Solution Focus in a Large Complex Organization


“Now we can see the cheese, not only the holes!” – Head of Strategy Project

Susanne Burgstaller SF headshot

Interview with Susanne Burgstaller who is a Solution-Focused consultant, coach, and facilitator. She is founder and managing director of usolvit consultants GmbH and has just brought out her new book “Solution Focus in Organisations. Consulting and leading from the Future” in German. She is an ICF PCC and does mostly organisational and HR development and change projects in Vienna and the CEE region.

Thinking of your recent project for a high profile public organization, what pleases you most about the work?

What pleases me most is the fact that it was possible to create a work alliance between the 3 presidents, the 40 different leaders of the organization, and a large chunk of the staff members in order to head in a joint direction. Previously, the “strategy” had been something that “those up there” had decided upon and no one else was interested. Through the joint work with everyone in the organisation, it became possible to make it clear to people what the presidents meant by “strategy”… that this “strategy” involved a lot of interactional goals which improved the cooperation in the organisation and was thus “good for them”, and included potentially all members of the organisation in determining future steps for the organisation.

What would the client organization tell us worked best for them?

Recently the vice-head of the organization said during a workshop with all the leaders: “Now we can see the cheese, not only the holes!” and the head of the Strategy Project told me that “the moaners clearly have less space now”. So obviously, people have learnt to watch out for what works, rather than focus on mistakes.

The leaders all agreed that the atmosphere in the organization had improved considerably and that the leaders´ workshop in Jan 2015 had been the best ever. The situation is tough for them, but they are in an optimistic mode. Somebody said half-jokingly: “The mood is better than the situation!” People are communicating more and more cooperatively with each other and during several critical moments in 2014 and early 2015 it was – and still is – possible to observe the members of the organization pulling together to face their challenges rather than going into conflict or accusing one another as was the case before the start of the project.

Their preferred future originally was described thusly:

  1. People work together across departments, divisions and political allegiances: ONE bureaucracy.
  2. People take decisions much lower down in the hierarchy.
  3. People communicate with more focus on outcomes and express appreciation more often.
  4. Staff members can rely on a more consistent standard of leadership behavior and decision making.
  5. They cope with pending huge changes (“de-canting” their historic building, moving into a new location for 2-3 years, and then moving back).

By now a detailed description of their preferred future has found its way into a “mission-vision-values“ statement, which has been defined jointly with all members of staff and is being published as we speak.

You have placed Solution Focus at the centre of your work. How does your client benefit?

I think they benefit by incurring relatively low consulting costs considering that it is quite a big endeavor. This is achieved by keeping the project as simple and slim as possible. This means avoiding grand “consulting designs”, mobilizing and utilizing internal resources as much as possible, using existing channels or platforms of communication, and working very cooperatively and hands-on with the leaders and a group of staff representatives called the “Task Force”. This also means that the people involved take on much more ownership of the initiative. Obviously the fact that we avoid problem-analysis and focus on what is wanted straight away, taking small steps that no one needs to stumble over, and doing all this in a light-hearted atmosphere of confidence and hopefulness also helps. And they also get to learn quite a bit about SF without ever spending a cent on an official training day!

Some other useful differences that were noticed:

  • There is less just talking or writing about preferred behaviours and more doing;
  • Simpler language so that “non-academics” can also follow;
  • More (highly) interactive workshops and meetings;
  • And more colour and “playfulness” instead of fear of mistakes and guardedness against conflicts and attacks.

Outcomes both the customer and myself were pleased about:

  • Unexpectedly big turnout and good feedback for the staff dialogue events in 2013 and 2014.
  • The Task Force volunteered to continue into 2014 and part of 2015.
  • The initiatives in 2014 and 2015 are driven by the people themselves.
  • The Leadership Curriculum has been well-attended and has produced a different attitude of more confidence among the leaders.
  • The new “Mission Statement” has been published.
  • More constructive and appreciative communication and MUCH more cooperation!
  • “Non-academic” staff speak more and show up more.
  • The staff council is positive about the whole endeavor.

You recently spoke at SOLWorld about the near demise of traditional change management approaches. What elements of those traditional approaches still work?

My colleagues at usolvit and myself did a survey in 2013-2014 where we asked approximately 100 managers and staff members within organizations about what behaviours of “change agents” they felt were most effective. Even though these people had not been confronted with SF before, they gave us lots of descriptions of behaviours that we identified as “Solution-Focused”.

They also emphasized some elements of the more traditional approaches to change. These were, for example, “implementation power & perseverance”, meaning that demonstrating continuity and consistency and being able to cope with frustrations and bouncing back from them was extremely important. Also, the traditional focus on “planning & organizing” came up again. Our customers felt that it was important that change champions would get a good picture of the current situation, be very clear about the desired outcomes, inform all parties continuously, demonstrate a systematic approach, and consider all parties or stakeholders affected.

How does SF move those practices forward?

I feel that SF is not necessarily in contradiction to these more traditional ideas, but that it transforms them in a productive way. When I work in change projects I of course emphasize SF behaviours, such as jointly generating an image of the preferred future in much detail, or identifying signs or steps of progress. When more “traditional” elements come into play I include them in an SF way by, for example, communicating respectfully and cooperatively with lots of SF questions, showing a collaborative and respectful attitude, or including stakeholders in the process as much as possible.

SF is essentially a coaching model for organizations. You seem to applying SF in new ways. What’s one application that you have created or used?

Susanne Burgstaller Solution-Focused wheelI am using this metaphor of the “Solution-Focused wheel” as a guideline for my change and OD consulting processes in organisations. It symbolizes that there are certain “stations” that are important to touch upon (the connecting points of the wheel) but that you can move in all directions depending on how things emerge in the situation and everything is connected.


Susanne Burgstaller Solution Focus SCOP-PortfolioI have also adapted the classic “SWOT” Portfolio in the more SF-focused “SCOP” Portfolio. In my experience, it helps avoid “analysis-paralysis” and get groups to move forward much more quickly.



What pleases you most about your book that has just come out on the German-speaking market?

The thing that pleases me most is that it has increased my communication and cooperation with my treasured international colleagues who have contributed to it! Also, I have learnt such a lot by having to write about my practice of SF.

Susanne Burgstaller Solution Focus bookMy best hope for the book is that it will make Solution Focus and the benefits it can bring to work in organisations better known in the German-speaking world. Particularly, I hope that it will show the useful differences SF organizational consulting has to offer in comparison to other consulting disciplines by providing faster and more direct routes to outcomes while at the same time generating more motivation and cooperation. (English edition to follow).

Connect with usolvit



Explaining Solution Focus to an insurance actuary

Insurance actuary Solution FocusMy colleague Promod Sharma of Taxevity* is an insurance actuary. He wanted to hear via a typical client story about how I personally use the Solution Focus approach to help support change in organizations. I was keen to give him a good example of the excellence of SF!

Main topic: Small-steps lead to big change

For the interview we used the small-steps theme featured in my last blog post.

A professional development tool for managers

I also talked about where I think SF fits as a professional development tool for managers, namely that they already have a practice skill (like Promod’s actuarial capability) and how SF will add a powerful extra change leadership dimension to their capabilities.

*Promod Sharma of Taxevity

Use Transparency to Clarify Problems, Build Solutions

Much has been said about the chronic need for transparency in government, on Wall Street, etc. The advocates of transparency like WikiLeaks see themselves as champions of the truth.Transparency, problems, solution focus

Transparency is an essential component of making progress in society. Some would say that a few of the champions of transparency are a bit obsessive; they become so enmeshed in proving their point as a means to an end that the ‘end’ is no longer clear.

The problem with understanding something is that it gives you the illusion that you can fix it–Hart Blanton

Similarly, those who obfuscate to prevent transparency are sustaining their need to remain opaque solely in their self-interest.

How can we use transparency and make progress in organizations?

In Solution Focus, we aim at helping people get to the solutions they want by reframing their view of the problems they face. Most problems in organizations are a construct.

Construct: (noun) an idea or theory containing various conceptual elements, typically one considered to be subjective and not based on empirical evidence Oxford dictionary

When you are looking for the root cause of a problem by pressing for transparency you may never see the end of the analysis, and it often results in assessing blame.

A transparency problem ‘construct’ points at blame vs. solutions.

It defeats transparency. So, understand the problem, just don’t enter into it.

Instead, focus on transparency in order to clarify what needs to get better and build solutions.

A solution focus perspective on transparency:

The old transparency model Transparency that leads to solutions
– Dramatize the person’s problem for the sake of getting their attention (as well as the attention of others) – Ask the person what they are doing that works and what needs to get better
– Attack the opposition’s credibility in order to get them to change their mind – Ask the person what they are aiming for and how that will be useful to others
– Expose and force the person to admit they are wrong – Allow the person the space to admit they have learned from the situation

Will this change the opaque bankers or WikiLeaks people? No! But, it can help people in organizations make progress using transparency about the problem and the desired solution. 

Ever wondered about the cost of teams at war?

Just think of the negative ROI – the waste of time, money, motivation, innovation and productivity, (not too mention employee disengagement) caused by the inability to collaborate!

When teams are at war…

Podcast  Tips and tools on speeding up progress towards team collaboration  

They might be skirmishing, infighting, or in open conflict. It’s a battle for power and the competitiveness is inefficient. They think they are ‘doing their job,’ but they’re not. They are not thinking about outcomes for the organization and the customer.

How would you like to help them:

  • Get more decisiveness, action and productivity,?
  • Remove bottlenecks to quality outcomes for the business and customers?

What’s their problem?

Teams in conflict see each other as the problem. Problem focus is normal in organizations, but much worse when teams compound it. Worse, they may have solutions at hand, but can’t agree on them because the ‘problem’ dominates the conversation. So it’s about who’s right.

Plus, one side usually decides to bully the other and force things through.

So, in order to get them to do the work, the job is to get them out of problem focus and move to solution building. We have to ignore the problem between the team.

‘Being opposed to collaboration these days is a bit like being against quality. Or maybe even profitability’ – Prahald Ramaswamy

What doesn’t work!

a. Don’t be the referee. Even if you’re the boss, they may both turn on you.

b. Don’t call a meeting to discuss the problem i.e., have, a) a time / agenda, b) make sure that everyone gets to speak, d) stick to the agenda, etc.

c. Don’t be a tough guy/gal by telling them there will be consequences if they don’t shape up. They will shape up for 10 minutes, no more.

Move forward. Ignore the problem focus.

The Solution Focus model for change and progress gets people to find out what they want and go do something about it. We don’t try to resolve the problem. After we have defined it and decided what we want, instead we mostly ignore the problem.

Collaboration is the goal … and it’s not a distant option. 


How to Have Monkey-Free Meetings. A Better Questions Cheat Sheet

How do we be a solutions provider and a leader / influencer in meetings? You didn’t think there were so many better solutions-oriented questions to ask about a meeting, did you?

Here’s your checklist cheat sheet to pull out before, during and at the end of almost any meeting.

Before the meeting:

Where have you already made the most progress (on the topic of the meeting)?

What is the one thing you want to be better (as a result of the meeting)?

What’s the one thing you want the presentation to enable you to do in your work?

When you receive a really good presentation, what format and content works best for you?

Suppose we have a good meeting, what will be different afterwards (that’s useful to you)?

What do you need me/us to focus on in the meeting?

Starting the meeting:

The goals and agenda for this meeting are… What do you need me to focus on?

Suppose this meeting goes well for you and your team, what will have worked best?

Suppose we have a good meeting, what will be different afterwards (that’s useful to you)?

You mentioned X in our lead up to this meeting. You’ve probably had experience in that area. What worked on those occasions? 

During the meeting:

Thinking of the presentation so far, how would you see this working for you?

You have just mentioned you like X … suppose we had implemented that element, how would that be useful to the organization? How would that help you with your larger goals?

What would you see being done differently to make it work for the customer? And how would you see this proposal as useful in making that happen?

Towards the end of the session:

Thinking of the various elements that make sense to you, how do you see them working for you / your team?

You mentioned you’re uncertain about (topic). Suppose we were to move ahead with the overall proposal and we made that work for you, what would you see us doing?

Inattentive, distracted, or uncomfortable audience:

How do you see this (presentation / section / concept) being useful to you so far?

What can you tell me that has been useful in the presentation so far?

On a scale of 1 – 10, where 1 means the presentation has limited value and 10 means  you’re ready to get going, where are you now?

Irrelevant questions:

Good question! In order to deliver on our meeting goal, I’d like to answer that at the end of the presentation. Go back to agenda.

I want to respect your time and the question that’s just been asked. How would you like me to handle it? Go back to agenda.

I’m glad you asked. I mentioned X, Y and Z earlier. My answer to your question is (respond). I think you’ll get more insight on your question if we go back to the agenda … point B in the next section should be helpful.

Challenging questions:

I’m glad you asked. My answer is (minimal detail). How do you see that being useful?

I have an answer, but first, who in the group can share some insights?

I’m impressed by your question. Particularly by (topic). You must know a lot about this area. Can I hear a bit more?

I can see that this proposal requires a lot of thought. When you have undertaken this kind of activity in the past, what worked? How did you manage to do that?

What gives you grounds for optimism that things will work out this time?

Thinking of today’s proposal and the parts that make sense to you, what would you see yourself doing right away?

Tough questions:

(Don’t disagree. Restate their point and ask) Did I get it right?

I am curious about the thinking behind your question. Tell me more?

People would say that’s a great question. I suggest it’s a bit ahead of the agenda we agreed to. Let’s continue and get back to the question later in the meeting and make sure it’s not missed.

Suppose your point was no longer an issue, what would we be doing instead?’

Sounds like you are (concerned) about (topic). Suppose we were able to address your concern, what would we be working on once we’d implemented it?

Thinking of your good question, and what we have proposed…suppose it did work, what would you see being useful to the customer, (other stakeholders, etc.)?

Closing the meeting:

When we have implemented the programme, what’s the one thing you see being most useful to you / the business / the customer?

I’d like to ask each person in the room how you see this meeting outcome being useful to you.

More on Monkey-free Meetings + A book full of ideas


Managers who kiss up, kick down.

The bad news? There’s not much you can do about them.

The good news? You can manage your behaviour by figuring out where you want to go.

Your manager has just has just given a speech saying how wonderful her/his boss is. They also give you a bit of credit too. Yet, an hour later they call you to tell you how badly you did on items X, Y and Z. Very badly!

You know the type:

They crave approval so they praise up the line and prevent transparency about their bad behaviour down the line. They are two steps ahead of you, usually to cement their case that you are out of line with their needs, that your ideas are not acceptable.

They live on despite their weak people leadership capabilities, poor communication skills, inability to adapt to change, self-serving relationship-building skills, scattered task management abilities, and poor people development skills. They are devoid of self-awareness. Nobody challenges them, even the leaders who know about the dysfunction.

Unfortunately, your boss is the exception to the rule Everyone’s trying to collaborate. The best you can do with this boss is remember the line, ‘Never wrestle with a pig – the pig enjoys the wrestling and you get dirty.’

What to do?

Think of this boss as a dysfunctional stakeholder who you can’t please. Take them seriously, not literally! Shake yourself loose of their grip on your mindset. Now start thinking of solutions for yourself and your team.

Begin with the end in mind

Go to the big picture of what outcomes you want. Not in your current role, but for your career.

Questions to regularly ask yourself:

What are you aiming to achieve? One year. Three years. Five years.

How will you know you’ve achieved it?

What was the best you ever did (at this thing)?

What went well on that occasion?

What will be the first signs that you’re getting there?

How will other people notice your progress?

This will give you direction to help move you forward within the current situation. It will aid decision-making, deal with ambiguity, and act as a bridge between the current and future.

Be patient. Be persistent. 

Be the leader your boss can’t be.

Support your staff to manage the complexity in front of them. Develop them by letting them see their ideas count (unlike your boss). Involve them in planning. Divest risk to them to help them build capability and confidence, and teach them decision-making capability. Delegate authority and leverage diversity, and set the tone – dissuade complaining.

Questions to regularly ask your team:

What are you aiming to achieve?

How will you know you’ve achieved it?

What was the best you ever did (at this thing)?

What went well on that occasion?

What will be the first signs that you’re getting better?

Will this change the behaviour of your boss?

No. It will help you think of solutions for yourself and manage through this complex part of your life while you wait for the boss to go away, or for you to decide to be successful in another organization.


Nine questions your colleagues are too embarrassed to ask

Are some of your colleagues feeling stuck about making change happen?

Here are some better questions to help your colleagues make change begin to happen.

Maybe it’s time to stop talking about the problem?

Here’s the dark secret…problem analytics are for your car mechanic and the scientists. When the issue is about people and people processes problem analytics destroy productivity. Your colleagues will be somewhat embarrassed by how much easier it is to make progress if you ask them, ‘What do you want instead of the problem?’

What if there’s no debate about who’s right/wrong?

With few exceptions in organizations (e.g., how do you fly an airplane) there are no right answers. It’s useful to disagree – that brings options to the discussion – but, debate means someone has to win. Winning debates is about being argumentative, not listening. So the debate winner is just as likely to be wrong. Instead ask your debaters, ‘What is that we want in common?’ ‘What are the outcomes that will help us make progress?’

How about we find a better way to deal with the angry voice in the room?

You don’t have to pay attention to angry voices simply because they demand the most attention. They can’t listen and they’re hard to listen to. Take them seriously, (they mean it), but not literally. Empathize with language like, ‘You sound like you are very frustrated’, and go back to your agenda.

What happens if no one is allowed to play the victim card?

In a world of people making a profession out of being a victim it’s useful to ask, ‘Despite the problem, what’s working?.’ Lives (and teams) lived defined by the damaging things that have happened before are automatically self-limiting. Fletcher Peacock says, water the flowers, not the weeds. Here’s someone who did.

Do we need to tell people what to do all the time?

Sometimes we have to ‘tell’, e.g., you are breaking the law. But most of the time if we keep telling people what to do, they will lose motivation, stop thinking, become disengaged, etc. Better to define what outcomes are desired and let them figure it out. Try. ‘Suppose we meet, maybe exceed the goals, what will we be doing more of, differently, better, etc. and, ‘How do you see yourself helping to achieve the goals?’

What if we make collaboration more than a nice-to-do option?

Collaboration is not an option; it’s a necessity. And, everyone is trying to collaborate, just not each other’s way. Don’t ask why they can’t work together. Instead, ask, ‘What have we managed to achieve (i.e., what’s worked)? What would our stakeholders (e.g., customers) want to see us doing? How would we see ourselves doing that? What first small steps might we take together?

What if we could leverage the strengths of people we think are our weak link?

Everyone has weaknesses. If we only amplify weakness chances are they will still deliver them. Get to what needs to be better by first amplifying what they do well. What they do well is the platform upon which they can move to a better place.

Could we actually coach people to find their own solutions, (not just yours)?

Peter Drucker said, ‘The leader of the future will be a person who knows how to ask’. That future is today. Asking people better questions that help them to come up with solutions wins in the short and long-term. Try, ‘When you’ve faced a situation like this before, what worked?’

What if letting go made us more authoritative leaders?

The difficult part of being a leader is the need to be right all the time. Wrong! Leaders brown-out on answers as much as their support staff. Stare them in the eye and say, ‘I don’t have a clue, but I suspect we do. What would be a good outcome for us?’ Close your mouth and listen for clues to the solution.

Does this sound too simplistic to resolve situations in a complex organization? Try it and see. 


De-escalate Confrontation To Create Engagement

Angry frustration surfaces within and between organizations and individuals all the time. Sometimes it escalates in ugly ways.

Any person capable of angering you becomes your master; he can anger you only when you permit yourself to be disturbed by him.  – Epictetus

Consider this scenario: Your business partner organization is feeling very threatened. Your team has been awarded funding for a project that they believe they totally own. The funder is sending them a message, but your partner doesn’t hear it – they are mad at you and are finding ways to undermine you.

De-escalation is proving preferable to confrontation in areas like policing. Maybe we should think the same way in organizations.

I have come to the frightening conclusion that I am the decisive element…it is my response that decides whether a crisis is escalated or de-escalated… – Johann Wolfgang von Goethe*

How do we de-escalate a real or potential threat / crisis when it is driven by the anger of others, and maybe ours too? Let’s use the above scenario to illustrate one way to engage the better way. Try this when you talk with them:

Sounds like you are quite upset by what’s going on.    Just say it and listen – don’t engage. Not yet!

How did you manage to do as well as you have so far?    Or  

If others were to give you credit for the good work done so far, what would they say?

How did that work?

What might have gone better?

Sounds like you have accomplished a lot. Thinking of the shift in funding what do you see yourself doing with the knowledge and skills you have? How else might you continue to be successful in other ways?

Notice that the frustrated partners are now talking a little more purposefully about themselves, not the funder or you. They are beginning to think about solutions for themselves.

De-escalate to engage in solutions (theirs) and make progress. The miracles can wait.        

Is this conversation going to create a dramatic change in attitude? Likely not, but it will give the other party things to think about … while you get on with your newly funded project. Who knows, they might become a contributor to the new project!

*The whole quote by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe: I have come to the frightening conclusion that I am the decisive element. It is my personal approach that creates the climate. It is my daily mood that makes the weather. I possess tremendous power to make life miserable or joyous. I can be a tool of torture or an instrument of inspiration, I can humiliate or humor, hurt or heal. In all situations, it is my response that decides whether a crisis is escalated or de-escalated, and a person is humanized or de-humanized. If we treat people as they are, we make them worse. If we treat people as they ought to be, we help them become what they are capable of becoming.


When Stuck, Small Change is Beautiful

Some people feel stuck when forces make the situation they face seem insurmountable.

It doesn’t seem at all beautiful to them.

I always begin the project briefing with the question: What’s working that you don’t want to change?

Followed by: What will it look like when the problem goes away?

The answers to these questions make me confident they are going to get unstuck. Why? Because their answers are the framework for starting small changes.

Their answers are the first small changes.

Great things are done by a series of small things brought together Vincent Van Gogh

Seth Godin assures us that the best way to get unstuck is to ‘start down the wrong path, right now’. Too radical? But, he goes on to say, “As you start moving, you can’t help but improve, can’t help but incrementally find yourself getting back toward your north star.”

Here are two surprisingly easy steps to getting to small beautiful steps:


1. What’s the ideal outcome? What will the situation look like without the problem present in the future?

2. What’s one small step that will take us in that direction, i.e., we can see the small change happening?

Don’t look for miracles…look for learning and move away from letting the client think they are stuck.

You might not end up with perfect, but it’s significantly more valuable than being stuck.Seth Goin

Be radical in the small step and flush out the details in ways that will let the client see the progress happening.

You must be the change you wish to see in the world. Gandhi

Reload and repeat.

Why does this work?

As Coert Visser states in his article Assumptions In Solution-Focused ChangeThere is always already a beginning of the desired situation on which further progress can be built.

Let small steps towards the solution focused change we want start to make a difference.


Pushing elephants through keyholes

Grumpy, disillusioned, angry, or fearful (choose one!) teams and / or stakeholders can seem like a mammoth change task.

To get them unstuck we can issue orders, develop new policy and/or a strategy with clear deliverables. We can also talk about the vision and run team-building exercises, etc. These are all good things to do.

But what if the elephant is stubborn, remains unengaged and reluctant to show that they are listening? They may be in flight, fight, or freeze mode.

How do we support them so that they may actually move forward? How do we get them unstuck and focused on the needs of the organization, not just themselves?

Change the narrative! Engage the elephant in a new dialogue.

How? Here are some approaches and steps:

Reacquaint them with their knowledge of the capabilities they already have. Help them see what’s working and what doesn’t need to change. Don’t worry if they seem, at first, unrealistic. You’re helping them see what the team brings to the process.

Remember, the goals for the required change will adjust constantly as the team begins to align with the needs of the organization. They are in a constant state of production, making sense of things their way.

You can indicate that there’s no urgency to arrive at a solution. They likely have to make some intense transitions and will only get it over time, one step at a time. This is counterintuitive, but it will speed up the process.

Our role is to help them with dissolving the problem – their way. Help them shed some useful light on the problem by asking how they manage to cope. But, don’t encourage too many more details on the problem.

Help them switch to the dormant side of their thinking, i.e., being helpful. Ask what it would be like if the problem no longer existed, i.e., what they want, and how that would be useful to the organization, other teams, etc. This helps them a) build a new back-story / identity, and b) evaluate the effect they might have on others by working on solutions.

Your job is to link the story – their narrative – together, to let them see the counter to the problem and let them transition themselves out of their fears.

Keep asking them if they’ve got any ideas about using the new learning. Frame it as a beginning. Help them notice the initiatives they might take to begin the change.

What happens if your leader wants fast action? Why not simply fire some or all of the team and replace them with new workers? Just ask yourself which approach might have the best ROI. In helping the elephant through the keyhole, the team probably has a bunch of valid, useful ideas for the organization that they were unable to express through the keyhole.

With grateful acknowledgement to Jim Duvall. More on the narrative approach to change  Innovations in Narrative Therapy