Carl Rogers and Experiential Therapies: A Dissonance?

In recent months, there has been a growing impetus for the formation of a person-centred/experiential organization of an international nature. My initial response to this was relaxed, because it seemed to involve the same historical-theoretical framework I had previously been familiar with via Rogers and Gendlin Several months later, I realized that anew personcentered/experiential organizational theme was being presented. Its proponents offer a view that is inclusive of different experiential approaches (Greenberg, et al. 1998). Since there are about two dozen experiential methods (Mahrer and Fairweather 1993) , it seems appropriate to examine the proposed theoretical— organizational fusion for its consistency with client-centered principles. However, this position in no way attempts to challenge the empirical efficacy of experiential therapies. Nor is it an exhaustive elucidation or comparison of theories. Rather, it is an attempt at an introductory exploration of theoretical dissonance between Rogers and experiential therapies — a necessary understanding for organizational development.