The first method for teachers and school psychologists for treating reported cases of group bullying in school was published by  Anatol Pikas,  in Swedish 1975 ("Så stoppar vi mobbning i skolan")  His method was disseminated in Scandinavian countries through translations. Anatol Pikas. later called this first approach PCm -- Persuasive Coercion method. 

It is apparent that the PCm, if properly used, has lifted the burden of bullying from many victims and met approval from new practitioners. Anatol Pikas has, however, observed  some users and  authors who have made some changes or additions to the "Pikas method" which reduce its long term effect. One of them has been that two or more adults are present in the talks with the individual bullies. Another is that talks with the group of suspected bullies after the individual talks has been omitted as preparing the final meeting between the victim and the bullies. In the worst cases they have even been counter productive

In the 1980s Anatol Pikas developed  SCm as a contrast to the changes some of the followers of the old PCm had introduced. The paradigm for the new conception of SCm is to see bullying as a conflict and treatment of it as  mediation. The adult mediator (teacher therapist) starts by asking the individual bully suspects to explain their views about the social life in the classroom  of which also the alleged victim, is also part. The mediator reinforces emotions of concern for the other side in the conflict.

However, the understanding of "what makes it tick" was variable amongst  followers. In 1998 he published a new book in Swedish which is more sophisticated than his previous ones, analyzing the differences between the proper Shared Concern approach and some variations amongst followers.

Mass media nourish the picture of the evil bullies and poor victims. Demonizing the bullies  gives an emotional outlet in "firm treatment of the bullies". This could well hinder dissolving what mass media sometimes consider to be the most thrilling problem: clandestine bullying. 

A new book of Anatol Pikas from 1998  presented an innovation:   practitioners of the Shared Concern method can disclose bullying behind the backs of the teachers without using informers. This occurs in class discussions about methods in tackling bullying. Such class discussions make a natural start for a new approach for "Whole School Policy" programs. A prerequisite for this is that the teachers (tie bully therapists)  have grasped the core of the method and have practiced it.

In Autumn 2001 an article about the variations amongst the followers will appear in School Psychology International: "New Developments of the Shared Concern method" Here is an abstract of this article accepted by the editors: 

Our exploratory question "What makes it tick?" has resulted in an educational device containing the following steps: 
(1) Elicit  an individual concern, i.e. an elementary ego motive. (2) As he or she cannot see a solution, you can amalgamate it into a shared concern that contains altruistic elements. (3) After you have done it with the individual you do it with the group.

Those of you who plan whole-school-programs may consider this: teachers' work in moral education becomes more convincing and thus also easier for you if they let a good atmosphere emerge from  co-operative management instead of moral management of conflicts. The teacher takes the role as mediator. You know  this already: the students learn more from what you do than from what you say. If you introduce the applied philosophy of shared solutions you introduce altruism (the genuineness of which is controlled by the other side) and your need to demonize your antagonist vanishes.

 After one or two days' role playing of SCm I often ask  the  participants of the course are asked to evaluate the course. Most of them write spontaneously: "The idea of Shared Concern can be used for more than just dealing with bullying." This comment is the best reward I know because I do not start by explaining the general philosophy of the Shared Concern method, I just give the participants a rather technical know-how.

If  in tackling bullying you apply SCm the rumor of the method will spread by the jungle telegraph of the students. They believe more in your practice than in a moral education conveying righteous norms by preaching disguised as discussions. 

When I am tired of routine work I take heart from the thought that SCm provides glimpses of a new paradigm for conflict resolution instead of the now dominating win-win between assertive individuals. I think that  my readers also possibly  see it in this way: the concept of Shared Concern method is combined with a pioneering  know-how for establishing new habits using shared solutions of the fateful conflicts endangering our global co-existence. 

Working with group bullying  -- an extreme case of bondingness: group -- the author asked "What makes  Shared Concern tick?" and found the concern of the bully for himself of becoming a victim in the violent group atmosphere. In a technique described in the links for this home page  the  bully's low-level self realization is, for a while, actualized, and, with his agreement  found to be insufficient. The outcome is found in a shared concern with the therapist and later on, with the former bully group and, finally, with the victim. The shared concern amounts to a higher level of self realization: the shared solution. 

When mapping the elements employed in this transition we perhaps approach a general policy  for improving the civic or bridging element in the school system: introducing mediation training in conflicts into the school syllabus for all future citizens. This training becomes valid for civic involvement or peace education through the ingredient of shared concern.