It has long seemed to me that there are some common principles of positive change, whether we are looking at the level of the individual (in therapy), the dyad (in couples’ therapy or mediation), the group, or between nations (in conflict resolution and international relations). This blog is an attempt to articulate, at a relatively abstract level, what those principles seem to be. This builds on my recent work developing the Directional Framework.
The Directional Framework asserts that, at core, people are striving to actualise particular directions. Directions are our desires, wants, and goals: for instance, ‘to be happy,’ or ‘to finish reading this blog.’
The Directional Framework, as with many other psychological theories (e.g., the work of Powers), suggests that these directions exist in a hierarchy, with lower-order directions the mean to achieve higher-order directions. For instance, I might have a lower-order direction of ‘finishing writing this blog’, which is towards a higher-order direction of ‘getting my ideas on directionality straight’, which might be towards a highest-order direction of ‘making a social contribution.’ There is no one agreed theory of what the highest-order directions are, and probably they vary by individuals and communities. But some of the most commonly posited highest-order directions, at the individual level, are relatedness, self-worth, happiness, and meaning.
In the Directional Framework, wellbeing is defined as the ‘actualisation’ of our highest-order directions. That is, we progress towards, and experience, the things that are most important to us. This could be at the individual level; but it could also be for a couple, or a community, or a nation. We progress, and get to, where we want to be. This is, essentially, equivalent to the ‘preference utilitarianism’ of such economist and philosophers as John Harsanyi.
From this standpoint, a lack, or reduction, in wellbeing, is a manifestation of excess disutility. Essentially, this means that something is getting wasted: that in some way we, or our couple, or our community, are not actualising our highest order directions as well as we might be.
The Directional Framework suggests two reasons for this. First, because the lower-order directions are configured in such a way that they are working against each other more than they need to be. Second, that the lower order things are being done in a way that are not as effective as possible as actualising those highest-order directions.
In essence, individual therapy, couples therapy, conflict resolution all work by helping agencies (e.g., people, communities, nations) to find more synergetic, and effective, ways of actualising their highest-order directions. Take couples therapy, for instance, as described in the excellent guide by Marina Williams. Here, the work is oriented around the development of communication skills, so that both parties are able to say what they need, and find creative solutions to their problems. That is identical to what Fisher, Ury, and Patton write about in negotiating agreements: identify the underlying interests, then creatively problem solve to work out ways in which you can develop win-win solutions. Or, as therapists, we help clients identify their underlying needs (e.g., for love, but also for independence), and then help them find ways in which they might get more of both of these things more of the time.
At all these levels, then, the means towards reducing excess disutility is by going ‘above’ the conflicts between lower-order directions, looking at what the higher-order directions are actually striving for, and then finding more effective ways of actualising more of them more of the time. In therapy, this is exactly the practice behind the Methods of Level approach, developed by Tim Carey, Warren Mansell and colleagues. You help clients to go up to higher-order issues and concerns, so that they can find synergies and resolutions there that they may not be able to find at lower levels.
Much of this process involves communication/the exchange of information. When agencies talk, they: clarify miscommunications and misunderstandings of what the other is trying to do, generate creative possible solutions, help to see the others’ underlying directions, recognise that the other is human like them. This is the same whether it is different ‘parts’ of the person talking in therapy, or different nations talking in international diplomacy.
Often, a third party can be helpful in facilitating this process: whether a therapist, couples’ counsellor, or mediator. A third party has the capacity to stand above the directions of either party, per se, and help them find creative, synergetic solutions. It also helps to ensure that all voices get heard, and essential pre-requisite for ensuring the optimal actualisation of directions as a whole. People can also do this to themselves through the process of mentalisation. Agencies can get caught up in ‘rogue’ drivers, pursuing their goals and directions irrespective of the greater whole. Mentalisation, at any level, allows people to stand above any one direction and see the greater, more complex unity.
Why does any of this matter? I think if we can identify the unified, structural principles of positive change—drawing from across such levels as therapy, couples work, and international relations—then we can develop more informative and constructive theories of how positive change happens. When I read the literature on couples therapy, or conflict resolution, or therapy it’s amazing to see the parallels across models and practices; but to date they tend to be in individual silos. If we can learn from each other—at these most abstract, structural levels—then we can also work together towards a greater common good.
Reference
This blog post can be referenced as: Cooper, M. (2021, May 21). Unified principles of positive change: Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and international. https://mick-cooper.squarespace.com/new-blog/2021/5/21/unified-principles-of-positive-change
More about the Directional Framework can be found in Cooper, M. (2019). Integrating counselling and psychotherapy: Directionality, synergy, and social change. London: Sage. There is also an open access introduction at https://doi.org/10.1002/johc.12148