‘S’ is for Scale questions - Harvey Ratner

‘On a scale where 10 stands for all those things we’ve talked about that you want to see happening in your life tomorrow, and 0 for the opposite, the worst things have been, where are you now?’

Scale questions are a fundamental part of Solution Focused practice. What is it about numbers that makes them so useful?

When I first started to use scale questions in the late 1980s, I felt like I was being very ‘techniquey’, even more than when I used the Miracle Question. And so when one or two clients expressed displeasure at the use of the technique, I wasn’t at all surprised. It was however a very small number who complained, and within a few years no one seemed at all bothered. Perhaps it’s because scale questions are becoming embedded in our culture, with people being asked to rate all sorts of things in daily life, to the extent that even being asked to rate one’s life in numbers no longer surprises. Today I asked someone to rate on a scale how well they thought they were managing their bereavement since their mother died, a question I might not have felt I could have asked some years ago.

During a presentation Steve de Shazer was giving for us at BRIEF in the early 2000s there was a discussion about scales and I remember someone – it might have been Paul Z. Jackson – suggesting that one factor that makes them powerful is that once a client accepts the question and starts to think of an answer, they are in effect committing themselves to the process: that they are on the way towards 10. Some practitioners – such as our colleague Chris Iveson – are fond of adding to the scale: ‘where on the scale would you be happy to get to? Where would be ‘good enough’?’ In my experience, almost every client says ‘7 or 8’. So even if the practitioner – and maybe the client too - is concerned that 10 is ‘unrealistic’, then they are now shooting for a 7 or 8 which feels much more doable.

What is crucially important in using the scale technique is to remember that the number is the client’s and so it is purely subjective and not at all an external expert-led assessment tool. In ‘L is for Lists’ Evan (2025a) wrote about the value of ‘lists’ and explained how asking a number can make a huge difference. In the paper Evan cites, Kim Berg & de Shazer (1993) mention a client who wasn’t able to say why she had put herself at 6 on the scale and simply said ‘I feel sixish’. She knew what it meant to her. We don’t need to know. However, in general we always ask questions to search out what the number represents to the client, a detailed description, as this is what seems most helpful in generating constructive thinking on the client’s part and a spur to action after the session is over.

When I watch trainees trying out scale questions, two things immediately jump out at me. One is that they seem in a hurry to get to asking the client about moving up the scale. It is important to slow down and spend much more time on how the client got to their number before wondering about further progress. Secondly, in asking about that, they often say ‘what do you need to do to get to +1?’ This latter question is a challenge to the client to say what exactly they are going to do about their situation and seems to be a kind of problem-solving question, as in an action plan, and is sometimes difficult for clients to answer. A Solution Focused question that is easier would be ‘How will you know you have got to +1? What would be the signs you had reached +1?’

In his blog ‘L is for lists’, Evan added a few more useful remarks about numbers. He cites Denise Yusuf as suggesting that numbers can cue the client into looking for small, apparently insignificant signs of progress – if the client says ‘I am only at a 3’, you begin to explore how they know that, and they immediately understand that you are interested in small stuff. In a further reference to the Kim Berg & de Shazer paper, we are told that the authors refer to the ‘magic’ of numbers ‘as anyone who has played around with numbers knows’ (p 9) and most clients will recognise that there is a playful aspect to scale questions that might bring the imagination into play in thinking through the answers.

Of course, an obvious value in asking scale questions is that it gives client and worker an easy way to check on the client’s view of their progress. de Shazer (1994) suggested adjusting the scale in a later session in the following way: 10 stands for ‘we no longer need to meet, you’ve achieved what you were hoping for from our work’ and 0 is ‘where you were just before we met the first time’. This is a clear signal to the client that you, as the worker, are focused on the end of the work and have no interest in letting the work drift over a lengthy period. In ‘M is for Minimalism’ Evan (2005b) discusses the minimalism of Solution Focused practice, including helping clients to move on in the fewest possible number of sessions.

PS In the last week I’ve had the new experience of a client telling me, in answer to this scale of de Shazer’s, that they are at 9 and ‘I won’t ever say I’m at 10 because I like talking to you and want to go on meeting you!’ Hmm, how about minimalism here, I asked myself. I’ve been wondering since then what to say that will be respectful but firm. Solution Focused practice, like all good therapy and counselling, is about change, forward movement, and if the client is doing well we need to get out of their way. One option, also recommended by de Shazer, is simply to extend the gap between sessions so that the client can see for themselves that they are making progress on their own.

Berg, Insoo K. & de Shazer, Steve. (1993) Making numbers talk: Language in therapy. In Friedman, S. (ed) The New Language of Change: Constructive Collaboration in Psychotherapy. New York: Guildford Press

de Shazer, Steve (1994) Words were Originally Magic. New York: Norton.

George, Evan (2005a) L is for Lists.  https://www.brief.org.uk/resources/a-to-z-of-sf-practice-part-2/l-is-for-lists.html

George, Evan (2025b) M is for Minimalism.  https://www.brief.org.uk/resources/a-to-z-of-sf-practice-part-2/m-is-for-minimalism.html

 

Harvey Ratner
London
16^th March 2025