Educational Consultation: An Examination Of Strategies For Dealing With Consultee Resistance

The purpose of this study was to assess perceptions of the consultant’s effectiveness in dealing with consultee resistance. The findings support the appropriateness of literature-recommended techniques for dealing with resistance. In a discussion of in-service teacher education, Tyler (1971) reminded the reader that exposure to new materials alone should not be the sole pathway to professional growth; the importance of the acquisition of new skills and understandings is paramount. Consultation appears to be the primary vehicle through which inservice training goals in education might be attained. Although not using the term consultation, Rubin (1971) summarized succinctly the belief system upon which consultation for the inservice training of teachers rests, . . . as educational reform occurs, teachers will need to acquire new skills; . . . these skills can be mastered only through methodical and intelligent training; . . . it is possible to determine whether or not such mastery has been attained; . . . given a legitimate opportunity and a supporting environment, teachers will strive to improve without manipulation. (p. 267) Dougherty (1990) listed several major types of consultation. Of those types, consultee-centered case consultation (Caplan, 1970) appears to be appropriate for use in educational settings. The primary goal of consultee-centered case consultation is consultee acquisition of knowledge and skills so that he or she may function more effectively with a current client as well as future, similar clients. The consultant has formal training in a particular professional specialty, whereas the consultee may or may not have professional training. The relationship is assumed to be voluntary, collaborative, nonhierarchial, and confidential. It is generally assumed that the consultee is open to and motivated toward change. In many instances, however, such is not the case. In consultee-centered case consultation, as well as in other types of consultation, consultants may encounter resistance. According to Dougherty (1990), consultee resistance is defined as a failure of the consultee to constructively participate in the consultation process. Piersel and Gutkin (1983) defined resistance as failure of the consultee to engage in problem solving. Some examples of types of consultee resistance include requests for personal counseling, stereotyping, and consultee concerns that consultation will take too much time and uncover consultee’s problems or inadequacies (Randolph & Graun, 1988). Although not using the term resistance, Caplan (1970) suggested verbal focus on the client, the parable technique, and nonverbal focus on the case as techniques that later have been regarded as appropriate approaches to handling certain types of resistance. Providing personal counseling or therapy is not recommended as an appropriate technique for dealing with consultee resistance (Caplan, 1970). Although confrontation is not specifically addressed in the literature, Caplan (1970) encouraged consultants to accept the consultee’s view. Thus, it would appear that confronting a consultee with his or her resistant behavior is not an appropriate approach for handling consultee resistance. It is acknowledged that consultee perceptions of the consultation process are of paramount importance. According to Dougherty (1990), "the perceptions of the consultation process by the parties involved are critical in determining the success of consultation" (p. 5). In a previous study (Randolph, Patterson, Barnes, & DeLoach, in press), the senior author of the present study investigated counseling students’ perceptions of consultant effectiveness when the consultant used various techniques for dealing with consultee resistance. Specifically included were (a) literature recommended techniques, (b) counseling techniques, and (c) confrontation techniques. Participants were graduate community counseling majors who had completed a graduate course in consultation and undergraduate counseling majors who had not completed such a course. The participants were shown a five-minute videotaped vignette in which (a) the consultee requested personal therapy, (b) the consultee stereotyped the third-party client, and (c) the consultee expressed negative perceptions of the consultation. The consultant in each tape dealt with these manifestations of consultee resistance using one of the three techniques listed above. The participants then responded to four statements regarding the effectiveness of the consultation. The overall results indicated that subjects responded differentially to the conditions. The senior author also reported a significant difference between (a) the literature recommended techniques and confrontation techniques conditions, and (b) the counseling and confrontation techniques conditions. A non-significant difference was observed between the literature recommended techniques and the counseling techniques conditions. On the other hand, the graduate students were more likely than their undergraduate counterparts to recognize that use of the counseling techniques was inappropriate for dealing with resistance. The authors concluded that resistance management training was needed for professionals who assume consultant roles. Randolph et al. (in press) were interested in determining the generalizability of the findings of the previous study to the school setting. Accordingly, these authors reviewed the literature to determine whether a study like the previous one by the senior author had been conducted with graduate and undergraduate teacher education majors. Being unable to locate such a study, the authors decided to conduct a study with graduate and undergraduate teacher education majors as subjects. Subsequently, the present investigation was designed to assess perceptions of the consultant’s effectiveness when using (a) literature recommended techniques, (b) counseling techniques, and (c) confrontation techniques for dealing with consultee resistance. Since the graduate-level teachers were experienced, expectations were that they would respond differentially to the three different techniques. Also in question was whether the undergraduate teacher education majors would respond differentially to the three different techniques.