Strengths-based Practice and Motivational Interviewing

Trevor Jay Manthey,Dianne Asher,Bryan Knowles,Stephanie Wahab

doi:10.18060/959

Abstract

There has been recent concern that many practices and programs erroneously claim to be strengths-based. In reaction some have called for researchers to make systematic comparisons to the tenets of strengths-based practice (SBP) before making the contention that an intervention is strengths-based. Motivational interviewing (MI) is an intervention which has been described as being strengths-based; however, no systematic efforts have yet been made to compare the two. This article takes a methodical approach to comparing SBP and MI to determine level of cohesion and how they might be used together. A case-example is used to illustrate how MI and SBP may be used in conjunction and implications for social work practice and education are discussed.

Highlights

There has been recent concern that social work agencies, programs, practices, and therapies that claim to be strengths-based often misperceive what it means to operate from a strengths-based practice (SBP) (Rapp, Saleebey, & Sullivan, 2005)
Motivational interviewing is philosophically consistent with the SBP principle of strengths assessment
Motivational interviewing (MI) is philosophically consistent with the SBP principle of using environmental resources

Summary

INTRODUCTION

There has been recent concern that social work agencies, programs, practices, and therapies that claim to be strengths-based often misperceive what it means to operate from a strengths-based practice (SBP) (Rapp, Saleebey, & Sullivan, 2005). Autonomy is contrasted with authority, in which the client’s role is to be told what he or she should do These elements of the spirit of MI are important when considering how this approach may or may not be consistent with strengths-based practice. It is important to make this comparison in order to respond to the call for individuals to make systematic efforts to corroborate a given intervention with SBP before making the contention that an intervention is strengths-based (Rapp et al, 2005) Conducting this comparison is important because not every intervention is appropriate for social work (even with empirical support) if the intervention is not consistent with social work values and ethics. The goal setting process is person-centered (Rollnick, Miller, & Butler, 2008)

Conclusion

Strengths-Based practice contains a systematic means of assessing strengths

The strengths-based relationship is hope-inducing

A GOOD FIT FOR SOCIAL WORK

A Combined Approach