Systemic intervention | about 30 minutes | free
Explore a fictional organisational relationship with objects, then test what the representation does and does not establish.
A low-stakes tabletop orientation exercise only, not a full constellation facilitation or therapy. Spatial impressions are not evidence of absent people's feelings, motives or hidden historical facts. Use trained support for deeper work and never compel personal disclosure.
This is original learning material, not a reproduced official course. Mechanical checks have determinate answers within the stated case. Worked comparisons for open judgements show defensible reasoning, not the only possible model. Specialist pedagogical review is not recorded.
Fictional case: a project coordinator receives requests from a sponsor and three service teams. The sponsor's messages are frequent; the teams' concerns often arrive late. Residents are discussed but do not attend project meetings. Use five labelled objects: coordinator, sponsor, teams, residents and project purpose. You may instead draw the arrangement or describe it in text; no movement or personal disclosure is required.
Use paper, your own drawing tool or the notes below. Attempt each step before opening its comparison. Describe a diagram in words when that is more accessible.
Produce: A diagram or text account with a stated meaning for distance and direction.
One possible arrangement puts the sponsor close to the coordinator, teams farther away and residents outside the main line of attention. Label this as your construction from the case, not a discovered invisible order. Another arrangement can be defensible if its meaning is explicit.
Produce: Two observations about the arrangement and two hypotheses about work.
Observation: the resident object is outside the line between sponsor and coordinator. Hypothesis: resident experience may receive less attention. Observation: the sponsor is placed closest. Hypothesis: frequent sponsor requests may dominate the coordinator's time. Neither placement establishes what the real people feel or intend.
Produce: One changed relationship and one observable inquiry.
Move purpose and residents into view and ask what would make that meaningful in work. A test could be to bring a consented resident account into a project review and observe whether it changes decisions. Moving an object is not itself an organisational change or proof of a better relationship.
These checks test the supplied case, not your overall competence. Open answers and model variants still need your judgement.
The facilitator says 'the objects prove the sponsor resents residents' and instructs the coordinator to confront them.
Withdraw the unsupported claim. Separate placement, impression and inference. Turn the impression into a cautious question that can be checked through ordinary inquiry; do not accuse an absent person on this basis.
A second learner places the teams closest to the coordinator. How should you compare the models?
Ask what each distance means and which case observations informed it. They may represent frequency, emotional salience or authority differently. Compare meanings and evidence rather than declaring one placement the true system.
A different model can be defensible when its purpose, assumptions and reasoning are explicit. A contradiction, incorrect unit, invented fact or unacknowledged change of purpose needs repair. Keep both your first attempt and revision.
No sign-in or submission is required. Notes are not sent by this practice tool. Use fictional information, not identifiable client or learner data. Saving stores this page's attempt only in this browser; clearing browser data can remove it. Export a copy to keep it elsewhere.
The complete original case above is free. Links below distinguish exercises from explanations, recordings, software and paid study. Reading a page or drawing in a tool is not itself a model check.
Further reading for each framework row, including the separate references associated with transposing theory.
Public sharing confirmed; approach and theory bibliography inspected. The presence of a reference does not establish that it contains self-check exercises.
The publisher describes exercises and cases. Use qualified supervision for facilitation; the original tabletop orientation here is free and treats representations as hypotheses, not evidence about absent people.
Publisher page, contents and sample route inspected. Full book not read; efficacy claims and claims about hidden systemic truths are not adopted by this pack.
Choose another practice area · Task-only version · Worked-answer version