Understanding the Provocative Change Works Model
I have been developing the Provocative Change Works model since 2006 after first meeting Frank Farrelly two years earlier in 2004. Provocative Therapy was the spark to create the PCW model, but the PCW model is more refined and multi layered.
Essentially, all PCW is about problem solving and finding “What’s the difference that makes the difference?”
The first stage is to obtain information and that means the careful and precise elicitation of information. Otherwise we may be “well intentioned” but we are not “well informed” in our communications. I remain amazed that many coaching and therapeutic models refrain from precise information gathering and scrutiny and instead rely on rolling out and depending on a series of pre planned techniques. Yes, some step by step processes and techniques can be useful, BUT often this results in a guessing game in communication sessions.
All sessions are recorded and clients are expected to watch or listen back to the sessions. PCW includes linguistic and metaphoric awareness as well as a good knowledge of psychoeducation and how to work in a jargon free manner. That’s tough for most people and especially people who rely too much on analysis and techniques.
One to one and group sessions
I am increasingly booking students for 1-on-1 sessions and running a variety of group courses. The group courses can be for training. The focus is always on finding what works best, which means constant revisions to the model. This is a very different dynamic way of working, and the one-to-one sessions are the fastest way to accelerate the integration of PCW skills. I currently see several individuals each week from across the globe.
Critical thinking and standards
Critical thinking and standards are essential in developing and evolving the PCW model. Yes, there are practitioner-to-trainer certifications, and all of them are renewable. I’m keen for practitioners to work with other human beings and for trainers to run actual training; otherwise, it’s a meaningless title. Once accepted, all trainers are expected to run at least one training session for 8 or more individuals each year to maintain certification. People don’t need to be “certified”, but my view is that it needs to be credible. All too often in the world of self-help, individuals engage in certification hunting, but never actually work with other individuals in using the skills. All of this, of course, limits the number of certifications, but it’s better to focus on quality rather than volume!
