This comparison draws in part from “Unlocking Potential: Motivational Interviewing for Teams” by Lauren McCarthy, MS, BCBA, LBA (BehaviorLive), and extends it with peer-reviewed research from our library of 27,900+ ABA research articles. The decision framework, BACB ethics code references, and cross-links below are synthesized by Behaviorist Book Club.
View the original presentation →One of the most consequential decisions a behavior analyst makes is not just what intervention to use, but how to approach the clinical question in the first place. For unlocking potential: motivational interviewing for teams, the difference between an evidence-based, individualized approach and a traditional, protocol-driven one can significantly impact outcomes.
This guide lays out the key factors side by side to support your clinical decision-making.
| Factor | Evidence-Based Approach | Traditional Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Primary conversational move | Directive: Instruction, evaluation, correction — supervisor supplies information and direction | MI-informed: Open questions, reflection, affirmation — supervisor evokes and acknowledges the supervisee's own content |
| Staff verbal behavior | Directive: Primarily responsive — answers supervisor questions, receives feedback, acknowledges directives | MI-informed: Generative — contributes observations, expresses values, identifies barriers, proposes solutions |
| Response to ambivalence | Directive: Resolved through persuasion or authority — supervisor argues for the correct position | MI-informed: Explored collaboratively — supervisor evokes both sides of ambivalence and supports autonomous resolution |
| Effect on psychological safety | Directive: Safety depends on the supervisor's tone and relationship quality — vulnerable to reduction under evaluative pressure | MI-informed: Safety is built structurally through consistent reinforcement of honest communication and genuine partnership |
| Best use cases | Directive: Clear skill deficits requiring instruction, compliance requirements, crisis situations, procedural training | MI-informed: Ambivalence about clinical approaches, team engagement and motivation, values alignment, complex interpersonal situations |
| Long-term team effects | Directive: Consistent performance on defined tasks; limited initiative and generalization beyond explicit requirements | MI-informed: Higher engagement and initiative; more generative problem-solving; stronger collaborative culture |
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Use this framework when approaching unlocking potential: motivational interviewing for teams in your practice:
Does the data support a need for intervention? Is there a meaningful impact on the individual's quality of life, safety, or access to reinforcement?
YES → Proceed to assessment NO → Document reasoning, monitor
A functional assessment should guide intervention selection. Avoid defaulting to standard protocols without individual analysis. Consider environmental variables, setting events, and private events.
YES → Select evidence-based approach matched to function NO → Complete assessment first
Goals should be co-developed. Assent and informed consent are ethical requirements. The individual's preferences and values matter in selecting both goals and methods.
YES → Proceed with collaborative plan NO → Engage in shared decision-making
This course covers the clinical and ethical dimensions in detail with structured learning objectives and CEU credit.
Unlocking Potential: Motivational Interviewing for Teams — Lauren McCarthy · 1 BACB Supervision CEUs · $18
Take This Course →We extended this decision guide with research from our library — dig into the peer-reviewed studies behind each approach, in plain-English summaries written for BCBAs.
239 research articles with practitioner takeaways
200 research articles with practitioner takeaways
161 research articles with practitioner takeaways
1 BACB Supervision CEUs · $18 · BehaviorLive
Research-backed educational guide
Research-backed answers for behavior analysts
You earn CEUs from a dozen different places. Upload any certificate — from here, your employer, conferences, wherever — and always know exactly where you stand. Learning, Ethics, Supervision, all handled.
No credit card required. Cancel anytime.
All behavior-analytic intervention is individualized. The information on this page is for educational purposes and does not constitute clinical advice. Treatment decisions should be informed by the best available published research, individualized assessment, and obtained with the informed consent of the client or their legal guardian. Behavior analysts are responsible for practicing within the boundaries of their competence and adhering to the BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts.