Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Tiffany Bacon's avatar

Such a beautiful and moving conversation today in MI Snack. I’m truly grateful for all the wisdom. The touching stories. I am definitely seeing ambivalence differently. And I have so much to take away to use in my own MI day to day as well as my future practice. ❤️. My heart has been touched.

Expand full comment
carol sullivan's avatar

Rethinking Decisional Balance in Motivational Interviewing

In the world of MI, decisional balance—the classic pros and cons list—is often mistaken for a core technique. In truth, Miller and Rollnick have long advised caution. While decisional balance can create space for clients to explore ambivalence, it can also unintentionally reinforce the status quo. When both sides of a dilemma have equal weight, clients may feel more stuck than supported, holding tightly to the familiar instead of moving toward change.

Still, decisional balance is not without value—particularly when approached with nuance and deep respect for client autonomy. Over the past year, under Sky’s tutelage, I’ve come to see a powerful way to work with sustain talk, especially when clients are in pre-contemplation or early contemplation. Rather than rushing to elicit change talk, I’ve learned to linger in the client’s experience of what’s working. I invite them to speak freely about the appeal of the status quo. This isn’t a technique—it’s an act of acceptance.

In a world where many clients have been judged, pressured, or “fixed,” showing genuine curiosity about what keeps them where they are can build something essential: trust. When I demonstrate that I won’t push or persuade, clients often open up. They feel safe enough to explore both sides of their ambivalence—sharing the costs of staying the same or hopes they quietly hold for change. In these moments, change talk arises not because I’ve evoked it but because the client feels safe enough to voice it.

Even when a client has moved into later stages of change, I pay close attention to any return of sustain talk. When it resurfaces, I gently return to the engaging task, making room for the client to explore what’s still unresolved. We give the status quo the attention it deserves—not to reinforce it, but to honor its role in the client’s story. From there, we return to evoking change talk, now with more clarity and trust.

At its core, MI is a method for evoking change talk and strengthening motivation. But that doesn’t mean we ignore sustain talk or avoid decisional balance. Used skillfully, they can deepen rapport, model respect, and create the safety needed for authentic exploration. I’m encouraged by this evolving understanding within the MI community. It reflects what I’ve seen in my practice: that sometimes, the way forward begins by standing still—with empathy, curiosity, and a willingness to walk alongside.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts