Frank Farrely on Provocative therapy

FRANK FARRELLY

"You bring out people's protest by collaborating with the enemy."

Frank Farrelly (1931 - 2013) has received international recognition as a highly gifted therapist. He is the author of several publications, including "Provocative Therapy" (with Jeff Brandsma). Farrelly conducted numerous workshops, seminars, and demonstrations in America, Europe, and Australia. He continued to travel the world until his 80s, teaching provocative therapy to aid workers. Trained as a social worker, he worked as a therapist in psychiatric hospitals for many years. His pioneering work with severely disturbed clients makes him a very interesting and important therapist.

Two important and frequently used quotes from Farrelly are: "Take your professional dignity and throw it out the window in the service of the client," and "I approach what the client avoids." I believe this reflects the essence of provocative coaching.

In the spring of 2010, I attended a course with him in Germany. Over five full days, there was ample opportunity to converse with Frank. Noni Höfner, another provocative psychotherapist in Munich, had already put in a good word for me. However, within the first two minutes, I realized that interviewing this star, who had spoken about this subject countless times, in a traditional manner—asking questions and getting answers—would be nearly impossible. My initial question (after some about his personal life) was about how his provocative approach differed from therapies in mental health institutions at that time. His response was, "Did you read my book?"

With a chuckle, I admitted that I might not be able to come up with any brilliant questions after all (even though I had put effort into that first question), and I suggested that he simply tell me what he wanted to share. The conversation below is a summary of this 'story': discussions we had at the table without a formal interview, conversations during the training, and spontaneous gatherings.

Frank began seeking alternative ways to help clients gain insight due to a) the motivation challenges faced by some clients, and b) his own upbringing, which involved different communication styles. He remarked, "If you're one of twelve kids, no one asks, 'Well, Frank, what do you want?' You just have to keep your head above water. Mom and Dad really didn't have time for me at all. My siblings kept me in line." These two factors—the lack of desired results in previous therapeutic conversations and his childhood experiences—led him to explore new methods of providing assistance.

During the sixties, when Frank introduced his new therapy approach, working provocatively in mental health care was groundbreaking. Society was still heavily influenced by the legacy of Freud. Frank introduced a new form of therapy: protest therapy. Reflecting on this, Frank remarked, "But, it's still very new to a lot of people." The need to work differently emerged as he observed that the prevailing approach was insufficient. Frank often dealt with individuals with severe psychiatric disorders undergoing mandatory treatment. This required a different approach from the Rogerian, kind, understanding, and supportive methods. "Client-centered therapy works best with mild depression, mildly anxious individuals, and introverted men," Frank noted. "But that only accounted for 15% of my client population in Wisconsin, so I had to come up with something else. I mentioned Tough Love first."

Frank likened provocative therapy to "friendly teasing between good friends." In this approach, you play the devil's advocate, siding with the negative and self-sabotaging aspects of your client and treating them as 'normal.' Frank often asks, "What's wrong with that?" He acknowledges that you will almost always receive an answer to this question, as well as pushback—even from schizophrenic patients or those with alcohol problems. This suggests that Frank believed his method was suitable for addressing a wide range of issues, including mental illness. When asked if provocative therapy applies to everyone, he answered affirmatively. He often faced objections, with others pointing out that everyone knows him and his approach, so clients know what to expect. To this, Frank responded, "That helps, but when they didn't know me, it worked too. How do you explain that?"

Curious about the specifics of provocative therapy, I asked one evening: "What exactly do you do with provocative therapy?" Frank responded, "You bring out people's protest by collaborating with the enemy: their own destructive behavior. Humor is the great lubricant, but I don't laugh at people; I laugh at the things that bother them." We also discussed what makes provocative therapy so distinct. "Look at the language, for example," he explained. "When I started provocative coaching, therapists spoke to patients as if they were reading 'Oedipus' by Sophocles. I felt therapists did this to impress. Most patients didn't understand this language at all. It was far removed from their reality. I knew that. I used plain language." Frank often encountered questions about whether profound discussions were possible using such straightforward language. "Nonsense," Frank retorted, "you have enough language to discuss life's profound matters."

Frank wasn't particularly fond of diagnostic labels. "There are kilometers of diagnostics performed," he remarked. "When psychology students begin their studies, they diagnose each other according to DSM-IV criteria until they've diagnosed everyone. Then, when they start practicing, they know nothing about the person behind the diagnosis." Frank's starting point was that everyone can change—a belief that motivated him to continue developing his method. He believed that people could change more rapidly and permanently, that they could influence their situation. This sometimes led him to make tough statements and take drastic measures. This perspective also extended to therapists. During a discussion about "impossible clients," Frank emphasized that therapists didn't have to endure everything. If something was unbearable, therapists could say, "I can't work well with you," "I don't have enough experience with this," or "These issues are beyond my capacity to handle."

Frank often delivered such messages humorously ("I'm too old to deal with your teeny-weeny problems"), but his underlying message was clear: "You can always leave. If someone is making your life miserable, it's not a sign that you're a bad therapist." I asked him how he could deliver such blunt remarks and still maintain a connection with his clients. "Did you ever get the impression that the client didn't feel taken seriously?" he countered. "No," I responded, "they usually felt quite comfortable. One client even mentioned that after a session." Frank explained, "I simply voice what people have been saying to themselves for a long time. I also reflect what others around them have said. And I do this in an engaging and friendly manner."

Frank Farrelly's legacy lives on through his groundbreaking work in provocative therapy. His willingness to challenge traditional therapeutic approaches and his emphasis on humor, plain language, and the potential for change continue to inspire therapists worldwide. Let's keep his spirit alive by exploring new ways to connect, understand, and empower our clients. 💬✨ #ProvocativeTherapy #FrankFarrellyLegacy

E-Book: Provocative coaching

Provocative coaching is an exciting stimulating method which uses humor, love and challenge.

Download E-book Provocative coaching

Nine provocative interventions

Provocative coaching lovingly makes a caricature of the clients view of the world. It is an exciting stimulating method which uses humor and warmth to challenge the client put him in his power.

Download pdf: Nine provocative interventions

Research on Provocative Coaching

"Humour, an important element of Provocative Coaching, has several beneficial effects to coaching when it is used appropriately." Click here to read about the research on Provocative Coaching conducted by Kukkonen & Lilleberg (2016).

PERVERSE INCENTIVES

PERVERSE INCENTIVES

The occupation of psychologist or coach is itself already subject to a perverse incentive. After all, the more sessions, the more cash for the (independent) therapist.

The profession of psychologist or coach is already subject to a perverse stimulus. After all, the more sittings the more cash for the (freelance) therapist.

Despite the fact that many fellow practitioners preach that they 'never do this', according to a report from the Cultural Planning Bureau, therapists actually gain self-enrichment at the expense of their client. There is a step-by-step reward, as you can read in the attached article from ‘@psycholoog’, a Dutch publication. If you are just on the border, join a session so you can get more out of your treatment, while the client may have already finished.

Incidentally, this does not only happen in our occupational group, it happens everywhere. On the basis of this, there is a human error that many policy makers fail to observe. Rolf Dobelli calls it the 'incentive super-response tendency'. I call it stimulation measures.

An example of this is the the 19th century Rat Pest Control Act. In the French colonial era, a proclamation was made in Hanoi: Money would be given for every dead rat that was delivered to the government. This meant that rat breeding flourished and the number of rats in Hanoi increased to unprecedented heights.

People, and thus psychologists, respond to stimulation measures. Everyone does what works to his advantage. People react to the incentive, but not always to the underlying intention. So in the case of our therapists, the intention is not to give the client an unnecessarily long treatment. That works to some extent, until the rate limit is in sight. Then the incentive to continue is strengthened. The higher benefit is almost within reach and tempts many people to prolong their therapy.

We provocative psychologists know this error like no other. We not only encourage our clients to discover these stimulation systems in the world, so that they have a more realistic view of how the world works, but we also talk openly about our remuneration and the favor that a client grants us by making slow progress. We use this ‘thinking error’ to our advantage and praise the client for not doing his homework. For example, this homework may include trying out new behavior in the workplace.

Client: I did not have an opportunity to try out my feedback on my boss. I did not know what to give him feedback on.

Therapist: Very good, you are just someone who takes time (played painlessly with a wink) and that's not bad at all for my money box, because then your therapy will take a few months longer?

Usually, the client starts protesting and expanding his motivation to get properly started next time.

Doing the counter-intuitive thing is what provocative psychologists can do very well and for a healthy reason:

(A) the client is encouraged to take action;

B) the perverse stimulus is opened, exposed and therefore recognized;

C) The client sees himself as responsible for getting better, because it costs him more money if he does not take action.

This seems to me a money box for society.

On to sustainable therapy, the provocative therapy.

Why men do not follow a coaching education

Coaching educations are being overwhelmed with women. This year, I followed an education at a fantastic anthropologist, Jitske Kramer, but, there were no men.

At other communication workshops and coach educations, I noticed the same thing. Provocative educations provide a mixed image. My autumn group solely consists of men. I started thinking about how this is possible.

In the past, in the ancient past, there were just male teachers. Figureheads who educated our very own children in a strict and legitimate way. Concerning psychologists, you did not yet have coaches in the past, it was the same case. Think about the father of the psychology; Mister Freud. Admitted, he looks confident with his cigar, on this photo! In this weblog, I will base the idea of why men do not want to be coaches, on an article of our southern neighbors, the Belgians: 'Men in the classroom? An extinct race'. Read the article as a PDF here or view the article online.

Just as for men in the education sector, also in social work it less attractive for mento work there. Being a coach as occupation belongs to the ‘soft industry’. It is better to be a manager. In the past the teacher held his position next to the doctor, the notary and the shepherd. You could say the same thing for the psychologist. They all were highly regarded professions. And that is exactly what men want; an occupation which is highly regarded. And to be honest, we as women, also like men who are highly regarded!

I want to mention something about quality, who is better, a man or a woman? When a test was conducted among teachers about who would be more professional, men or women, and who provided better quality, there was a tie between men and women. More women in education, did not decrease the quality of the education. But what it did, nevertheless, was that it made sure that work would be done out of feminine values.

However, I do not think that it is healthy for clients to just see women as a coach. Boys and girls often need another approach at school and I think that this is not different in the playground of the corporate life.
I notice that by looking at my own children. I got 3 boys. And even though I try very hard and use all my psychological techniques, I often lose it from my husband, “the technician”. Something to become extremely jealous of. I do not always reach the desired effect and I generally comment on ‘soft cases’ such as no cursing, be nice to each other and do not twitch and pick each other.

On these moments, I am happy to also work provocatively. It is based on facts, humoristic and challenging. Exactly what men like. And that is why men should be a coach. Just maybe in another way. Provocative coaching does appeal the feminine part, as we provocative coaches, are focused on helping the other. Just as every other form of coaching. But, we have definitely something for the masculine part: not beating around the bush, using humor, challenging thouths and habits, asking for facts and details and using stereotypes. Fast progresses is made and that’s what men like. But there is always good contact. And after something difficult occurs between men, they are able to laugh again together. Men are able to have a short conflict with each other and afterwards they will go on like nothing happened. That is something you will learn with provocative coaching. For women this skill is a bit harder, just have a look at the little comic strip.

I actually wanted to make an appeal; more women in the group. But after having written this, I though, no, why actually? Then we have a genuine coach group of men. And you will make sure I have a hard time! Because I will remember that for 20 years!

Ten fast ways to provocative coaching

Provocative coaching lovingly caricatures the client’s world view. It is an exciting and stimulating method to rapidly empower the client through humor, warmth and challenge.

Opleiding provocatief coachen

Meer informatie over provocatief coachen?

Boek van Adelka Vendl over provocatief coachen