The document discusses task centered approaches to helping, which emerged from social work to provide a systematic yet practical process. It breaks problems down into discrete parts, sets mutually agreed upon goals, and proceeds in small sequential steps. The four stages are: 1) developing a problem focus through questioning, 2) reaching agreement on goals and contracts, 3) developing goals into manageable tasks, and 4) ending and reviewing the work. While pragmatic, it is critiqued for assuming rational clients able to identify problems and goals. Overall, task centered approaches aim to achieve tangible results quickly in a collaborative manner.

1. Task Centred Approaches to
Helping
Nathan Loynes

2. Cognitive Flexibility
• Last week you were introduced to the
work of DeBono and the ‘Thinking Hats’
approach to lateral thinking and problem
solving.
• In order to wear and switch ‘hats’, the
mentor must demonstrate ‘cognitive
flexibility’.

3. Cognitive Flexibility
• Related to Gardner’s concept of multiple
intelligences.
• Goleman’s Emotional Intelligence.
• Jones and Day (1996) discuss how social
intelligence and academic intelligence
might be distinct.
• Jones and Day analyse Cattell-Horn’s
(1966) theory of fluid and crystallized
intelligence.

4. Task Centred Approaches
Emerged from the field of Social Work, but can be
applicable to any endeavour involving casework
with people.
Evolved as a response to unstructured reactionary
casework management.
NB: Last week we considered how mentors must
work with the outlook and ‘reality’ of the client.
Task Centred work acknowledges that there
may be times where the mentor might need to
set the agenda

5. Task Centred Approaches
It can be seen as ‘atheoretical’ meaning that
it has ‘real life’ practical application.
You might think of this as a ‘bottom up’
process (i.e. working with practical
elements of people’s lives) rather than
subscribing to a strong ‘top down’
theoretical discipline: Contrast person
centred approaches.

6. Task Centred Approaches
• Task Centred work is systematic and
rooted in ‘Behavioural Psychology’.
• (Contrast Person Centred approaches)
• The task centred process is rooted in an
presupposition of ‘cause and effect’.

7. Howe, 1987
• Problems are broken down into
constituent parts and dealt with discretely.
• Goals are set, but, mutually agreed.
• Involvement proceeds in small, sequential
manageable steps.

8. Doel: There are four stages
1. Developing a focus on the problem
through effective questioning e.g.
DeBono’ White Hat processes.
2. Reaching agreement: Goals and
contract.
3. Develop goals into manageable tasks
(Like Friedman Outcomes
Accountability)
4. Ending and reviewing the work (APIR
and Reflection)

9. There is a critique of the Task
Centred Approach
• Success assumes that the client is rational
(Cf Solution Focussed and Person
Centred approaches)
• It relies on the clients ability to make
sense of what is wrong and what is
wanted.
• What is wanted depends on motivation
and feasibility (Cf Miller and Rollnick)

10. Conclusion
• Task centred approaches are pragmatic
and hence do not rely on a great
theoretical application of expertise on the
part of the mentor.
• TC approaches are able to achieve
tangible results very quickly.
• Mentee’s are able to appreciate the
benefits of this approach, especially if
results are tangible and timely.

11. Mentor’s mandate (anti-
oppressively, please!)
• Task Centred approaches can prevent
‘drift’ in casework and allows the
practitioner to define certain aspects of the
relationship including some of the goals.
However, Marsh and Doel are at pains to
express that this mentor goal setting
should be achieved with agreement and in
an anti-oppressive manner.