Proactivity

Proactivity sounds great right? It's positive and meaningful, and everything we want to be all the time. Except for some reason we can't. Not quite enough anyway. We mull over things in the present, forget the milk on the way home and then get scorned when you need to brave the cold and go back, leaving washing up to your partner. Why? I'll try to understand what proactivity actually is by looking at cognition, it's evolutionary benefits, and how to get better at it. 

Why does it feel bad to get it wrong? The absence of proactivity just feels like such an outright failure, when perhaps we're being a little too harsh on ourselves. Let's look at this construct on a continuum. Say, at one end you have spontaneous, the other proactive. Now where do you want to average out? Personally I love being a planner, but always feel great when I've let certain things go a bit and live in the moment. I say certain, because for me, I prefer my spontaneity to be a visit to the pub, seeing a friend, or going to a movie with the kids. Not in the slightest is it the spontaneity of rushing out the door and leaving your keys to the house inside. How fun. 

From my research into the Big 5, and further, it's further delineated components (10 total factors, two for each main 'big 5'), I would posit rather comfortably, that people who are higher in openness, at least by 2 standard deviations or 95% of people, may be more spontaneous by default. I would further hypothesize that at least these people are more comfortable to let things go and see what eventuates. This would be a stark contrast to thos who may be high in neuroticism or negative emotion, which would perhaps present with the same behavioural outcome, but whereas the open people may in some sense plan or rationalize their given spontaneity, neurotic people would be destroyed by it, and yet it would keep happening despite their negative feelings. 

It's good to have a basic understanding of what's going on for people personality wise because from there we could layer on top things like mental health. If for a moment take certain ailments like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, these things may further exacerbate anyones natural tendencies and lead to an impairment at proactivity. 

Next we parse intelligence. According to famous Psychology Professor, Jordan Peterson there is but one type; cognitive. Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences on the other hand, proposes that people are not born with all of the intelligence they will ever have. This theory challenged the traditional notion that there is one single type of intelligence, sometimes known as “g” for general intelligence, that only focuses on cognitive abilities. Gardner proposed that there are eight intelligences: Linguistic, Logical/Mathematical, Spatial, Bodily-Kinesthetic, Musical, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal, and Naturalist (Gardner, 1983; Gardner & Hatch, 1989; Gardner & Moran, 2006).

Traditional IQ tests focus on cognitive abilities and measure only one type of intelligence. They are based on the assumption that analytical ability equates to greater intelligence. In contrast, Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences suggests that people have at least 8 different types of intelligences (Gardner & Hatch, 1989). Gardner proposed that traditional IQ testing does not fully and accurately depict a person’s abilities (Gardner & Moran, 2006). Instead, he proposed eight different intelligences based on skills and abilities that are valued in various cultures: Linguistic, Logical/Mathematical, Spatial, Bodily-Kinesthetic, Musical, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal, and Naturalist (Gardner & Hatch, 1989; Gardner & Moran, 2006). Despite this however, there is so much criticism around intelligence because of the lack of empirical evidence for just about all scales outside of traditional IQ tests. Test-retest data just isn't as strong, and longitudinally over time, scores for individuals vary way more than has been yet to be predictable like IQ has.

I believe the higher the IQ score, the easier it may be for one to hold, or juggle, more things in their 'minds eye'. In turn, this will have the behavioural perception that people who can juggle multiple things with ease, may indeed be brighter than the rest of us. Picture for a second however, the exceptionally bright person, the "Mensa"amongst us who we know (because they profess it perhaps) may indeed be so focused and so particular that they have a 'one track mind', and can't be proactive at all. Constantly focused on the here and now, not what is happening on a multitude of angles. For this, I really do think personality comes into it quite remarkably, as difficult as it may be to quantify just how. Intellect is important, but as the 'big-10' personality assessment highlighted, intellect itself is a personality construct, and when this is perhaps in the second or third standard deviation, peculiar presentations emerge. Perhaps the graphic below somehow illustrates what I think could be the sweet-spot here.

Controversially here, I guess I'm saying that as we approach the fringe of IQ excellence, there may indeed be a perceived difference in an ability to be proactive on multiple fronts. Sure, you may be able to play chess well, but can you proactively make sure you're doing things for your partner, caring for others, and being truly capable?

Here, I'd suggest that we have a real opportunity. IQ is fixed, but empathy and other EQ scores are not. Personality is rather fixed too, but our behavioural responses are not. Unconscientious people can learn to be organised, and neurotic people acquire skills to be calm. so whilst we cannot hope necessarily to acquire a higher intelligence, there's hope for all of us. How? Here's some tips I've observed to be helpful:

1. think of others. I don't mean trivially, but really think of them. Imagine what it may be like for other people and seek to feel what it's like for them. 

2. Practice increasing your feelings vocabulary. This has been helpful at increasing overall emotional intelligence. When talking to others, say how you feel and why. Naming this more often, really helps you to connect with your own, and others feelings. Don't over-do this, it's a bit strange for others, but it's great to feed into a feedback or conflict space. 

3. Ask Questions. This is way under-done in my opinion, especially through conflict. Don't assume you understand yourself and your own reactions fully, let alone the other person. As questions of others, and yourself. Spend time thinking and breaking down your own perceptions, and don't judge others for theirs, simply enquire to increase your own understanding. 

Here's some others.

Next I'll try to add real value to two situations; proactivity through a caregeivers role, and as a professional helper. 

Proactive Caregiver

In this role, I think proactivity is key to reducing angst, and creating greater, long-lasting harmony in the relationship whether it's for hours, or for a lifetime. 

If you're in the dating phase, perhaps you want to un-creepily extract something specific as a gesture you may be able to do for your date. For example, you may be messaging each other back and forth, if so, look for something they're interested in and fold that into your in-person interactions. Why? It feels like you really care, and are interested enough to take ownership and put pressure on yourself to stand out and focus on the other person's feeling. Who doesn't want that?! It may be that you can talk about a certain travel trip, go and find a particular cocktail, discuss problems in their employment sector, anything really. If it's not genuine, you'll fail and look like you're creepy or desperate. This is where focusing on asking questions and connecting to how things feel, or what problems may exist is key.

If you're in a long-term relationship, this is slightly trickier. Why? Because if you suddenly change tact, the other person will wonder what's up! Start small, and be genuine. Linger for a bit longer, not on your phone, to be present. Invite conversation about what you already know they care about. Do small caring gestures, like a cup of tea, a glass of wine, or an additional chore without asking. The biggest pitfall here I believe, is not being busy because you've assumed you're being helpful. Don't disappear to go do something, and don't sit with without discussion, else you risk not adding value as you may intend. 

Extending this to children, environmental management is absolutely key, as is preparation. It's from this, that environmental safety is made a priority for young children, giving rise even to successful child protection models which prioritise household environment. I propose not a hierarchy, rather a Venn model to illustrate what I think are the child safe priorities below. As you can see, lots of overlap, and nothing that doesn't lean on something else. 

You'll learn fast in the presence of a newly walking toddler, that even though you thought your environment was child-proof, it is in fact far from it. Akin to having a puppy, nothing is safe. So what do we do? We mount televisions on walls, screw bookcases to walls, tie up cords on blinds, put up gates, etc. We're foolish if we do all this and stand back proud, as we've always undoubtedly missed something. get it right though, and you can let children explore the environment with minor supervision, creating mental space for you, and swift developmental improvements for them. 

Going further, being proactive is the founding principles behind many parenting programs such as 123 Magic, Tuning into Teens, and others. Creating space and calm in advance paves way for opportunities to drain emotion and have breakthrough conversation and drive change. This extends all the way from setting up boundaries and clearing expectations before a positive activity (ie seeing friends or TV time), to how you deliberately distance yourself when things are heightened at the point of a 'blow-up' (note distance means being physically close usually, ie in the same room or next and doing very little to invite dialogue when clam, not taking off or doing anything distracting).

Here's my top tips to focus on:

1. Learn about the condition - Understanding the condition of the person you are caring for can help you anticipate potential problems and take steps to prevent them.
2. Plan ahead - Planning ahead can help you avoid last-minute crises. Make sure you have a backup plan in case something goes wrong.
3. Take care of yourself - Taking care of yourself is essential to being a good caregiver. Make sure you get enough rest, eat well, and exercise regularly.
4. Stay organized - Keeping track of appointments, medications, and other important information can help you stay on top of things.
5. Communicate effectively - Good communication is key to being a good caregiver. Make sure you keep the lines of communication open with the person you are caring for and with other members of your healthcare team.
6. Be patient - Caring for someone can be challenging at times. It is important to be patient with yourself and with the person you are caring for.

Proactive Care Worker

This one's fun! As a professional, you're afforded the opportunity regularly to hone your skills at perception, foresight, and empathy; the key ingredients to proactivity. What's more, is that professionally, this is usually more foregiveable because, depending on your employment of course, service users (or customers, clients, etc.) expect professionalism and structure far before they demand these high level interpersonal skills. 

If you're in a care setting, you can practice this daily. Do something to make your people around you remember them. The more headroom you can create, the more you can hold. How do you create headroom I hear you ask? It's really hard, especially when dealing with people:

1. Remove anxiety. This will consume your every thought, kill motivation, and eliminate any capacity to be proactive. Ask yourself what you're really worried about. Name it, normalise it, and move on. 
2. Prime yourself. Do something creative and energising that gets your mind to open up. 
3. Capitalise on momentum. Find and create positive feedback loops. 
4. Smile. That's right, smile or find something to make you laugh. Stimulating our serotonin, even when faking it (although effect is not as big) can help you to be more positive and let go of negative emotions. 

In order to be really useful, you're going to have to build a relationship. The better you know your people, the better you can meet their needs. Without intimate knowledge, we must rely on assumptions and generalisations. In the human services field, this is usually not problematic because your assumptions and generalisations become finely tuned over time to predict quite well en mass. To become truly exemplary however, you need to find the nuance that each person brings. This applies at all levels of organisations, and with all client groups. It is the skill that sets apart true practitioners, from mere workers. Of course I'm not suggesting that we rely on each individual to drive our organisations and approaches completely however, assumptions can still serve really well to open doors to conversations and to attempt to meet needs with clients and colleagues who may not be adept yet at articulating their specific needs. Afterall, how many of us truly can say that we always know precisely what we need? I don't know about you, but sometimes I feel off, and unless I spend time really breaking down my cognitions, I usually just shake things off, change tact, and move on. Things like Maslow's hierarchy of needs, psychological models of social status, observations on dissonance, etc. are all great things to know. Even Social Learning theory and it's modern day evolved teachings can help us to work out what people may 'need' to improve their situations. We can then work from the top-down, and posit certain things with people to see what sticks; this inevitably is the structure of the very esteemed motivational interview. 

How close do we get to others to truly help them? Are there any problems with this? We certainly can't be taking up intimate relationships with all our colleagues, let alone our clients, in order to help people. In fact, as I reflect, it's possibly slightly easier to evoke change in those at arms length, than those truly close. If you've ever tried to 'change' a partner, you'll definitely know what I'm talking about! It is the balance of distance, but knowledge and connection that's truly 'fabulous'. The Zone of Fabulousness, is exactly what Vikki Reynolds (2019) described as this balance. As she discusses, where people get too close, it's hard to truly help people, often doing more harm than good, as your vested interests can start to take over. This is where I believe (as she discusses, just slightly differently), the art of detachment is key to practice. We sometimes need help from others, but we ourselves, can step back, take a look at what's going on, and strategize the best course of action. This can happen well without de-attaching (essentially putting up walls), and as Vikki discusses, we need to all approach these 'messy' situations with hope and care. 

Sounds a bit scary, but rest-assured, Vikki is hopeful, and I think I know why. As she points out astutely, offenders against children very seldom do so without the existence of a well established relationship. Thanks to contemporary criminological research which has worked its way into protective models such as the 'five heroes' (OCG, NSW) as well as the Australian Child Safety Standards (DSS). The 5 heroes is a graphical exemplar of how promotion of varied and many positive and close 'heroes' for children is what keeps them safe. Offenders, as it seems, rarely target vocal and well-versed children with lots of connections. It is this very discourse that plagued 3 different Royal Commissions in Australia, (abv.) Child Sexual Abuse, Elder Abuse, and Abuse against Persons Living with Disabilities. The strongest protective measure of all it seems, is connection. It needs to be driven by the client yes, but as workers, we do well to reflect on this and strive to enhance connections of our clientele and our colleagues for that matter. 

Isolation is a key problem we need to ameliorate. Even during COVID, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare found that although data across the Nation was scarce both ways (ie. offender and victim), they found enough to indicate that rates of domestic violence did increase during those years. Responses were reduced, as was reporting (likely), and many women reported an increase. 

So must we increase our supervision of workers as the key? Not necessarily. I believe that relationships and connection are still important to foster, whilst at the same time, increasing measures of meaningful participation, complaints handling, transparency, etc. can all assist greatly in reducing risk to both clients and workers. Eliminating shadows would be my goal, not necessarily also shining a spotlight on vulnerable people. I would put ownership on ourselves and our systems by:

1. Complaint invitations. Making sure all people (clients and workers alike) have clear, transparent, and easy to use mechanisms for complaint.
2. Encouraging feedback. Whilst not maybe sitting at the level of 'complaint', meaningful feedback can sometimes catch wrongdoing, and should be overseen with care and reverence it deserves. Creating a thirst for this in teams is another key. 
3. Embedding ownership. Getting people to detach and look at problems objectively helps everyone to come up with more holistic and effective solutions rather than becoming consumed with any particular tact. It would be ideal if we could all strive to have the highest levels of personal responsibility (ownership) whilst not letting anything drop in a sense of care, compassion, and humanistic connection. Detaching and not De-Attaching!
4. Increase transparency. Remember, it is in the shadows, that darkness truly takes hold. Find a way to encourage transparency, sharing, discussion, and positivity. Anything to the contrary can extinguish robust conversation and encourage people to just 'not share'. When this happens, people stop sharing what's going on with the vigour and enjoyment they could, but that doesn't mean they're stopping their actions. Experience tells me rather, that this just encourages things to go underground, and from there, what may begin as benevolence, can quickly become malevolence or evil. 

We can all be proactive in building meaningful connections with our colleagues, and our clientele. I believe this is how we can truly start to make meaningful change for people. We can tailor the right solution, and disassemble road-blocks as they arise, if we truly understand how they came to be in the first place. Without a good relationship, the truth around the existence of these barriers may always remain a mystery and sit just out of reach of change. 

https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/domestic-violence/family-domestic-and-sexual-violence-service-respon/summary

https://vikkireynoldsdotca.files.wordpress.com/2019/09/2019-context-uk-zone-of-fabulousness-reynolds.pdf

https://ocg.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-01/G_CSS_SAFESeriesuserguide.pdf