Social Work Methods and Models
The Strengths Perspective in Social
Work
With grateful acknowledgements to Phil Lee
1
What is the Strengths Perspective &
where did it come from?








Practice model , framework, perspective – theory? – generated from
within social work in the US principally
Based on the idea that client / user groups have untapped personal
resources
Popular with social workers due to clear emphasis on user self
determination, and on the need to demonstrate ‘respect’ to all users
Deliberate offering of an alternative to the idea of seeing clients as
‘pathology units’
Emerged – not surprisingly – in psychiatric & custodial settings
Directs all persons working with clients to not allow negative labels to
dictate or influence the course of ‘help’ that the user will receive
Principal proponents – Saleebey D (ed) 2002, 3rd ed The Strengths
Perspective in Social Work Practice, Allyn and Bacon
Parton N and O’Brien P 2000 Constructive Social Work, contains many
similar themes – alongside an emphasis on narrative approaches –
which we will deal with separately
2
As Saleeby (1997) suggests
The strengths perspective formula is
simple:
“Mobilise clients’ strengths (talent,
knowledge, capacities) in the service of
achieving their goals and visions and
the clients will have a better quality of
life on their terms”
3
Intellectual origins of this approach







Radical social work – need to recognise political
implications of sw and not pathologise
Erving Goffman – his work on labelling and stigma
Psychological Resilience theory – people can benefit
from difficult life events. People are highly resilient.
Saleeby suggests that the majority of people do NOT
repeat the problems they experienced as children
Ego Psychology
Rogerian humanistic approaches
Geoffrey Bateson’s & brief, solution-focussed therapy
– emphasis on mutuality, on the “now”, and on seeing the
‘problem’ as not contained in the person but systemic
Empowerment and anti-oppressive practice – solutions
as a mutual learning process based on partnership
4
Practice Assumptions





Karen Healy (2005, pp 157-58) suggests there are 5:
All people have strengths, capacities & resources
People usually demonstrate resilience, rather than
pathology, in the face of adversity. As Saleeby(1996, p10)
states – “all humans have an inclination for healing.”
Service users have the capacity to determine what is best
for them & do not need Social Workers to define their best
interests
Social workers tend to focus on clients’ deficits and
pathologies – not their resources & strengths
Social Workers are also reluctant to form real partnerships
with users – and yet it is only through such collaborative
partnerships that service users’ capacities can be
enhanced
5
Practice Principles
Healy (2205, pp. 158- 165) again suggests 5:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Adopt an optimistic attitude
Focus on service user’s assets
Collaborate with the service user
Work towards long term empowerment of service user
Create community
Let’s explore each of these in turn with an deliberate
emphasis on HOW WE might try to carry out such
principles in our practice
We will note some problems – but reserve the majority of our
criticisms to the later evaluative section.
6
1





Adopt an optimistic attitude
Challenge ourselves - & all those that work with us – to
question pathological & deficit-orientated views of users
Seek out evidence of strengths e.g. with families seen at
risk on abusing their children – we need to explore support
networks that they feel comfortable with
Constantly convey our beliefs that the users have the
capacities to deal with their immediate problems & achieve
a better quality of life
Challenge negative labels - we must be careful in the
language we use. We should always refer to, and focus on,
their strengths and not their problems
Separate person from problem – if problems have to be
mentioned then do so in a manner that conveys respect for
their resilience e.g. a survivor of abuse or trauma
7
2
Focus on service user’s assets
Quinn P 1998, in Understanding Disability, Sage, p 105,
suggests that :
“It is easy to assume…..that any adult with Down’s
Syndrome will be a happy, placid person who is satisfied
with routine, repetitive tasks…..instead, the entire range of
possible cognitive abilities, physical capacity, and personal
interests must be evaluated. The assumption should be
made that the young adult can accomplish any task, until
this is proven wrong.”
Exactly the same perspective applies to working with older
people with various degrees of dementia.
8
HOW?
When listening, we must be constantly on
the look for positives – for capacity,
capability & resourcefulness – as Van
Wormer (2001, p32) states. E.g. Absence
from school – 2 days a week – so focus
initially on the 3 days of attendance!
 BUT we cannot ignore negative diagnoses &
past behaviours – cannot gloss over them –
the secret lies in how such ‘labels’ are
applied. We will return to this issue later

9
1





Collaborate with the service user
Compare expert-centric & collaborative ways of
interviewing & interacting with a user
Partnership is the first necessary stage for empowerment
Explore what might, at first, seem to you to be irrational
service user responses – as de Shazer (1985, p 7)
suggests
Pay attention to physical environment, user’s responses to
all situations; mutuality – using 1st names (but only by
agreement) and try to de-mystify all necessary professional
procedures
Encourage the service user to explore ALL possible
solutions – how they see it – and however apparently
unrealistic – be optimistic
10
4
Work towards long term
empowerment of service user




Saleeby(1997, p8) quotes Rappaport, stating that
a commitment to a service user “requires us to
create opportunities for the alienated & distressed
to seize some control over their lives & the
decisions that are critical to their lives.”
Emphasis should always be on possibilities rather
than past problems – getting at the user’s hopes
and dreams
Affirming users’ resilience and enabling capacities
– including those forged in terrible adversity
Try to gain early initial practical outcomes
consistent with longer term hopes and dreams 11
5





Create community
Always recognise positives in the user’s social
networks
Social networks can be a way of linking users into
wider community networks
Green and Haines (2002) have developed a
community development, strengths approach –
focussing on Assets
Good community work practice – seek to build
change through members in the community – not
from outside
Use existing capacities and assets, etc
12
British Strengths Perspective – Parton &
O’Byrne
Little recognition of the seminal texts of US
work
 But clear similarities in that their work
emphasises the strengths and resources
that service users have in & around them
 Rich source of case examples
 Greater use of narrative and voice than in
US work

13
Clearly the Strengths Perspective offers:

A positive framework for understanding the
personal, community and systemic strengths
operating in any situation

Uncovering strengths and framing them in an
accessible and useful way becomes a core social
work process
What are the strengths and weaknesses of this
approach?
14
Weaknesses






Simple old pop psychology, positive thinking in disguise
Places too great an emphasis on individuals to make their
own changes – in that sense it is highly individualistic
Ignores harsh realities & is inconsistent with core
components of the role of statutory social work. In some
situations, emphasising strengths is both unviable & may
exacerbate user’s vulnerabilities – to harm themselves &
others
The partnership ideal similarly disguises the real power
differentials between social workers & service users
It has an absurdly optimistic view of human nature –
Pollyanna-ism – it just really re-frames misery
Not clear about what the limits of a strength actually are –
“Well I am very good at fighting”; “I know every dealer in
this town”, “I know how to control my wife”, “I can take cars”
15
.
Strengths
Recognises a place for & the power of
optimism in achieving change
 Allows us to see how our language, our
behaviours and our orientations can
disempower users very easily
 Challenges bio-medical and legal
discourses in a way that should enable
social workers to de-mystify the practices of
these professions
 Can be used to emphasise social not
individual causes of personal problems

16