Article 2 of the Norway Feedback Trilogy
I wanted to let you know that we (Morten Anker, Jacqueline Sparks, and Ann Stapnes)
just submitted the second of the Norway Feedback Project trilogy (a lofty title I know, but hey, I have to call it something notable to justify all this work). I can’t tell you much at this point until we get further along in the review and acceptance process. But I wanted to tell you a little about it because it is so interesting.
First, a little about the study: It analyzes 742 written client responses to 2 alliance oriented questions regarding the services received as part of a 6-month follow-up of couples in routine care. Using a qualitative method, 15 categories and 2 domains emerged. In addition, a quantitative analysis of respondents’ statements from the feedback study (Anker, Duncan, & Sparks, in press) compared feedback and non-feedback groups. The study’s mixed method provides a multi-layered view of couple therapy and the alliance, and an interesting finding emerged regarding couples’ experiences of an all but neglected part of the alliance—the nuts and bolts aspects of the agreement on tasks dimension. We generally think of agreement on tasks as being about the agreement of what models and techniques are used in service of the client’s goals. But the tasks dimension also includes routine tasks such as frequency of sessions, payment, scheduling, etc. Clients in the feedback condition had significantly fewer complaints regarding the more mundane aspects of the alliance: frequency of meeting, handling of cancellations and rescheduling, etc. These finding suggest that not only do we need to pay attention to these details, but also that somehow soliciting feedback resulted in more agreement about these mundane but apparently important aspects.
On another note, with Morten's help, I am interviewing the therapist from the Norway Feedback study that became the best therapist when feedback was added to her work. It is really fascinating. Here is the movie trailer version of what she has said so far: Feedback via the measures and graphs brought focus and clarity to the work; engendered a sense of shared responsibility and collaboration; and encouraged her to be more courageous, to step outside of comfort zones knowing that clients would let her know if she went too far. There is much embedded in those words, about the common factors and her development as a therapist, and I look forward to more from her.
The process with her, I believe, would be helpful for about anyone who takes their development as a therapist seriously--to reflect about what feedback has brought to the work, and how it has changed it for the better. That is a project that is just getting under way and I will let you know much more about in the fall.
Barry
just submitted the second of the Norway Feedback Project trilogy (a lofty title I know, but hey, I have to call it something notable to justify all this work). I can’t tell you much at this point until we get further along in the review and acceptance process. But I wanted to tell you a little about it because it is so interesting.
First, a little about the study: It analyzes 742 written client responses to 2 alliance oriented questions regarding the services received as part of a 6-month follow-up of couples in routine care. Using a qualitative method, 15 categories and 2 domains emerged. In addition, a quantitative analysis of respondents’ statements from the feedback study (Anker, Duncan, & Sparks, in press) compared feedback and non-feedback groups. The study’s mixed method provides a multi-layered view of couple therapy and the alliance, and an interesting finding emerged regarding couples’ experiences of an all but neglected part of the alliance—the nuts and bolts aspects of the agreement on tasks dimension. We generally think of agreement on tasks as being about the agreement of what models and techniques are used in service of the client’s goals. But the tasks dimension also includes routine tasks such as frequency of sessions, payment, scheduling, etc. Clients in the feedback condition had significantly fewer complaints regarding the more mundane aspects of the alliance: frequency of meeting, handling of cancellations and rescheduling, etc. These finding suggest that not only do we need to pay attention to these details, but also that somehow soliciting feedback resulted in more agreement about these mundane but apparently important aspects.
On another note, with Morten's help, I am interviewing the therapist from the Norway Feedback study that became the best therapist when feedback was added to her work. It is really fascinating. Here is the movie trailer version of what she has said so far: Feedback via the measures and graphs brought focus and clarity to the work; engendered a sense of shared responsibility and collaboration; and encouraged her to be more courageous, to step outside of comfort zones knowing that clients would let her know if she went too far. There is much embedded in those words, about the common factors and her development as a therapist, and I look forward to more from her.
The process with her, I believe, would be helpful for about anyone who takes their development as a therapist seriously--to reflect about what feedback has brought to the work, and how it has changed it for the better. That is a project that is just getting under way and I will let you know much more about in the fall.
Barry
posted by Barry at
8:55 AM
0 Comments
