Motivation – finding a reason for change

Whether you think you can or think you can’t, you are right.

Henry Ford

It does not matter how slow you go as long as you do not stop

Confucius

We are all familiar with the adage, you can lead a horse to water, but can’t make it drink. Although the first phrase in this proverb may be true, the second only applies because it presumes that change is something motivated by an intervention attempted by an outside force. If, however, we abandon that premise and consider change an “inside job” resulting from internal motivation, then a 21st Century version of this adage may well be, You can lead a horse to water but can’t make it drink...but you can salt the oats.

https://tinyurl.com/y5odkn6q

This “salting of oats,” although accomplished by an “outside force” is nonetheless intended to evoke—although sometimes provoke—an internal shift in perspective. It is this shift that enables those being interviewed to evaluate their situation differently, to view the facts in their life through a “new set of lenses” so to speak. Like the teacher who asks a class if two-minutes is a short or long period of time and then responds, smiling, to a pupil who blurts out Short, Okay…then hold your breath for two-minutes, a shift in perspective can affect one’s interpretation of the facts, which becomes a precursor to a change in behavior. A humorous allegory to illustrate:

Lipstick in school

-- Author Unknown (http://www.inspire21.com/stories/educationstories/LipstickinSchool)

According to a news report, a certain private school in Washington was recently faced with a unique problem.

A number of 12-year-old girls were beginning to use lipstick and would put it on in the bathroom. That was fine, but after they put on their lipstick, they would press their lips to the mirror leaving dozens of little lip prints.

Every night the maintenance man would remove the lip prints, and the next day the girls would put them back.

Finally, the principal decided that something had to be done. She called all the girls to the bathroom and met them there with the maintenance man. She explained that all these lip prints were causing a major problem for the custodian who had to clean the mirrors every night (you can just imagine the yawns from the little princesses).

To demonstrate how difficult it had been to clean the mirrors, she asked the maintenance man to show the girls how much effort was required.

He took out a long-handled squeegee, dipped it in the toilet, and cleaned the mirror with it. Since then, there have been no lip prints on the mirror.

There are teachers...and then there are educators.

Reflecting on this, one might argue, there are interrogators…and then there are interviewers.

The less ready one is to change, the less motivation there is to make a change. Effective interviewers know this and resist the temptation to engage in what William Miller (2013) refers to as the “righting reflex” (p10) or an attempt to provoke change in the belief that doing so prevents additional untoward consequences resulting from the maladaptive behavior. However, as the old saying goes, right church…wrong pew. Instead, a more efficient approach to accessing an interviewee’s internal motivation is to assess where she or he may be on the continuum of readiness to change and then engaging the individual in such a way as to facilitate movement along that continuum toward change.

It may seem counterintuitive to delay interceding in one’s high-risk behavior, especially if that behavior presents the real potential for physical harm to the individual or those with whom she or he interacts. In fact, many who resist this approach to interviewing argue that a delay in confronting one’s reticence to change is tantamount to enabling the continuation of maladaptive behaviors. But consider this question: Which is the shorter total amount of time, the time between when someone is confronted prematurely about making a change and terminates treatment before returning a year later in a crisis, ready to consider that very change, or the three—or two or four—months it may take for a practitioner who recognizes the importance of moving through the stages of readiness until the point is reached where the individual chooses, of her or his own accord, to change? In short, as William Miller (2013) asks, is it more productive to wrestle with one’s interviewee or to dance?

Economists refer to something similar conducted by business executives and their chief financial officers as a “cost-benefit analysis.” When considering the costs involved in realizing a benefit, one can assess if the ratio between the costs associated with realizing the benefit(s) are such that they warrant continued “payment.” If the costs are deemed too high, exploring change becomes logical if not obvious. Facilitating this consideration of “costs vs. benefits” constitutes the “salt” added to the oats our interviewee is fed, thereby evoking a “thirst” for change.

What do you think?

---

[1] For a worksheet related to this essay, visit https://tinyurl.com/yxapk8ou

Miller, W. & Rollnick, S. (2013). Motivational Interviewing: Helping people change. Guilford Press: NY, NY