moment, and can hardly be differentiated in many places from, partly, an interaction or a conversation with a real person. So I’m totally curious what you say about that. And this thought hadn’t occurred to me before at all. But especially against this backdrop, that we’re also entering a new kind of communication here, and new skills are required here too, and we’re also in the process of learning that, so to speak, I find it really exciting to pick up this aspect here too and bring it in, and gladly also discuss it. What do you say to that, Marc?
I have to laugh and grin, laugh always in a positive sense. Dear Yasemin, you’re completely right, and for me ChatGPT has led me to reflect right now on what questions I can ask. This has the following background. I know that you, and Jürgen, and others here in the room use ChatGPT too, and I check that too, in that I type in the words, so, in the evening you propose a topic, then I check what ChatGPT says on this topic and try to use your words. But since I know that you do this too, and the others here in the room do this too, and a reflection room is really important to me, that we don’t all have the same results on stage — that would be totally boring — I try to find other words for it, other questions for it. And that’s how I came, yesterday too, to the topic where I thought, reflection, obedience and refusal, command and obedience. What other words come to my mind in my vocabulary that I could use as substitute words? What topics are closely related to those? And then feed ChatGPT with other questions, with new questions, with new words, to simply get different results too, because in my opinion it would otherwise be boring if we all look at the same templates and all bring the same thoughts into such a reflection room, then that offers no added value for the people who are there. And added value is really only offered when reflection stands, even if you have a contrary opinion. And I exchanged about that with Jürgen this week too, that it would also be really, really exciting if someone plays devil’s advocate, not in the sense of… but that you simply have a contrary opinion, because discussing a contrary opinion, even opinions that maybe touch on a taboo topic, and where you can nonetheless clarify, these aren’t my values, but we’re talking about it, I’ve read this, how does that person feel about it — that makes such a room much, much more interesting. So, to make it short, ChatGPT has led me to have to think about how I formulate questions, with which words I formulate questions, and it requires a fair amount of concentration. I can only formulate questions with the right words, so my vocabulary also gets fostered through that.
Yes, wonderful, thank you so much. And yes, I also find this aspect exciting, that you just said you also try to formulate other, different kinds of questions, so that not everyone, so that we don’t all end up, so to speak, with the same result here in the room, if several people ask ChatGPT too. And yes, and I find this really exciting, because we know this from Google.
So you’ve certainly experienced this, that you enter some search term, and even though it’s identical for the other person, something different gets shown, and you actually wanted to say, please go to the third, the third search result. That’s what I mean. Look at that, or something? And you’re on the phone, and the other person looks at the third result on their end, even though they entered the same search result, entered the same search term, a different result comes out, leaning on the stored information the system has learned about what, in what form, is also relevant for me in my searches. In that sense this is certainly similar here with ChatGPT too. You’d have to check, if you ask the same question, whether the same answer comes out. I’d claim no. And because the system in the background is also learning, so to speak, and through the training that takes place over time, different results get spit out too, in quotation marks, and then of course also again, if the questions are varied, and so on, then depending on the quality of the prompt in the input, so to speak, the results also vary in turn with regard to what comes out afterward. So, that’s also totally exciting at this point too. Would you like to build on this too, Marc, before I open up the next point?
Yes, thank you, dear Yasemin, because that’s a really great point. That also makes clear to me that my approach is right, right for me, and that I also want to learn to display other behaviors. So by other behaviors I simply mean, formulating questions I wouldn’t otherwise have formulated. But I only manage that through the reflection, in the way you just described it exactly. I couldn’t put it better. I think about, what might Yasemin search for? And it’s always fun for me to search for exactly the opposite, just to arrive at new answers. And it also became clear to me that even I, with this use of modern technology, am not self-determined here. We had the topic of how we can act self-determined. And if the software, in this case the computer, in the background, self-determined — not me being self-determined, but the computer self-determinedly deciding which advertising and which information is relevant for me — then I can outmaneuver that, if I change my behavior every now and then.
Yes, wonderful, thank you so much. Yes, then let’s briefly go into the terms, so to speak, as formats, that I already brought in during the room’s introduction too. I talked about coaching and supervision, for example. I left out intervision, we can include that too. So these are already nuances in the differentiation. Supervision and intervision especially are often, in everyday use at least, not cleanly separated conceptually, so let’s look at what the differences actually are — coaching is usually one-on-one, supervision takes place in a group. With supervision it’s usually various teams, groups, and organizations, where a reflection takes place, but where someone is also present who, so to speak, accompanies this supervision, this reflection too, and is the point of contact in this context, let’s say. Whereas intervision is more about a kind of peer exchange, where various people voluntarily commit to being equal, and it could be called a professional, solution-oriented self-help group, or consultation. So it’s various members who advise each other, who are in exchange, and here not necessarily one person leading or moderating, asking the questions and accompanying it professionally, but rather these people themselves, who are professionals, conducting a kind of peer consultation among themselves. In practice it’s often the case that supervision is used representatively, or synonymously, for both, where you really have to ask again what’s actually meant. In the literature, or in theory, this is normally differentiated again, roughly the way I just described it. You’ll certainly find different definitions too, with slight variations, but basically the main difference is that with supervision it’s guided by a professional, and with intervision, colleagues are among themselves in exchange, who might well also be professionals in their field themselves. And to differentiate from that again, of course, would be something like, I exchange with a buddy or something, where we’re not talking about professionals in their field, but rather a kind of exchange takes place. And then we also have the differentiation between coaching and consulting, maybe. Classically, with consulting, a reflection doesn’t necessarily take place, but it’s about someone who brings field experience, knows the shortcuts, and shows various options, so you can, so to speak, directly take the shortcut, by having various options shown to you and then specifically selecting what fits, say, the person or the organization. Whereas with coaching, the approach behind it is more that everything is already within us, that we basically get guided from outside through the corresponding questions, in order to then find answers too. That means, a classic coach, by definition at least — this too is often practiced differently — by definition is basically, or actually, someone who works exclusively through questions, and accompanies the coachee, so to speak, in finding their own answers themselves through the questions asked, and in that sense might give impulses sometimes too, or something, but in no case any advice or similar, and thereby represents a reflection format, whereas with consulting there’s certainly also reflection involved, but in terms of proportion, in a different way, and maybe also less strongly pronounced. But we can gladly discuss this too. So if you have different views on this, feel free to join in and let’s talk about it. So, I find it quite exciting too, to look again at untangling the terminology a bit here too. Then we also had the inner monologue. I actually find the term great, by the way, we should use that more often instead of talking to yourself. I find it sounds a lot nicer than to say, by the way, I also talk to myself sometimes. And then we also have the classic dialogue, or conversation, and those would be a few different formats. The next question would be, further education, training, mentoring — aren’t those also reflection formats, to a degree? So we can look at this too. I mean, if we participate in a training or something, there are various aspects that could also be classified here as reflection formats. On one hand, it’s the case that I get new impulses that also stimulate thinking, and where I’m allowed to enter into reflection first, to look and then evaluate afterward. And on the other hand, depending on, for example, how the training or a further education is structured, there are often corresponding sequences here too, where space for reflection, so to speak, gets built in or given, where various exercises are done, and so on, that serve that purpose too. Probably it’s not per se the training, or per se the further education, that should be seen as a reflection format, because it’s often about knowledge transfer or similar too. But corresponding sequences are often built in here too, which also represent reflection formats, depending on how the whole thing is designed. And then mentoring, where a kind of exchange takes place, or a mentee gets accompanied by a mentor. Here too, from my point of view, we’re talking about a reflection format again, where, for example through the dialogue, various things get triggered, the exchange takes place, and then reflection happens too. What do you say to that? Those are a few things I brought with me. Let me repeat, in one sentence — I’ve noted for myself, reflection conversations, they can take place inward or with the help of outside, either individually one-on-one or in a group.
And now comes a point, dear Yasemin, that I’d like to share with you, because it just became clear to me. For me, defining the terminology was a big aspect of why I only had success later. And I’ll explain why too. What happened to me is, at some point I realized in my life that nothing was running smoothly, neither privately nor professionally, absolutely nothing was running smoothly. Then I got the tip, both from family and from outside, why don’t you find yourself a psychologist. And I was strong and had an answer for everything. And what I would never have done in my life is look for a psychologist — terminology — I don’t go on the couch. I know exactly what’s causing it. I know exactly who’s to blame. I know everything. I’ve read everything. If there’s one thing I don’t need in my life, it’s definitely not a psychologist. And I find that so interesting, what terminology does. And then I went into reflection, thought, okay, where’s the problem? The problem is just the terminology. Replace psychologist with the word coaching. And then I thought, okay, in America, there are highly paid managers. There are managers who earn millions. What do they have? They have a coach. They get fitness coaching, they do time coaching, they do management coaching. They do nothing other than a training. A training and a reflection. And that’s nothing else. And just to even get into reflection at all led, for me, to — the word reflection, or the terminology psychologist or coach or trainer, anyone can use whatever word they want — in this case, Jürgen will jump down my throat in a moment, the terminology isn’t bad if my own terminology helps me get into action at all. And that’s really important to me again, because just this reflection, so swapping the terminology for a term I accept, where my brain says, yes, this brings you something, what are you doing this for — led to me being where I am today. That had nothing to do with luck or hard work, but was simply through the conversations and through this outside view. Then I’d have another example — back then I was in a relationship, I really did look for someone. The really typical thing is, when you come home and tell how it went, that the partner says, well, we could have saved that money, I could have told you that too. Yes, I say, okay, but if you tell me that, coming from you I might experience that as an attack, as a threat, as being patronizing, as know-it-all-ish, and so on. In that case I give money to a stranger for an assessment that tells me what I don’t want to hear, in order to change my behavior. And I don’t feel threatened or influenced by this person now. Whereas I’d have to say that about the partner saying it. And that would be my point about coaching now, about every coaching. Every person wants to influence us. The partner wants to influence us, the person across from us wants to influence us. And I’m arguing right now that my coach doesn’t influence me, because they also want to be paid for it. In reflection I’d also say, though, coaching too — I don’t want to accuse anyone of anything — but coaching too is a business model. And I then have to decide for myself, does this coaching bring me personal added value? Then it’s also fine that the other person earns money for it. But I’ve also experienced — that’s also a practice — that someone says, oh, we’re on such a good path right now. If you don’t book the seminar — like in certain cults — now we still need to book the course, you’re developing so wonderfully. That of course is also an influence. Namely also an influence, since the person across from me also wants to feed their family. And I then personally decide for myself, does that make sense to me? Is that coherent for me? Do we have added value there? And if I have added value, then of course the person across from me, who shares their knowledge with me, also has added value, because I can develop further, and the other person is also doing well in the process.
Yes, thank you so much. There were various aspects in there again that I’d like to pick up on too. One is what we associate with the terminology, that this also has an effect on us, how we put things into drawers for ourselves too. What I find interesting, again and again in this context, is exactly this phenomenon you basically just described — that with psychologists, a mix-up often happens in the classification too. Because a psychologist isn’t classically a therapist who does something medically, there are separate medical professionals specifically responsible for that. Therapists are often psychologists, and that’s probably where this connotation comes from, so to speak, with the association that’s attached, that we somehow mix that up. But basically there are a lot of psychologists who work in completely different fields too, and so on. So it really does make sense here too, to look more closely at the terminology. And there’s one aspect I’d like to pick up again and differentiate further. You said, the partner could have said that, I could have told you that too. On one hand the question is, would the partner have actually said that, if you hadn’t told them, that’s one question. The other question, or rather the other point, is that a really essential difference is neutrality. That means, the moment I hire a professional, I have a neutral person who first has no interest at all in what specifically, content-wise, let’s say, comes out as a result or insight, but rather that insights come out at all for the person, and that they of course also develop further, or generate insights for themselves, and so on. And what you described could of course also be a kind of influence, in the direction of, yes, great, you’ve developed there. Then we’re already in the evaluation of the setting, so to speak, but not — and that’s the main difference — the neutrality, or the non-influence at that point, refers to what I derive there for myself as insight. And there, whether it’s a therapist, a psychologist, a coach, a mentor, whatever, first has no interest at all in the insight I derive from it needing to go in a certain direction, but rather the goal that was jointly set is to work together in that direction. And that’s an essential difference. If I do that with my partner, then maybe the wish is there too, change already. And we don’t have that, in that form, with a psychologist, coach, or whatever. There, change is also in the foreground, but which kind of change, that’s decided by the person who booked the session as a client. Marc, would you like to build on this too?
Yes, exactly, and I’ll continue exactly on that, because I described exactly this process I’d gone through privately in a reflection conversation, and ChatGPT at least also listed for me, on the topic of classic formats of reflection. That’s first talking to yourself, and conversations in general, and then we get to gathering information, and that’s exactly what happens in this exchange with the other person, that you first gather information, what are they actually feeling. Then they say how, and then we also get, and that’s also part of the format of reflection, then we get into self-evaluation, how we evaluate ourselves, how we analyze ourselves, self-analysis, and those are all the points we’ve already addressed in the room, which then also lead to new sub-points. But once the first step has happened, that you say, I’m ready now, whatever it is in my life, to reflect on it, or, as Jürgen thought, not just reflect, but think, to get into the thinking process. Whether in an inner monologue with myself, because I notice something’s there. We know that, whether we’re happy or not. We can’t lie to ourselves about that. We feel that every morning when we get up. And if we then establish, I’m not happy yet, but don’t know why yet, then we go into the inner monologue. But if we know why we’re unhappy, because maybe we don’t like our job, or because we’re afraid to separate from our partner, because you don’t do that. And because there are also beliefs, if you’ve been married for ten years, you’re a bad person if you separate from someone. And if you then go into reflection, and also into self-evaluation, if it’s in a professional context, or into self-worth — we had Johanna Dahm on stage before too, who held a topic on that — and we then find that we’ve forgotten a lot of things where our self-worth is really great, because every one of us finished school, got a driver’s license. That might have been a small challenge in hindsight for one person. But I remember, when I was 18, the driver’s license was a big challenge. And it was really, really important to me, because the car meant freedom. And it really was pressure, to pass this test, to learn the questions, and so on. Today I laugh about it, but there are many things we look down on in hindsight. But at the moment the task lies ahead of us, we face the task with great respect and awe.
Yes, thank you so much, and let’s differentiate here again too. So, by format I understand, so to speak, to some degree the setting that gets set up, or what’s used, to let this reflection take place within. And things like information gathering, or the way, which questions I formulate, how, whether I formulate questions at all or whether they’re rather search terms I enter somewhere, in some tool for example, and so on. That would already be more toward forms and types of reflection, partly forms and types, but already the how too. So we’re already at the methodology there. That means, how do I concretely proceed then? And that could also be different with the dialogue, or different with coaching, different with supervision. That means, one is, so to speak, the space that’s opened up, where reflection as a format takes place. And the other is, how do I concretely proceed. And with “how do I proceed,” we’re basically at the methodology we’re looking at. And then there are different, I’ll call them expression forms and types. And those are then aspects like writing, painting, using symbols, asking questions, or similar. And so, for the coming days too, we have a bit of this classification, that today we really primarily stay with the formats, what else there is. Would you like to build on this too? And at the same time I’d also like to invite the others too, because the more people and thoughts we have, of course, the more perspectives we open up too. So I’d be really happy if we had more listeners join in, and maybe bring in their thoughts too. Maybe also to build on what’s already been said, and gladly support here too, untangling the terminology and looking more closely, and possibly also bring in more reflection formats we haven’t mentioned yet, or haven’t brought in yet. Marc.
Now I have to ask you, Yasemin — how would you gather feedback? Is that a format for you too? I’m having trouble right now with the terminology you named. I understand it, but ordering it in my head, because in searching for this topic I found all the points I just mentioned as an explanation. So you see, even ChatGPT has trouble answering this topic’s complexity correctly. And ChatGPT gave me a different representation for the format. And now my question would be, would you, for example, see reflection as a format too? So, gathering feedback from other people. That could also lead to us reflecting and arriving at new insights.
Yes, gathering feedback itself is, for me, more a technique or a method, so to speak the way of proceeding at that point. That’s not yet, for me, the classic format. If there’s something like, though, say we implement, let’s say, regular feedback rooms, where feedback always takes place, then that could also be a reflection format. But this, I, I, I ask a specific person for feedback right now, I’d locate that under methodology. And you see how difficult that is sometimes too, because these boundaries also flow into each other. By format I mean this space, so to speak, that gets opened up. And here Jürgen supports us now, I think that’s great. A very good morning, dear Jürgen. What do you say to that?
I don’t know if I’m supporting you, dear Yasemin. Hello, Marc and everyone in the room. Because I’m asking a question. I’m asking a question because I’m also a bit mentally meandering with regard to these separating criteria between format, method, and other terms that have already come up. And for the further course, if I can contribute something to this, I’ll ask this question now, whether I understood correctly. The format, if I can briefly summarize it, the format determines the way it’s carried out. And the method, which we’re still putting off, or rather, sorry, I have to go back, the format determines the structure within which the reflection takes place. The organizational structure, my god, yes, the organizational structure within which the reflection takes place. The method determines how the actual reflection is carried out, and specifically through the predetermination of the format. That’s what I’ve taken from your really interesting exchange so far, and that’s my question, did I understand that correctly? Thank you.
Yes, absolutely. I can just let that stand as is, I find that really well described. And maybe now we can also differentiate again with the method, these forms and types of reflection. By that I meant things like writing, painting, symbolism. And with the method I apply, those are often somewhat more complex aspects too. So not how it’s represented, but how I proceed and how it’s carried out. Jürgen, maybe you’d like to venture an approach on that too.
Agreed. I’ll put a check mark next to that now. Did I understand correctly. Positive reinforcement for the day. And now, assuming I understood that correctly, I tried to bring these two onto a common denominator. Because I choose a format that also supports my methodology. And there I’d claim that certain formats also require certain reflection methods. But let me set that aside for now. I think this bracket — and I’m going a bit past the actual topic of today’s room now, because admittedly I’m trying to bring two attempts together and make them coherent for myself — these two, on one hand the format and the method, I see connected especially through three essential positions I need to think about beforehand. Namely, what’s actually the purpose, basically the initial trigger and purpose of my reflection. And then, this new term applies now, with whom do I reflect, meaning, do I get myself a coach, or do I go into the inner dialogue? And the third, what’s actually the topic? One of my favorite topics, give your reflection a topic. And these three, I’ll take that for myself now as a given, these three are actually the connecting link between format and method. Sorry if this now goes a bit beyond the scope of this room, but it would suit me really well if you could confirm this now, or set me straight accordingly otherwise. Thank you.
Yes, thank you so much. And that’s exactly why I opened this up again and again, already since yesterday, so to speak preparing for it, because it’s actually also important, in terms of understanding, that we also know what we’re talking about, or where we differentiate too. So it’s also important to talk about formats, types, forms, and methodology, and to differentiate reasonably cleanly here too. It’s not at all about complete correctness. You could also call format something else, not format, but setting or something. But it’s about us really understanding each other, what do we actually mean by that? Yes, it’s not about the terminology for me, that this has to be called format or that has to be called methodology or something. There are others who might talk about approaches or something, but this often gets used quite synonymously, and you don’t really know what’s actually meant. And that’s why it was important to me to bring in this first step here first. And the question you formulated, or rather the thesis you put forward, that accordingly, based on the methodology, I then also choose the format, for example, I find that really exciting, and it’s also quite worth discussing. Overall I find, and this keeps coming up for me, the question is, what comes first? Do I choose the format first, leaning on, say, a goal, and the methodology results from that? Or is it exactly the reverse? And I find that really exciting. Because let me open up an example now. If we’re now, say, in a professional context, then we look at the situation, especially in a consulting environment or something, Jürgen, and we could maybe pick up aspects from practice there too, as an example, to approach this a bit. And the methodology — there are companies, for example, that look for certain coaches who work quite specifically with certain methods. And I find that difficult, because that’s a bit like the watering-can principle. The question is, is the methodology even suitable for that? And then I’ve basically already set the guardrails. Whereas if I first look at the problem, and based on that decide which method might now fit, to work on this problem — in our case that would be reflection, I want to practice reflection — then I might arrive at completely different results than if I decide which format I choose leaning on the predetermined methodology. That’s why I find that a really, really exciting question at this point, and I’m really, really curious what you say about that. Jürgen, would you like to respond directly?
Yes, gladly, gladly. The question is absolutely justified, and I’ll stick with it too. It’s also really difficult, and I try to, or tried in the past to, approach it through these determining factors I just named. Basically, what’s actually the purpose, the occasion, the initial trigger, and the second point is, who actually reflects — do I just need myself, in quotation marks, or do I need a supporting service, and a supporting service could then in turn be a coach, so an expert who guides me through an appropriate method, or do I just need, as a sounding board, in quotation marks, an echo wall, other trusted people? And the really essential thing is the content. I’d already mentioned that too. What’s actually the topic of the whole thing? And maybe this is dodging your question now, dear Yasemin, but in a process sequence, if I had to represent reflection as a process, then I’m still of the opinion that first it requires perceiving an initial trigger, an impulse. But that’s not our topic today. I hope this perception will become a topic at some point. And then the second. These three points, and that’s the difficulty for me, are to think through completely detached from a possible format and also from a method. And I think that’s exactly the point where reflection differs from thinking. For me, thinking, in contrast to reflection, is also a transformation into the future, where I consider, and who could help me with this now, and no, not who could help me with this, but who do I need who helps me with this. That’s an essential difference for me. And again, I’ll repeat myself, these three points, the purpose and the goal-setting and the content, these are actually, for me, the essential processes to then decide, on one hand about the format, so the organization of the reflection, and then decide how this reflection should actually run methodically, content-wise. I know I’m dodging your question a bit now, but that’s the crux of the matter for me, in general, before I even engage with format and method. I hope I got that across reasonably well. Thank you for listening.
Yes, wonderful, thank you so much, and I’m absolutely with you that we first look at purpose, occasion, initial trigger, and also content — by content I also mean, what issue is supposed to be solved, what content is supposed to be dealt with, for example, content also includes, for me, whether it’s more factual, professional, so is this a case we want to talk about, or is it, say, about aspects that maybe touch on behavior patterns or similar, so where it’s also about me as a person. So you can make such differentiations here, in order to make decisions, leaning on that, which format then also seems suitable for me accordingly. Though it’s not a right or wrong format at that point either, I find that important to mention too, not in the sense of, well, purpose, occasion, and initial trigger and content don’t fit this format at all, but you can, in various cases, partly choose different formats too. That maybe also has something to do with individual fit too. So that plays a role here too. Do I want to, do I maybe want to do certain things rather in a group, do I want to do that rather one-on-one? Those are all questions you can also look at here, and to lean on that to make a decision. But even with this aspect of content, from my perspective we’re still not at the methodology itself. And once I’ve chosen the format, only then can various methods be applied too. And I might not even know the methods yet. That means, especially if that takes place in, say, an accompaniment, let’s say it’s a coaching or it’s a supervision, then I don’t even know yet what methods will be applied. That means, for me,
the method only comes in second place, and here too there are different methods that can be applied to work on exactly the same concern. So here too it’s about selecting the methodology to fit the concern too, but also paying attention to the fit, so both the context and considering the individual fit too, and so on. And in that sense, if we go by this understanding, I’m fully with you — purpose, initial trigger, content, leaning on that, so to speak, to decide on a format for myself, and then in the second step just look at which methods also serve the concrete work, and so on. And when we talk about reflection, to look at that too. And yes, with this sequence, with this process sequence, I’m with you too, we’ll also look at that more closely again. But we’d also established that this reflection keeps taking place at various points, again and again. That means, I have one reflection that takes place. Leaning on that I then transition into thinking and acting. And then new reflection loops come again, so to speak. And once I’ve chosen the format, where I say, within this format I want to practice reflection, then certain reflection loops repeat themselves, so to speak, which pay into exactly this concern, I’ll describe it that way now. And with that we’re also in this, I’ll say a kind of cycle, you could describe it that way. Marc, Jürgen, did you want to build on this too?
Dear Yasemin, I have a question first — would you see self-analysis, just the word self-analysis, as a format too? I’d have an example for that right after too. Just whether, with your terminology, self-analysis is basically a format too?
I’d actually classify it as a format too. So self-analysis, or self-talk. Earlier we had inner monologue too. That would, so to speak, be the format for me. The way I then carry out the self-analysis, so how I proceed, that would then concretely be the method. Marc, does that answer your question?
Yes, that answers my question. And the background of my question was, I just reflected, both privately and professionally, on self-analysis. Because this week I talked with a friend about it. If, for example, everyone has the wish to find a partner, and self-analysis is, for me, the cause, personally, from my life experience, always the first thing that helps me move forward. Because I was first reflecting outward. So if I want to find a partner, then the question is, where do I find one? Do I go online? Do I go to a disco? Do I go to a café? I directed everything outward, until, through reflection, I arrived at, when do I actually turn my gaze inward? So before I engage with these questions of where I find a partner, I have to, self-reflectively, in self-analysis, ask myself, why could I even be a good partner in the first place? So which woman even has an interest in becoming my partner? And she certainly won’t do that so Marc doesn’t go through life alone. And the second, in a professional context, could be a goal that the task is, how do we get more customers, and self-analysis — and you asked whether the methodology can be the same everywhere. No, that depends on the person. Exactly there, on how we find more customers, there are several approaches. So, I immediately start thinking about who that could be, how I get to the customers, and I start tomorrow. And then there are the perfectionists, who say, interesting, they analyze the market, then they need documents, then they need perfect photos, they need at least one, two years, I’m exaggerating now completely, to reach out to someone for the first time. And if someone then proposes a methodology without engaging with themselves, or without the individual people who then implement it going into self-analysis, and the self-analysis then also being known, then I fully agree with you that partly wrong methodologies then get applied, because we’re all different, work differently, evaluate information differently, one method can’t fit everyone. So I’m firmly convinced that there isn’t one fitting method for everyone, but only the fitting method for myself.
Yes, thank you so much. And that’s also the reason why I always say, basically there’s no good or bad method, in quotation marks, but the methods are developed, and it’s always the question of which context I apply it in, whether there’s a corresponding fit or not. And we coaches or consultants or whatever have certainly also experienced this in our own practice, that it can also happen that you choose a method and it doesn’t get you anywhere. Then you have to “change” the method again. But that doesn’t mean the method doesn’t work, but rather it possibly, at some point, didn’t have a fit, maybe only with the person the method is applied to, that they simply can’t get along with this method. And then it makes no sense to force this through, or to make a generalization, in the sense of, the method is just stupid per se, it doesn’t work or something, but really to differentiate very precisely here too, and look at what exactly didn’t work, and then maybe derive lessons learned from that, to apply the method differently elsewhere, and again establish a fit in a targeted way, or rather only apply it when the fit also seems to be given. But there can also be, I’ll call them, moments of failure here too. And that’s human too, and belongs to it too. I’m personally not a fan, though, against the backdrop of my personal experiences, not a fan of choosing the method first and applying the watering-can principle over everything. I haven’t had good experiences with that, and I’m convinced of that myself. But maybe my opinion will change at some point too, if I have different experiences. Currently I’m convinced that the methodology is, so to speak, only secondary, and it’s first about what’s the purpose, the initial trigger, and content to be worked on, and leaning on that, so to speak, to then consider which method can now also be concretely applied to actually reach the desired goal that’s formulated, and make progress in the process steps here too. I’d like to pick up a question from the chat too, before we round off the room for today with the closing round later. Ismail asked, what is structured reflection? Can you reflect on reflection without structure? I’d answer that directly right away. Feel free to build on it too. We’d said there’s a conscious reflection, where we maybe have certain steps too, where we quite consciously look, and direct our checking gaze at it. And then there’s a kind of unconscious reflection too, because reflection per se always takes place impulsively, whenever we perceive stimuli from outside. And in split seconds, often, it’s not reflected, so not consciously reflected, but I’ll call it a kind of affect, that against the backdrop of the experiences we’ve had in the past, our brain relatively quickly sends us corresponding signals, sends feelings. It’s a cocktail of various chemical substances that get released, and accordingly feelings and such get generated too. Leaning on that, we possibly also make decisions, though we differentiate here again, so to speak, what’s conscious and unconscious. And especially in this area of the conscious, then also, yes, to have a certain structure in the reflection. Maybe you’d like to say something about that too, Jürgen, Marc.
Gladly, Jürgen. I actually wanted to say something about the previous point again, coming back to these positions you also repeated, so the initial preconditions like purpose, goal, target group, content, and initial trigger. I’d have a completely different aspect too, in my view a really important one, and I derive it from the two examples dear Marc gave in this room today, with regard to what he reflects on. The first example was that he said, I reflected because I realized my business wasn’t running. And a second example was about the relationship with his partner. And it occurred to me there, both are subject to the weighing of time too. And if I transfer that to a project, to project events, for example, I might have really little time under certain circumstances to think about the format and method of a reflection, whereas with a private — I don’t want to devalue it, but let’s say value-neutrally, with another topic, I might even go into procrastination under certain circumstances, because I say, okay, that’s not priority one for me, but priority three. So, in that sense, time would also be an essential point and a precondition again, I think, to then arrive at which format I choose now, given the available time, and which methodology. I wanted to add that too. Thank you for that.
Yes, wonderful. Thank you so much. I find that great too. And that raises another question I’d also like to bring in, before we continue or round off for today. And specifically, we’d also talked about, or differentiated, exactly against this backdrop, Jürgen, what you just addressed, and talked about how, if we’re trained in it, we’re also able, in the situation itself, where things also need to go fast, to take on, for example, a meta-perspective, so the bird’s-eye view on the meta-level, to carry out a reflection in the situation too. And here the question arises for me again now — if we say reflection formats on one hand, then we have forms, types of reflection, and we also have the methods. Specifically this, this aspect of the meta-level, in the situation itself, taking on the bird’s-eye view — is that now a format, or is that a method? What do you say to that? Jürgen, go ahead.
If I may answer that right away. That’s part of reflection for me, and specifically in the form of inner feedback. That’s my opinion on that. If I see myself in the situation now, for example in a professional context, and I’m responsible for carrying out this reflection in a format of group work, I’ll call it group work, so also drawing on other people, and we start with brainwriting, and then, to exclude unconscious bias as much as possible, and then first a brainstorming, and so on. Then, in my view, what you just addressed, this meta-level, that’s, for me, how should I put it, my permanent reflection level — no, that’s not right, reflection level isn’t right. Thinking level, to look at that and say, does this even work at all? The purpose, the goal I pursue with this reflection, does it succeed? And that’s why, because of that last sentence, I’d like to differentiate again, my thinking, why I differentiate that this isn’t reflection, but it’s a thinking process, because it shifts into the future and questions whether I’ll even get there. But that’s actually the essential thing for me. Taking on the bird’s-eye view, seeing myself as a meta-level, is actually the vacuum cleaner for the feedback that I then use to steer the reflection too, not to control it, but to steer it. Thank you.
Yes, wonderful, thank you so much. Yes, I think this or that will become a bit clearer toward the end too. Above all, we’d said we have the different overarching topics we’re opening up, and then look more closely again, also in combination, in the connection with each other. And in that sense I’m already looking forward to that too. I think we can just let this stand for now, and let it work on us a bit. And the more specific insights we take from the individual rooms, and then afterward open up the other overarching topics, thinking and acting, each again, to then look at them all in the connection again as a process, so to speak, then I’m sure this or that will become clearer again too, for us too, in generating insights. So I’m really looking forward to that, found it totally exciting. Thank you so much. And then I’d like to move into the closing round for today. Marc, Jürgen, what are your highlights?
I noticed, quite subjectively, I noticed that it apparently comes easier to people to enter rooms where it’s just about letting emotions run free. I notice that with this room here too, compared to other rooms that might be fuller. So it’s much easier to say, that person is stupid. And I agree with that too, rather than to reflect. And at this point I don’t want to say what my highlight was, but I’d like to thank you again, dear Yasemin, because you personally provide Marc with an incredible amount of added value, invite me to reflect, and keep managing to take me back to my childhood, namely asking, why is that so? Is that really so? This asking and questioning — and there are many things I do become aware of, but that I don’t think about. And through your rooms I’ve gained extremely many insights personally, which have given my life, well, a lot of added value, and have improved my life. And that’s why I appreciate your rooms so much, and am grateful that you keep at it, and that you don’t shape your rooms around how do I get 100 or 150 people in, but you offer me added value, and a thousand thanks for that.
Oh, what a nice piece of feedback. Thank you so much, dear Marc. Jürgen?
Yes, I won’t build on that now, because that would come across as flattery. But yes, heartfelt thanks again, as always, every day. I always say, this has become the mentally, and mentally demanding, ritual for me every morning. The highlight, like with many rooms, is that I now have quite a few connecting points to think about and reflect on, but also just to look up, because the topic now suddenly interests me and has newly come up. I thank you heartily for that, and I think it really wasn’t so easy today to actually bring about a reasoning and a shared agreement here — what’s actually behind this terminology? And I thank you for us having worked on that. And I think we also arrived at a really good result. Thank you for that, and have a nice day.
Yes, wonderful. Thank you so much to you too. I found it great too. And especially the terminology was really important today too, and remains important too, also with regard to tomorrow and the coming days, when we continue with the following rooms. And in that sense I also have the impression, as I said, it’s not at all about whether we use the term format for it, but that we simply know among ourselves what we mean by it, so we can also make this differentiation accordingly in the individual rooms. And I’m looking forward to picking up forms and types, as I’ve now called it, of reflection tomorrow. So, what forms and types of reflection actually come to mind for us? And that includes aspects like writing, painting, or similar. And here, simply to gather together and see what all comes together, and I’m looking forward to that, in that sense, until tomorrow at eight, here together again, if you have the time and inclination, at Deep Talk. I wish you a wonderful day, see you tomorrow. Ciao.
