There is no Conflict Between Traditional BCBA Supervision and the POOGI

In traditional situations where a BCBA is providing supervision, there is usually a large focus on the BCBA teaching and managing others to implement certain skills for the benefit of a client. Often, supervision focuses on activities like Behavior Skills Training (BST), making sure the staff member is able to implement the appropriate skills, monitoring that the skills are being implemented correctly, and reinforcing when skills are implemented correctly. That’s, of course, appropriate. That’s why the BCBA is there.

In my view, this focus can sometimes lead to a problem. Specifically, there is so much emphasis on the staff following the direction of the BCBA, that frequently we find staff that are afraid to speak up when something is wrong. I have sometimes used special procedures to address this issue. And I think more needs to be done. It is one thing to speak up when something is glaringly wrong–that’s good. But that’s not enough. We’d like staff to be constantly on a Process of Ongoing Improvement. Nothing is ever perfect. So, you should be getting constant suggestions. Unfortunately, most of the time we aren’t.

But there is a negative side effect to encouraging the Poogi. When staff know you encourage suggestions, he or she is tempted to just “try it out” and see how it goes before discussing it with the BCBA first. Obviously inappropriate. I’ve also found that BCBA’s can get uncomfortable with staff who “challenge” them too much with alternative suggestions for what should be done in a particular case. This sometimes leads BCBAs who have gone down the path of encouraging the POOGI return to a more traditional path, and suggestions for improvement stop coming.

There really shouldn’t be any conflict between traditional BCBA supervision and POOGI activities. First, staff should be expected to follow the treatment procedures as they are written by the BCBA. There shouldn’t be changes made “on the fly.” But, at the same time, staff should be encouraged to make constant suggestions to how those treatment procedures might be improved. Then, the BCBA has to commit to getting back to the person and making decisions on those suggestions quickly before they are implemented. If the BCBA decides not to implement the suggestion, he or she should specify why. Of course, when you tell someone that you won’t implement their suggestion, you have to do it in a way that doesn’t punish future suggestions.

It is a lot of work, but it is one of the best ways to improve.

NOTE: I got this idea from this crazy non-behavior analytic book. You never know where good ideas will come from.

Behavior analytic services should only be delivered in the context of a professional relationship. Nothing written in this blog should be considered advice for any specific individual. The purpose of the blog is to share my experience, not to provide treatment. Please get advice from a professional before making changes to behavior analytic services being delivered. Nothing in this blog including comments or correspondence should be considered an agreement for Dr. Barry D. Morgenstern to provide services or establish a professional relationship outside of a formal agreement to do so. I attempt to write this blog in “plain English” and avoid technical jargon whenever possible. But all statements are meant to be consistent with behavior analytic literature, practice, and the professional code of ethics. If, for whatever reason, you think I’ve failed in the endeavor, let me know and I’ll consider your comments and make revisions, if appropriate. Feedback is always appreciated as I’m always trying to POOGI.

 

Scroll to top