Close to each other to learn together

Approaching Others means still pursuing what is already present, still seeking what we have found, not being able to be even with our neighbor. Like caressing. The caress is the unity of approach and proximity.
Emmanuel Levinas

In a context where collaboration takes a central place in organizations, facilitation and collective intelligence emerge as levers for transforming human dynamics and optimizing exchanges.

Traditional approaches to cooperation and the collective, however, tend to focus on objectifying dimensions, where the individual, although an actor in his community, can feel a certain gap between his commitment and the essence of the collective to which he contributes.

This is where Michel Henry’s notion of the collective subjective body opens up new perspectives, by allowing us to consider the collective no longer as a sum of individuals, but as a common experience which is lived in and through the body of each person. (Henry, 1990).

The experience of the collective in the body

Facilitation is often seen as an external, neutral role, aimed at optimizing interactions while remaining at a distance. However, this concept can be enriched by the phenomenological vision of the collective subjective body. Michel Henry describes the collective not as a simple juxtaposition of individuals, but as a dynamic interconnection, where each member is involved not only with their mind, but also with their body, in a shared body-to-body experience (Henry, 1987 ).

This collective subjective body is formed through cooperation in the face of a common ordeal, by overcoming together the resistance encountered in work and the collective achievement of objectives (Faure, 2020). In this view, collective intelligence lies not only in the sharing of explicit ideas or knowledge, but also in tacit agreement and bodily adaptation to other members.

This collective knowledge is based as much on somatic perceptions as on the acquisition of skills and is manifested by gestures, postures and shared affects (Henry, 2000). The exchanges of glances, the synchronized breathing rhythms or the harmonized movements are not simple group effects, but manifestations of a collective body which is experienced and constructed in reciprocity.

Facilitation as a catalyst for the collective body

In the context of facilitation, the facilitator then becomes a mediator who does not simply structure the verbal exchanges, but promotes a space of bodily resonance. By creating an environment of trust, it invites participants to focus on their sensory and emotional experience, to welcome their own feelings in connection with those of others. The facilitation of collective intelligence becomes a “bodily facilitation” in the sense that it mobilizes bodily resources to allow everyone to feel connected, in and through the body (Dejours, 2009).

This bodily anchoring of collective intelligence occurs through practices of attention to the body which allow participants to synchronize. Exercises such as conscious walking, shared breathing exercises or even collective movement practices offer concrete frameworks for physically connecting with other members of the group, forging a common feeling and allowing the circulation of collective energy (Faure, 2013 ).

The facilitator, through his careful listening to the bodily and emotional needs of the group, allows this intimate and immediate connection, which goes beyond words and which nourishes the feeling of belonging to a collective.

The collective subjective body: an intelligence beyond the individual

This collective subjective body is not limited to a dynamic of interactions, but is embodied in the collective memory of the group, a memory which is formed through shared trials and successes (Henry, 1990). Michel Henry emphasizes that collective experience is not the result of a simple addition of individual experiences, but that it creates tacit knowledge, specific to the group.

This knowledge, often inarticulable, allows the collective to adapt and evolve intuitively in the face of the challenges it encounters. It is a form of collective bodily intelligence, where group members act as a whole, sensing each other’s needs together and responding instinctively to complex situations (Collins, 2010).

Facilitation, in this context, plays a fundamental role in allowing the emergence and maturation of this collective body. By integrating practices of bodily synchronization and emotional regulation, it equips the collective to recognize and strengthen this tacit knowledge, essential in situations of intense cooperation. Facilitation thus becomes a vector for activating collective bodily intelligence, allowing the group to draw on this collective memory and act in harmony.

Implications for organizational practice

For organizations, encouraging this approach to collective body intelligence and facilitation represents an opportunity to transform cooperation. By recognizing the collective subjective body as a vector of efficiency and well-being, companies can better meet the requirements of cohesion, resilience and creativity (Dejours, 2013).

Training in body facilitation, somatic practice workshops, or even spaces dedicated to collective exercises focused on bodily feelings can help create more engaged, grounded and adaptable collectives. By giving the body a place in collective intelligence, the organization not only gains productivity, but creates conditions conducive to the lasting well-being of its members, and a deep feeling of collective belonging.

Image : Gerd Altmann – Pixabay

Sources

Collins, H. M. (2010). Tacit and explicit knowledge. University of Chicago Press.

Dejours, C. (2009). Living Work, vol. 2: Work and emancipation. Payot.
https://www.decitre.fr/livres/travail-vivant-9782228908405.html

Dejours, C. (2013). Effects of collective disorganization on the link to the task and the organization. Journal of Psychoanalytic Group Psychotherapy, 61(2), 11-13.

Faure, D. (2013). Clinical knowledge: A rereading based on Michel Henry. In V. De Gaulejac, F. Giust-Desprairies, & A. Massa (Eds.), Clinical research in social sciences (pp. 85-98). Eres.

Faure, D. (2020). How the collective comes to the body: Collective subjective body and cooperation. Work, 43, 115-136.

Henry, M. (1987). Barbarism. Grasset. https://www.decitre.fr/livres/la-barbarie-9782130631088.html

Henry, M. (1990). Material phenomenology. Presses Universitaires de France.
https://www.decitre.fr/livres/phenomenologie-materielle-9782130431404.html