Mr Grigorios Kokorakis Referring to your knowledge of Johari Window Task and Processes Defence Mechanisms in
... I remember that since my childhood I used to pose questions to myself and to others related to the creation of the Universe, the existence and destination of the humanity, the development of the social culture, the ideology, the distinction between spirituality and materialistic world, the seek for the absolute truth, the subjectivity of knowledge and so on. ... Thus, my wish is to identify the nature of the decision making process and to explore the mechanisms that framework it. ... Another one could be the relation of decision making with other social and self attributes such as the structure of society, the exert of power and politics, the dominant ideology, the psychological factors, the centralisation of knowledge, the learning and experience etc. ... I was the only person that openly refused to participate to this task. ... Moreover I expressed my belief that this task simple could not be done anyway not by our team at least. ... Karen primary strategy was our team to keep its materials and to convince other teams to give what we were needed in order to the task to be completed entirely by ourselves. ... Despite the accuracy of the instructions, group members found impossible to determine the measurements and procedures that could fulfil the task. ... For instance what was the reason that forced me not to participate at all in this task? ... At first the members of the group considered that the scope of the group was the optimum accomplishment of the task (task orientation). ... Though, when she realised that the situational awareness has changed from the task orientation to the relationship one, she felt frustrated and abandoned her position as leader. Moreover I observed that the members of the group were annoyed by the lack of resources that were necessary for the completion of this task. ... While other members of the group followed a poststructuralist (rational, epistemological) approach in terms that they perceived the achievement of the task as something pragmatic and real. To this position I argued by following a postmodernism (phenomenological) point of view in which the achievement of the task was entirely subjective and thus it belongs in the sphere of the fantasy (ibid, pp 136 – 137). Furthermore, the lack of knowledge regarding the wills and interests between the members of the group and the members of the other groups. ... Based on the Johari Window communication tool (Gordon, 1983) that I drawn during the workshop I was able to survey that the Blind, Hidden and Unknown areas were larger than the open area as the level of trust between the others and myself or between my group and myself was low. ... The different points of view between the members of the groups over the nature and the purposes of this workshop resulted to the creation of defence mechanisms and conflicts between them. As far as myself is regarded, I used flight Defences mechanisms (Dispenza, 2002) against the other participants of my group such as Intellectualisation (It is better to let others make the work instead of I do not want to do it because the concept of this task is useless!