Toward a Feminist and Multicultural Model of Consultation and Advocacy Mary Ann Hoffman, Elaine L. Phillips, Debra A. Noumair, Sandra Shullman, Carol Geisler, Jacque Gray, Judith Homer, Sharon Horne, Diana L. Paulk, Randa Remer, Shelagh Robinson, Indra Rocha-Singh, Diane J. Tinsley, Rebecca Toporek, and Donna Ziegler The authors present core ideas or constructs that might be integral to a feminist and multicultural model of consultation. According to the model, the structure of consultation is (a) nonhierarchical and (b) an open triad (incorporating extrapersonal and outside factors).The process of consultation is (c) culturally responsive and (d) empowering. The role of the consultant is as (e) an agent for change and (f) an advocate for both the client and the system. Los autores y sus ideas centrales presente o construyentes quizas sea integral para una feminista y un modelo de la consulta multicultural. Segun el modelo, la estructura de la consulta es (a) nonhierarchical y (b) una triada abierta (incorporando extrapersonal y factores exteriores). El proceso de la consulta es (c) culturalmente receptiva y (d) autorizada. El papel del consultor es como (e) un agente para el cambio y (f) un defensor para el cliente y el sistema.
E
ffective consultation interventions support, enhance, and transform school, and organizational environments. Because the function of these types of organizational encounters represents the principal mechanism by which individuals "get things done" (Iannello, 1992, p. 3), it is important to understand the structure, process, and outcome of effective consultation interMary Ann Hoffman, Counseling Psychology Program, Department of Counseling and Personnel Services, University of Maryland, College Park; Elaine L. Phillips, University Counseling and Testing Center, Western Michigan University; Debra A. Noumair, Department of Organization & Leadership, Teachers College, Columbia University; Sandra Shullman, Executive Development Croup, Columbus, Ohio; Carol Geisler, Counseling Center, Northern Michigan University; Jacque Gray, Department of Applied Behavioral Studies in Education, Oklahoma State University; Judith Homer, Department of Psychology in Education, Arizona State University; Sharon Home, Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Research, University of Memphis; Diana L. Paulk, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; Randa Remer, Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology, University of Indiana; Shelagh Robinson, Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, McGill University; Indra Rocha-Singh, Counseling Center, University of California-Riverside; Diane J. Tinsley, Department of Psychology, University of Florida; Rebecca Toporek, Department of Counseling and Personnel Services, University of Maryland; Donna Ziegler, Psychology Department, Gannon University. Carol Geisler is now at Rosevilk, Minnesota-area schools; Jacque Cray is now at the Center for Rural Health, University of North Datota; Diana L. Paulk is now at the Center for the Advancement of Youth Health, University of AlabamaBirmingham; Randa Remer is now at the office of Residence Life, University of Kentucky; Shelagh Robinson is now at the Psychology Department, Dawson College; and Rebecca Toporek is now at the Department of Counseling, Career, and College Counseling Spedalizfltions, San Francisco State University, Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Mary Ann Hoffman, Counseling Psychology Program, Department of Counseling and Personnel Services, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 (e-mail:
[email protected]). © 2006 American Counseling Association. All rights reserved. 116
JOURNALOFMULTICULTURALCOUNSELINGANDDE\/ELOPMENT'April2006«Vol.34
ventions. Furthermore, the increasingly diverse world makes it important to consider the role that cultural variables such as gender roles, race, and ethnicity play in informing effective consultation interventions. Yet our review of the literature in the area of consultation reveals relatively little information on how multicultural and feminist perspectives might inform consultation regarding these societal changes. This is in sharp contrast to the large body of literature in the area of consultation. In addition to several thousand articles on this general topic listed in PsycINFO, a division of the American Psychological Association (APA; Division 13) is devoted to consultation. Given this attention to the general topic of consultation and given that consultation involves the complex interaction between individuals (consultant and consultee) and systems, it is interesting to note the relative lack of attention to feminist and multicultural perspectives in consultation. In a review of the PsycINFO database for journal articles published during the last 10 years, only a few articles (e.g., Jackson & Hayes, 1993; MuUin & Cooper, 1998; Ramirez, Lepage, Kratochwill, & Duffy, 1998; Steward, 1996) were found that described theories or techniques of multicultural consultation. No articles were found that focused on feminist theories or techniques of consultation. We did find that some key writings on multicultural and feminist consultation were included in books and book chapters (e.g., Iannello, 1992). It may be that the lack of articles on this topic is because theories of psychologically based consultation have evolved primarily from earlier work in psychology in the areas of group and individual therapies and that feminist and multicultural theories are relatively new. The field of consultation certainly has changed and expanded over the years (Leonard, 1994,1999); additionally, it may be the case that practitioners and proponents of multicultural and feminist theories and practices are just beginning to become leaders in consulting circles and that a framework for consultation incorporating both feminist and multicultural perspectives has not yet been proposed in the literature. In support of these explanations, a summary of an occupational analysis of the field of consultation by Kurpius, Fuqua, Gibson, Kurpius, and Froehle (1995) found that the typical consulting psychologist is an older White male who graduated from an APA-approved training program with little specific course work in consultation. In addition, these consultants reported that the majority of their consultation interventions were with individuals rather than with systems where the need to consider multicultural variables might be more salient. Waclawsld, Church, and Burke (1995) surveyed organizational development practitioners and found results similar to those reported by Kurpius et al. Waclawski et al. (1995) reported a gender breakdown of respondents as 64% male and 36% female and found that male practitioners were older and had been in the field longer. They noted a changing trend of moving away from traditional social, psychological, and group-based methods of consulting to one with a greater emphasis on interventions aimed at helping systems or organizations achieve their desired goals. In an increasingly diverse workforce, it makes intuitive sense that workplaces and organizations would benefit from capitalizing on the diverse experiences jouRNALOFMULTICULTURALCOUNSELINGANDDEVELOPMENT»April2006'Vol.34
11 7
and strengths of employees to ensure an environment that promotes productivity. Both Ramirez et al. (1998) and Steward (1996) noted that there is an increasing demand for multicultural consultations and that consultants need training to focus effectively on multicultural variables. In developing their training recommendations, Ramirez et al. used the multicultural counseling work of Sue and Sue (1990) and Arredondo et al. (1996) and the systems work of Parsons (1996) to delineate multicultural competencies for consultants. These competencies include the consultant's awareness of the impact of race, ethnicity, and culture of both the consultant and of the consultee; flexibihty in adjusting the consultation style according to the culture and worldview of the consultee; and the use of culturally appropriate strategies (Ramirez et al., 1998). In addition to competencies that might be taught to trainees, Hellkamp, Zins, Ferguson, and Hodge (1998) recommended that faculty who teach consultation should be more diverse than is currently the case. Several researchers have attempted to go beyond defining multicultural competencies to examining models of multicultural consultation. For example, Mullin and Cooper (1998) explored a quantitatively derived model for international consultation that was influenced by Hofstede's (1991) and Hackney and Cormier's (1996) theoretical models for multicultural consultation. Mullen and Cooper noted similarities in the models and were able to integrate these two models with more traditional consultation models in a successful consultation project in South Africa. Although theoretical models and ideas are beginning to emerge for a multicultural model of consultation, few theoretical models have been proposed for feminist consultation. One exception is the work of Iannello (1992), who proposed that feminist consultation interventions can occur in a nonhierarchical and nonpatriarchal manner. Her work is important because it carefully integrated the classic literature on consultation (e.g., Argyris, 1957) and illustrated how constructs that support a feminist perspective have been shown to be effective in past consultative interventions. Although her work does not explicitly integrate other multicultural variables into a feminist consultative perspective, it is apparent that such an integration could be made. It seems appropriate to use both feminist and multicultural theories to develop a model of consultation because feminist theories and multicultural theories share many common tenets, such as a focus on the greater context of the individual's world and on changing existing power structures. Moreover, a broad definition of multiculturalism includes gender and sex roles as well as race and ethnicity. The themes discussed in this article are based on the process and outcome of a workgroup of Division 17's (APA, Division of Counseling Psychology) Section for the Advancement of Women that met to examine feminist and multicultural perspectives in consultation. The purpose of the workgroup was to (a) examine how existing models of consultation might be informed by feminist and multicultural theories and then (b) identify the components that should be included in feminist and multicultural consultation.
118
JOURNALOFMULTICULTURALCOUNSELINGANDDEVELOPMENT'April2006«Vol.34
process of the working group In October 1998, Division 17's Section for the Advancement of Women held a conference titled Advancing Together: Centralizing Feminism and Multiculturalism in Counseling Psychology. Workgroups were formed to examine the ways that feminist and multicultural perspectives inform various aspects of our work as counseling psychologists in areas such as psychotherapy, ethics, and career counseling. Participants in the consultation and advocacy group were 5 graduate students, 3 counseling center staff psychologists, 5 full-time faculty members, and 3 licensed psychologists in independent practice. All 16 members of the group were women, and they ranged in age from 23 to 54 years. Fourteen of the women were European American, one was Asian American and one was African American. The group was diverse in terms of sexual orientation and partner status. Consultation training and experience ranged from graduate course work to more than 20 years of postdoctoral experience as a consultant. Thefirstthree authors served as group facilitators. Prior to the conference, our workgroup on consultation and advocacy reviewed the classic literature on consultation as well as contemporary writings to determine how feminism and multiculturalism have informed the extant literature. In addition, we brought examples from our own consultation experiences to the conference. During the next 2 days, we met as a group to generate core ideas that we believed defined feminist/multicultural consultation. We defined core ideas as statements that represented important ideas or perspectives but that had not yet been grouped or organized into overarching themes. After the conference, three raters (the first author and two counseling psychology doctoral students) independently identified broad themes based on the core ideas generated by the workgroup. When they reached consensus on these themes, they independently grouped the core ideas using these themes. Six broad themes that we believed defined feminist/multicultural consultation were identified and then placed in the following three categories: (a) structure—nonhierarchical and open triad (incorporating extrapersonal and outside factors), (b) process—culturally responsive and empowering, and (c) role of consultant—agent for change and advocate for both the consultee and the system. We begin each of the three sections of our article (Structure, Process, and Role of Consultant in Feminist/Multicultural Consultation) with a brief overview of the relevant literature. We then present a definition of each theme, including a description of the core ideas that defined that particular theme. We include a contrast of our perspective with that found in the extant literature on consultation. jouRNALOFMULTICULTURALCOUNSELINGANDDEVELOPMENT«April2006«Vol.34
119
structure of feminist/multicultural ronsuitation Two broad themes were identified in this category. We viewed the structure of feminist/ multicultural consultation as nonhierarchical versus hierarchical and as representing an open triad (including extrapersonal and outside variables) versus a closed triad. NONHIERARCHICAL VERSUS HIERARCHICAL Hierarchy can be defined as "society arranged according to 'degree,' with power, privilege, and authority varying together" (Hole & Levine, 1979, p. 554). In terms of organizational consultation, a hierarchy might be based on existing arrangements about who has power (e.g., who decides to bring in a consultant, who decides who or what needs to change, and who decides how change will occur), privilege (e.g., who benefits from the change or whose rights will be considered), and authority (who has legitimate power, such as a boss or the consultant). In her review of the literature, GaUessich (1985) concluded that consultation is often described as an activity by which the consultant, an expert in a specialized body of knowledge, assesses the problem and recommends solutions to the consultee. This kind of consultative structure may be viewed as hierarchical because someone with power decides that consultation is needed, the consultant is seen as the expert, and the consultee is viewed as lacking the expertise to solve her or his "problem." Essentially, the consultant's role is to get the consultee "back on track," and the roles of those involved are well-defined and often rigid. In her review of the role of hierarchy in organizational interventions, Iannello (1992) noted that the key defining element of bureaucracy is hierarchy; because of this, many, if not most, models of consultation view hierarchy as inevitable. Yet the philosophical underpirmings of nonhierarchical models seem to mesh with the basic tenets of many systems models as well as with the tenets of multicultural and feminist models of intervention. Our workgroup described the structure of feminist/multicultural consultation as nonhierarchical on the basis of important core ideas. The following ideas defined the nonhierarchical structure: (a) The consultant first collaborates with the consultee and the organization to identify power structures in a system that need to be addressed before change can occur, (b) the consultant has mindful expertise including specific skills that are useful to the consultee but values the expertise that each member of the organization brings to the process, (c) the consultant is aware that not all members of the organization have the same power or access to resources, and (d) the consultant interrupts the hierarchy by considering power and resource differences among members when assessing problem and designing interventions. Our group viewed the costs of hierarchy as typically outweighing the benefits in terms of reducing motivation, undermining cooperation, underudlizing existing
120
JOURNALOFMULTICULTURAL COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT* April2006'Vol. 34
resources, and resulting in the loss of human potential. We challenged the notion that hierarchy is inevitable and agreed with Iannello's (1992) conclusion that the development of hierarchical models of consultation should be viewed in a historical and cultural perspective rather than as necessary structures for consultation.
OPEN TRIAD VERSUS CLOSED TRIAD Parsons (1996) suggested, and our group concurred, that assessing consultees requires examining the context of their psycho-social-physical environment. Rather than being a closed system, the consultation triad is an open system that is influenced by extrapersonal factors as well as by factors outside the organization. Internal factors (e.g., performance on the specific tasks assigned to an individual or a group) that affect a consultee or a system may be easier to assess than extrapersonal forces (e.g., the effect of sexual harassment on the working environment). Yet the costs of ignoring extrapersonal factors may be great because this practice contributes to the maintenance of the status quo (Kurpius et al., 1995). Extrapersonal factors can be examined by assessing the consultee's worldview (Weigel, 1999) or by exploring the ways in which the external context of the consultee's life affects performance (e.g., Caplan, Caplan, & Erchul, 1994). Many views and models of consultation pay limited attention to the system in which the consultee resides, yet we view the open triad as an essential component of feminist/ multicultural consultation. In that regard, our thinking is most similar to systemic theories that have a primary focus on the context in which the problem occurs (Schein, 1987; Soo-Hoo, 1997). The following core ideas defined our view of the open triad as an essential component of feminist/multicultural consultation: (a) The problem is considered within the context of the entire system rather than being focused on one individual or component; (b) both interpersonal and extrapersonal factors are identified; (c) forces outside the organization (e.g., famiUes, communities) may also play a role in problems and in problem resolution and prevention; and (d) when extrapersonal variables are considered in consultation interventions, change will affect the entire system and not just one component. These core ideas support the notion of the open versus closed triad, which acknowledges the role of interdependence between the various parts of an organization and the role of contextual variables in influencing the system in which they operate. The emphasis is away from viewing an individual or an isolated unit as "tlie problem" to a broader focus on the complex interplay of multiple Interpersonal and extrapersonal forces. In other words, extrapersonal and external forces are considered, and the problem is viewed within the context of the entire system. The consultation experience is viewed as an opportunity to transform a system rather than to focus on an individual or to accommodate the status quo.
JOURNALOF MULTICULTURAL COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT' April 2006 • Vol. 34
121
process of feminist/multicultural consultation Another important difference between our view of consultation and that of many other models is our focus on process. Not only is the process of the consultation viewed as important as the task or outcome but so is the manner in which the consultation triad works together. This process is defined by attention to how multicultural variables contribute both to problems and solutions in the system, a collaborative and inclusive stance, a shift in expertise from the consultant to the consultee, and a focus on transformation rather than accommodation. Two broad themes were identified in this category: Feminist/multicultural consultation is culturally responsive rather than patriarchal, and it empowers all members of an organization rather than vesting power in the few. We viewed the process of consultation as one of innovation and change using an approach that is culturally responsive and empowering to all members of the system. CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE VERSUS PATRIARCHAL CONSULTATION
Consultation is most effective when it incorporates a process that is compatible with the culture of the current system so that a bridge can be formed between the status quo and innovation and change (Parsons, 1996). Culture includes the values and norms of a system. Cultural responsiveness includes an interest in those values as well as openness to multicultural variables that might affect members of the organization differentially. Another example of cultural responsiveness is the consultant's acknowledgement of cultural differences and how these might affect her or his role (Jackson & Hayes, 1993). Increasing cultural responsiveness among members of an organization may be linked to enhanced social support and organizational functioning (Brinson & Lee, 1997). In contrast, our group discussed several ways in which a patriarchal approach might defme an organization. For example, members of the organization with power may support notions of socially constructed differences on the basis of cultural factors such as gender, race, and ethnicity. Or, it may be that there are long-standing rules, norms, and mores of the organization that essentially serve as constraints that block access of some members from full participation in the organization. Failure to recognize patriarchy in an organization may lead to missed opportunities to initiate organizational changes that allow all members to participate and achieve equally (Iannello, 1992). The following are core ideas that defme a culturally responsive process of feminist/multicultural consultation: (a) The consultant is aware of her or his own cultural biases and values and how these might affect the consultative process, (b) the consultant has expertise and skills to offer but views the consultee and organization as the experts about their world and the cultural norms of the 122
JOURNALOFMULTICULTURALCOUNSELINGANDDEVELOPMENT«April2006«Vol.34
organization, (c) the consultant is aware that problems may reside in the system of opportunity (access to resources) rather than in those who do not have these opportunities, (d) the consultant is aware of the role that patriarchy and existing power structures can play in creating barriers to change, (e) the assumptive or "default" values (i.e., gender privilege. White privilege) need to be examined and changed in order to fundamentally change the system, and (f) there is a willingness to change the structure of the system or organization rather than maintain the status quo. These core ideas share the theme that the cultural environment of the organization is considered when designing change processes. Although all organizations have a culture in that they have rules, norms, and existing power structures, this culture often serves to maintain the status quo and to make change difficult. Furthermore, it may be patriarchal in that it is based on greater privilege for some than for others. In contrast, our themes reflect the view that the feminist/ multicultural consultation involves an active and aware consultant (i.e., culturally responsive) who considers the role of culture and how it differentially affects various constituents in the organization. EMPOWERMENT VERSUS POWER
Power implies domination or controlling others, including the ability to reward or punish, perhaps through administrative oversight (Iannello, 1992). Use of power in interventions can lead to feehngs of marginalization and disenlranchisement and can cause individuals to devalue their unique contributions (Brinson & Lee, 1997). This may be especially true for consultees who already feel disempowered because of their gender, or racial/ethnic status. In contrast, empowerment redefines the notion of power by framing it as the ability to do or accomplish something, such as when members of an organization monitor or control themselves (Iannello, 1992). Essentially, empowerment is a process whereby members of an organization develop self-efficacy or self-control about important aspects of their work rather than feeling controlled and managed by someone above them in the hierarchy. One of the ways to empower various members of an organization is through developing a collaborative relationship that allows everyone to contribute in a meaningful way (Parsons, 1996). In addition to the ways in which consultees are empowered, the manner in which the consultant uses her or his power emerged as an important idea in our workgroup. Similar to Parsons (1996), we viewed the consultee as perceiving that the consultant has expert power or special knowledge and skills that are valued or necessary to move forward. But we went one step further in describing the consultant and consultee as being in a reciprocal and collaborative relationship where both give as well as receive expert knowledge. This occurs as the consultant "gives" her or his power to the consultee and as the consultant learns from the consultee. Moreover, as the members of the organization beJOURNALOF MULTICULTURAL COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT- April 2006 • Vol. 34
123
came empowered, the importance of the consultant's expert power was reduced as power shifted to members of the organization. Core ideas that defined the process of feminist/multicultural consultation as empowering were the following: (a) Both the consultant and the consultee have valuable knowledge and expertise, (b) the process of consultation identifies untapped resources so that power differentials between members of the organization will shift over time, (c) the consultant is mindful of the difference between using power to bring about change and empowering others to change, (d) consultant instills belief in consultee and in the organization that change can occur through their own efforts, and (e) the process supports the goal that expertise and power will be shifted from the consultant to the consultee and organization so change can be maintained. These core ideas share a common thread of using the consultant's expertise and skills to help identify resources in the consultee and in the organization that can be used to empower those involved. We believe that empowerment leads to greater inclusion, use of untapped resources, and collaboration of organizational members. Ultimately, it allows the process of consultation to lead to more lasting change because the locus of change is in the members of the organization rather than in the consultant.
role of the feminist/multicultural consultant The task or goal of consultation often is a specified outcome such as a technical report, dissemination of information, increased organization productivity or morale, or consultee remediation or growth (Gallessich, 1985). In other words, the expectation is that the consultant will produce a particular product or solve a specific problem. In contrast, we view the overarching goal of feminist/multicultural consultation to be transformation of both the consultee and the organization rather than accommodation or change related to a more narrowly defined problem. Two broad themes were identified regarding the role of the consultant in feminist/ multicultural consultation: The consultant serves as an agent for change rather than as an agent for maintaining the status quo, and the consultant advocates for both the client and the system rather than advocating for one over the other. CONSULTANT AS AGENT FOR CHANGE VERSUS MAINTAINING THE STATUS OUO Our work group viewed the consultant as an agent of change for an organization, leading to growth and ultimately to prevention, rather than as an agent to return the organization to its status quo position. As Parsons (1996) noted, consultants have been viewed historically as either an agent of change or an agent for maintaining the status quo. He effectively argued that this either/or position is not as useful in imderstanding the consultant's perspective as is a values continuum, such as the one proposed by
124
JOURNALOFMULTICULTURAL COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT-April2006'Vol. 34
Pearl (1974). In this continuum, the consultant's orientation is placed along a philosophical vdues continuum with four points, heginning with "perpetuate status quo," moving to "process consultant," then to "empowerment of powerless," and ending with "revamp the system." At one end of the continuum is the consultant who focuses on increasing efficiency or helping memhers of the system fit more effectively within the organization. In contrast, the consultant at the other end of the continuum identifies significant prohlems in the organization and serves as an advocate for change (Parsons, 1996). As noted earlier in this article, empowerment (the third point on tliis continuum) is one of the six themes we identified as essential to feminist/multicultural consultation. Our group, however, viewed empowerment as the process that would lead consultants, consultees, and organizations to the task or goal of hecoming agents for change, which represents Pearl's (1974) endpoint. We helieved that prevention of future prohlems and disruptions in the organization could be addressed only through empowerment and then through revamping parts or all of a system. The following core ideas defined our view of the consultant as an agent for change: (a) The consultant views the system through a new lens and serves as a catalyst for change; (h) the consultant seeks to alter the status quo as a means of empowering members of the system to begin the process of change; (c) when change influences one aspect of the system, there is a willingness to deal with systemic changes; (d) the system changes rather than just the individual or individuals who are viewed as having a "deficit"; and (e) being an agent of change can lead to transformation, rather than accommodation, which ultimately can maintain change and prevent the recurrence of similar problems in the organization. It is clear fi-om these themes that as an active participant or agent for change, the consultant is an important component in our view of feminist/multicultural consultation. Similarly, the consultation process is seen as offering an opportunity for transformation rather than accommodation. Transformation might lead to prevention by protecting the organization firom experiencing similar systemic problems in the future. CONSULTANT AS ADVOCATE FOR BOTH CLIENT AND ORGANIZATION Advocacy typically is viewed as separate from consultation because of some critical distinctions between these two activities. We struggled with the notion of whether or not advocacy should be a part of all feminist/multicultural consultations or if they should be viewed as distinct activities. We believed that some of the goals and boundaries of consultants and advocates are different. For example, advocacy may go beyond a professional context in that it may be personal or political. Advocates may assume an adversarial role in seeking to support their chent or their cause. We resolved this dilemma by beginning with the premise that the consultant is invited into a system and as a part of that invitation, examines the organization's values and goals and essentially agrees to operate within them. The consultant's goal then becomes to facilitate the
JOURNALOFMULTICULTURAL COUNSELING ANDDEVELOPMENT'April2006» Vol. 34
125
organization in achieving its mission and stated goals (Parsons, 1996). When this occurs, the consultcint can advocate for the system as well as for the consultee's role within the system. The core ideas that defined our view of the consultant as an advocate for both the client and the system were (a) the consultant knows in advance who the consultee is, how the consultation will be used, who the information will serve and how, and the potential for misuse so that both the consultee and the system can be served; (b) the consultant supports the goals of the consultation; (c) advocacy within a system is a powerful means of providing the validation and tools tofi^eeup unused or underutilized resources so that all parts of the organization are served; and (d) advocacy is another means of transforming a system rather than simply accommodating to it. A key aspect of our core ideas about the consultant as an advocate for both the consultee and the organization is the necessity of knowing in advance important parameters about the organization, the consultee, and how the information gathered will be used. The values and expectations of all three members of the triad need to be acknowledged in order for the consultant to truly serve EIS an advocate for both the consultee and the organization. The expectation that both the consultee and the organization will be served allows the consultant more freedom to tap underutilized resources, to foster collaboration, and to empower members of the system.
discussion Feminist and multicultural theories share many common tenets, such as a focus on the greater context of the individual's world, the belief that opportunities and resources are not equally distributed, and a goal of changing the status quo. Moreover, a broad definition of multiculturalism includes gender and sex roles as well as race and ethnicity. Accordingly, it seems appropriate to integrate both feminist and multicultural theories to develop models of consultation. Our workgroup examined the possibility of moving toward a model of feminist/multicultural consultation and identified six broad themes representing the structure, process, and role of the consultant in this type of consultative model. We viewed feminist/multicultural consultation as being nonhierarchical, an open triad (considers extrapersonal factors), culturally responsive, and empowering, with the consultant serving as an agent for change and advocating for both the consultee and the system. In examining these themes and thinking about how they might be applied to an organization, it is important to emphasize that the three categories (each with their two themes) do have some degree of overlap. For example, the structure and process of consultation often form a loop because they do not occur in a linear manner. It is also important to note that our confirmatory review of the literature after our group met showed that our six themes, or elements of these themes, can be found in the writings of other authors. Nevertheless, we are unaware of other writings that have combined these particular themes and that have specifically attempted to identify both feminist and multicultural perspectives to use in mov126
jouRNALOF MULTICULTURAL COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT* April 2006 • Vol. 34
ing toward an integrative model of consultation. This suggests that feminist and multicultural variables may continue to be overlooked in the consultation process. In our view, this represents a limitation in the literature and poses an important challenge for future research and training.
conclusion On the basis of the work of our group, we offer the following broad conclusions about feminist/multicultural consultation and hope that these conclusions will be useful in stimulating others to consider integrating feminist and multicultural themes in their consultative activities: (a) Nonhierarchical approaches provide greater benefits in terms of increasing motivation, promoting cooperation, using existing resources, and minimizing the loss of human potential; (b) hierarchy is not inevitable, and this structure might persist in part due to historical and cultural perspectives rather than because it represents a necessary stmcture for consultation; (c) an open triad structure examines the complex interplay of interpersonal and extrapersonal forces within the context of the system (rather than a focus on an individual or one aspect of the system as the "problem"); (d) the consultation experience is viewed as an opportunity to transform a system rather than to accommodate the status quo; (e) patriarchal structures are based on greater privilege for some versus others, and this may lead to serious disparities in the system of opportunity for various constituents in the organization as well as an underutilization of human resources; (f) the consultant's expertise and skills should be used to help identify untapped and underutilized resources in the consultee and in the organization as a means of empowering those involved; (g) the role of the consultant is as an active participant or agent for change; (h) the consultation process is seen as offering an opportunity for transformation and change that might ultimately protect the organization from experiencing similar systemic problems in the future; and (i) advocacy requires the consultant to know in advance the values, goals, and expectations of the consultee and the organization and how the information gathered will be used, so that she or he can truly serve as an advocate for both the consultee and the organization. The themes and core ideas identified by our workgroup provide the foundation for moving toward a model of feminist/multicultural consultation that we hope will stimulate research, influence training, and guide consultation efforts. Because feminist and multicultural variables contribute to the overall sociocultural context of an organization or system, both of these perspectives are critical in understanding the assumptive parts of a system (e.g., patriarchy), in understanding how resources and opportunities are distributed, in questioning the status quo, and for looking at new ways to approach issues and to intervene more effectively. Attention to feminist and multicultural perspectives in the consultation process provides an opportunity for the consultation experience to include all voices, to empower the participants, and to trctnsform rather than to simply accommodate a system. JOURNALOFMULTICULTURALCOUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT'April2006« Vol. 34
127
rpferenres Argyris, C. (1957). Personality and organization. New York: Harper & Row. Arredondo, P., Toporek, R., Brown, S. P., Jones, J., Locke, D. C , Sanchez, J., et al. (1996). Operationalization of the multicultural counseling competencies./oarna/ of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 24, 42-78. Brinson,J. A., & Lee, C. C. (1997). Culturally responsive group leadership; An integrative model for experienced practitioners. In H. Forester-Miller &J. A. Kottler (Eds.), Issues and challenges for group practitioners. Denver, CO: Love. Caplan, G., Caplan, R., Erchul, W. (1994). Caplanian mental health consultation: Historical background and current status. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 46, 2-12. Gallessich, J. (1985). Toward a meta-theory of consultation. The Counseling Psychologist, 13, 336-354. Hackney, H. L., & Cormier, L. S. (1996). The professional counselor: A process guide to helping {2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Hellkamp, D. T., Zins, J. E., Ferguson, K., & Hodge, M. (1998). Training practices in consultation: A national survey of clinical, counseling, industrial/organizational, and school psychology faculty. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 50, 228-236. Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of ihe mind. London: McGraw-Hill. Hole,J., & Levine, E. (1979). The first feminists. InJ. Freedman (Ed.), Women: A feminist perspective (pp. 553-572). Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield. Iannello, K. P. (1992). Decisions without hierarchy. New York: Routledge. Jackson, D. N., & Hayes, D. H. (1993). Multicultural issues in consultation, yourna/ of Counseling & Development, 72, 144-147 Kurpius, S. E., Fuqua, D. R., Gibson, G., Kurpius, D.J., & Froehle, T. C. (1995). An occupational analysis of consulting psychology: Results of a national survey. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 47, 75-88. Leonard, H. S. (1994). Report on the 1994 Colorado Conference on Consultation to Corporations and Business. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 46, 32-33. Leonard, H. S. (1999). Becoming a consultant: The real stories. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 51, 3-13. Mullin, V. C , & Cooper, S. E. ( 1998). Cross-cultural consultation in a South African cancer setting. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 50, 47-58. Parsons, R. D. (1996). The skilled consultant: A systematic approach to the theory and practice of consultation. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Pearl, A. (1974). The psychological consultant as change agent. Professional Psychology Research and Practice, 5, 292-298. Ramirez, S. Z., Lepage, K. M., Kratochwill, T. R., Duffy, J. L. (1998). Multicultural issues in school-based consultation conceptual and research considerations. Journal of School Psychology, 36, 479-509. Schein, E. H. (1987). Process consultation (Vol. 2). New York: Addison, Wesley, Longman. Soo-Hoo, T. (1997). Strategic consultation: The evolution and application of an efficient approach. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 49, 194-206. Steward, R.J. (1996). Training consulting psychologists to be sensitive to multicultural issues in organizational consultation. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 48, 180-189. Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (1990). Counseling the culturally different: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley. Waclawski,J., Church, A. H., & Burke, W W. (1995). Women and men as organizational development practitioners and analysis of differences and similarities. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 47, 89-107. Weigel, R. G. (1999). One size does not fit all. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,
51, 47-56.
128
JOURNALOFMULTICULTURAL COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT'April2006'Vol. 34
