motivational interviewing [2.0]: the four processes + OARS

Hot Takes On Leading & Learning

Not a hot take as in something new, an oldy but a goodie. Why Capable People Are Reluctant to Lead Read

Forgiveness for some, but not most—yet. Biden-Harris Administration to Provide 804,000 Borrowers with $39 Billion in Automatic Loan Forgiveness as a Result of Fixes to Income Driven Repayment Plans. Read

Sidelined women and prime-age workers are returning to the labor force. Women, Prime-Age Workers Return to the Labor Force – But Blacks See Warning Signs. Read

This Weeks Read

Cont’d. Motivational Interviewing In Schools (Rollnick et al., 2016)

MI is built on four processes and core skills codified in the acronym OARS. This week, we are summarizing both of these components of MI and our take on their implications in leaders.

Two Important Call-outs

• Four Processes: Engaging, Focusing, Evoking, Planning

  1. Engaging is the process of actively establishing a connection and a helpful working relationship.

  2. Focusing is an observable process that describes how people in a conversation decide what change to talk about, and which direction the conversation should go in.

  3. Evoking is the process of drawing out a student’s ideas about why and how to change.

  4. Planning is the process of helping the student decide how to make the change, what to do, and when, and in MI, it sits on the foundation of the other three processes.

• Core Skills - OARS: Open Questions, Affirm, Reflect, Summarize

  1. Open questions invite a range of possible answers, not just “yes” or “no”…An open key question can be critical for steering the conversation in a productive direction…They provide a forward-looking momentum.

  2. Affirming is less of a judgement and more like shining a light on something positive inside the student…Behind an affirmation lies an open-minded willingness to notice positive things about a student. This is sometimes hard when faced with a student who seems to have a list of problems written on his forehead. Its one thing to help a student see what went wrong, quite another to “raise his game” with an affirmation.

  3. To reflect is to repeat in different words what you have heard the student say or perhaps what he or she was trying to say… Reflections are the lifeblood of skillful practice.

  4. To summarize well means, first, listening and noticing the student’s key points during the conversation, in readiness for producing them in a summary…A summary brings together what’s been said.

Our Take

• In summary—the overview or big picture of the processes involved in MI conversations involve a sequence—in most MI texts depicted using a stair climbing visual (see ours above). These processes overlap and are often cyclical with a clear endpoint. The conversation begins by engaging the person(s) to establish a collaborative partnership and demonstrate curiosity about them. Establishing rapport that you understand their experiences and aspirations and that you are unaffected, but invested. The next step is focusing or identifying a change they want to discuss. This is often natural and traced through a logical progression, however, sometimes the conversation needs support in funneling in a productive direction. The core of MI is that throughout the conversation, evoking takes place which means eliciting the person's own motivation for change. Evoking is often accompanied by ‘talk change’ or a persons’ hope-filled statements alluding to their ideas of making positive change. When a commitment to change becomes apparent, planning actions are typically formulated.

• An interesting point about the potential limitations of engaging with students is that while engagement is important and can foster a positive connection between students and educators, it is essential to strike a balance and avoid falling into a pattern of enablement. A few texts discuss the difference between sympathy and empathy. Sympathy can create a ‘pastoral reflex’ where the focus becomes providing comfort and support without necessarily addressing the underlying issues or facilitating meaningful progress. While sympathy involves feeling sorry for someone's situation, empathy involves understanding and sharing the emotions of another person. In contrast to sympathy, empathy allows for a deeper understanding of the student's perspective, which can help guide the conversation towards constructive change. Focusing the conversation on change and encouraging student-led progress, can be a valuable complement to engagement. It helps redirect the interaction towards goals and actions that empower the student to take responsibility for their own growth and development. By shifting the focus to long-term, student-led change, the conversation becomes more oriented towards enabling the student to develop skills, resilience, and a sense of agency.

  

• It is important for educators and mentors to recognize that their role is not solely about "saving" or rescuing students [and understanding that this common consequence of well-intentioned work is highly detrimental], but rather about fostering an environment that encourages personal growth and self-efficacy. By combining engagement with a focus on change and student-led progress, educators can provide support while also promoting a sense of ownership and empowerment in the student's educational journey.

Share This Newsletter!

Help us, help others. Refer friends, subscribe, share, repost—Do all the things!

Curious about receiving the leadership support and development you deserve? Visit us at bigmission.co.