Manu Melwin Joy
School of Management Studies
CUSAT, Kerala, India.
Phone – 9744551114
Mail – email@example.com
Kindly restrict the use of slides for personal purpose.
Please seek permission to reproduce the same in public
forms and presentations.
– Stewart and Jones (1987).
– Claude Steiner (1974).
– Novey (1993).
– Harris and Harris (1985).
• Planetary Okayness.
• Stewart and Jones (1987)
seemed to define the degree
of OKness a person feels as the
"essential value" (that one
perceives in oneself and
• This implies that it is more
than just behaviour.
• Steiner (1974) gave a more
philosophical definition of
• He said that Berne had a
conviction and "'faith in human
nature“ about the OKness of
• As a result, we all are OK, even
those who commit the most
• Such individuals are not
responsible for their genes or
early backgrounds and thus are
OK, even though their behavior is
• For his part, Novey sees OKness
as meaning "I am an acceptable
human being, with the right to
live and meet my needs, and
you are an acceptable human
being with the right to live and
get your needs met.“
• For him, "rights" and
"acceptability" are used in
• Harris and Harris (1985) saw
OKness almost as a comparison
of following between a child and
his or her parents:
– Power and
• Another aspect of life positions is
taken up by Pearl Drego (2008).
• He talked about the
environmental crisis affecting the
earth as “scripty and suicidal”. It
is a position of the extreme
antisocial (I+ U-T-) or
hopelessness (I-U- T-).
• Issues such as climate change,
water shortages, marine pollution
etc. are all global problems – that
can overwhelm us with their
scale and complexity.
• It is at the small group level that
we can create and maintain
healthy life positions including
other groups, nations and
importantly future generations.
• Then maybe we can step back
from the hopelessly suicidal and
antisocially homicidal positions.