Chapter 6 Translate theories to guide the engagement process
(EPAS 2.1.7 Apply knowledge; EPAS 2.1.10 Engage, assess, intervene, and evaluate)
DOI: 10.4324/9781315856056-6
With an awareness of the varying theories and increased skill level in the use of techniques, students will be better prepared to provide services to clients. They will be guided by principles instead of good intentions, thus leading them to greater professionalism ⌠They will also be able to understand and adopt or adapt new techniques and models that arise in the future, as well as be able to test out various theories and techniques to determine those with which they are most comfortable.
(Boyle, Hull, Mather, Smith and Farley, 2009, p. 112).
Lesson 6 begins a new section. In this section, we will work on using fourteen different theories to guide the planned change process. Table 6.1 summarizes the specific questions that translated theories help us answer. The questions are organized by phases of the planned change process. In the lessons in this section, I will begin by a brief introduction to the multi-theoretical social work approach to the phase and the translation device or devices that transform theories for our practical use in that phase.
The engagement phase and translation by metaphors
The helping process begins as we engage our individual, group, community, societal, or international client. After preparing for a meeting with aclient or client system, the helping work begins. The client and worker have come into contact and the worker initiates the process of engagement. The Council on Social Work Education (2008) identifies several tasks necessary to engagement: substantively and affectively prepare for action with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities; use empathy and other interpersonal skills; and develop a mutually agreed-on focus of work and desired outcomes. The first two tasks involve worker actions like preliminary tuning into the client and client needs; conveying respect; demonstrating empathy through words, gestures and deeds; generating trust; and beginning to build a cooperative alliance or relationship. The third task will be covered more fully in Lesson 10. The engagement process, if successful, will create a foundation for the active involvement of the client or client system in the each of the phases of the planned change process.
Table 6.1 Translating theories to answer questions at planned change phases | Phase | Question |
| Engagement | What theory-informed styles of engagement might we consider and translate for use, and which style or blend of styles fits with the case particulars? |
| Information gathering | According to our selected translated theory or combination of translated theories, which features of the PIE configuration should we focus on? |
| Assessment | Following theory translation, which theory-informed or multi-theory conceptualization best explains the PIE challenge? |
| Goal setting | What desired outcome(s) does the theoretical conceptualization (constructed following theory translation) suggest can be achieved? |
| Intervention | According to our chosen translated theory or integrated set of theories translated for use, how should the worker and client system act to progress toward targeted goals and objectives? |
| Evaluation | As recommended by the theory base that we have reconstructed from translated theories, what should we measure and how should we organize the evaluation of the effectiveness of the helping work? |
| Ending | When is the optimal time to end the helping service according to our translated-orienting theory or theories, and in what ways might the ending experience be optimized? |
Engagement is a critical phase of the planned change process. Successful helping requires that the worker engage the client or members of a client system. To engage help seekers, the worker uses a variety of helping procedures related to preparing the meeting space, greeting the client or client group in a respectful manner, conveying an intention to attend to client concerns with empathy, clarifying privacy protections, negotiating basic roles and rules, and removing any barriers to cooperative inquiry and problem solving work. Social workers have referred to this critical ingredient of the effective helping in a variety of ways: building a working alliance, creating a helping system, establishing rapport, joining with the client and so on.
There are many ways to approach the engagement process. Multi-theoretical engagement involves the selective and purposeful use of diverse styles of relationship derived from fourteen theoretical traditions for conceptualizing engagement work and for reaching out to vulnerable populations and allies and in challenging villains. Each theoretical framework suggests a particular style or approach to engaging the client or the members of a client system (Brooks-Harris, 2008).
Each theoretical framework grows from a root metaphor. Any frameworkâs preferences regarding engagement reflect the theoryâs âroot metaphorâ for conceptualizing the worker and the client. Root metaphors are basic comparisons that theorists use to make sense of an overall theoretical framework or a disciplinary stance toward human behavior and bio-psycho-social development (Pepper, 1942; Rigney, 2001). Practice theories related to the basic explanatory theoretical frameworks are also built on root metaphors (Martin and Sugarman, 1999; Neimeyer, 1999). The root metaphor influences the theoryâs conceptualizations of the client, the targets for change, the worker role and tasks, the engagement process, the change process, and the notion of optimal personal and system growth. For example, symbolic interactionists conceive of society as a conversation among different groups and within the minds of societal members. Applied symbolic interactionists conceive of the social worker as a communication expert who can master the languages of different membership groups, help groups learn each othersâ vocabulary, and use public and private conversations to organize problem solving work and solve problems. These metaphors shape the engagement processes informed by symbolic interactionism.
Conveyance metaphors are comparisons of more limited scope than root metaphors that theorists use to make sense of a selective aspect of human behavior and the environment or human development (MacCormac, 1985). Scholnik (2000) identified some familiar conveyance metaphors. Here, I will briefly discuss how these might be used for conceptualizing and orienting the engagement work. Kohlbergâs conception of moral development makes many comparisons to learning by argument and dispute. Using this metaphor, the worker might approach a client as a debater and call into question premises and reasoning supporting immoral behavior. Piagetâs cognitive developmental approach makes comparison of the developing person to a theoretician making a series of paradigm shifts toward personal theories of greater and greater complexity and rationality. From this starting point, the practitioner might approach the client as a fellow scientist and inquire about his or her thinking about and explanations for a troubling situation. Constructionist and narrative theorists compare human development to a series of stories. The social worker using a narrative conveyance metaphor might act as a listener of stories and invite the client to tell tales of early life triumphs, setbacks, and pivotal experiences.
Osborne (1995) also identified some conveyance metaphors used by developing theorists and argued that these metaphors should differentially influence the approach practitioners take toward practice with families. Humanistic theorists use images and ideas characterizing the developing person as naturally good and inclined to grow if validated. Here, the social worker engages the client like a loving parent who affirms the worth and the words of the growing child. Family systems theorists often use imagery characterizing the child as an element subject to multiple forces of energy and the parent to an electrician optimizing the flow of electric forces to the child. If we extend this metaphor to the engagement process, we might think of the social worker as an electrical inspector checking the range, adequacy, and quality of electrical connections between family members.
Fourteen approaches to the engagement phase
Multi-theoretical social work recommends the mastery of many theoretical frameworks and familiarity with each frameworkâs metaphor-based conception of the helping role and engagement style. Such mastery increases the tools available for reaching out to, understanding, and forming a productive relationship with clients.
Although a workerâs conception of the helping role and associated engagement style varies by theoretical framework, the current theoretical, research, and practice literature provides little guidance in identifying these variations. Practitioners will need to think carefully about which engagement style or styles will fit a particular helping situation. Table 6.2 summarizes my preliminary conception of fourteen different theory-directed engagement styles.
The following are summaries of a few illustrative theory-based engagement styles. Each is presented as a proposition linking the theoretical root metaphors for worker and client with the associated and expected helping actions during the engagement process.
Behavioral Theory: If the worker is like a lab scientist and the client like a participant in a study, the worker begins the helping process by carefully setting up the work setting and by using cues, rewards, punishments, and models to engage the full participation of the experimental subject.
