The Four Sectors of Schema Dynamics Programming

More than 3 years have passed since I created SDP (Schema Dynamics Programming). With this opportunity, I publicly present a non-academic summary of what the development program entails. This is something that some of my clients got very familiar with.

There are four big sectors in my structuring of Schema Dynamics Programming:

  1. Measurement, awareness, evaluation and interpretation in order to set facts, states and results;

  2. Problem-solving, usually centered on modes and schemas;

  3. Intermediary – issues arised from either of the other three other sectors which are usually dealt with between the main processes;

  4. Performance development, usually focused on skills and metaprograms.

I have inventoried a list of 24 minimum techniques and 8 other tools into a flexible program for personal development. I called it BMT 1.1 (Brief Minimum Toolwork). Following these four big sectors, I have allocated the techniques so that for each purpose, there are at least two techniques to choose from. Before applying the techniques, I present to the client the possibility to choose by reading, explaining and understanding what are the advantages and requirements of each technique. It is called “minimum” because, in my work, these were the most frequently used techniques. Besides these, there are other tens of techniques that I can use, if necessary.

A technique is a process or a strategy based on a procedure and/or a sequence. It follows a certain algorithm or succession of steps. It uses advanced theoretical models and classifications from which the client has studied the essential. The client is provided with the minimum required work of learning from one session to another, based on the path agreed.

  

The four sectors, in order

1. Measurement is done at three moments within the personal development program. In the beginning, in order to assert the present state and to chart the direction towards the desired state. In the middle, after solving some of the problems and to assess the efficiency and the effectiveness of the work and after completing the whole program. The standard measurement is done by applying a set of questionnaires. The scoring of the questionnaires is free. The first personalized interpretation of the result is free. All the subsequent interpretations are paid.

The purpose of the measurement is to bring awareness to the client and, possibly, understanding and motivation. Often times, the interpretation in itself is very revealing and can have a huge impact.

The measurement through questionnaires is also indicative after some work sessions to know if the techniques are providing the sought results. Some effects can be felt by the client after a few change processes, by noticing what triggers don’t trigger anymore and what new behaviors get generated.

SDP is supposed to be much more efficient and effective than most other psychotherapeutic approaches, therefore the client should notice a relevant generative change at least after the 5th session if not after the 3rd. Feed-back from third parties is also welcomed, as people around the client may observe the changes. These positive changes should remain strong, although they are influenced by the life conditions, as defined within Spiral Dynamics.

Another source of observation is in the interaction between the client and the consultant themselves. If the dynamic between them changes and the client doesn’t reflect the same old mechanisms, that’s another sign of change.

  

2. Problem-solving is addressed on modes and schemas. The first step is to identify key traumatic unconscious events at the intersection between maladaptive schemas and schema modes using statistic research and the client’s personalized results. This sector employs various techniques to approach childhood and transgenerational trauma with powerful experiences of reframing.

As a result, the client is aware of more options and given freedom from the burdens of the past. The client can leave behind the negative emotions, limiting beliefs and unsuccessful lessons. Usually, this step is one to self-sabotage, as inner conflicts may be discovered and approach in order to go forward with the work. In this step, the transactional analysis modes may also serve as a useful guide and the psychological games from Karpman’s triangle must be dealt with. The non-planned inner conflicts arising are solved using tools from the 3rd sector.

  

3. Intermediary. This is not a chronological sector, but an additional one, dealing with any supplementary issues which may arise in any other sector, including performance development. Basically, the minimum tools serving here provide emergency control for eventual damages, setbacks, roadblocks and relapses. SDP is not failure-proof. Usually, things don’t go as planned. Therefore, there must be contingency planning. It is important for any client to know that (s)he has choices. If (s)he changes his/her mind, that’s OK, too. There are alternatives.

  

4. Performance development. After the problems got removed from the ground, it is now fertile to install and develop new skills and metaprograms which would accelerate the path to success, in any way the client wishes to proceed. Usually, this, compared to the problem-solving sector should take less, because the modeling technology from NLP employed here is state-of-art. Still, I have not yet found a client who wouldn’t trip at this point also, being an opportunity for huge insights and proving the problem-solving and performance development naturally go hand in hand.

  

  

My main focus in what I am offering to my clients in the schema dynamics programming process is on these values:

  • guarantee of effectiveness if the homework is done and the processes followed;

  • the efficiency of the techniques in terms of time and knowledge applied as compared to anything else similar – if you think you know a technique which does the same thing faster, please tell me;

  • flexibility and possibility of choice for the client to choose to experience a certain technique rather than another;

  • integrating inner mental and emotional processes and leaving the body and physical issues to the medics and other practitioners;

  • as much awareness, responsibility and control delegated to the client to work independently as soon as possible.

I had to have a practical approach focused on actual change, while still keeping an eye on measuring the effects of my work. That means less research and more results. Therefore, in my deontology, if I know that I have a technique which takes 1 hour to apply with a client and I know for sure it already works, I will propose that to the client, with at least an alternative of another technique which fulfills the same thing but takes 2 hours… and I would not be surprised if the client picks the technique which takes 1 hour. Therefore, the testing and practice of the 2nd technique will be the second best option, therefore less practiced. That leads to the fact that some techniques I have used tens of times and others just a few times.

All of the main techniques that I am offering I have practiced successfully with at least 1-2 clients and each technique has alternatives that serve the same purpose. I invite you to consult the list of these techniques here.

 

Marcus Victor Grant

Copyright © Marcus Victor Grant, 2019-present

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.