Problem Management and Person-Centred Approach to Counseling - Essay Example

You’re Name Professor Course 19 June 2006 Compare and Contrast Egan’s Problem Management and Roger’s Person Centered Approach to Counseling To accurately begin this research it is quite easily perceived what the primary similarity is between these two approaches. Obviously they are both meant to assist in correcting problematic areas in people’s lives that promote stress, high anxiety, self doubt, and increased worry which might be relative to their job or some other pertinent aspect that has relation to their career and or family life. Both Rogers and Egan attempt to help individuals by assisting them in reaching a state of self-awareness and self-assertiveness so that they can develop and grow in their life in the proper and a more positive manner. The main idea that has the most influential control over these two models has to do with how they both utilize empowerment as a way to promote positivism instead of negativism, and they both focus on the emotion of empathy (Kendall & Gerow 1996, p. 725). Egan’s model implicitly demonstrates how the recent past and the present have a direct influence on how individuals will behave in their everyday activities. Also, following the ideas presented by Egan, they don’t necessarily focus on any specific theory or framework. Rather, Egan provides cohesive thought into exploring specific problem areas which can then be utilized to reach a resolution to what is creating the adversity for the person. Also, Egan uses a structure that focuses on “core principles” which include aspects that direct a person to try and change their behavior by having the person address the three following questions: 1) What is going on? 2) What do I want instead? 3) How might I get to what I want? (Egan 1998, pp. 8-9). As can be seen the main idea is to help the individual map out the correct steps to facilitate a change in their life. It ultimately leaves a lot of space for the individual in general to work through their problems while the therapist or counselor lends a listening and attentive ear. This places the counselor as somewhat of a therapeutic guide who allows the individual to learn assertive behaviors while they act as a mediator through the problem solving process. The main idea is to formulate new mind sets while breaking away from the old ones so that an individual can generate new ideas that might be of help to them (Egan 1998, p. 10). This type of approach has been found to be quite common throughout different cultures and it is also believed to be rather effective in correcting behaviors that lead to specific problems in people’s lives (Bolton 1986). In Egan’s book he states that many clients seek counseling services due to problems that they are having trouble dealing with on their own. The following quote serves well to bring coherence to this statement: Many clients become clients because, either in their own eyes, or the eyes of others, they are involved in problem situations that they are not handling well. These clients need ways of dealing with, solving, or transcending their problem situations. In other words, they need to manage their problems in living more effectively (Egan 1998, p. 4). In this regard, there is a strong similarity between Egan and Rogers in tackling situations such as these. Rogers, like Egan believes that the counseling environment should be supportive to an individual and that there should be a lead in to help the client develop a self-understanding of their own adverse actions from the past and the present (Kensit 2000, p. 346). However the main difference is that the Rogerian theory defines the fact that the client should not be directly lead to the issues creating the critical problems in their life but rather they should be helped to understand them and pinpoint them on their own. Also, while Egan focuses more heavily on past experiences as the main culprit for the problems, Roger’s methodology is not as heavy in this area. Although Rogers does define the fact that past experiences can have some impact he perceives the changes to come from the development of an insight within the individual rather than simply learning from the past conditioning that they have had. Furthermore, Egan’s model is more directive while Roger’s is more in-directive which is a huge difference in thought within a process such as this. The primary goals of the Rogerian method are seen to be similar to Egan’s philosophy in the regard of how they are set to promote self-esteem and more of an openness in the communication process to work through various difficulties that might be found. However, in Roger’s counseling methodology the client directly chooses in what direction that they want the counseling experience to go (Kahn 1999, p. 94). Nevertheless, despite some of the acute differences between these two, the similarities remain intriguing. For example, Roger’s is extremely alike Egan as he believes that sincerity and trust are two of the most imperative factors to implement in the client/counselor relationship. Also, as was said, Rogers does realize that the past experiences do have some affect on an individual which do provide a great deal of insight into getting a person to realize their deficiencies. However, as was stated, Rogers does not feel that the past truly has that much of a part on the future of an individual as Egan does. For instance Egan believes that by focusing on past experiences, they will be what improves and changes the behaviors of an individual while Rogers believes that a more ingrained and insightful philosophy is what effectively turns clients around to improve upon their life. For instance, while Rogers claims that a person is directly influenced by what they have been exposed to in the past, and of which does become helpful in locating specific adverse determinants, it alone is not what defines the integrative insights that a client unmasks which help them reassert themselves in a positive manner, away from what has been a negative influence previously. Rogers states that by the utilization of his person-centered therapy, a person can consciously alter his behavior to ward of negative patterns from continuing to emerge (Rogers 1942). This type of philosophy has gradually developed into an approach that forces individuals into reevaluating their own philosophical concepts about their behaviors and their life in a generalized manner. Rogers emphasizes the fact that for person-centered therapy to be truly effective then the counselor him or herself has to be genuinely attuned to the individual’s needs and not pretend to seem to care about how their problems are affecting them. Egan of course follows this same type of thinking in regards to genuine concern and empathy with individual clients, so there is not an extreme difference in this conceptualization. Furthermore, both show that a wholly clinical attitude is not helpful in reaching amicable resolutions to certain difficulties. What is being stated is that it is the concentrated genuine efforts from the counselor that is without a doubt sincerely concerned about the well-being of the individual, of which will help them to solve their problems in a rational and logical manner with a good measure of trust between the counselor and the client. Egan and Rogers both agree with this type of philosophy. Roger’s himself does not like to use the term, “patient” because it does not seem to bring enough emphases to the relationship and also does not appear to bring a connection between the two either. The person-centered approach is not a pretense or falsified way of pretending to let the client guide themselves. In fact, Roger’s has always pointed out that for “client-centeredness” to be wholly effective it has to remain sensitive and sincere towards the client but in a non-directive therapeutic way. He states this is what sets it apart from other methods of therapy (Rogers 1945, p. 137). Thereby, one of the most prominent differences between Egan and Rogers is the fact that Rogers looks to be more of a philosophical realm while Egan’s is more of a solid psychological approach. Rogers believes that by having an individual realize that there are forces that exist within them, and not simply just external then a more insightful and spontaneous approach can develop which will influence a person’s behavior more accurately. This is why Rogers does not put the same type of degree of faith into the past experiences of individuals because the form of therapy he discusses is found to be unpredictable through any prior influences or conditionings a person has developed by previous interactions in their life. Therefore his thoughts lean in the direction of “volitional control” which he feels have to be taken into account within any framework that involves a “psychological equation” (Taft 1933). Egan specifically focuses on challenging individuals to change their behaviors, and in this regard the difference between the two is undoubtedly obvious if it was not before. For added emphases it can be seen in Egan’s latest work that he utilizes a “pragmatic approach” that includes cultures from all around the world as well (Egan 2006). Also, Egan is found to use many different theoretical orientations and he is proficient in integrating these into a helping methodology to assist clients. He utilizes the humanistic, cognitive, cognitive-behavioral, and solution focused forms to try and break down the adversities in an individual’s life and then he progresses forward to challenge the past behaviors of an individual to transform them into positive reinforcements (Egan 2006). Of course this can quite fluidly be seen as a form of “positive psychology” as Egan takes problem occurrences that have created adversities and has the client transform them into what could be opportunities for the future. He also places heavy emphases on self-healing which utilizes hope and optimism to motivate and encourage individuals to develop a form of self resilience as well (Egan 2006). Although it can be stated that Rogers does similar tasks and techniques they are in an opposite manner from Egan’s structure. When Egan focuses strongly on correcting the problems within management he utilizes a more formal approach, very different from Roger’s in some respects. For instance Egan (1998, p. 301) points out that it is the planning phase that can lead to the correct conversations which define how people can develop a better response to certain situations in their work environment. Therefore this approach has the ability to change any adverse areas in a more comprehensible manner. Egan thereby shows that helping professionals does not always require moving into a full “case work” mode but rather the help can ultimately stem from an indirect conversation with an individual (Egan 1998, p. 301). Egan also shows that the best way he feels to help professionals is by showing them how to organize the most important aspects in their direct environment. He states that dis-organization is often some of the main reason why people run into difficult situations in their lives and therefore he tries to prevent that by guiding them in the right direction but again, not directly guiding them but assisting them in becoming self-aware themselves. Hasty and dis-organized action is often self-defeating. “I tried this and I did that and nothing worked” is usually a sign of poor planning rather than the impossibility of the task. Stimulating clients to think different ways of achieving their goals is usually an excellent investment of time (Egan 1998, p. 30). There are many common issues that individuals often run into when trying to work through certain problematic areas in their life or in their work environment. Often people like to utilize a wishful thinking and hope for the best but this isn’t the logical way to approach problems as to reach accurate resolutions a person must be self-assertive and be sure of the approach they are using. Egan shows that a majority of people like to “play it safe” to avoid further complications in an already delicate situation but this doesn’t directly solve all of the pertinent issues either. The best but most difficult way (according to Egan) is to “strike a balance” that will keep every element in proportion with an individuals ideals towards the outcome that they would like to have. This is considered to be a combination approach and the following quote describes it more efficiently: This “combination” approach is the most difficult to apply, for it involves a great deal of analysis, including clarification of goals, a solid knowledge of personal values, and the ability to rank of strategies according to one’s values, plus the ability to predict results from a given course of action. Even more to the point, it demands challenging the shadow side of the problem, chosen goals and the ineffectual courses of action that have been adopted in the past (Egan 1998, p. 297). In this specific area both Egan and Rogers unisonly agree that a sound counseling approach is the best way to help clients through a delicate combination method such as this one just described (Egan 2002). Furthermore, though both Rogers and Egan do use different methods of helping clients come to an understanding in their problems they both have to tackle the similar issues that all guidance counselors are faced with at one point or another. These are intertwined around the problems with choice and commitment by clients. For instance both agree that attempting to implement a change is never an easy solution. Take for example those of us in societies who have promised New Year’s resolutions to ourselves year after year yet about a month into them we leave them at the wayside? The problematic situations being discussed are no different than this type of problematic situation. It takes commitment and a will to move past the difficult aspects in order to succeed, this is of course true for an individual in a business position. Therefore, guidance counselors such as Rogers and Egan have to make certain that the agenda they are trying to urge a client to take up is strong enough for them to stay on course and not regress back into an adverse position again. Unfortunately, regardless of any type of interventive therapy the choice is ultimately left with the client, especially in person-centered therapy as the counselor does not force any ideas onto the client whatsoever. The following quite validates the statement about person-centered therapy and how it is an individual choice process: Person Centered therapists are not as a scientist to an object of study, but as a person to person. He or she feels this client to be a person of self-worth of value no matter what his condition, his behavior or his feelings. He respects him for what he is, and accepts him as he is, with his potentialities (Rogers 1965, p. 22). This defines the fact that Roger’s has a much stronger belief in client’s abilities than does Egan because Rogers tends to focus on the positive nature of human beings regardless of how badly their past is marred. The difference here between the two is the fact that (as has been mentioned) Egan transforms the past while Roger’s has clients seemingly ignore it and leave it where it should be, in the past. He instead feels new insights are much better in progressing forward in business or in personal life experiences in general. Also, he believes that clients can acquire the ability to improve upon themselves without much push from the counselor. For instance once an individual gains a strong sense of self worth and respect for themselves then they are ready and prepared to share those types of feeling with others, especially in regards to respect and respecting others (Shaffer 1978). It is clear that Roger’s is more an insightful approach and Egan’s is an external approach, which this has been briefly mentioned earlier in this literature. However, this statement is not meant to belittle either one of these models by any means as both prove to be worthy in different contexts of helping professionals, even though there might be limits to both of them also. However the positivism far outweighs any negativism or repercussions from any action. To conclude this comparison and contrast between Egan and Rogers it has been discovered that the Rogerian approach involves working within each individual clients own personal world. The therapist is attentive and listens carefully to the client, not either disagreeing or agreeing but rather mediating the situation. This is similar to Egan’s Problem Management technique which is another area that has been discussed previously. The main focus of Person-Centered therapy is on the immediate conscious experience and not the past, which is where one of the greatest differences comes in between these two. The Rogerian approach supposedly free’s an individual from adversities so that they can grow and develop in their life and they can become self-directed and independent in their business transactions as well. The main issue is to develop trust with the client by giving genuine empathy, which has been stated that both of these methods do show. Over all, understanding the client’s personal feelings and how they relate to them is the most detrimental aspect of all when either one of these counselors must relay communication back to the client. Basically though, and in finality, although these two follow different ideals, and though there are similarities as well, it does not minimize the fact that they are designed to help professionals. With that in mind they are welcomed by many people who need guidance and understanding, and help in trying to solve intricate problems that are beyond their own scope of rationale. Works Cited Bolton, R. People Skills: How to Assert Yourself, Listen to Others, and Resolve Conflicts. Sydney: Simon & Schuster (1986). Egan, G. The Skilled Helper: A Problem Management Approach to Helping. Brooks, Cole 6th Edition (1998). Egan, G. Exercises in Helping Skills. 7th Edition Pacific Grove, California: Brooks Cole Publications (2002). Egan, G. The Skilled Helper: A Problem Management and Opportunity Development Approach to Helping. 8th Edition (2006): Part I. Kahn, Edwin. “A Critique of Non-Directivity in the Person-Centered Approach.” Journal of Humanistic Psychology 39 (1999): 94-110. Kendall, P. & Gerow, M. “Long-Term follow up of a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Anxiety-Disordered Youth.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 64 (1996): 724-730. Kensit, Denise. “Rogerian Theory: A Critique of the Effectiveness of Pure Client-Centered Therapy.” Counselling Psychology Quarterly 13 (2000): 345-351. Rogers, C. R. Counseling and Psychotherapy. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co. (1942). Rogers, C. R. “Counseling.” Review of Educational Research 15 (1945): 135-163. Rogers, C. R. A Humanistic Conception of Man. California: Science and Behavior Books Inc (1965). Schafer, J. B. Humanistic Psychology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Incorporated (1978). Taft, J. The Dynamics of Therapy in a Controlled Relationship. New York: Mcmillian (1933). Read More