problem solving model in case work

Allisonmurdach's Blog

Helen harris perlman and the problem solving model.

Helen Harris Perlman and the Problem Solving Model

Allison D. Murdach LCSW

2942 Hardeman St.

Hayward, Ca. 94541

510-581-6794

Abstract: This article examines the work of Helen Harris Perlman in developing the problem-solving model of social work direct practice. The origins, development and subsequent spread of this approach throughout social work practice is discussed and the various ways in which this model has been applied in the profession is briefly reviewed. The current status of the model, including concerns about its contemporary viability and usefulness, is examined at the conclusion of the article.

Key Words: Problem-Solving Model, Social Work Method, Social Work History, Direct Practice, Social

Work Profession

“I do claim to be an authority on the Problem-solving model in social work, both in

its methodological aspects and its theoretical roots. I am the originator and developer

of that model.” (Perlman, p. 1, 1980)

This article examines the work of Helen Harris Perlman (1906-2004) in the development of the problem-solving model of direct practice in social work. As we approach the third anniversary of her death (September 18, 2004), it is important to recognize once again the importance and magnitude of her contribution to the field. Perlman, a prolific social work author as well as a distinguished clinician and educator in social work, always laid special claim to her model, which she developed in the 1950’s. Sadly, although she asserted ownership, her model soon slipped from her hands because of its wide acceptance and became, in the latter stages of her life, often misrepresented and at times unrecognizable.

Perlman and Problem-Solving

Perlman did not start out to be a social worker. Her original intention was to become a college humanities professor. After graduating from the University of Minnesota with honors in 1926 with a B. A. in English literature, she was told that she was unemployable at the college level because she was a woman and especially because she was Jewish. She then found work as a summer caseworker for the Chicago Jewish Social Service Bureau. Later she reported that this first exposure to social work was a revelation. “A whole world opened up to me,” she said, a world in which she also “got a great deal of satisfaction from being able to help people.” ( News & Notes, 2004, p. 1). She continued working in various social work capacities and assignments at increasingly responsible levels until 1933, when she got a scholarship enabling her to enroll in the New York School of Social Work, now affiliated with ColumbiaUniversity. While completing her training in social work in New York, she was in demand as a speaker and often addressed various conferences and professional groups about new developments in social work theory and method. In 1943 she earned her master’s degree in social work from ColumbiaUniversity. She joined the social work faculty of the Schoolof Social Service Administrationat the Universityof Chicagoin 1945. While at the school she became first a national and then an international social work figure because of her writing about social work issues, as well as her teaching, consulting, public speaking, and her innovative development of the problem-solving model of social work practice. She published her classic text, Social Casework, A Problem-Solving Process , in 1957. She officially retired late in her career, but continued to work, teach, write, and do research at the school until just before her death at age 98, even though afflicted near the end of her life with blindness.

Despite her many scholarly achievements, Perlman always remained a clinician at heart. As a professional with broad learning and classical training, Perlman was driven to use the insights derived from her clinical work as inspiration for conjecture about social work method and training. She said her contacts with clients gave her valuable learning opportunities because these relationships involved her in “many cases…(in which) families faced the same kinds of problems and conflicts that one encountered in the great works of literature.” (News & Notes, 2004, p. 5.) She also stated that it was through these experiences that she came to realize that she “had learned much more of the sickness in people than of their healthiness.” She soon recognized that she needed to look beyond client pathology to see instead the great “human potential for recuperation and aspiration” that resided in the many ordinary individuals and families who sought her care and assistance on a daily basis (Perlman, 1971, p. xviii). It was considerations such as these that eventually led to her interest in, and championing of, the importance of processes of everyday human problem-solving in resolving the difficulties in client’s lives (Perlman, 1957).

Development of the Problem-Solving Approach

Before discussing Perlman’s model in detail, it will be instructive to review the intellectual background of her approach to gain a better understanding of the context in which it developed. Prior to the appearance of Perlman’s text in the 1950’s the topic of problem-solving had been, and today continues to be, an area of study in this country in many fields, particularly psychology. In 1907 the psychologist and philosopher William James established problem solving (which he called “ common sense”) as a field of intellectual enquiry by giving it a central place in his doctrine of Pragmatism, a philosophical approach to truth which also sought to develop methods that were “helpful in life’s practical struggles” (James, 1963, p.36). The goal of such methods, James believed, was to help individuals to find their own truth through observation and experience (James, 1963). In 1910 James’ fellow pragmatist John Dewey conceptualized human problem-solving (or, in his terms, “reflective thinking”)as being composed of four central elements: recognizing and formulating a problem, gathering facts that will lead to a solution, testing each proposed solution, and deciding upon a course of action (Dewey). Perlman was the first social work author to use the term “problem-solving” in a social work context and credits Dewey’s writings as her inspiration for the concept (Perlman, 1971).

Social work was at first slow to adopt the pragmatic idea of problem-solving as a style of intervention. Mary Richmond, the founder of social work direct practice method, was influenced more strongly by medical methods of intervention (i.e., “study”, “diagnosis”, and “treatment”) (Richmond, 1917) than the philosophical and psychological approach taken by James and Dewey. Although also a form of problem-solving, the medical approach was, and continues to be, practitioner-driven and assumes the pathology and passivity of the client. The pragmatic approach, on the other hand, has always emphasized client normality and capacity for personal self-determination, which it seeks to enlist in a search for growth and positive change (Perlman, 1957).

The medically-oriented view of the helping relationship prevailed in social work throughout the early twentieth century, largely due toRichmond’s extensive impact on the profession’s development (Garton & Otto, 1964). Due to the growing popularity of the pragmatic point of view in this country (Menand, 2001), the problem-solving mode of thinking began to influence direct social work practice and social work theorists in the 1920’s and social work authors increasingly began to refer to the practitioner’s efforts to involve clients in the helping interaction by engaging the client’s own problem-solving capacities. The following list of recommended worker interventions from classic social work writers over several decades, much condensed, helps to indicate the progress of this development:

a) Help client acknowledge difficulty.

b) Assist client in understanding the meaning of the situation.

c) Aid client in making decision to change. (Sheffield, 1922)

a) Show sympathetic approach with client.

b) Establish rapport.

c) Present and discuss facts of the case.

d) Stimulate the client to action. (Young, 1935)

a) Demonstrate to the client your ability to observe and listen.

b) Begin where the client is.

c) Ask only necessary questions.

d) Take leadership only when needed, otherwise use client’s own resourcefulness.

e) Offer interpretations of client’s situation, as well as resources and direction only as needed.

(Garrett, 1942)

a) Demonstrate acceptance of client.

b) Discuss client request.

c) Gather facts about request.

d) Note and discuss client stresses and patterns of behavior.

e) Offer only interpretations of the situation that can also utilize the client’s own insight and can aid the client to take action. (Hamilton, 1951)

In developing her problem-solving model, Perlman utilized the best features of these intervention schemes but infused them with even greater attention to client problem-solving efforts and capacities (Perlman, 1970). First in a journal article in 1953 (Perlman, 1971b) and finally fully in her book, Social Casework, a problem-solving process (Perlman, 1957), she laid out the intervention stages required by her model. These can be outlined briefly as follows:

a) Ascertaining and clarifying the facts of the problem.

b) Thinking through the facts.

c) The making of some choice or decision. (Perlman, 1957)

Perlman’s problem-solving approach, which appears extremely simple and derivative in bare outline, was actually sophisticated and innovative (Bunston, 1985). Far from being just a rehash of John Dewey, her model was a synthesis derived from a number of sources: her background in the humanities, her philosophical reflections combined with her knowledge of psychodynamics and the social sciences, her extensive clinical experience, and her study of the “functional” version of social work originated by Jessie Taft, with its strong emphasis on the importance of the helping relationship in direct practice (Perlman, 1957, 1970). Building from this foundation, she brilliantly formulated a unique cognitively-oriented and client-centered problem-solving process for social work intervention. In doing so, she highlighted her concepts of “focus” and “partialization”, which described ways of aiding the client to overcome difficulties by tackling small problems first and thus building confidence to move on to more challenging goals.

Though this brief sketch of her work hardly does justice to the power and complexity of Perlman’s accomplishment, it does at least highlight the principal stages of her model: problem definition, problem analysis (including the generation and review of alternatives), and the need for specific decision about a course of action (including methods of monitoring and evaluating the results of such action) ( Perlman, 1957). This intervention method was initially controversial in the profession. Some thought it a mere social work copy of long existent business and management intervention techniques. Others found it too “rationalistic” and structured, and overly focused on method instead of process, while some in the “diagnostic” social work tradition complained that it was superficial and did not sufficiently address in depth issues of diagnosis, psychopathology, or treatment. It also was buffeted by competing versions of problem-solving and by “adaptations” of her model that both amused Perlman and caused her dismay (Perlman, 1980). However in the end, her brilliant synthesis of cognitive analysis, practicality, and psychodynamic compassion and understanding led her model to triumph over her social work critics and imitators. So successful has the problem-solving approach become that it has now recently been enshrined in the international definition of social work practice (International Definition of the Social Work Profession, Supplement of International Social Work, p. 5, 2007).

Concerns about Problem-Solving

It is ironic that the wide-spread influence, success, and acceptance of Perlman’s model makes her achievement appear today to be almost commonplace and banal. This has even led some to question the method’s apparent efficiency and effectiveness and to seek more in-depth explanations of what actually constitutes problem-solving activity (DeRoos, 1990). The easy accessibility of the problem-solving approach has also caused others to question the accuracy of its empirical foundations (Bunston, 1985). Perlman herself, reflecting on her model’s lack of adornment, was to complain in her later years that many social workers seemed to talk as if the problem-solving method in social work had always existed and “just happened”, that it seemed to have no author or source, and was not even inspired by her work (Perlman, p. 1, 1980). The popularity and appeal of her approach, it seems, did indeed have its price.

In addition to the above, other theorists have raised objections that question the whole notion of using a problem-solving model in helping interventions. In essence, these objections can be boiled down to the following four general statements:

1) In reality problem “solving” doesn’t often happen– Some have claimed that in real life social workers and their clients deal with tremendous uncertainty and rarely with well-identified problems, therefore problem “solving” does not often happens and the most that can be hoped for is problem reduction and management—goals that are more realistic and far easier for clients and workers to achieve (Schon, 1983).

2) Problem- s olving is only one form of thought— Authors in the narrative tradition of social work and therapuetic intervention have worried that fixation on the problem-solving mode of interaction can constrict the client’s ability to freely tell his or her “story” and thus fail to tap into alternate styles of thought and reflection ( Anderson, 1997).

3) The problem-solving model is culture-bound— Since the social work problem-solving approach was developed initially in social work in the context of white, middle-class culture in the United States (though Perlman did have extensive clinical experience working with minority populations, Perlman, 1971a), some have raised concerns that the approach may be unsuitable for clients from other cultures or social groups. It is held this model may be especially inappropriate for individuals from cultures that rely on less organized and less focused methods to address difficulties in social life (such as Native Americans and Mexican-Americans) (Sue, 1981; Galan, 2001).

4) The model is based on non-experimental (i. e., “soft”) evidence— Since Perlman developed her model when social work research was in its infancy, most of her supporting documentation was drawn from clinical and anecdotal sources, plus her own extensive clinical experience. In other words, when developing her approach Perlman made extensive use of the now discredited “argument from authority” in her research (Gambrill, 1999). Although this may put her model on shaky ground in our current social work world of evidence-based practice, it is also true that her problem-solving approach today stands out as a final tribute to the power of “practice wisdom” (DeRoos, 1990) especially as used by a practitioner like Perlman, who possessed a solid liberal arts background as well as infinite discretion and finesse.

Conclusion

Although today no social work author who today used Perlman’s model-building procedures exclusively would be readily considered for academic advancement, the fact that her conceptualizations were generally successful in actual practice appears to bear out psychologist Kurt Lewin’s famous adage that “there is nothing so practical as a good theory.” However, it still needs to be asked how the model measures up today in our current research-heavy climate in social work practice? In general one can answer: pretty well. A number of evaluation research studies done over the past several decades have documented that problem-solving approaches and their variants, such as task-centered treatment and problem-solving therapy, have an impressive record of effectiveness in work with diverse different populations, cultural groups, treatment methodologies, and diagnostic categories (Reid, 1988; Reid & Fortune 2002; Dobson, Backs-Dermott, &

Dozois, 2000). Indeed these research efforts have, for the most part, laid to rest the objections to Perlman’s problem-solving approach mentioned in the previous section. One issue remain still remains, however. As mentioned above, though the many current variants of Perlman’s approach have been demonstrated to have proven efficacy and effectiveness, Perlman’s model itself is based on theory which has never been empirically tested. Although some have tried to develop ways to accomplish this goal (Bunston, 1985), many of her sources now go back as far as seventy or eighty years, and it may never be possible to fully validate Perlman’s claims empirically. However as Perlman, who loved proverbs, would probably note: “the proof of the pudding is in the tasting.” Thus it appears that it is now in the proof offered by actual practice success that we can best find the final validation of her method.

References

Bunston, T. (1985). Mapping practice: problem solving in clinical social work. Social Casework,

66, 225-236.

DeRoos, Y. S. (1990). The development of practice wisdom through human problem-solving

processes. Social Service Review, 64, 276-287.

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston: D. C. Heath.

Dobson, K. S., Backs-Dermott, B. J. & Dozois, D. J. A (2000). Cognitive and cognitive-behavioral

therapies. In C. R. Snyder & R. E. Ingram (Eds.) Handbook of psychological change , pp. 409-428.

New York: Wiley.

Galan, F. J. (2001). Experiential approach with Mexican-American males with acculturation stress.

In H. E. Briggs & K. Corcoran (Eds.), Social work practice, pp. 283-302. Chicago: Lyceum.

Gambrill, E. (1999). Evidence-based practice: an alternative to authority-based practice. Families in

Society, 80, 341-350.

Garrett, A. (1942). Interviewing. New York: Family Service Association.

Garton, N. R. & Otto, H. A. (1964). The development of theory and practice in social casework.

Springfield,ILL: Charles C. Thomas.

Hamilton, G. (1951). Theory and practice of social case work (2 nd ed.) . New York:ColumbiaUniversity.

International definition of the social work profession (2007). Supplement of International Social Work,50,

James, W. (1967). Pragmatism and other essays. New York:Washington Square.

Menand, L. (2001). The metaphysical club. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

News & Notes (2004). Helen Harris Perlman, social work pioneer and distinguished educator,

p. 1 and p. 5. Chicago: TheSchool ofSocial Service Administration.

Perlman, H. H. (1957). Social casework. Chicago: TheUniversity ofChicago.

Perlman, H. H. (1970). The problem-solving model in social casework. In R. W. Roberts & R. H.

Nee (Eds.), Theories of social casework , pp. 131-179. Chicago: TheUniversity ofChicago.

Perlman, H. H. (1971a). A guide to the reader of this book. In H. H. Perlman, Perspectives

On social casework , pp. ix-xxiv. Philadelphia:TempleUniversity.

Perlman, H. H. (1971b). The basic structure of the casework process. In H. H. Perlman, Perspectives

On social casework , pp. 51-64. Philadelphia:TempleUniversity.

Perlman, H. H. (1980). Letter to author.

Reid, W. J. (1988). Brief task-centered treatment. In R. A. Dorfman (Ed.), Paradigms of clinical social

Work , pp. 196-219.

Reid, W. J. & Fortune, A. E. (2002). The task-centered model. In A. R. Roberts & G. J. Greene (Eds.),

Social workers’ desk reference , pp. 101-104. Oxford:OxfordUniversity.

Richmond, M. E. (1917). Social diagnosis. New York: Russell Sage.

Schon, D. A.(1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.

Sheffield, A. E. (1922). What is the case worker really doing? The Journal of Social Forces, 1,

362-366.

Sue, D. W. (1981). Counseling the culturally different. New York: Wiley.

Young, P. (1935). Interviewing in social work. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Theories Used in Social Work Practice & Practice Models

Social work theories are general explanations that are supported by evidence obtained through the scientific method. A theory may explain human behavior, for example, by describing how humans interact or how humans react to certain stimuli.

Social work practice models describe how social workers can implement theories. Practice models provide social workers with a blueprint of how to help others based on the underlying social work theory. While a theory explains why something happens, a practice model shows how to use a theory to create change.

Social Work Theories

There are many social work theories that guide social work practice. Here are some of the major theories that are generally accepted in the field of social work:

Systems theory describes human behavior in terms of complex systems. It is premised on the idea that an effective system is based on individual needs, rewards, expectations, and attributes of the people living in the system. According to this theory, families, couples, and organization members are directly involved in resolving a problem even if it is an individual issue.

Social learning theory is based on Albert Bandura’s idea that learning occurs through observation and imitation. New behavior will continue if it is reinforced. According to this theory, rather than simply hearing a new concept and applying it, the learning process is made more efficient if the new behavior is modeled as well.

Psychosocial development theory is an eight-stage theory of identity and psychosocial development articulated by Erik Erikson. Erikson believed everyone must pass through eight stages of development over the life cycle: hope, will, purpose, competence, fidelity, love, care, and wisdom. Each stage is divided into age ranges from infancy to older adults.

Psychodynamic theory was developed by Freud, and it explains personality in terms of conscious and unconscious forces. This social work theory describes the personality as consisting of the id (responsible for following basic instincts), the superego (attempts to follow rules and behave morally), and the ego (mediates between the id and the ego).

Transpersonal theory proposes additional stages beyond the adult ego. In healthy individuals, these stages contribute to creativity, wisdom, and altruism. In people lacking healthy ego development, experiences can lead to psychosis.

Rational choice theory is based on the idea that all action is fundamentally rational in character, and people calculate the risks and benefits of any action before making decisions.

Social Work Practice Models

There are many different practice models that influence the way social workers choose to help people meet their goals. Here are some of the major social work practice models used in various roles, such as case managers and therapists:

Problem solving assists people with the problem solving process. Rather than tell clients what to do, social workers teach clients how to apply a problem solving method so they can develop their own solutions.

Task-centered practice is a short-term treatment where clients establish specific, measurable goals. Social workers and clients collaborate together and create specific strategies and steps to begin reaching those goals.

Narrative therapy externalizes a person’s problem by examining the story of the person’s life. In the story, the client is not defined by the problem, and the problem exists as a separate entity. Instead of focusing on a client’s depression, in this social work practice model, a client would be encouraged to fight against the depression by looking at the skills and abilities that may have previously been taken for granted.

Cognitive behavioral therapy focuses on the relationship between thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Social workers assist clients in identifying patterns of irrational and self-destructive thoughts and behaviors that influence emotions.

Crisis intervention model is used when someone is dealing with an acute crisis. The model includes seven stages: assess safety and lethality, rapport building, problem identification, address feelings, generate alternatives, develop an action plan, and follow up. This social work practice model is commonly used with clients who are expressing suicidal ideation.

To learn more about SocialWork@Simmons, request information and an admissions counselor will contact you.

Request Information

Subject List
Take a Tour
For Authors
Subscriber Services
Publications
African American Studies
African Studies
American Literature
Anthropology
Architecture Planning and Preservation
Art History
Atlantic History
Biblical Studies
British and Irish Literature
Childhood Studies
Chinese Studies
Cinema and Media Studies
Communication
Criminology
Environmental Science
Evolutionary Biology
International Law
International Relations
Islamic Studies
Jewish Studies
Latin American Studies
Latino Studies
Linguistics
Literary and Critical Theory
Medieval Studies
Military History
Political Science
Public Health
Renaissance and Reformation

Social Work

Urban Studies
Victorian Literature
Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Brief Therapies in Social Work: Task-Centered Model and Solution-Focused Therapy

Introduction.

Introductory Works
Reference Works
Journal Articles and Scholarly Works
Task-Centered Organization
Animal-Assisted Brief Therapy
Specialized SFT Organizations

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

Child Welfare Effectiveness
Rare and Orphan Diseases and Social Work Practice
Unaccompanied Immigrant and Refugee Children
Find more forthcoming articles...
Export Citations
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Brief Therapies in Social Work: Task-Centered Model and Solution-Focused Therapy by Cynthia Franklin , Krystallynne Mikle LAST REVIEWED: 30 September 2013 LAST MODIFIED: 30 September 2013 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195389678-0188

Brief therapies serve as evidenced-based practices that place a strong emphasis on effective, time-limited treatments that aid in resolving clients’ presenting problems. The resources presented in this article summarize for professionals and educators the abundant literature evaluating brief therapies within social work practice. Brief therapies have appeared in many different schools of psychotherapy, and several approaches have also evolved within social work practice, but two approaches—the task-centered model and solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT)—stand out as being grounded in research and have also gained international acclaim as important interventions for implementation and further study. These two approaches are the focus of this bibliography. The task-centered model and SFBT were developed by social work practitioners and researchers for the purposes of making clinical practice more effective, and they share a common bond in hoping to improve the services delivered to clients. Since the development of the task-centered and solution-focused approaches, brief therapies have become essential to the work of all types of psychotherapists and clinicians, and many of the principles and practices of brief therapy that are a part of the task-centered and solution-focused approaches are now essential to psychotherapy training. Clinical social workers practicing from the perspective of the task-centered model and SFBT approaches work from several brief therapy assumptions. The first regards the client/therapist relationship. The best way to help clients is to work within a collaborative relationship to discover options for coping and new behavior that may also lead to specific tasks and solutions for change that are identified by the client. Second is the assumption that change can happen quickly and can be lasting. Third, focus on the past may not be as helpful to most clients as a focus on the present and the future. The fourth regards a pragmatic perspective about where the change occurs. The best approach to practice is pragmatic, and effective practitioners recognize that what happens in a client’s life is more important than what happens in a social worker’s office. The fifth assumption is that change can happen more quickly and be maintained when practitioners utilize the strengths and resources that exist within the client and his or her environment. The next assumption is that a small change made by clients may cause significant and major life changes. The seventh assumption is associated with creating goals. It is important to focus on small, concrete goal construction and helping the client move toward small steps to achieve those goals. The next regards change. Change is viewed as hard work and involves focused effort and commitment from the client and social worker. There will be homework assignments and following through on tasks. Also, it is assumed that it is important to establish and maintain a clear treatment focus (often considered the most important element in brief treatment). Parsimony is also considered to be a guiding principle (i.e., given two equally effective treatments, the one requiring less investment of time and energy is preferable). Last, it is assumed that without evidence to the contrary, the client’s stated problem is taken as the valid focus of treatment. The task-centered model and SFBT have developed a strong empirical base, and both approaches operate from a goal-oriented and strengths perspective. Both approaches have numerous applications and have successfully been used with many different types of clients and practice settings. Both approaches have also been expanded to applications in macro social work that focus on work within management- and community-based practices. For related Oxford Bibliographies entries, see Task-Centered Practice and Solution-Focused Therapy .

Task-Centered Model Literature

The task-centered model is an empirically grounded approach to social work practice that appeared in the mid-1960s at Columbia University and was developed in response to research reports that indicated social work was not effective with clients. William J. Reid was the chief researcher who helped develop this model, and he integrated many therapeutic perspectives to create the task-centered approach, including ideas from behavioral therapies. The task-centered model evolved out of the psychodynamic practice and uses a brief, problem-solving approach to help clients resolve presenting problems. The task-centered model is currently used in clinical social work and group work and may also be applied to other types of social work practice.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

About Social Work »
Meet the Editorial Board »
Adolescent Depression
Adolescent Pregnancy
Adolescents
Adoption Home Study Assessments
Adult Protective Services in the United States
African Americans
Aging out of foster care
Aging, Physical Health and
Alcohol and Drug Abuse Problems
Alcohol and Drug Problems, Prevention of Adolescent and Yo...
Alcohol Problems: Practice Interventions
Alcohol Use Disorder
Alzheimer's Disease and Other Dementias
Anti-Oppressive Practice
Asian Americans
Asian-American Youth
Autism Spectrum Disorders
Baccalaureate Social Workers
Behavioral Health
Bereavement Practice
Bisexuality
Brief Therapies in Social Work: Task-Centered Model and So...
Bullying and Social Work Intervention
Canadian Social Welfare, History of
Case Management in Mental Health in the United States
Central American Migration to the United States
Child Maltreatment Prevention
Child Neglect and Emotional Maltreatment
Child Poverty
Child Sexual Abuse
Child Welfare
Child Welfare and Child Protection in Europe, History of
Child Welfare and Parents with Intellectual and/or Develop...
Child Welfare, Immigration and
Child Welfare Practice with LGBTQ Youth and Families
Children of Incarcerated Parents
Christianity and Social Work
Chronic Illness
Clinical Social Work Practice with Adult Lesbians
Clinical Social Work Practice with Males
Cognitive Behavior Therapies with Diverse and Stressed Pop...
Cognitive Processing Therapy
Community Development
Community Policing
Community-Based Participatory Research
Community-Needs Assessment
Comparative Social Work
Computational Social Welfare: Applying Data Science in Soc...
Conflict Resolution
Council on Social Work Education
Counseling Female Offenders
Criminal Justice
Crisis Interventions
Cultural Competence and Ethnic Sensitive Practice
Culture, Ethnicity, Substance Use, and Substance Use Disor...
Dementia Care
Dementia Care, Ethical Aspects of
Depression and Cancer
Development and Infancy (Birth to Age Three)
Differential Response in Child Welfare
Digital Storytelling for Social Work Interventions
Disabilities
Disability and Disability Culture
Domestic Violence Among Immigrants
Early Pregnancy and Parenthood Among Child Welfare–Involve...
Eating Disorders
Ecological Framework
Economic Evaluation
Elder Mistreatment
End-of-Life Decisions
Epigenetics for Social Workers
Ethical Issues in Social Work and Technology
Ethics and Values in Social Work
European Institutions and Social Work
European Union, Justice and Home Affairs in the
Evidence-based Social Work Practice: Finding Evidence
Evidence-based Social Work Practice: Issues, Controversies...
Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs
Families with Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual Parents
Family Caregiving
Family Group Conferencing
Family Policy
Family Services
Family Therapy
Family Violence
Fathering Among Families Served By Child Welfare
Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders
Field Education
Financial Literacy and Social Work
Financing Health-Care Delivery in the United States
Forensic Social Work
Foster Care
Foster care and siblings
Gender, Violence, and Trauma in Immigration Detention in t...
Generalist Practice and Advanced Generalist Practice
Grounded Theory
Group Work across Populations, Challenges, and Settings
Group Work, Research, Best Practices, and Evidence-based
Harm Reduction
Health Care Reform
Health Disparities
Health Social Work
History of Social Work and Social Welfare, 1900–1950
History of Social Work and Social Welfare, 1950-1980
History of Social Work and Social Welfare, pre-1900
History of Social Work from 1980-2014
History of Social Work in China
History of Social Work in Northern Ireland
History of Social Work in the Republic of Ireland
History of Social Work in the United Kingdom
HIV/AIDS and Children
HIV/AIDS Prevention with Adolescents
Homelessness
Homelessness: Ending Homelessness as a Grand Challenge
Homelessness Outside the United States
Human Needs
Human Trafficking, Victims of
Immigrant Integration in the United States
Immigrant Policy in the United States
Immigrants and Refugees
Immigrants and Refugees: Evidence-based Social Work Practi...
Immigration and Health Disparities
Immigration and Intimate Partner Violence
Immigration and Poverty
Immigration and Spirituality
Immigration and Substance Use
Immigration and Trauma
Impact of Emerging Technology in Social Work Practice
Impaired Professionals
Implementation Science and Practice
Indigenous Peoples
Individual Placement and Support (IPS) Supported Employmen...
In-home Child Welfare Services
Intergenerational Transmission of Maltreatment
International Human Trafficking
International Social Welfare
International Social Work
International Social Work and Education
International Social Work and Social Welfare in Southern A...
Internet and Video Game Addiction
Intervention with Traumatized Populations
Intimate-Partner Violence
Juvenile Justice
Kinship Care
Korean Americans
Latinos and Latinas
Law, Social Work and the
LGBTQ Populations and Social Work
Mainland European Social Work, History of
Major Depressive Disorder
Management and Administration in Social Work
Maternal Mental Health
Measurement, Scales, and Indices
Medical Illness
Men: Health and Mental Health Care
Mental Health
Mental Health Diagnosis and the Addictive Substance Disord...
Mental Health Needs of Older People, Assessing the
Mental Health Services from 1990 to 2023
Mental Illness: Children
Mental Illness: Elders
Meta-analysis
Microskills
Middle East and North Africa, International Social Work an...
Military Social Work
Mixed Methods Research
Moral distress and injury in social work
Multiculturalism
Native Americans
Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders
Neighborhood Social Cohesion
Neuroscience and Social Work
Nicotine Dependence
Occupational Social Work
Organizational Development and Change
Pain Management
Palliative Care
Palliative Care: Evolution and Scope of Practice
Pandemics and Social Work
Parent Training
Personalization
Person-in-Environment
Philosophy of Science and Social Work
Physical Disabilities
Podcasts and Social Work
Police Social Work
Political Social Work in the United States
Positive Youth Development
Postmodernism and Social Work
Postsecondary Education Experiences and Attainment Among Y...
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
Practice Interventions and Aging
Practice Interventions with Adolescents
Practice Research
Primary Prevention in the 21st Century
Productive Engagement of Older Adults
Profession, Social Work
Program Development and Grant Writing
Promoting Smart Decarceration as a Grand Challenge
Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Psychoanalysis and Psychodynamic Theory
Psychoeducation
Psychometrics
Psychopathology and Social Work Practice
Psychopharmacology and Social Work Practice
Psychosocial Intervention with Women
Qualitative Research
Race and Racism
Readmission Policies in Europe
Redefining Police Interactions with People Experiencing Me...
Rehabilitation
Religiously Affiliated Agencies
Reproductive Health
Research Ethics
Restorative Justice
Risk Assessment in Child Protection Services
Risk Management in Social Work
Rural Social Work in China
Rural Social Work Practice
School Social Work
School Violence
School-Based Delinquency Prevention
Services and Programs for Pregnant and Parenting Youth
Severe and Persistent Mental Illness: Adults
Sexual and Gender Minority Immigrants, Refugees, and Asylu...
Sexual Assault
Single-System Research Designs
Social and Economic Impact of US Immigration Policies on U...
Social Development
Social Insurance and Social Justice
Social Intervention Research
Social Justice and Social Work
Social Movements
Social Planning
Social Policy
Social Policy in Denmark
Social Security in the United States (OASDHI)
Social Work and Islam
Social Work and Social Welfare in East, West, and Central ...
Social Work and Social Welfare in Europe
Social Work Education and Research
Social Work Leadership
Social Work Luminaries: Luminaries Contributing to the Cla...
Social Work Luminaries: Luminaries contributing to the fou...
Social Work Luminaries: Luminaries Who Contributed to Soci...
Social Work Regulation
Social Work Research Methods
Social Work with Interpreters
Strategic Planning
Supplemental Security Income
Survey Research
Sustainability: Creating Social Responses to a Changing En...
Syrian Refugees in Turkey
Systematic Review Methods
Technology Adoption in Social Work Education
Technology for Social Work Interventions
Technology, Human Relationships, and Human Interaction
Technology in Social Work
Terminal Illness
The Impact of Systemic Racism on Latinxs’ Experiences with...
Transdisciplinary Science
Translational Science and Social Work
Transnational Perspectives in Social Work
Transtheoretical Model of Change
Trauma-Informed Care
Triangulation
Tribal child welfare practice in the United States
United States, History of Social Welfare in the
Universal Basic Income
Veteran Services
Vicarious Trauma and Resilience in Social Work Practice wi...
Vicarious Trauma Redefining PTSD
Victim Services
Virtual Reality and Social Work
Welfare State Reform in France
Welfare State Theory
Women and Macro Social Work Practice
Women's Health Care
Work and Family in the German Welfare State
Workforce Development of Social Workers Pre- and Post-Empl...
Working with Non-Voluntary and Mandated Clients
Young and Adolescent Lesbians
Youth at Risk
Youth Services
Privacy Policy
Cookie Policy
Legal Notice
Accessibility

[66.249.64.20|185.80.151.9]
185.80.151.9

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Problem-Solving Courts

The scope of criminal court research and evaluation has grown with the advent of problem-solving courts. Examples of problem-solving courts include drug courts, domestic violence courts, reentry courts, and veterans treatment courts.

The Problem-Solving Court Model

Problem-solving courts differ from traditional courts in that they focus on one type of offense or type of person committing the crime.

An interdisciplinary team, led by a judge (or parole authority), works collaboratively to achieve two goals:

Case management to expedite case processing and reduce caseload and time to disposition, thus increasing trial capacity for more serious crimes.
Therapeutic jurisprudence to reduce criminal offending through therapeutic and interdisciplinary approaches that address substance use disorders and other underlying issues without jeopardizing public safety and due process.

The most common problem-solving courts are drug courts, but several other types of programs apply similar approaches to address violent and repeat offending, and returns to incarceration. [Note: Repeat offending is often referred to as "recidivism" in criminal justice research.]

Learn more about:

Drug courts
Domestic violence courts

Other NIJ projects in this area include:

" Identifying Those Who Served: Modeling Potential Participant Identification in Veterans Treatment Courts ," and article in the inaugural issue of Drug Court Review , published by the National Drug Court Resource Center.
The final report or executive summary as submitted to the National Institute of Justice.
NIJ’s completed Evaluation of Second Chance Act Adult Reentry Courts that examines program processes, impacts, and costs.
Past evaluations of two community court programs, see A Community Court Grows in Brooklyn: A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Red Hook Community Justice Center, (Executive Summary) (pdf, 13 pages) , and Dispensing Justice Locally: The Impact, Costs, and Benefits of the Midtown Community Court (pdf, 361 pages) .

Cite this Article

How to master the seven-step problem-solving process

In this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , Simon London speaks with Charles Conn, CEO of venture-capital firm Oxford Sciences Innovation, and McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin about the complexities of different problem-solving strategies.

Podcast transcript

Simon London: Hello, and welcome to this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , with me, Simon London. What’s the number-one skill you need to succeed professionally? Salesmanship, perhaps? Or a facility with statistics? Or maybe the ability to communicate crisply and clearly? Many would argue that at the very top of the list comes problem solving: that is, the ability to think through and come up with an optimal course of action to address any complex challenge—in business, in public policy, or indeed in life.

Looked at this way, it’s no surprise that McKinsey takes problem solving very seriously, testing for it during the recruiting process and then honing it, in McKinsey consultants, through immersion in a structured seven-step method. To discuss the art of problem solving, I sat down in California with McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin and also with Charles Conn. Charles is a former McKinsey partner, entrepreneur, executive, and coauthor of the book Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything [John Wiley & Sons, 2018].

Charles and Hugo, welcome to the podcast. Thank you for being here.

Hugo Sarrazin: Our pleasure.

Charles Conn: It’s terrific to be here.

Simon London: Problem solving is a really interesting piece of terminology. It could mean so many different things. I have a son who’s a teenage climber. They talk about solving problems. Climbing is problem solving. Charles, when you talk about problem solving, what are you talking about?

Charles Conn: For me, problem solving is the answer to the question “What should I do?” It’s interesting when there’s uncertainty and complexity, and when it’s meaningful because there are consequences. Your son’s climbing is a perfect example. There are consequences, and it’s complicated, and there’s uncertainty—can he make that grab? I think we can apply that same frame almost at any level. You can think about questions like “What town would I like to live in?” or “Should I put solar panels on my roof?”

You might think that’s a funny thing to apply problem solving to, but in my mind it’s not fundamentally different from business problem solving, which answers the question “What should my strategy be?” Or problem solving at the policy level: “How do we combat climate change?” “Should I support the local school bond?” I think these are all part and parcel of the same type of question, “What should I do?”

I’m a big fan of structured problem solving. By following steps, we can more clearly understand what problem it is we’re solving, what are the components of the problem that we’re solving, which components are the most important ones for us to pay attention to, which analytic techniques we should apply to those, and how we can synthesize what we’ve learned back into a compelling story. That’s all it is, at its heart.

I think sometimes when people think about seven steps, they assume that there’s a rigidity to this. That’s not it at all. It’s actually to give you the scope for creativity, which often doesn’t exist when your problem solving is muddled.

Simon London: You were just talking about the seven-step process. That’s what’s written down in the book, but it’s a very McKinsey process as well. Without getting too deep into the weeds, let’s go through the steps, one by one. You were just talking about problem definition as being a particularly important thing to get right first. That’s the first step. Hugo, tell us about that.

Hugo Sarrazin: It is surprising how often people jump past this step and make a bunch of assumptions. The most powerful thing is to step back and ask the basic questions—“What are we trying to solve? What are the constraints that exist? What are the dependencies?” Let’s make those explicit and really push the thinking and defining. At McKinsey, we spend an enormous amount of time in writing that little statement, and the statement, if you’re a logic purist, is great. You debate. “Is it an ‘or’? Is it an ‘and’? What’s the action verb?” Because all these specific words help you get to the heart of what matters.

Want to subscribe to The McKinsey Podcast ?

Simon London: So this is a concise problem statement.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah. It’s not like “Can we grow in Japan?” That’s interesting, but it is “What, specifically, are we trying to uncover in the growth of a product in Japan? Or a segment in Japan? Or a channel in Japan?” When you spend an enormous amount of time, in the first meeting of the different stakeholders, debating this and having different people put forward what they think the problem definition is, you realize that people have completely different views of why they’re here. That, to me, is the most important step.

Charles Conn: I would agree with that. For me, the problem context is critical. When we understand “What are the forces acting upon your decision maker? How quickly is the answer needed? With what precision is the answer needed? Are there areas that are off limits or areas where we would particularly like to find our solution? Is the decision maker open to exploring other areas?” then you not only become more efficient, and move toward what we call the critical path in problem solving, but you also make it so much more likely that you’re not going to waste your time or your decision maker’s time.

How often do especially bright young people run off with half of the idea about what the problem is and start collecting data and start building models—only to discover that they’ve really gone off half-cocked.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah.

Charles Conn: And in the wrong direction.

Simon London: OK. So step one—and there is a real art and a structure to it—is define the problem. Step two, Charles?

Charles Conn: My favorite step is step two, which is to use logic trees to disaggregate the problem. Every problem we’re solving has some complexity and some uncertainty in it. The only way that we can really get our team working on the problem is to take the problem apart into logical pieces.

What we find, of course, is that the way to disaggregate the problem often gives you an insight into the answer to the problem quite quickly. I love to do two or three different cuts at it, each one giving a bit of a different insight into what might be going wrong. By doing sensible disaggregations, using logic trees, we can figure out which parts of the problem we should be looking at, and we can assign those different parts to team members.

Simon London: What’s a good example of a logic tree on a sort of ratable problem?

Charles Conn: Maybe the easiest one is the classic profit tree. Almost in every business that I would take a look at, I would start with a profit or return-on-assets tree. In its simplest form, you have the components of revenue, which are price and quantity, and the components of cost, which are cost and quantity. Each of those can be broken out. Cost can be broken into variable cost and fixed cost. The components of price can be broken into what your pricing scheme is. That simple tree often provides insight into what’s going on in a business or what the difference is between that business and the competitors.

If we add the leg, which is “What’s the asset base or investment element?”—so profit divided by assets—then we can ask the question “Is the business using its investments sensibly?” whether that’s in stores or in manufacturing or in transportation assets. I hope we can see just how simple this is, even though we’re describing it in words.

When I went to work with Gordon Moore at the Moore Foundation, the problem that he asked us to look at was “How can we save Pacific salmon?” Now, that sounds like an impossible question, but it was amenable to precisely the same type of disaggregation and allowed us to organize what became a 15-year effort to improve the likelihood of good outcomes for Pacific salmon.

Simon London: Now, is there a danger that your logic tree can be impossibly large? This, I think, brings us onto the third step in the process, which is that you have to prioritize.

Charles Conn: Absolutely. The third step, which we also emphasize, along with good problem definition, is rigorous prioritization—we ask the questions “How important is this lever or this branch of the tree in the overall outcome that we seek to achieve? How much can I move that lever?” Obviously, we try and focus our efforts on ones that have a big impact on the problem and the ones that we have the ability to change. With salmon, ocean conditions turned out to be a big lever, but not one that we could adjust. We focused our attention on fish habitats and fish-harvesting practices, which were big levers that we could affect.

People spend a lot of time arguing about branches that are either not important or that none of us can change. We see it in the public square. When we deal with questions at the policy level—“Should you support the death penalty?” “How do we affect climate change?” “How can we uncover the causes and address homelessness?”—it’s even more important that we’re focusing on levers that are big and movable.

Would you like to learn more about our Strategy & Corporate Finance Practice ?

Simon London: Let’s move swiftly on to step four. You’ve defined your problem, you disaggregate it, you prioritize where you want to analyze—what you want to really look at hard. Then you got to the work plan. Now, what does that mean in practice?

Hugo Sarrazin: Depending on what you’ve prioritized, there are many things you could do. It could be breaking the work among the team members so that people have a clear piece of the work to do. It could be defining the specific analyses that need to get done and executed, and being clear on time lines. There’s always a level-one answer, there’s a level-two answer, there’s a level-three answer. Without being too flippant, I can solve any problem during a good dinner with wine. It won’t have a whole lot of backing.

Simon London: Not going to have a lot of depth to it.

Hugo Sarrazin: No, but it may be useful as a starting point. If the stakes are not that high, that could be OK. If it’s really high stakes, you may need level three and have the whole model validated in three different ways. You need to find a work plan that reflects the level of precision, the time frame you have, and the stakeholders you need to bring along in the exercise.

Charles Conn: I love the way you’ve described that, because, again, some people think of problem solving as a linear thing, but of course what’s critical is that it’s iterative. As you say, you can solve the problem in one day or even one hour.

Charles Conn: We encourage our teams everywhere to do that. We call it the one-day answer or the one-hour answer. In work planning, we’re always iterating. Every time you see a 50-page work plan that stretches out to three months, you know it’s wrong. It will be outmoded very quickly by that learning process that you described. Iterative problem solving is a critical part of this. Sometimes, people think work planning sounds dull, but it isn’t. It’s how we know what’s expected of us and when we need to deliver it and how we’re progressing toward the answer. It’s also the place where we can deal with biases. Bias is a feature of every human decision-making process. If we design our team interactions intelligently, we can avoid the worst sort of biases.

Simon London: Here we’re talking about cognitive biases primarily, right? It’s not that I’m biased against you because of your accent or something. These are the cognitive biases that behavioral sciences have shown we all carry around, things like anchoring, overoptimism—these kinds of things.

Both: Yeah.

Charles Conn: Availability bias is the one that I’m always alert to. You think you’ve seen the problem before, and therefore what’s available is your previous conception of it—and we have to be most careful about that. In any human setting, we also have to be careful about biases that are based on hierarchies, sometimes called sunflower bias. I’m sure, Hugo, with your teams, you make sure that the youngest team members speak first. Not the oldest team members, because it’s easy for people to look at who’s senior and alter their own creative approaches.

Hugo Sarrazin: It’s helpful, at that moment—if someone is asserting a point of view—to ask the question “This was true in what context?” You’re trying to apply something that worked in one context to a different one. That can be deadly if the context has changed, and that’s why organizations struggle to change. You promote all these people because they did something that worked well in the past, and then there’s a disruption in the industry, and they keep doing what got them promoted even though the context has changed.

Simon London: Right. Right.

Hugo Sarrazin: So it’s the same thing in problem solving.

Charles Conn: And it’s why diversity in our teams is so important. It’s one of the best things about the world that we’re in now. We’re likely to have people from different socioeconomic, ethnic, and national backgrounds, each of whom sees problems from a slightly different perspective. It is therefore much more likely that the team will uncover a truly creative and clever approach to problem solving.

Simon London: Let’s move on to step five. You’ve done your work plan. Now you’ve actually got to do the analysis. The thing that strikes me here is that the range of tools that we have at our disposal now, of course, is just huge, particularly with advances in computation, advanced analytics. There’s so many things that you can apply here. Just talk about the analysis stage. How do you pick the right tools?

Charles Conn: For me, the most important thing is that we start with simple heuristics and explanatory statistics before we go off and use the big-gun tools. We need to understand the shape and scope of our problem before we start applying these massive and complex analytical approaches.

Simon London: Would you agree with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: I agree. I think there are so many wonderful heuristics. You need to start there before you go deep into the modeling exercise. There’s an interesting dynamic that’s happening, though. In some cases, for some types of problems, it is even better to set yourself up to maximize your learning. Your problem-solving methodology is test and learn, test and learn, test and learn, and iterate. That is a heuristic in itself, the A/B testing that is used in many parts of the world. So that’s a problem-solving methodology. It’s nothing different. It just uses technology and feedback loops in a fast way. The other one is exploratory data analysis. When you’re dealing with a large-scale problem, and there’s so much data, I can get to the heuristics that Charles was talking about through very clever visualization of data.

You test with your data. You need to set up an environment to do so, but don’t get caught up in neural-network modeling immediately. You’re testing, you’re checking—“Is the data right? Is it sound? Does it make sense?”—before you launch too far.

Simon London: You do hear these ideas—that if you have a big enough data set and enough algorithms, they’re going to find things that you just wouldn’t have spotted, find solutions that maybe you wouldn’t have thought of. Does machine learning sort of revolutionize the problem-solving process? Or are these actually just other tools in the toolbox for structured problem solving?

Charles Conn: It can be revolutionary. There are some areas in which the pattern recognition of large data sets and good algorithms can help us see things that we otherwise couldn’t see. But I do think it’s terribly important we don’t think that this particular technique is a substitute for superb problem solving, starting with good problem definition. Many people use machine learning without understanding algorithms that themselves can have biases built into them. Just as 20 years ago, when we were doing statistical analysis, we knew that we needed good model definition, we still need a good understanding of our algorithms and really good problem definition before we launch off into big data sets and unknown algorithms.

Simon London: Step six. You’ve done your analysis.

Charles Conn: I take six and seven together, and this is the place where young problem solvers often make a mistake. They’ve got their analysis, and they assume that’s the answer, and of course it isn’t the answer. The ability to synthesize the pieces that came out of the analysis and begin to weave those into a story that helps people answer the question “What should I do?” This is back to where we started. If we can’t synthesize, and we can’t tell a story, then our decision maker can’t find the answer to “What should I do?”

Simon London: But, again, these final steps are about motivating people to action, right?

Charles Conn: Yeah.

Simon London: I am slightly torn about the nomenclature of problem solving because it’s on paper, right? Until you motivate people to action, you actually haven’t solved anything.

Charles Conn: I love this question because I think decision-making theory, without a bias to action, is a waste of time. Everything in how I approach this is to help people take action that makes the world better.

Simon London: Hence, these are absolutely critical steps. If you don’t do this well, you’ve just got a bunch of analysis.

Charles Conn: We end up in exactly the same place where we started, which is people speaking across each other, past each other in the public square, rather than actually working together, shoulder to shoulder, to crack these important problems.

Simon London: In the real world, we have a lot of uncertainty—arguably, increasing uncertainty. How do good problem solvers deal with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: At every step of the process. In the problem definition, when you’re defining the context, you need to understand those sources of uncertainty and whether they’re important or not important. It becomes important in the definition of the tree.

You need to think carefully about the branches of the tree that are more certain and less certain as you define them. They don’t have equal weight just because they’ve got equal space on the page. Then, when you’re prioritizing, your prioritization approach may put more emphasis on things that have low probability but huge impact—or, vice versa, may put a lot of priority on things that are very likely and, hopefully, have a reasonable impact. You can introduce that along the way. When you come back to the synthesis, you just need to be nuanced about what you’re understanding, the likelihood.

Often, people lack humility in the way they make their recommendations: “This is the answer.” They’re very precise, and I think we would all be well-served to say, “This is a likely answer under the following sets of conditions” and then make the level of uncertainty clearer, if that is appropriate. It doesn’t mean you’re always in the gray zone; it doesn’t mean you don’t have a point of view. It just means that you can be explicit about the certainty of your answer when you make that recommendation.

Simon London: So it sounds like there is an underlying principle: “Acknowledge and embrace the uncertainty. Don’t pretend that it isn’t there. Be very clear about what the uncertainties are up front, and then build that into every step of the process.”

Hugo Sarrazin: Every step of the process.

Simon London: Yeah. We have just walked through a particular structured methodology for problem solving. But, of course, this is not the only structured methodology for problem solving. One that is also very well-known is design thinking, which comes at things very differently. So, Hugo, I know you have worked with a lot of designers. Just give us a very quick summary. Design thinking—what is it, and how does it relate?

Hugo Sarrazin: It starts with an incredible amount of empathy for the user and uses that to define the problem. It does pause and go out in the wild and spend an enormous amount of time seeing how people interact with objects, seeing the experience they’re getting, seeing the pain points or joy—and uses that to infer and define the problem.

Simon London: Problem definition, but out in the world.

Hugo Sarrazin: With an enormous amount of empathy. There’s a huge emphasis on empathy. Traditional, more classic problem solving is you define the problem based on an understanding of the situation. This one almost presupposes that we don’t know the problem until we go see it. The second thing is you need to come up with multiple scenarios or answers or ideas or concepts, and there’s a lot of divergent thinking initially. That’s slightly different, versus the prioritization, but not for long. Eventually, you need to kind of say, “OK, I’m going to converge again.” Then you go and you bring things back to the customer and get feedback and iterate. Then you rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat. There’s a lot of tactile building, along the way, of prototypes and things like that. It’s very iterative.

Simon London: So, Charles, are these complements or are these alternatives?

Charles Conn: I think they’re entirely complementary, and I think Hugo’s description is perfect. When we do problem definition well in classic problem solving, we are demonstrating the kind of empathy, at the very beginning of our problem, that design thinking asks us to approach. When we ideate—and that’s very similar to the disaggregation, prioritization, and work-planning steps—we do precisely the same thing, and often we use contrasting teams, so that we do have divergent thinking. The best teams allow divergent thinking to bump them off whatever their initial biases in problem solving are. For me, design thinking gives us a constant reminder of creativity, empathy, and the tactile nature of problem solving, but it’s absolutely complementary, not alternative.

Simon London: I think, in a world of cross-functional teams, an interesting question is do people with design-thinking backgrounds really work well together with classical problem solvers? How do you make that chemistry happen?

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah, it is not easy when people have spent an enormous amount of time seeped in design thinking or user-centric design, whichever word you want to use. If the person who’s applying classic problem-solving methodology is very rigid and mechanical in the way they’re doing it, there could be an enormous amount of tension. If there’s not clarity in the role and not clarity in the process, I think having the two together can be, sometimes, problematic.

The second thing that happens often is that the artifacts the two methodologies try to gravitate toward can be different. Classic problem solving often gravitates toward a model; design thinking migrates toward a prototype. Rather than writing a big deck with all my supporting evidence, they’ll bring an example, a thing, and that feels different. Then you spend your time differently to achieve those two end products, so that’s another source of friction.

Now, I still think it can be an incredibly powerful thing to have the two—if there are the right people with the right mind-set, if there is a team that is explicit about the roles, if we’re clear about the kind of outcomes we are attempting to bring forward. There’s an enormous amount of collaborativeness and respect.

Simon London: But they have to respect each other’s methodology and be prepared to flex, maybe, a little bit, in how this process is going to work.

Hugo Sarrazin: Absolutely.

Simon London: The other area where, it strikes me, there could be a little bit of a different sort of friction is this whole concept of the day-one answer, which is what we were just talking about in classical problem solving. Now, you know that this is probably not going to be your final answer, but that’s how you begin to structure the problem. Whereas I would imagine your design thinkers—no, they’re going off to do their ethnographic research and get out into the field, potentially for a long time, before they come back with at least an initial hypothesis.

Want better strategies? Become a bulletproof problem solver

Hugo Sarrazin: That is a great callout, and that’s another difference. Designers typically will like to soak into the situation and avoid converging too quickly. There’s optionality and exploring different options. There’s a strong belief that keeps the solution space wide enough that you can come up with more radical ideas. If there’s a large design team or many designers on the team, and you come on Friday and say, “What’s our week-one answer?” they’re going to struggle. They’re not going to be comfortable, naturally, to give that answer. It doesn’t mean they don’t have an answer; it’s just not where they are in their thinking process.

Simon London: I think we are, sadly, out of time for today. But Charles and Hugo, thank you so much.

Charles Conn: It was a pleasure to be here, Simon.

Hugo Sarrazin: It was a pleasure. Thank you.

Simon London: And thanks, as always, to you, our listeners, for tuning into this episode of the McKinsey Podcast . If you want to learn more about problem solving, you can find the book, Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything , online or order it through your local bookstore. To learn more about McKinsey, you can of course find us at McKinsey.com.

Charles Conn is CEO of Oxford Sciences Innovation and an alumnus of McKinsey’s Sydney office. Hugo Sarrazin is a senior partner in the Silicon Valley office, where Simon London, a member of McKinsey Publishing, is also based.

Explore a career with us

Strategy to beat the odds

Five routes to more innovative problem solving

We will keep fighting for all libraries - stand with us!

Internet Archive Audio

This Just In
Grateful Dead
Old Time Radio
78 RPMs and Cylinder Recordings
Audio Books & Poetry
Computers, Technology and Science
Music, Arts & Culture
News & Public Affairs
Spirituality & Religion
Radio News Archive

Flickr Commons
Occupy Wall Street Flickr
NASA Images
Solar System Collection
Ames Research Center

All Software
Old School Emulation
MS-DOS Games
Historical Software
Classic PC Games
Software Library
Kodi Archive and Support File
Vintage Software
CD-ROM Software
CD-ROM Software Library
Software Sites
Tucows Software Library
Shareware CD-ROMs
Software Capsules Compilation
CD-ROM Images
ZX Spectrum
DOOM Level CD

Smithsonian Libraries
FEDLINK (US)
Lincoln Collection
American Libraries
Canadian Libraries
Universal Library
Project Gutenberg
Children's Library
Biodiversity Heritage Library
Books by Language
Additional Collections

Prelinger Archives
Democracy Now!
Occupy Wall Street
TV NSA Clip Library
Animation & Cartoons
Arts & Music
Computers & Technology
Cultural & Academic Films
Ephemeral Films
Sports Videos
Videogame Videos
Youth Media

Search the history of over 866 billion web pages on the Internet.

Mobile Apps

Wayback Machine (iOS)
Wayback Machine (Android)

Browser Extensions

Archive-it subscription.

Explore the Collections
Build Collections

Save Page Now

Capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future.

Please enter a valid web address

Donate Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape

Social casework, a problem-solving process

Bookreader item preview, share or embed this item, flag this item for.

Graphic Violence
Explicit Sexual Content
Hate Speech
Misinformation/Disinformation
Marketing/Phishing/Advertising
Misleading/Inaccurate/Missing Metadata

plus-circle Add Review comment Reviews

505 Previews

3 Favorites

DOWNLOAD OPTIONS

No suitable files to display here.

EPUB and PDF access not available for this item.

IN COLLECTIONS

Uploaded by Sanderia on October 12, 2010

Application of Perlman's Problem Solving Model in Caseworkwith Marginalised Elderly

2016, IOSR-JNHS

The article focuses on the application of the problem-solving model of casework proposed and developed by Helen Paris Pearlman's [1957], The four P’s of casework practice: Person, Place, Problem and Processes are discussed in the Indian context. The model has been effectively administered to five elderly women residing in a welfare institution in Chennai. The effort indicates that Pearlman’s Model can be successfully adopted in the Indian setting by integrating direct and indirect practices of casework, suited to our local needs and issues Keywords: Marginalised elderly women, Person, Place, Problem, Process, Direct and In-Direct social casework, Indigenous model. I

Related Papers

gigil george

lubarak dario

BMC health services research

Frédéric Balard

In 2009, case management interventions were a new social service in France implemented within the framework of the PRISMA-France program (2006-2010). People who had benefitted from case management intervention were individuals, over 60 years old living at home in situations deemed complex by professionals. Their informal caregivers were also considered as users of the service. This research accompanied the interventions during the implementation of PRISMA-France attempting to explore the users' (old people and their informal caregivers) and case managers' first experiences of case management. Its aim is to provide a thorough knowledge of the dispositive in order to reveal any initial failings and to ensure optimum conditions for the onset of full implementation. The study had a qualitative explorative design. Cross-linked representations of case-management were obtained through opened-ended and guided interviews with three types of informants: old people (19), their informal...

ushvinder popli , Sulfikar C

The phenomenon of population ageing is becoming a major concern all over the world, for both developed and developing countries, since last two decades. The longevity is the one the greatest achievement of the modern world and demographic transition of growing elders will have a dramatic impact on the individual's life, structure of the family and other social institutions. Tribes constitute 8.61% of the total population of the country, numbering 104.28 million (2011 Census, Govt of India) and cover about 15% of the country's territorial area and most of them remain at lowest stratum of the society and their life is conditioned by the nature. The elderly among tribes are lowest stratum people and they face lot of psychosocial issues. The quality of life among tribal elderly is deteriorating because of inadequate facilities and weak support systems. Social work is practice-oriented profession to enhance the well-being of the people by intervening at the points where people find difficulties. It can make the unique professional contributions to elder people and their family to adapt the system or environment. Social work practice with tribal elderly has lot of challenges and there is a large scope for micro and macro level interventions. This paper try to documents the challenges and scope of social work practice among tribal elderly in India in context of systems or environments they live and recommend some measures to address these challenges.

Professor Dr. Sakina Riaz Social Work

This study is divided into five sections and covers a brief overview of the clinical practices of Social Case Work as a strategy for patient's welfare in the Public Hospitals of Karachi. In section one, the concept of Social Case Work in Pakistani pedagogical scenario and Social Case Work's contribution to the current health care system is discussed. The second section of the study covers the review of the literature. The succeeding section, i.e. section III stated the methodology adopted to derive the results of the study. The results of this study, based on the analysis ended by applying the proposed methodology have been argued in section IV. In the concluding section, conclusions and recommendations were presented. In this exploratory research study, the qualitative methods have employed to understand the reasons which are responsible for devalue of Social Case Work Practices in the public hospitals in Karachi.

Ilango Ponnuswami

Bimal Antony

Raja Samuel

carol maddock

Soumitra Sarkar

Models of Social-Work Practice

Cite this chapter.

Zofia T. Butrym 2

61 Accesses

The concept of ‘social functioning’, as described in the previous chapter, provides social work with its basic terms of reference in relation to its broad objectives. It is, however, too abstract a concept for operational purposes and it calls for ‘middle-range’ generalisations for its application to social-work practice to be effective. It is not surprising, therefore, that an integral element in all conceptualisations of social-work practice has been an attempt to ‘translate’ the meaning of social functioning into some more tangible terms. An analysis of these different attempts provides valuable insights into the nature of the complexity of social work as a helping activity, and can thus serve as a useful supplement to some of the discussion in the preceding chapter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

R. W. Roberts and R. H. Nee (eds), Theories of Social Casework (University of Chicago Press, 1970).

Google Scholar

J. W. Reid and L. Epstein, Task Centred Casework (Columbia University Press, 1972) pp. 7, 10.

H. Goldstein, Social Work Practice: A Unitary Approach (Columbia University Press, 1973) p. 187.

H. H. Perlman, Social Casework: A Problem-Solving Process (University of Chicago Press, 1957).

H. H. Perlman, ‘The Problem-Solving Model in Social Casework’, in Theories of Social Casework , ed. Roberts and Nee.

H. H. Perlman, ‘Social Casework in Social Work: its Place and Purpose’, in Casework within Social Work , ed. J. Parker (Department of Social Studies, University of Newcastle, 1973).

Perlman, ‘Social Casework in Social Work’, pp. 13–14.

Perlman, ‘The Problem-Solving Model in Social Casework’, pp. 151–2.

Ibid. p. 152.

F. Hollis, ‘The Psycho-Social Approach to the Practice of Casework’, in Theories of Social Casework , ed. Roberts and Nee, p. 35.

Ibid. p. 48.

Ibid. p. 46.

Ibid. p. 65.

R. E. Smalley, Theory for Social Work Practice (Columbia University Press, 1967) and ‘The Functional Approach to Casework Practice’, in Theories of Social Casework , ed. Roberts and Nee.

Smalley, ‘The Functional Approach to Casework Practice’, p. 93.

Ibid. p. 80.

N. Timms, Social Casework: Principles and Practice (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1964) ch. 1.

C. Winnicott, ‘Casework and Agency Function’, in Child Care and Social Work (Welwyn: Codicote Press, 1964).

Ibid. p. 62.

Ibid. pp. 61–2.

Report of the Committee on Local Authority and Allied Personal Social Services , Cmnd. 3703 (London: H.M.S.O., 1968).

P. Halmos, The Faith of the Counsellors (London: Constable, 1965).

Ibid. pp. 26, 27, 28, 182, 190.

C. Rogers, ‘The Characteristics of a Helping Relationship’, Personnel and Guidance Journal , no. 37 (1953) p. 6.

Ibid. p. 16.

E. J. Thomas, ‘Behavioural Modification and Casework’, in Theories of Social Casework , ed. Roberts and Nee, p. 187.

D. Jehu et al. , Behaviour Modification in Social Work (New York: Wiley, 1972).

M. Shaw, ‘Ethical Implications of a Behavioural Approach’, in ibid.

D. Kaplan, ‘A Concept of Acute Situational Disorder’, Social Work (April 1962).

L. Rapoport, ‘Crisis Intervention as a Mode of Brief Treatment’, in Theories of Social Casework , ed. Roberts and Nee, p. 277.

Ibid. p. 277.

Ibid. p. 267.

Reid and Epstein, Task Centred Casework .

J. W. Reid and A. W. Shyne, Brief and Extended Casework (Columbia University Press, 1969).

Reid and Epstein, Task Centred Casework , p. 20.

Ibid. p. 20.

Smalley, Theory for Social Work Practice .

L. von Bertalanffy, General Systems Theory (New York: George Braziller, 1968).

W. Buckley, Sociology and Modern Systems Theory (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1967).

E. J. Thomas and R. A. Feldman, ‘Concepts of Role Theory’, in Behavioural Science for Social Workers , ed. E. J. Thomas (London: Macmillan, 1967).

Sister Mary Paul Janchill, R.G.S., ‘Systems Concepts in Casework Theory and Practice’, Social Casework (February 1969).

A. Pincus and A. Minahan, Social Work Practice: Model and Method (Illinois: Peacock, 1973).

Goldstein, Social Work Practice: A Unitary Approach .

Pincus and Minahan, Social Work Practice , pp. 247–71.

A. Pincus and A. Minahan, ‘An Integrated Framework for Social Work: Some Implications for Education and Practice’ , in A Unitary Approach to Social Work Practice , ed. F. Ainsworth and J. Hunter, Conference Report (University of Dundee, 1975) p. 48.

Goldstein, Social Work Practice , p. XIII.

Ibid. p. 54.

Ibid. p. 55.

Ibid. p. 118.

Ibid. p. 188.

Ibid. p. XIII.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

London School of Economics and Political Science, UK

Zofia T. Butrym ( Senior Lecturer in Social Work )

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

About this chapter

Butrym, Z.T. (1976). Models of Social-Work Practice. In: The Nature of Social Work. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-15685-6_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-15685-6_2

Publisher Name : Palgrave, London

Print ISBN : 978-0-333-19703-5

Online ISBN : 978-1-349-15685-6

eBook Packages : Palgrave Social & Cultural Studies Collection Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

SUGGESTED TOPICS
The Magazine
Newsletters
Managing Yourself
Managing Teams
Work-life Balance
The Big Idea
Data & Visuals
Reading Lists
Case Selections
HBR Learning
Topic Feeds
Account Settings
Email Preferences

How to Talk to an Employee Who Isn’t Meeting Expectations

Jenny Fernandez

It’s an opportunity to address the gap between the work they’re delivering and the company’s goals.

Approaching a conversation about improving an employee’s performance requires preparation, empathy, and a focus on collaboration. Even though hearing the truth about their current performance will be tough and potentially hurtful, it’s a teaching moment managers must embrace to help them become more resilient and adept at problem-solving and developing professional relationships. The author offers several strategies for treating difficult performance conversations not as fault-finding missions, but instead as opportunities to work collaboratively to define a shared commitment to growth and development.

As a leadership and team coach, I frequently encounter situations where managers feel ill-equipped to give their team members negative performance feedback. These conversations can be particularly challenging because the stakes are high for both sides. Unfavorable performance reviews and ratings come with tangible consequences for an employee’s compensation and career progression. Further, if the negative feedback is a surprise to them, it might prompt them to start looking for a new job.

Jenny Fernandez , MBA, is an executive and team coach, Columbia and NYU faculty, and future of work and brand strategist. She works with senior leaders and their teams to become more collaborative, innovative, and resilient. Her work spans Fortune 500 companies, startups, and higher education. Jenny has been recognized by LinkedIn as a “Top Voice in Executive Coaching, Leadership Development, and Personal Branding” and was invited to join the prestigious Marshall Goldsmith’s 100 Coaches community. She is a Gen Z advocate. Connect with her on LinkedIn .

Partner Center

Facility for Rare Isotope Beams

At michigan state university, international research team uses wavefunction matching to solve quantum many-body problems, new approach makes calculations with realistic interactions possible.

FRIB researchers are part of an international research team solving challenging computational problems in quantum physics using a new method called wavefunction matching. The new approach has applications to fields such as nuclear physics, where it is enabling theoretical calculations of atomic nuclei that were previously not possible. The details are published in Nature (“Wavefunction matching for solving quantum many-body problems”) .

Ab initio methods and their computational challenges

An ab initio method describes a complex system by starting from a description of its elementary components and their interactions. For the case of nuclear physics, the elementary components are protons and neutrons. Some key questions that ab initio calculations can help address are the binding energies and properties of atomic nuclei not yet observed and linking nuclear structure to the underlying interactions among protons and neutrons.

Yet, some ab initio methods struggle to produce reliable calculations for systems with complex interactions. One such method is quantum Monte Carlo simulations. In quantum Monte Carlo simulations, quantities are computed using random or stochastic processes. While quantum Monte Carlo simulations can be efficient and powerful, they have a significant weakness: the sign problem. The sign problem develops when positive and negative weight contributions cancel each other out. This cancellation results in inaccurate final predictions. It is often the case that quantum Monte Carlo simulations can be performed for an approximate or simplified interaction, but the corresponding simulations for realistic interactions produce severe sign problems and are therefore not possible.

Using ‘plastic surgery’ to make calculations possible

The new wavefunction-matching approach is designed to solve such computational problems. The research team—from Gaziantep Islam Science and Technology University in Turkey; University of Bonn, Ruhr University Bochum, and Forschungszentrum Jülich in Germany; Institute for Basic Science in South Korea; South China Normal University, Sun Yat-Sen University, and Graduate School of China Academy of Engineering Physics in China; Tbilisi State University in Georgia; CEA Paris-Saclay and Université Paris-Saclay in France; and Mississippi State University and the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) at Michigan State University (MSU)—includes Dean Lee , professor of physics at FRIB and in MSU’s Department of Physics and Astronomy and head of the Theoretical Nuclear Science department at FRIB, and Yuan-Zhuo Ma , postdoctoral research associate at FRIB.

“We are often faced with the situation that we can perform calculations using a simple approximate interaction, but realistic high-fidelity interactions cause severe computational problems,” said Lee. “Wavefunction matching solves this problem by doing plastic surgery. It removes the short-distance part of the high-fidelity interaction, and replaces it with the short-distance part of an easily computable interaction.”

This transformation is done in a way that preserves all of the important properties of the original realistic interaction. Since the new wavefunctions look similar to that of the easily computable interaction, researchers can now perform calculations using the easily computable interaction and apply a standard procedure for handling small corrections called perturbation theory. A team effort

The research team applied this new method to lattice quantum Monte Carlo simulations for light nuclei, medium-mass nuclei, neutron matter, and nuclear matter. Using precise ab initio calculations, the results closely matched real-world data on nuclear properties such as size, structure, and binding energies. Calculations that were once impossible due to the sign problem can now be performed using wavefunction matching.

“It is a fantastic project and an excellent opportunity to work with the brightest nuclear scientist s in FRIB and around the globe,” said Ma. “As a theorist , I'm also very excited about programming and conducting research on the world's most powerful exascale supercomputers, such as Frontier , which allows us to implement wavefunction matching to explore the mysteries of nuclear physics.”

While the research team focused solely on quantum Monte Carlo simulations, wavefunction matching should be useful for many different ab initio approaches, including both classical and quantum computing calculations. The researchers at FRIB worked with collaborators at institutions in China, France, Germany, South Korea, Turkey, and United States.

“The work is the culmination of effort over many years to handle the computational problems associated with realistic high-fidelity nuclear interactions,” said Lee. “It is very satisfying to see that the computational problems are cleanly resolved with this new approach. We are grateful to all of the collaboration members who contributed to this project, in particular, the lead author, Serdar Elhatisari.”

This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. National Science Foundation, the German Research Foundation, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Chinese Academy of Sciences President’s International Fellowship Initiative, Volkswagen Stiftung, the European Research Council, the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the National Security Academic Fund, the Rare Isotope Science Project of the Institute for Basic Science, the National Research Foundation of Korea, the Institute for Basic Science, and the Espace de Structure et de réactions Nucléaires Théorique.

Michigan State University operates the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) as a user facility for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC), supporting the mission of the DOE-SC Office of Nuclear Physics. Hosting what is designed to be the most powerful heavy-ion accelerator, FRIB enables scientists to make discoveries about the properties of rare isotopes in order to better understand the physics of nuclei, nuclear astrophysics, fundamental interactions, and applications for society, including in medicine, homeland security, and industry.

The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States and is working to address some of today’s most pressing challenges. For more information, visit energy.gov/science.

IMAGES

problem solving analysis framework
Problem-Solving Strategies: Definition and 5 Techniques to Try
The 5 Steps of Problem Solving
An Overview Of 9 Step Problem Solving Model
Top 15 Problem-Solving Activities for Your Team to Master
7 steps to master problem solving methodology

VIDEO

[OR1-Modeling] Lecture 5: Case #4 Problem description constraints
Problem Solving Model
The 4C'S Problem Solving Model Study Case Eiger
Using the Problem Solving Model for your PSA (Optional)
#6 Steps Problem Solving Model# By SN Panigrahi
BTC/MRI Problem-solving in organizations: it works!

COMMENTS

Application of Perlman's Problem Solving Model in Caseworkwith
Abstract: The article focuses on application of the problem solving model of case work proposed and. developed by Helen paris pearlman's [1957],The four P's of case work practice: Person ...
Problem-Solving Theory: The Task-Centred Model
This chapter focuses on the task-centred model (Reid and Epstein 1972) as a prime example of the major influence problem-solving theory has exerted in the practice of social work.First, as background for understanding the development of the task-centred model, the chapter offers a brief account of the historical development of the problem-solving model (Perlman 1957) and describes its key ...
Helen Harris Perlman and the Problem Solving Model
3) The problem-solving model is culture-bound—Since the social work problem-solving approach was developed initially in social work in the context of white, middle-class culture in the United States (though Perlman did have extensive clinical experience working with minority populations, Perlman, 1971a), some have raised concerns that the ...
PDF Problem-Solving Theory: The Task-Centred Model
Blanca M. Ramos and Randall L. Stetson. Abstract. This chapter examines the task-centred model to illustrate the application of problem-solving theory for social work intervention. First, it provides a brief description of the problem-solving model. Its historical development and key principles and concepts are presented.
Social Casework : A Problem-Solving Process , Volume 10
Social Casework: A Problem-Solving Process, Volume 10. Helen Harris Perlman. University of Chicago Press, Mar 15, 1957 - Political Science - 268 pages. This is a basic book in social casework. Its thesis is that among all the complexities within the subject matter and operations of casework there are certain constant elements, forces, and ...
Theories Used in Social Work Practice & Practice Models
The model includes seven stages: assess safety and lethality, rapport building, problem identification, address feelings, generate alternatives, develop an action plan, and follow up. This social work practice model is commonly used with clients who are expressing suicidal ideation. To learn more about SocialWork@Simmons, request information ...
PDF Chapter 2 Models of Social-Work Practice
This model owes its existence to Perlman who has been e1aborating it gradually over the years. Her formulations can be traced through her many writings, in particular S:Jcial Casework: A Problem-Solving Process,4 'The Problem-Solving Model in Social Casework' ,5 and 'Social Case work in Social Work: its Place and Purpose' .6
The problem-solving model: A framework for integrating the science and
In this chapter we (a) review the early development of the problem-solving model for social work practice; (b) discuss the later development of the problem solving model in terms of its extension to and further elaboration by generalist models of social work practice; (c) provide an overview of how the problem-solving model allows for the integration of the scientific and artistic elements of ...
Models of Social Case Work
(3) A problem-solving model. The hospital is viewed as a problem-solving organization. Illness is a real problem. The problem-solving phase, in casework, focuses on the identification of the problem to be worked on, breaking it down into manageable parts, and establishing or limiting goals. The emphasis is on the present problem.
Social Casework: A Problem-Solving Process . Helen Harris Perlman
Social Casework: A Problem-Solving Process.Helen Harris Perlman . Florence Sytz
Brief Therapies in Social Work: Task-Centered Model and Solution
The task-centered model evolved out of the psychodynamic practice and uses a brief, problem-solving approach to help clients resolve presenting problems. The task-centered model is currently used in clinical social work and group work and may also be applied to other types of social work practice.
What Are The Theories & Practice Models Used in Social Work?
Proposed by Helen Harris Perlman in her book Social Casework: A Problem-solving Process, the problem solving model. Ms. ... By examining a person's life story, this social work practice model externalizes struggles, allowing individuals to adopt a new perspective and see the bigger picture. From a distance, they may be able to reframe their ...
Social casework : a problem-solving process
Social casework : a problem-solving process by Perlman, Helen Harris. Publication date 1957 Topics Social Work, Social case work, Service social personnel, Social casework, Maatschappelijk werk Publisher [Chicago] : University of Chicago Press Collection inlibrary; printdisabled; internetarchivebooks
PDF Application of Perlman's Problem Solving Model in Caseworkwith
To apply Pearlman's Problem Solving Model of case work intervention to enable the clients to deal with the problems. Based on the outcome of the intervention, to develop a suitable model of case work intervention that could be effectively applied by social workers working with elderly women in welfare institutions in the local setting.
Problem-Solving Courts
The Problem-Solving Court Model. Problem-solving courts differ from traditional courts in that they focus on one type of offense or type of person committing the crime. An interdisciplinary team, led by a judge (or parole authority), works collaboratively to achieve two goals: Case management to expedite case processing and reduce caseload and ...
How to master the seven-step problem-solving process
When we do problem definition well in classic problem solving, we are demonstrating the kind of empathy, at the very beginning of our problem, that design thinking asks us to approach. When we ideate—and that's very similar to the disaggregation, prioritization, and work-planning steps—we do precisely the same thing, and often we use ...
What is Problem Solving? Steps, Process & Techniques
Finding a suitable solution for issues can be accomplished by following the basic four-step problem-solving process and methodology outlined below. Step. Characteristics. 1. Define the problem. Differentiate fact from opinion. Specify underlying causes. Consult each faction involved for information. State the problem specifically.
Social casework, a problem-solving process
Social casework, a problem-solving process by Perlman, Helen Harris. Publication date 1957 Topics Social case work, Problem Solving, Social Welfare, Service social personnel, Maatschappelijk werk, Social casework Publisher [Chicago] University of Chicago Press Collection inlibrary; printdisabled; internetarchivebooks; americana
Problem-Solving Models: What They Are and How To Use Them
Here is a six-step process to follow when using a problem-solving model: 1. Define the problem. First, determine the problem that your team needs to solve. During this step, teams may encourage open and honest communication so everyone feels comfortable sharing their thoughts and concerns.
Application of Perlman's Problem Solving Model in Caseworkwith
2 Abstract: The article focuses on application of the problem solving model of case work proposed and developed by Helen parispearlman's [1957],The four P's of case work practice: Person, Place, Problem and Process are discussed in the Indian context. The model has been effectively administered on five elderly women residing in a welfare ...
PDF Social Case Work UNIT 5 SOME THEORETICAL APPROACHES IN CASE WORK
5.0 OBJECTIVES. The present unit deals with some theoretical approaches in casework, which has been the predominant social work method in social work practice. After studying the unit you will be able to know more about Existential Theory, Cognitive Theory, Behavioural Modification theory, Problem solving approach and electic approach.
PDF Problem-Solving Theory: The Task-Centred Model 9
report titled Special Case Work: Generic and Speciﬁc published in 1929. This report ... To some extent, this report laid the groundwork for the development of the social work problem-solving model by Helen Perlman (1957). Perlman's problem-solving model was rooted in psychodynamic ego psychology theory (Coady and Lehmann 2016). Perlman, a ...
Models of Social-Work Practice
H. H. Perlman, 'The Problem-Solving Model in Social Casework', in Theories of Social Casework, ed. Roberts and Nee. Google Scholar H. H. Perlman, 'Social Casework in Social Work: its Place and Purpose', in Casework within Social Work, ed. J. Parker (Department of Social Studies, University of Newcastle, 1973).
15 Real-Life Case Study Examples & Best Practices
To ensure you're making the most of your case studies, we've put together 15 real-life case study examples to inspire you. These examples span a variety of industries and formats. We've also included best practices, design tips and templates to inspire you. Let's dive in!
How to Talk to an Employee Who Isn't Meeting Expectations
It's an opportunity to address the gap between the work they're delivering and the company's goals. Approaching a conversation about improving an employee's performance requires ...
[ENGSUB] สายแฟตัวป๊า "ออฟ ...
พังตู้ #ออฟจุมพล ป่าปี๊สายแฟ แกกก จะช็อคคค Item แต่ละชิ้นมันอลังเกิน ผลิตใหม่ ดีไซน์ใหม่ทุกชิ้น พอเห็นราคา ลมแทบจับ เอนจอยกับการเล่า Story...
International research team uses wavefunction matching to solve quantum
New approach makes calculations with realistic interactions possibleFRIB researchers are part of an international research team solving challenging computational problems in quantum physics using a new method called wavefunction matching. The new approach has applications to fields such as nuclear physics, where it is enabling theoretical calculations of atomic nuclei that were previously not ...