Author Archives: Stephen Mordue

Myron’s Maxims – this weeks discovery

Posted on by
Reply

I came across this concept last week – Myron’s Maxims – and thought I’d have a delve into it and do some thinking!

Myron Rogers is an expert in organisational development and systems thinking, known for his work in helping organisations manage change and complexity. He is particularly recognised for his application of systems theory to organisational leadership and change processes. He explores  the importance of understanding organisations as complex systems and looks at how change emerges from the interactions and relationships within systems.

He is best known for articulating Myron’s Maxims, a set of principles that guide organisational change and leadership but also tell us a lot about life – and for this article – social work! Here they are….

– People own what they help create

– Real change happens in real work

– Those who do the work, do the change

– Connect the system to more of itself

– Start anywhere, follow everywhere

– The process you use to get to the future is the future you get.

Let’s look at them….

People own what they help create

Here he emphasises the importance of participation and co-creation in achieving lasting change. This resonates for me in life and social work practice. We know co-creation of strategies for change or care planning lead to better outcomes for people and they engage better with self-created options. And we know that in life in general we do better when we do things with other people – or at least doing things with other people is an important component of our well-being. The other being time on our own!?

Real change happens in real work

This suggests that transformation comes from actual, hands-on practice, not from abstract plans. Christine, my wife, is always saying to me, ‘ok then – just do it!’. And she’s right I often procrastinate in the thinking stage. There comes a point where you have done enough thinking and know enough so you then must do something. That’s where the real change takes place. Eileen Munro made this same point in her review of children’s services – you need to figure out when you know enough and then actually do something. I’m not saying that’s easy, but it is essential.

Those who do the work, do the change

This reinforces the idea that people directly involved in the work are best positioned to create meaningful change. We can’t have someone else go to the gym for us. We must go. We can’t do the work for people we are working with. They must do the work. That’s the only way to make true change happen.

Connect the system to more of itself

You need to be focusing on leveraging existing networks and relationships within a system to foster change. The idea is that systems (whether an organisation, community, or even an individual’s life) are made up of interconnected elements. When you strengthen these connections, you enable better communication, collaboration, and shared understanding, which ultimately leads to more sustainable and effective outcomes. In social work, consider a case where a client is facing homelessness, unemployment, and mental health challenges. Instead of addressing each issue in isolation, the social worker connects the client to a network of services—housing support, employment counselling, mental health services, and peer support groups. By linking these different services (parts of the system) and encouraging them to collaborate, the client receives more comprehensive support. This holistic approach, which “connects the system to more of itself,” ensures that the various agencies don’t work in silos but come together to address the client’s needs in a coordinated and integrated manner, leading to better outcomes.

Start anywhere, follow everywhere

This maxim encourages a flexible approach to change, allowing it to emerge from any point within the system. Making a starts the hardest part I’m fond of saying but simply doing something creates momentum and motivation. And then follow where the momentum takes you. Consider a case where a family is referred to a social worker due to concerns about a child’s behaviour at school. The referral might initially focus on helping the child with behavioural interventions. However, as the social worker engages with the family, they might uncover other underlying issues—such as financial stress, parental conflict, or untreated mental health challenges in one of the parents. Rather than rigidly sticking to the initial issue (the child’s behaviour), the social worker “follows everywhere” by addressing the broader context, helping the family with financial resources, referring parents to counselling, and working with school staff to support the child holistically.

The process you use to get to the future is the future you get

This highlights the importance of the methods and processes used in shaping the desired outcome. You fall to the level of your systems rather than rise to the level of your goals. Systems, planning, and routine are everything. What you look for you see. Be careful what you look for and always have a system or plan.

Myron’s Maxims and Living a Good Life

Myron’s Maxims emphasise the importance of ownership, process, and interconnectedness, all of which are key to living a fulfilled and meaningful life. The principles acknowledging that people own what they help create and that real change happens in real work. They highlight the value of personal involvement in shaping your own path. A good life is not just about outcomes but also about the processes we engage in daily—the relationships we build, the systems we connect with, and the ways we contribute. The idea that the process you use to get to the future is the future you get underscores that living intentionally, fostering positive connections, and remaining flexible in adapting to life’s challenges are essential for achieving long-term satisfaction and purpose.

Myron’s Maxims in Social Work Practice

In social work, Myron’s Maxims align perfectly with empowering individuals and communities. People own what they help create speaks directly to participatory practice in social work, where service users are active partners in decision-making, helping them take ownership of their lives and outcomes. Real change happens in real work resonates with the importance of practical, hands-on interventions and ongoing reflection. The maxim those who do the work, do the change highlights that transformation in clients’ lives occurs when they are deeply involved in the process, rather than simply being passive recipients of support. Finally, connecting the system to more of itself and starting anywhere, following everywhere encourage social workers to view their interventions holistically, understanding the client as part of a wider system and recognising that change can begin from any point in a client’s journey. Ethical, collaborative, and systemic. Thanks Myron!

Professional Identity – defining the box.

Posted on by
Reply

Professional identity in social work is complex and multifaceted, encompassing more than just desired traits or competence. It reflects not only the personal sense of self that a practitioner develops through experience and growth, but also a collective identity shared within the profession. This collective identity binds social workers together through common values, ethics, and professional expectations. The process of shaping this identity is ongoing and evolving as individuals navigate the challenges and responsibilities of the field. Given its depth and fluid nature, professional identity in social work is difficult to define, as it is more than simple characteristics and involves the integration of personal, professional, and societal dimensions.

This article looks at this through the lens of the Fran Wiles journal article from 2013 ‘Not Easily Put into a Box’: Constructing Professional Identity, which appeared in Social Work Education: The International Journal

Personal and professional identities differ in several key ways. Personal identity is shaped by an individual’s unique experiences, values, beliefs, and personality traits, which are influenced by factors such as family, culture, and personal history. It represents how a person sees themselves outside of formal roles and in various aspects of life, reflecting their sense of self, relationships, and personal goals.

In contrast, professional identity is the sense of self that is constructed within the context of a profession. It is shaped by the norms, values, ethics, and expectations of a particular field, in this case social work, and reflects how individuals view themselves in their professional role. Professional identity also involves adopting the standards, skills, and competencies necessary for success and credibility in the workplace.

While personal identity is rooted in individuality and personal history, professional identity is shaped by external structures and collective expectations. The two identities can overlap, especially in professions like social work, where personal values often align with professional ethics. However, they do remain distinct, with professional identity being more defined by the responsibilities and behaviours required in a work setting, while personal identity reflects your core self across various contexts – your whole life.

In social work practice, being part of the profession inherently brings an individual’s personal identity and behaviour under scrutiny. This is because social work operates within a framework of high ethical standards, values, and responsibilities that require practitioners to align both their personal and professional identities with the core principles of the field. Social workers are expected to embody qualities such as empathy, integrity, and social justice not only in their professional tasks but also in their personal conduct. This expectation places a spotlight on how personal beliefs, values, and actions intersect with professional responsibilities.

Given the nature of social work, where relationships, trust, and ethical decision-making are central, a social worker’s behaviour in both the personal and professional is continuously evaluated. How we manage our biases, boundaries, and emotional responses can significantly impact our effectiveness in practice. Social work practice often involves complex human interactions, where personal values may come into conflict with professional codes of ethics. In such instances, practitioners are expected to prioritise the values and standards of the profession, ensuring that their behaviour aligns with ethical guidelines.

Being a social worker means accepting that your actions, decisions, and even personal beliefs may be examined to ensure they do not compromise your role or the welfare of service users. This scrutiny underscores the need for ongoing reflection and self-awareness to navigate the complexities of integrating personal identity with professional expectations.

In the article Wiles states that their ‘analysis showed students constructing their professional identity in relation to desired traits, or through developing a sense of shared identity with other social workers; alternatively, it was portrayed as a process of individual development’.  Some main themes emerge.

Complexity of Professional Identity

Wiles emphasises that professional identity is not a fixed trait but a dynamic process that evolves throughout an individual’s career. It involves a combination of desired traits, collective identity within the profession, and personal development as a social worker.

Reflection and Identity Work

The article highlights the importance of reflection in the construction of professional identity. Wiles notes that social work students engage in identity work, particularly during their final stages of study, where they reflect on their professional development and prepare for practice.

Support Mechanisms for Development

Wiles suggests that social work educators should provide support mechanisms for students to continue developing their professional identities after qualification. This includes professional supervision, team collaboration, and opportunities for continuing professional development.

Cultural Understandings

Wiles explores how students’ conceptualisations of professional identity reflect broader cultural understandings within the social work community and society, showing that these identities are influenced by various social discourses.

It is evident then that developing a strong professional identity in social work requires cultivating several key traits. Adherence to professional standards, such as those outlined by Social Work England and the Professional Capabilities Framework, is fundamental to ensuring competent and ethical practice. A solid foundation of theoretical knowledge and expertise is essential, enabling social workers to make informed decisions and apply effective interventions. Additionally, a genuine commitment to serving others – maybe grounded in altruism – forms the ethical core of the profession, driving practitioners to prioritise the welfare of individuals and communities. Social workers also enjoy a high degree of autonomy, allowing them to exercise judgment and flexibility in their roles, while being guided by a code of ethics. The use of research and the ability to engage in critical thinking are vital, as they enable professionals to stay informed about best practices and continuously improve their skills.

A shared professional identity in social work is both collective and shaped by the specific settings and specialisms within the field. Social workers have a common professional foundation, but distinct identities can form around specialisms such as child protection, mental health, or adult services. These specialisms allow practitioners to develop expertise and tailor their approach to specific areas of practice while maintaining the core principles of social work. However, working within multidisciplinary teams can sometimes challenge or erode professional identity, as the distinct role of the social worker may become blurred when collaborating with other professionals.

Drawing on Goffman’s ideas of identity work, becoming a social work professional involves a significant transformation of one’s personal identity. Experiences from personal life are reshaped and reframed through education and professional training, as individuals learn to navigate the complexities of social work practice. A key component of this transformation is the “use of self,” where practitioners integrate their personal experiences and qualities with professional skills in a reflective and intentional manner. This process of becoming a social worker requires not only the mastery of theoretical knowledge and practical skills but also the internalisation of a professional identity that aligns with the values, ethics, and standards of the field. Goffman’s concept of identity work underscores the fluid and ongoing nature of this process, as social workers must continually balance their personal identity with the expectations of the profession. As a result, professional identity not only shapes how you perform in the role but also impacts how you view yourself personally. For students, this identity work is critical—they must evolve from learners to professionals by integrating knowledge and embodying the core principles of social work in their practice.

Students need reflective space to actively explore and rehearse their emerging professional identities as social workers. This reflective practice is essential for allowing them to integrate theoretical knowledge with real-world experiences, critically evaluate their actions, and align their personal values with the ethical standards of the profession. In these spaces, which are for the most part their practice placements, students can safely explore different approaches, receive feedback, and refine their understanding of their role within the social work field. Reflective space also helps students navigate the complexities of their identity work, as they process the emotional, intellectual, and ethical challenges they encounter. By engaging in regular reflection, they become more self-aware and better prepared to handle the nuanced demands of social work practice, ultimately shaping a stronger, more confident professional identity.

Working from home: Are you a segmentor or an integrator? It could make a difference.

Posted on by
Reply

When it comes to thinking about working from home the psychology literature would suggest there are broadly two types of people.

Some of us are Segmentors. We prefer to keep work and non-work separate so may struggle with them being in the same place. Segmentors may find it difficult to strike a balance. Sometimes this is to do with work role. So, some of these things are job as well as person specific. Some jobs have weak role boundaries while some maybe can offer more flexibility. Maybe there is significant overlap between personal interests and professional ones. Possibly the job allows for a great deal of autonomous work. These things may make it difficult for some to keep things separate when working and living in the same space. Some jobs have strict role boundaries so may be easier to segment even at home especially if you are a segmentor.

Some people are Integrators. Such people prefer (or are happy to) integrate work and non-work. Alternatively, where a job has weak role boundaries it may be inevitable that the two merge. Integrators might therefore struggle at home with a job that has strong role boundaries and maybe such jobs are less suitable for home working.

My job as an example.
For most of my working days each week I work for a university. This job drifts between days when role boundaries are weak. For example, I may have the opportunity to read a lot, and I often read for pleasure the sort of books I need to read for my job. There is no boundary between the two. I browse the web, take notes, connect ideas, and spend time thinking. I do this for work, and I do this for myself for pleasure. On days like these it can be difficult to see whether a particular activity is work related or not. Some days though I need to deliver lectures and seminars. There are strong role boundaries on those days, and even when I was delivering things from home during the pandemic, I had to be in a certain place at a certain time to do a certain thing with little flexibility. I work freelance some of the week and on those days it’s often difficult across a whole day to see any delineation. I’m definitely a natural integrator which is probably why I love home working but I’m happy to be a segmentor when the tasks of the day require it.

Our well-being when it comes to our whole lives is an interaction between person – role – and environment.

What sort of person are you?
What sort of roles do you have at work and outside of works?
What is the environment like you have to operate in? Does it help or hinder?

Are you a segmentor or an integrator?

Difficult Conversations – Dealing with anger

Posted on by
Reply

In the final part of this ‘trilogy’ of difficult conversations articles I want to look at anger. Firstly, it’s worth saying that this may not just be the anger of the other person it may be your sense of anger. That feeling that you are becoming angry. That feeling that you are becoming frustrated. Anger often occurs in accelerating cycles both within an individual and between people. So once one person gets angry both people get angry.

First principle when in doubt get out. Sometimes it’s simply better to end a conversation or move the conversation onto something different before returning to it at a later time.

As Groucho Marx once quipped speak when you’re angry and you will make the best speech you will ever regret.

We become angry when there is someone trying to interfere in the space between us and what we intend to do – someone between us and our peace. When we believe that interference is deliberate the impact is stronger. And I think it’s fairly safe to say that the people we work with consider our interference in their worlds to often be deliberate and unwelcome.

What can you do to stop feeling angry or what can you do to stop the other person feeling angry? This is a good question – because of how quickly we react neurologically when someone displays their anger something has already gone badly wrong. Something is not beginning to escalate something has already escalated.

This shows the reality that anger is an innate capacity. It’s required from an evolutionary point of view for self-protection. So, when we feel threatened, we get angry. Anger signals intent. The person is getting angry to protect themselves

Sometimes it’s a behaviour learned culturally. Some observe growing up that getting angry is something people do when they’re trying to assert themselves. Sometimes becoming angry elevates a person’s status – they are listened to. So, it can be experience driven behaviour – a way to cope. Anger is the manifestation of your own nervous system.

Anger blinds you and derails conversation. Anger limits your ability to remain civil. This emotion limits how you access and process information. Once someone us angry, they are not listening or responding rationally they are responding angrily. It’s almost pointless to continue – we need to build those golden bridges from the second article. This is a way to de-escalate the anger and help the other person not feel as though there backing down in some way – not losing face. The things we’ve already talked about – the relationship that you have – the use of the words we and us – will all help to do this.

Do’s and don’ts

  • don’t meet anger with anger
  • don’t blame – discuss
  • don’t make negative assumptions about the other persons intentions or motivations or the source of their anger
  • do monitor closely yourself and the other person for signs of anger
  • do change the subject
  • do reframe the conversation
  • do pause – take a breath. The goal of pausing in the heat of the moment is to disconnect the automatic link between emotion and action – it serves to slow it down – slow down. When you slow down you calm down
  • do bite your tongue- do not counterattack- particularly important here is keeping control of your facial expressions and body language
  • listen listen listen
  • do not deny the situation is tense. In many circumstances acknowledging the tension or the negative feelings or the frustrations is helpful. Denying these things is seldom helpful
  • after a tense moment do try to make an empathy statement. This helps foster deeper connexion. For example – I hear you – this must be hard
  • ultimately make your safety a priority – walk away if you have to

When you think about anger think not only about the other persons but also yours

This is the third in a series of 3 articles

The others are at the links below

Difficult Conversations – some initial thoughts

Difficult Conversations – Advanced Skills

Anger | NottAlone

Difficult Conversations – Advanced Skills

Posted on by
Reply

In the previous article we considered some initial thoughts about what to bear in mind when approaching a difficult conversation. Always be mindful as I said that good relationships are the foundation of what we’re trying to do. These good relationships, these meaningful relationships hinge on factors like dependability, kindness, honesty, empathy, authenticity, and the apparent obvious valuing of the relationship.

So firstly, simply offering a listening ear I feel is an advanced skill. Because often when we’re busy we forget how to sit quietly and simply listen. Doing this gives the opportunity for people to share their words and their feelings and it develops trust. And here is the first thing to think of. If the person says something you don’t understand or flies in the face of the logical progression in your head place that lack of understanding on yourself. So, phrases here to use would be things like, “can you explain that a little further to me”,  “I want to be able to understand clearly what it is that you’re telling me”. And let the person talk again while you listen.

What we’re trying to do here is what Boghossian and Lindsay call, in their book “How To Have Impossible Conversations”, building golden bridges. The first part of building a golden bridge is to understand what the other person is saying. Secondly, if this is the case, gently point out discrepancies in what they might be seeing. Get them to think about those discrepancies and articulate them to you in the way that they want to. A golden bridge offers them the opportunity to change what they’re saying, on reflection, without being socially embarrassed by what they have said. I’m sure you’re aware that people engage better with decisions when they feel as though it is them who have made the decision. This is where your effective communication, counselling, and negotiation skills are essential. More on negotiation here. What we’re doing here is trying to head off the conflict before the conflict emerges even when the conversation is difficult. Remember people don’t knowingly desire bad things. People don’t knowingly desire to make decisions that compromise themselves or others. They genuinely think – for whatever reason – they are making a good decision.

Collaborative language

What we’re trying to establish with these advanced skills is that we are in this together within the interaction that is taking place. And the application of this technique is quite simple to describe but often quite difficult to implement.

Start by using the words ‘we’ and ‘us’.

Weinstein and Deutschberger two sociologists said that we is one of the most seductive of English words. Its inclusion in what you say forms a relationship structured in terms of mutuality and interdependence. So, try to replace ‘you’ or ‘I’ with ‘we’.

Also, in the same vein the use of the word ‘us’ is important. “it would be great for us if we could figure out how to move forward on this issue”. “How can we see if that will work”. “How can we give that a go so everybody is safe”.

This next idea also relies on really listening but also on restating the other persons position as well or better than they did.

You should do this before you openly disagree with anything. What this does, at the very least, is show the person that they have been heard, that their voice is important, and that you have accurately heard what they had to say. It also gives them a chance to correct you if that is required. Inevitably you may need to propose a different plan but if they know they’ve been heard they may be more receptive to listening to the alternative.

Taking this approach eliminates the ‘yes but’ statement. When you disagree with something someone has said it’s quite easy to fall into the ‘yes but’ trap. ‘Yes but’ encourages anger and I think it’s worth noting at this point that when someone states a position, they are often stating that position in good faith because for whatever reason, in their position, from their subjective perspective, they think that’s the best thing they can do.

Now they might think that’s the best thing to do because it’s easy or because it doesn’t challenge their world. Or maybe it gets you off their back, but they will authentically think that that’s the best thing to do for them in this moment. Why might that be so?

One of the problems may be cognitive bandwidth. People who have problematic lives, who were often living in poverty, who are often not heard have limited ‘bandwidth’ to consider future options and tend to live in the short term. If their concern in the short-term is to pay the rent or put food on the table, they may not have the cognitive ‘space’ to consider future options. So, if a solution appears to work to them in the short term, or it maintains the life they have so that they are not challenged to change, then they will genuinely believe that that is the best thing to do. When people don’t have a great deal of cognitive bandwidth it’s doubly hard for them to engage in change related tasks. Just imagine for yourself when you are trying to facilitate a change – think of something basic like maybe losing weight or getting fit – if that was the only thing you had to do – if that was the only thing you had to worry about you might be able to give it a good go – you might even start well – but once you have a rough day at the office, or an argument with your partner, or an invite out for a Friday night, how easily the momentum to make the change disappears. And the people we often work with have many many challenges in their lives – you being there maybe being one of them

Rapaport’s rules

Rappoport was a Russian born American game theorist who contemplated a list of rules for offering disagreement or criticism in conversations and we can learn a little something from what he had to say.

Here are his rules….

Rule #1 – expressing the persons position shows that you have made a sincere attempt to understand their position.

Rule #2 – shows that you actually have things in common in relation to the issue despite maybe coming to different conclusions.

Rule 3 – demonstrates mutual learning and respect by showing the person that what they said was informative and valuable. This gets called in a lot of the literature pro social modelling. You are behaving in the way that you want the other person to behave.

So, build Golden Bridges – give people a way out or they may become entrenched in a position even if you’ve convinced them otherwise

Use ‘We’ and ‘Us’ to engender a spirit of ‘in it together’.

Be aware that people in difficult circumstances may have limited cognitive ‘bandwidth’ to consider future options

Apply Rapaport’s rules

This is the second of 3 articles in this series

The others are here

Difficult Conversations – Some initial thoughts

Difficult Conversations – Dealing with anger

Difficult Conversations – some initial thoughts

Posted on by
Reply

When it comes to conversations in Social Work practice, particularly difficult ones, we have to start with the question “What are we trying to achieve?” What is the problem we are trying to overcome? Often, I’d suggest, it’s the (almost) impossible. We are trying to have enlightening, helpful conversations, often with difficult messages to deliver, with people who may be in denial about their world and the world out there. In this environment we’re meant to try and do this without aggravating anyone! Without making the conversation difficult and challenging.

So, let’s start by cutting ourselves some slack and acknowledging that sometimes when things go wrong there’s often not a lot we could have done. As I say frequently, the Stoic Philosophers say we can’t control everything so we shouldn’t set our happiness and our view of how well we did on such things. But we must try to predict as much as we can… because conflict – and difficult conversations – are stress inducing – for us and for the other people involved. Best avoided if possible. If not avoidable then managed well.

And it’s not just with service users, parents, or children. It’s sometimes with other professionals and sometimes with our own colleagues in our own teams.

We are involved in deliberate conversations. We need to involve ourselves in listening – but when tense maybe we don’t listen effectively.

Why is Rumi the best-selling poet in the US? - BBC Culture

There is a way between voice and presence

where information flows.

In disciplined silence it opens.

With wandering talk it closes.

RUMI (13th-century Persian poet)

What’s going on when we are involved in dialogue, conflict, and difficulty? What are the underpinning things that help us avoid this in the first place or navigate through it? Because while the best form of defence is to avoid the conflict in the first place, we have to acknowledge that conflict is, at some point, inevitable.

Some things to bear in mind

Aristotle's Contributions in Mathematics – StudiousGuy

There’s always a philosopher, often Greek, that we can turn to and in this instance, I turn to Aristotle’s ‘Modes of Persuasion’. Often in our conversations we are trying to persuade – or at least put forward a position that we want the other person to consider – and Aristotle says there are three crucial things to engage…. Ethos, Pathos and Logos

Ethos

Ethos – your ethics. The question here in the mind of the other person is can you be trusted.  The starting point for the individual might be that you can’t be. The reality is that difficult conversations are easier when there is a relationship of trust there. You need to start by building that relationship. It sounds obvious really but in busy practice may be difficult and may not get the attention it deserves.

Trust isn’t about liking each other or what each other is saying it’s about a functional relationship that permits disagreement or conflicting opinion. It also needs to allow, particularly for Social Workers, given the perceived (if not real) position of power we often find ourselves in – balance. Balance of power

A social contract is established in the very early parts of an interaction based on previous knowledge of each other if we have it, or ideas about each other if we don’t have specific knowledge. If you don’t have a relationship with the person, you are likely to be having the relationship the previous Social Worker had. You need to ask, ‘What’s your relationship like with the person – where are you at with them?’ ‘What’s the relationship of the person with social work?’ Overcoming any obstacles that this places in our way by how we communicate is the cornerstone, I’d argue, of social work practice. There is nothing more important. So whatever we discover in thinking about those two questions demands we do something about it – at least have an awareness

Listening is crucial. Nobody cares how much you know until they know how much you care – so the famous saying goes. Build rapport. Assume the other person will be nervous or apprehensive about you being there. Having a ‘professional’ involved in your life brings up all sorts of fears and tensions – don’t add to them. Being honest about difficult things is important – but we need to think about how we frame what we have to say.

Pathos

Pathos is the emotional content of any conversation or relationship we find ourselves in. There is always an emotional content to what we do. Emotional Intelligence is key. We must exhibit emotional control. It’s our responsibility to do so and not expect the same in return. We must manage the emotions of others and that starts with managing our own.

Managing our emotions successfully stifle’s impulsiveness – so it mediates our response – and helps us perform effectively. Recognising emotions in others and knowing how to manage them is a fundamental skill. The problem with this skill is it’s usually forged in the ‘heat of the fire’ rather than been thought about and reflected on before action and after action. What is going to trigger the persons emotions? What emotion? What will I do about it to avoid it or manage it?

Never forget emotions are contagious and easily escalate.

Logos

Finally, Logos – Logic. What we are saying needs to be logical. We need to engage our thinking brain. This relies on us managing our emotional brain (see above!). We need to articulate this logic in a way that the other person can understand. Think clearly before, and during, and after the conversation. Empathise. Persuade. Any conversation is two people in a dialogue trying to find the truth – an agreed truth. A logical truth. Only then can things move forward.

The conversation must connect to how people understand things. We must find the other persons understanding of the thing, know ours, and connect the two. Often when you do this you find people are more ‘movable’ (as you’ve acknowledged their truth) and the ‘truths’ are not as far apart as they appear. There will be some commonality.

Often when we are discussing ‘truths’ like this in practice we need to keep people talking (and we need to keep reflecting) because then we can Develop Discrepancies (there’s or ours).

Developing discrepancies (a feature of motivational interviewing – read about it here) creates a gap between where the person has been (or currently is) and where they want to be. We can use The Columbo Method here. It’s a simple yet clever and cunning way to handle a potential contradiction in what you are being told. Remember the television show Columbo, starring Peter Falk? The fictional Columbo was a detective who solved murder mysteries – hugely popular in the 1970’s. He was a humble and unassuming character who had the ability to get anyone to tell him anything, despite their initial resistance – very disarming. When someone said something to Columbo that was conflicting or inconsistent, he would rub his head and say, “I noticed yesterday you said one thing, and now you are saying something else. I’m confused.” He would say things like, “Could you clarify this?” or “Help me understand.” Columbo did not accuse those he was questioning. By taking the responsibility for his confusion, he disarmed the other person — who then would slowly feel comfortable telling him the things he needed to know to solve the crime. The Columbo Method is to present the facts that appear to conflict, give the person the benefit of the doubt, and then ask questions for clarification. We need to look in this ‘mirror’ ourselves as well. Are we making assumptions that contradict what we are trying to achieve or that are at odds with our professional values.

Ethos – Pathos – Logos

Ethics – Emotions – Logic

Real discussion creates understanding rather than division.

This is the first of 3 articles in this series

The others are at these links

Difficult Conversations – Advanced Skills

Difficult Conversations – Dealing with anger

Thoughts on ‘Radical Perspectives On Mental Health’

Posted on by
Reply

I had the luxury of a spare Saturday yesterday (12th February 2022) that coincided with an online festival of presentations and discussion on all manner of things from philosophy to science, all the way around culture and back again. It was the Winter Revel brought to us by How The Light Gets In.

I’ve been to one of their online festivals before and loved listening to people who were new to me and people whose books I’d read. They have some ‘heavy hitters’ on the bill. 

Lucy Johnstone | In-depth interview

I was so pleased to listen to Lucy Johnstone’s (left) take on Mental Health…. a radical take, as she put it, in many ways. Lucy is is a UK clinical psychologist, trainer, speaker and writer, and a long-standing critic of biomedical model psychiatry. She has worked in adult mental health settings for many years, alternating with academic posts.

She said a number of interesting things that critique the current professional and public perception of mental health that I am still thinking through for myself but I felt were worthy of getting out there for further exploration. You can comment below or join the chat at our Social Work Shorts Discord server – you’ll need to download the app or desktop version and then follow this link. 

So what did she say!?

She started by quoting Dr Allen Francis the chair of the DSM IV Committee (the mental health diagnostic manual) as saying ‘there is no definition of a mental disorder ….it’s bullshit.’ Johnstone was keen to point out in saying this and the other things she said she wasn’t denying the very real and problematic experiences that people have. She was simply suggesting that we are approaching it in the wrong way ….and she did offer a solution which I’ll get to later. She confirmed the view of Francis stating that diagnosis is not scientifically valid saying that diagnosis is circular. You’re hearing voices – you have schizophrenia – how to we know you have schizophrenia – you’re hearing voices etc. This points to the fact that mental health diagnosis is social not medical. The person doesn’t fit with what society perceives as ‘normal’.

She went on to suggest that psychiatry rarely helps people. She wasn’t saying that it sometimes didn’t help but that mostly it doesn’t. In fact she suggested that psychiatry can sometimes reinforce the stigma that goes with having a mental health problem. She suggested also that well intentioned anti-stigma campaigns often do quite the opposite and reinforce the ‘othering’ of people with such ‘problems’. They are based, she feels, on an illness model rather than a model that centres emotional suffering. She noted that the mantra ‘we all have mental health’ elevates the normal range of emotions and feelings to a higher level and problematises or medicalises a range of feelings that sit within a ‘normal’ range. Again she was not saying that people with emotional difficulties should not be supported but rather that the elevation is inappropriate for many. Self diagnosis is unhelpful and also so is the over medicalisation of a range of emotions.

The problem with diagnosis and the diagnostic manual she suggests is that 9 out of 10 of us at some point will meet the criteria for one or other of the ‘mental illnesses’ so eventually it will be 10 out of 10 so then we all are mentally ill and systems get overwhelmed and people that should be at the top of the priority list for support don’t get it. Of course such over diagnosis plays right into the hand of pharmaceutical companies who can offer us medication.

In relation to current treatments she makes the startlingly obvious point that is overlooked that despite such treatments rates of distress across the world are rising. So if what you’re doing isn’t working maybe it’s time to do something different.

First of all what is the problem!?

She suggested that economic conditions brought about by neoliberalism had created job insecurity, reduced welfare services, reduced community ties, excluded some groups and led to materialist values which in turn has led to an increase in mental health problems. It takes me back to a quote from Alvin Toffler that I often use from his book Futureshock written in 1970. He predicted that the change of pace he saw then would continue into the future (our present) and people wouldn’t be unable to keep pace with the change. Add into this Debord’s view in his The Society of the Spectacle that people’s worth will become tied up not in what they ‘are’ but in what they have. This leads to a drive to consume more and more to signal to others our success. This creates a tension that he refers to as an ‘opium war’ that forces people to equate goods with satisfaction. Mental health ‘problems’ are therefore rooted in a social phenomenon that has a psychological impact. This requires us to change the social world to make it a better ‘fit’ with the universal human condition

Johnstone, with Mary Boyle propose in their book ‘A Straight Talking Introduction to the Power Threat Meaning Framework: An alternative to psychiatric diagnosis’ an alternative. The framework mentioned in the title Power Threat Meaning.

The framework haas been developed by a core group of psychologists and service users over a 5 year period laying out the following key principles. The framework builds on trauma informed practice, de-medicalises and de-professionalises mental health intervention, explores how distress makes sense in a context and creates no separate group of the mentally ill.

The framework asks some core questions:

  • What has happened to you? (How is Power operating in your life?)
  • How did it affect you? (What kind of Threats does this pose?)
  • What sense did you make of it? (What is the Meaning of these experiences to you?)
  • What did you have to do to survive? (What kinds of Threat Response are you using?)
  • What are your strengths? (What access to Power resources do you have?)
  • and to draw it all together What is your story?

Johnstone suggests that this framework draws on the importance of the group to the individual, acknowledges our relationship tot he natural world, integrates mind, body, and spirit with that natural world and builds on (among other things) community narratives and values.

Now if like me you’re a social work you’re probably thinking…. that sounds like it aligns with social work practice and values very well to me! What do you think? Hearing Lucy Johnstone talk about this felt like turning a corner and was so refreshing. Check out the book. It’s available here from the publishers web site and all the other usual places.

A Straight Talking Introduction to the Power Threat Meaning Framework: An alternative to Psychiatric diagnosis 9781910919712

Motivational Interviewing – be like Columbo

Posted on by
Reply

Remember the television show Columbo starring Peter Falk?

The fictional Columbo was a detective who solved murder mysteries – hugely popular in the 1970’s. Having recently used this analogy with a group of second year undergraduate students on the social work programme I teach on I realise that some of my cultural references may be a little dated! But I’m going to go with it!

Columbo was a humble and unassuming character who had the ability to get anyone to tell him anything, despite their initial resistance – very disarming. When someone said something to Columbo that was conflicting or inconsistent, he would rub his head and say, “I noticed yesterday you said one thing, and now you are saying something else. I’m confused.” He would say things like, “Could you clarify this?” or “Help me understand.” Columbo did not accuse those he was questioning but rather by taking the responsibility for his confusion, he disarmed the other person who then would slowly feel comfortable telling him the things he needed to know to solve the crime. The Columbo Method is to present the facts that appear to conflict, give the person the benefit of the doubt, and then ask questions for clarification.

Miller and Rollnick in their 1991 book “Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People to Change Addictive Behavior” badge this as ‘developing discrepancies’, showing people that what they said at one point doesn’t correlate with what they are saying now, or what they say they are going to do doesn’t fit with what they say they will do. It’s the gap between where the person has been, or is, and where they want to be.  I am minded to talk about my dalliance into Slimming World but won’t because there is indeed a discrepancy between my ‘I must lose weight’ and ‘Oooo Pizza!’

Helping Clients develop discrepancy is “the active ingredient underlying motivational interviewing’s efficacy” say Miller and Rollnick, going on to state that “Motivational Interviewing is an effective, evidence – based approach to overcoming the ambivalence which stops people making desired changes in their lives”. The emphasis though – because of intrinsic motivation as a more effective method of motivation – is on personal choice and responsibility for the future.

Internal (or intrinsic) motivation is motivation that comes from within. Maybe things like ‘I want to feel healthy’, rather than, ‘I want to lose 2 stone’. The latter is an external marker, the former, an internal motivator. Intrinsic motivation is associated with greater long-term change. Research shows people with low internal motivation have worse outcomes and people with higher levels of both internal and external motivation have better outcomes. (Deci and Ryan, 1985, 1987, Curry et al 1991). So, ‘I want to lose 2 stone and I’m doing it because I want to feel healthy’, is perfect.

Motivational Interviewing was developed initially in response to working with client resistance in alcohol treatment in the late 1980’s but is now widely considered as been helpful in many areas where motivation to change is required. Most social work practice involves either supporting someone to consider change and initiate it, or supporting someone to readjust to a change thrust upon them, for example, an older person having a stroke or heart attack. It’s helpful as it can work in relatively ‘brief’ interventions and is a more helpful ‘stance’ in working with high levels of resistance in clients than a confrontational or coercive style.

Motivational interviewing builds on Carl Rogers’ optimistic and humanistic ideas that we all have the capacity to change and become the best version of ourselves – we just need to figure out how. It’s about people’s capabilities for exercising free choice and changing through a process that works towards self-actualization. Essentially, motivational interviewing activates the capability for beneficial change that everyone possesses. Once ‘activated’ some people can continue change on their own, while others require more formal treatment and support over the long journey of recovery or adjustment.

The therapeutic relationship for both Rogerian and motivational interviewers is a democratic partnership. Your goal in motivational interviewing is to elicit self-motivational statements and behavioural change from the client in addition to creating client ‘discrepancy’ (the Columbo Method) to enhance motivation for positive change.

The idea of developing discrepancies originated from cognitive dissonance theory which suggest that there can be an imbalance between the internal and the external values of the individual.  This causes a person to feel unbalanced. So, where there is incongruence between what a person feels and does this can cause a dissonance, an imbalance, or a feeling of not being true to oneself. Cognitive dissonance can make people feel uneasy and uncomfortable, particularly if the disparity between their beliefs and behaviours involves something that is central to their sense of self. For example, behaving in ways that are not aligned with their personal values which may result in feelings of discomfort. That uncomfortable feeling can be used positively to initiate motivation and therefore change.

We can ‘develop’ discrepancies by pointing them out sensitively and in doing so you create a gap between where the person has been (or currently is) and where they want to be. The individual can come to a realisation that their current behaviour is not leading them towards their goals, and they become more motivated and open to change. The goal is to resolve that the discrepancy by changing. In doing this you can offer and explore the positives and negatives of change and so ‘roll with resistance’.

The emphasis is on intervention and change not the issue which could lead us to ponder is change sustainable if an underlying problem is not dealt with successfully. Worthy of some reflection and consideration of this idea in relation to the individual you are working with.

This ‘Motivational Interviewing’ approach

  • Encourages positive engagement
  • Acknowledges and works with client resistance
  • Is collaborative, not collusive
  • Is a blend of different therapeutic approaches, inc. Person-Centred, Solution-Focused and cognitive-behavioural ideas with a process model of change.
  • It has a belief in the possibility of change
  • Shows respect for individuals
  • (Hopefully) achieves empowerment

What doesn’t work to motivate

Persuasion

It’s tempting to try to be helpful by persuading – you might want to draw the persons attention to the importance or urgency of the problem being addressed. Or maybe put to them the benefits of changing a behaviour. These strategies are likely to backfire because you are trying to motivate extrinsically – not intrinsically. It usually only increases client resistance and decreases the probability of change.

Righting reflex

Miller and Rollnick suggest as practitioners we sometimes use our corrective lens. We want to ‘put the client right’. We want to change their behaviour, so we argue or push back. This often simply leads to an impasse with the client standing their ground based on all the reasons not to change.

Strategies to use

  • Express empathy
  • Be Non-judgmental
  • Make sure that the client is being heard and understood.
  • Develop discrepancy – Help the client see the difference between their core values and their behaviour.
  • Define the most important goals.
  • Support self-efficacy – The Client’s must believe in their ability to change. I have a view that our role as social workers is to eradicate the need for social workers. We should work with people in such a way that they eventually don’t need us anymore because they have developed the skills or understanding they need. This is reminiscent of the strengths based approach in social work practice. It can be good to focus on such skills and strengths and on past successes because this….

….promotes self-esteem and builds confidence which moves the client in the direction of change.

The goal is to move the client to what is referred to as change talk rather than sustain talk. They talk about how they will change rather than how they wil

Student zone: Take note(s)… a skilful art!

Posted on by
Reply
People climbing books. isolated on white background. Vector illustration. Eps 10

What is at the root of academic success.

As a lecturer in Social Work at Sunderland University I get to talk to, listen to, and observe students going about their business. I watch them in my lectures writing copious notes generally thinking, ‘my goodness! Don’t write down and rely on anything I say!’ Self deprecating humour is my go to place! Such things lead me to consider note taking and academic success. I myself often take notes and having read the wonderful book ‘How to Take Smart Notes’ by Sonke Ahrens, I realise there’s more to it than meets the eye. My musings here are largely from or driven by that book. Here are some things to consider.

IQ does not drive academic success – what drives academic success is what you do day in day out

In order to learn you must strategise your learning – it’s not something that happens by chance. What leads to success is how you go about your everyday work and what you do day in day out will affect the quality of your assignments, rather than just what you do when you’re writing the assignment.

Success depends on the environment you create externally and internally

Where you work and how you work – and how you feel about work – will dictate the quality of the work. There’s a well researched phenomena which goes that if you work in a cluttered environment you will think in a ‘cluttered’, messy, way. This applies not only to your desk but also to where you store your files, how you structure your folders on your computer, and generally how you go about storing all manner of things that you need to support your success. Your internal environment is also important. How you feel on the inside. Do you feel alert or tired, sluggish or enthusiastic? Have you set an effective approach goal? Approach goals are about setting positive thoughts in motion. Students who set avoidance goals – ‘I just don’t want to fail’ – rather than positive approach goals – ‘I want to do my best’ – actually do worse in assignments research has shown as a consequence of this avoidance thinking. Positive mental attitude isn’t a silver bullet but it sets out a pathway.

Learning is cumulative and connected

When we’re taking notes and reading books and generally going about our business of studying we need to connect our ideas in some sort of system so that we can see what links to what because, as you may have noticed, ideas are connected and build on each other. Theory influences practice, practice helps us consider methods, methods are influenced by theory – and so it goes. If you watch University Challenge you’ll spot that sometimes they know the answer but often they don’t but they work it out from other things they know.

Insight only comes from exposing yourself to volume of material

I often say at induction events and during lectures that those who do the best are those that read the most. You have to expose yourself to a range of ideas and often to the same idea in different places until you hit a light bulb moment. You have to put the graft in. If you wanted to grow bigger biceps you couldn’t get someone else to go to the gym for you and do barbell curls you’d have to go to the gym yourself and you’d have to go more than once!

Notes

When it comes to taking notes there are two key places to consider

In Lectures

When Reading

In Lectures

Firstly, we can’t multitask effectively. If you are trying to write everything down then you risk missing what’s been said. Whatever you do in class or when watching a video lecture be in that moment – phone away and on silent, distractions eliminated. Don’t try to capture everything – capture only the key points. Use bullet points and short phrases to signpost yourself to further reading.

Note down things you didn’t understand (ask questions in class if you can) and then follow up with reading the things you found difficult – you will find things difficult that’s fine!

Do these things:

  • Arrive in time to be settled
  • Title and date your notes
  • Be ready to focus completely – set a positive attitude – a positive approach goal
  • Develop abbreviations for yourself that you always use to speed things up when note taking
  • Highlight, underline, and capitalise to add emphasis to key points etc. I use arrows to connect points a lot
  • Use headings and sub headings. Have one point per line and leave gaps to add things in

Then, crucially, return to your notes    

The important thing to do is to go back to them as soon after class as possible and review and re-write them adding in other things you remember and then using the guided reading (where there is some),or relevant texts you find yourself, to embellish and enhance what you have noted down. You should undertake this review within 24 hours – sooner if you can. So plan this time into your calendar. This cements learning. Repetition is everything.

Review your notes periodically. When you type up the next notes look through all of the previous notes – this establishes those connections – write the connections down!

When Reading

Read with pen in hand and note or underline (not on the library books obs! Maybe use post-it notes). Once you’ve done this you must do something with these notes and underlines

Be aware that reading is a skill. Different texts require different approaches, some take longer to read, some can be scanned through, and when reading some you need to go off and look things up that you don’t understand. This is completely normal. Don’t panic.

Write up your notes and underlines
Your on-going understanding is reliant on external scaffolding. If you want to really understand something turn it into your own words. Just copying down quotes can risk stripping them of their context and therefore their meaning (and can risk plagiarism). Always write down the outcome of your thinking. This is about having a meaningful personal dialogue with the text.

Writing down is not a record of your thinking it is your thinking
“I’m never sure what I think until I see what I write” Carol Loomis (American Journalist)

Take notes…. consolidate notes…. read your notes… connect your notes…. tell it to yourself (I do this when I’m walking the dog! In my head not out loud!)

Deliberate practice is the only serious way of becoming better at what we are doing. To be good at writing you don’t just write when you have an assignment to do – you need to practice writing, and you can do that when sorting out your notes into a meaningful system!

Stephen is a Lecturer in Social Work at University of Sunderland. He’s a bit obsessed with self-care, well-being and productivity and writes about those things on here in the productivity section and on our sister site Self Care Shorts

The transition problem – student to practitioner

Posted on by
Reply

In their book ‘The Lost Art of Running’ Shane Benzie and Tim Major talk about research that was undertaken with athletes that sought to explore their running gait and style. The research was conducted indoors on a treadmill so that the researchers could control conditions. They watched the athletes and learnt lots about how they ran and offered suggestions to improve. They runners got better at running.

They then moved outdoors and…. the improvements disappeared. The changes didn’t work the same. Because outdoors – real life if you like – isn’t the same as in the lab. The runners still used what they had learnt but had to re-engineer and, in some cases, relearn some of what they knew. Social Work is the same. What you learn at University and what you learn on placement gets you through the door and you then need to transfer that knowledge into the real world of practice.

Croisdale-Appleby noted this in the 2014 report Re-visioning Social Work Education and said ‘the first year of practice is absolutely vital for social workers as they consolidate the learning from their degree and develop new knowledge and skills in their first employment setting’

Playing the guitar

Let me give you another example. I’m a guitarist and have taught many people over the years to play the basics. If I was to hand someone a guitar they would intuitively know what to do with it…. to a point. They would know not to try and blow into it like it was a wood instrument. They would know it wasn’t something to help them with cooking. They would probably pluck the strings. I’d then teach them a little theory. Which string needs to be tuned to which note and what shapes to place your fingers in on the fret board to make chords to strum. We’d then practice. We’d replay, over and over again, the same shapes and learn to change between them. Over time we’d learn to play a song with the chords we had learnt and invariably the student says I’d like to play ‘song x’. So you look at ‘song x’ and realise that the guitar student knows most of the chords but needs the chord of F to play it all. F is not an easy chord for a beginner. They feel like they are back to square one and their confidence takes a knock. But over time (a long time) they overcome this, learn F, and a whole other set of chords, and they become proficient enough to play with other people and maybe join a band. They have to learn to then play in time with others… this is not as easy at it sounds. Then… someone might ask them to improvise a guitar solo which they’ve never done before so they use their intuition! ….based on the theory they know and the practice they have done Full circle! And the first time they do it it may well be alright but it might not be brilliant but they’ll practice and it will get better

Intuition > Theory > Practice > Time > Intuition (or as we call it Practice Wisdom)

Starting in practice

Evidence from Grant Sheridan and Webb (2017) suggests that newly qualified social workers felt ‘quite well’ or ‘very well prepared’ for practice in general. However, when this is broken down into preparedness for specific tasks, confidence levels drop. Essentially I’d suggest this is because specific tasks are often context specific (the type of social work you are doing and the organisation you are doing it in) and role specific – that is – not generic. You have to reapply the skills from the treadmill on the outdoor running track.

The conclusion of formal social work education is only one layer of the learning experience which is continuous throughout your career (or should be).

They also found that respondents felt most prepared to ‘promote and enable’ (89 per cent) and least prepared to ‘intervene and provide’ (32 per cent). Again because intervene and provide is context specific whereas promote and enable has a more value base feel about it. Respondents in the study reported feeling ready to conduct assessments, build relationships and communicate but less prepared for commissioning services and dealing with IT systems. Well they would because you can’t teach this as it is too organisation specific. They said they felt prepared for applying theory and demonstrating values but not for caseload management. It’s not the face to face work that seems to cause the stress but the ‘office’ function the research tells us.

The Dunning-Kruger effect

There is also something else going on that relates to the Dunning-Kruger effect. There are certain points in our lives where we are likely to overestimate our abilities and feel quite confident. Usually when we have achieved something that has taken great effort. Like completing a degree or securing a promotion or becoming a manger… or becoming a lecturer! The problem occurs when you transition from something where you are at the top of your game and you have to translate that knowledge into something else. This transition tends to undermine your confidence and you feel like an imposter.

Objectivity's Blind-Spot: The Dunning-Kruger Effect | Procrastination.com

Moving from being a student into practice is one such transition. You’ve just graduated and you know loads of stuff. You’ve just had a great placement and a got a good mark for your dissertation and then you have to translate the knowledge you have (which is valuable) into the new practice environment. You are likely to feel immediately out of your depth and like you know nothing and your confidence will take a hit.

At this point you need to remember some things. This feeling is completely normal for us all, to one degree or another, when we transition. You do know loads of stuff you just need to rework that knowledge into a new environment – stay calm. When transitioning it’s essential to stay focussed and organised. You are going to have to ‘lean into’ this for a while and it will take pretty much all of your energy. As in the diagram above your confidence will take a hit but apply the theory, engage in practice, take your time, and you will develop the practice wisdom to climb up that curve again….. and next time you transition you are likely to have to go through the same process again! Joy!

Remember your degree can not completely prepare you. It can only give you what you need to get started. It gets you the key to the door. Like people say about driving a car. You only really learn to drive a car after you’ve passed your driving test. This is the same. You are qualified, you are good enough, you can do this… but… the transition is going to be difficult and now you know that you can prepare for it.

  • Have growth mindset, a positive attitude, and that will help.
  • Keep on top of your planning and organisation and take time out for yourself.
  • Don’t lose yourself in the transition.
  • Work with your manager and mentor in an honest way and seek out support.

Whenever things are changing those who create as much order as possible do the best.

References:

Newly Qualified Social Workers’ Readiness for Practice in Scotland Scott Grant, Lynn Sheridan and Stephen A. Webb British Journal of Social Work (2017) 47, 487–506

Croisdale-Appleby, D. (2014) Re-Visioning Social Work Education: An Independent Review, London, Department of Health