Solution-focused brief therapy

1. Introduction

Version followed: SFBTA Research Committee, Solution Focused Therapy Treatment Manual for Working with Individuals, 3rd edition (2025), the Milwaukee (Brief Family Therapy Center, de Shazer and Berg) line. Where the 2nd version (SFBTA, 2013) or the London BRIEF variant (Iveson, 2002; Iveson interview c. 2010) differs, this is flagged.

Solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT) is a competency- and resource-based conversational therapy. Steve de Shazer and Insoo Kim Berg developed it at the Brief Family Therapy Center (BFTC) in Milwaukee, with colleagues. [source: Loue, ch. 1; SFBTA 2025 p. 5] It is not a problem-specific protocol. It is a way of interviewing that can be used with any presenting issue where the conversation can turn to what the client wants. [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 36]

How change happens. The model holds that change comes from solution building, not problem solving. Therapist and client co-construct detailed descriptions of the client's preferred future and of times when parts of it already happen (exceptions). The client then does more of what already works. [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 5] The manual locates the therapeutic process in the dialogue itself. The therapist listens for fragments of what the client wants and what already works, selects them, and builds on them with the next question or formulation, so that new meanings are made in the conversation ("co-constructive sequences"). [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 8–12] Small changes are expected to lead to larger ones. Solution behaviours are assumed to be in the client's repertoire already, so skills training is not presumed. [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 5; SFBTA 2013 p. 2]

Historical note: the 1986 BFTC paper was still exceptions-driven and began from the complaint. The later model (miracle question, preferred-future first) grew out of it. [source: Durrant, introduction to de Shazer et al. 1986 reprint]

2. Framework

SFBT has no fixed phases across a course of therapy. It has a recurring session structure that differs between the first and later sessions, plus an ending procedure. [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 14]

First session [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 14, 17–31; SFBTA 2013 pp. 12–21]

Opening: either a goal-focused question (best hopes or what would make the meeting useful) or a brief competency sequence first. The manual says Berg tended to open with the competency sequence. Ask about pre-session change.
Preferred future / goal: use the miracle question or a best-hopes follow-up. Build a detailed, concrete description.
Strengths, successes and supports: ask about resources and relationships.
Exceptions: find times when parts of the preferred future already happen.
Scaling: ask where the client is now on a 0–10 progress scale, and optionally ask about motivation and confidence.
(Optional) consulting break.
Ending message: compliments, affirmation of goals, and an observational or behavioural suggestion. The Formula First Session Task (FFST) is a standard option.

Later sessions [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 14; SFBTA 2013 pp. 21–22]

Open with "What's better?" (an exception question). Work it with EARS.
Scale progress.
Ask what would be different one or two points higher. This continues goal formulation.
Check the previous suggestion indirectly. Use compliments, or coping questions if nothing is better.
Give a summary and a suggestion.

Ending [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 31; Iveson 2002]

Early on, ask which scale number would mean the client no longer needs to come. Clients often say 7 or 8, not 10.
End when the client reports being at or near that number. Leave the door open for return.
BRIEF lengthens the intervals between sessions as progress continues.

Session count and format

No fixed number. The aim is as many sessions as the client needs and no more. [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 15]
Reported averages: 2.9–4.6 sessions in BFTC-era studies, under 4 at BRIEF, and 5.66 in a 2022 review. [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 15]
Iveson reports about five sessions on average, each up to 45 minutes, rarely more than eight, and often one is enough. [source: Iveson 2002]
Format: individual, couple, family or group. A reflecting team behind a mirror is optional, and a solo therapist can take a break or skip it. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 30–31, 36; SFBTA 2013 p. 19]

Criteria for moving on and reviewing

Move from goal-building to scaling and the end message once there is a usable preferred-future picture. A usable picture is concrete and observable; describes the presence of something rather than the absence of the problem; gives a beginning step rather than an end state; and includes interactions others would notice. [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 21]
Movement up the client's scale is the progress measure. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 22–24]
If there is no improvement after about three sessions, Iveson judges the approach unlikely to work. [source: Iveson 2002] In that case, review fit, goals and referral (see section 5). [synthesis]
Variants:
- BRIEF (London) opens with "best hopes", prefers a "tomorrow"/preferred-future description to a goal, is neutral about outcomes, and gives no tasks because outcomes did not depend on whether tasks were done. [source: Iveson interview c. 2010; Iveson 2002]
- SFBTA 2013 names an 85% adherence and competency threshold. It requires a master's-level clinician with formal SFBT training and supervision, preferably live supervision. [source: SFBTA 2013 pp. 23–24]

3. Guiding principles

[source for this section unless marked: SFBTA 2025 pp. 5, 10–17; SFBTA 2013 pp. 2, 11–12]

Solution building, not problem solving: put most of the session time into describing what the client wants and what already works, not into causes.
Future focus: ask about the preferred future. Explore the past only for resources and earlier successes.
If it isn't broken, don't fix it; if it works, do more of it; if it doesn't work, do something different: don't intervene where the client reports no problem. Amplify what works. When something fails, help the client try something different, not more of the same. [source: Loue ch. 1, citing de Shazer et al. 2007]
No problem happens all the time: assume there are exceptions and keep looking for them.
Solutions come from the client's repertoire: build on the client's existing behaviour before teaching skills.
Small change leads to bigger change: ask for the smallest noticeable next sign of progress, not a full solution.
The solution need not match the problem: follow what the client says would be better, even if it seems unrelated to the complaint.
Solution talk needs different skills from diagnosis: you don't need a full problem assessment to start (risk screening still applies; see section 5).
Client as expert, not-knowing stance: be curious. Your questions should come from wanting to learn the client's view, not from your own hypotheses. [SFBTA 2025 p. 17, citing Anderson & Goolishian]
Stay on the surface / no hidden meanings: use the client's own key words. Don't interpret or read between the lines; ask instead. [SFBTA 2025 p. 10; McKergow 2023]
Not problem-phobic: acknowledge and validate the problem when the client raises it, then return gently to what they want. [SFBTA 2025 pp. 13–14]
Cooperation, not resistance: when work stalls, treat it as your not yet having found how to cooperate with this client, and change your approach. This follows from de Shazer's 1984 "death of resistance" argument. [SFBTA 2025 p. 15; McKergow 2023]
Questions over directives: rely mainly on questions. Interpretation and confrontation are rare. [SFBTA 2013 p. 11]
Positive, collegial, hopeful stance: notice and say aloud what the client is doing well. [SFBTA 2013 p. 11–12]
Co-construction (listen, select, build): each question should pick up something useful from the client's last answer. [SFBTA 2025 pp. 10–12]
As long as it takes and not one session more: review the need for each session and stop when the client's "good enough" is reached. [SFBTA 2025 p. 15]
Neutral about the outcome (BRIEF): the direction is the client's business, so don't steer toward your preferred result. [Iveson interview c. 2010]
Minimalism: ask yourself what is necessary, and don't add techniques for their own sake. [Iveson interview c. 2010]
Work alongside other help: encourage clients to keep medication, self-help groups or family therapy that helps them. Clients with severe psychiatric or medical problems or unstable living situations likely need additional services. [SFBTA 2013 p. 22]

4. Intervention inventory

All example wording is the author's own and marked (illustrative), unless quoted and cited. SFBT techniques are question sequences, not stand-alone exercises. Each one feeds the next through listen, select, build. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 10–12]

4.1 Pre-session change question

Purpose / when: Use at the start of a first session. It finds change the client has already started, which you can build on. Early BFTC research found that about two-thirds of clients reported some pre-session change. [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 28, citing Weiner-Davis et al. 1987]
Steps:
1. Say that people often notice things changing between booking and the first appointment, then ask whether the client has noticed anything.
2. If yes: check that the change fits what they want and that they would like it to continue. Then use EARS on it (4.11).
3. If nothing has changed: ask how they kept things from getting worse (a coping question). [SFBTA 2013 pp. 12–13]
4. If no clear answer: move on to a goal question.
Example language (illustrative): "Quite often people notice some things are already a bit different between phoning us and coming in. Have you noticed anything like that?" / "Is that something you'd like to keep happening?"
Watch for: Don't push if the client says nothing has changed. It's working if the client starts describing their own actions ("I made myself ring my sister").

4.2 Opening competency sequence (strengths, resources, supports)

Purpose / when: Use this before or after the goal question. It establishes competence and resources early. The manual says Berg tended to open this way. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 14, 17–18]
Steps:
1. Ask about the client's daily life, work, interests, or what they're good at.
2. Follow any competence with detail questions (how, when, who notices).
3. Reflect strengths back as compliments (4.12).
4. Bridge to the goal question.
Example language (illustrative): "Before we get to why you're here, tell me a bit about yourself. What do you enjoy, or what are you good at?" / "How did you manage to keep that job going through all this?"
Watch for: A client in acute distress may experience this as dismissive. If so, acknowledge the distress first. [synthesis] It's working if the client brightens or volunteers more resources.

4.3 Best-hopes / goal-focused opening question

Purpose / when: Use this as the main opening. It sets the contract and orients the session to the desired outcome. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 17, 19; Iveson 2002]
Steps:
1. Ask what the client hopes will come from the meeting or the work together. The 2013 manual also uses a "how can I be helpful" form. [SFBTA 2013 p. 13]
2. Clients usually answer with the problem first. Acknowledge it, then ask what they would like instead. [SFBTA 2025 p. 19]
3. Repeat until you have a hope stated in positive terms, in the client's words.
4. Move to the preferred-future description (4.4 or 4.5).
Example language (illustrative): "What are your best hopes from our talking together?" / "So the panic has been taking over. If it weren't, what would you want to be doing instead?"
Watch for: Hopes that are about other people ("I want my son to behave"). Respect them, then ask what difference that would make to the client and what they would be doing. [synthesis] It's working once the hope describes something the client can notice in themselves.

4.4 Miracle question and its follow-up sequence

Purpose / when: Use it after the initial hope, to get a detailed, concrete picture of the preferred future. It works as both goal-setting and a mental rehearsal. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 19–21; SFBTA 2013 pp. 13–15]
Steps:
1. Introduce it as an unusual question and speak slowly.
2. Describe the hypothetical: a miracle happens overnight while the client sleeps, and the problems that brought them are resolved. They don't know it happened because they were asleep.
3. Ask what the first thing would be that tells them, on waking, that something is different.
4. Follow up for detail: what they would notice next, what they would do instead, and who else would notice.
5. Use relationship questions (4.7) to get observable interactions.
6. Turn absence into presence ("I wouldn't be anxious" becomes what they would be doing instead).
7. Move from general to specific, and from internal states to observable behaviour. [SFBTA 2025 pp. 33–34]
8. Use the client's exact words in each next question, and give short formulations (summaries) as you go.
9. Ask which pieces of the miracle are already happening, even a little. This leads into exceptions (4.8). [SFBTA 2025 p. 21; Iveson 2002]
Example language (illustrative; paraphrase, not the manual's wording): "I'm going to ask you a strange question. Suppose tonight, while you're asleep, a kind of miracle happens and the things that brought you here are sorted, but you don't know because you slept through it. When you wake up tomorrow, what's the first small thing you'd notice that would tell you something had changed?" / "And when you're 'calmer', what would your partner see you doing at breakfast?"
Watch for: Useful answers are concrete, observable, situational, describe what is present, give a first step, and are realistic. [SFBTA 2025 p. 21] Fantastical answers (a lottery win, a dead person returning) need gentle handling (see section 5). The question is working when the client becomes absorbed, slows down and gives sensory or interactional detail.

4.5 Preferred-future "tomorrow" question (BRIEF variant)

Purpose / when: This is an alternative to the miracle question. Use it when "miracle" doesn't fit the client (for example on cultural or religious grounds, or because it sounds trivialising), or if you follow the BRIEF model. [source: Iveson interview c. 2010; Iveson 2002] The reasons for choosing it are [synthesis].
Steps:
1. Ask the client to imagine that their best hopes from the work had been realised, or that life was moving in a direction that suits them.
2. Ask what they would notice from waking tomorrow.
3. Get a micro-description of the day, as in 4.4 steps 4–8.
4. If the client is facing a dilemma, ask what they would do with it if life were going the way they want. [Iveson interview c. 2010]
Example language (illustrative): "Suppose you woke tomorrow and your life had started heading the way you want. What would be the first sign?"
Watch for: BRIEF does not push this into a fixed goal or a plan to get from A to B. It describes the future and leaves the route to the client. [Iveson interview c. 2010]

4.6 Goal formulation (making goals well-formed)

Purpose / when: Use this throughout. Clients describe goals vaguely, and this sharpens them so you can scale them and the client can act on them. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 21, 33–34; SFBTA 2013 pp. 12–13]
Steps: For each vague element, ask one of these:
1. "What instead?" (to state it as something present)
2. "What exactly would that look like?" (to make it specific)
3. "Who would notice and what would they see?" (to make it observable)
4. "What would be the very first small sign?" (to find a beginning)
5. "Is that something you could do?" (to keep it in the client's control)
Criteria: Goals should be small, positive, behavioural, within the client's control and achievable in daily life. [SFBTA 2013 p. 12]
Example language (illustrative): "You said you'd be 'more confident'. What would you be doing at work that tells you you're more confident?"
Watch for: Don't impose your own goal. If an external party, such as a court, sets the goal, see 4.18.

4.7 Relationship questions

Purpose / when: Use these to turn internal states into observable interactions, to bring in other people's perspectives, and to work with clients who did not choose therapy. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 24–25, 34]
Steps:
1. Ask who knows the client well, or who would be first to notice a change.
2. Ask what that person would notice, and how the client would respond to them.
3. Use the same perspective for scaling ("Where would your mum put you?").
Example language (illustrative): "Who'd be the first to spot that things were better? What would they notice?" / "And what would you notice them doing differently in return?"
Watch for: If the client is isolated, use a pet, a colleague, or a previous version of themselves. [synthesis] This works when answers become interactional and detailed.

4.8 Exception questions and previous solutions

Purpose / when: Use these to find times when the problem was absent or less severe, or when part of the preferred future already happens. These form the basis for "do more". [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 21–22; SFBTA 2013 p. 11; Miller & de Shazer]
Steps:
1. Listen for exceptions in the client's talk, and ask directly if none come up.
2. Ask what was different then: who, what, when, where. Ask what the client did.
3. Ask about past problems the client solved, and how. [SFBTA 2013 p. 11]
4. Link the exception to the stated goal. The most useful exceptions are the ones related to what the client wants.
5. Compliment the client's part in it.
6. If the client sees the exception as luck, explore it so the client comes to see it as an exception. [Miller & de Shazer]
Example language (illustrative): "When was the last time the evening went even a bit more the way you'd like?" / "What did you do to make that happen?" / "How did you get through that difficult period last year?"
Watch for: Clients may dismiss exceptions. Don't argue. Ask about smaller ones. It's working when the client claims their own agency in an exception.

4.9 Scaling questions (progress, next step, good-enough, motivation, confidence, others' view)

Purpose / when: Use these every session. They measure progress, find what the client is already doing, set the next small step and agree the ending point. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 22–24, 31; SFBTA 2013 pp. 16–18; Iveson 2002]
Steps:
1. Define the poles. For example, 10 = the day after the miracle or best hopes fully met, and 0 = the worst things have been. The 2013 version also uses a "Miracle Question Scale" where 0 = when the appointment was made.
2. Ask where the client is now.
3. Ask what tells them it's that number and not lower. Then use EARS on what they are already doing.
4. Ask what would tell them they had moved up one point, or what would be different at one or two points higher. Get observable detail.
5. Ask what number would be good enough to stop coming. [SFBTA 2025 p. 31; Iveson 2002]
6. Variants: a motivation scale (how much the client wants change) and a confidence scale (how confident they are it can happen). Confidence often starts low, around 1–4. [SFBTA 2025 p. 23]
7. Use separate scales for different areas of life. Iveson notes that progress on one scale often spills over to others. [Iveson 2002]
8. Ask a relationship scale: where someone close would put them.
Example language (illustrative): "On a scale where 10 is that morning after the miracle and 0 is the worst it's been, where are you today?" / "Four. What's putting you at four and not at two?" / "What would one point higher look like?" / "What number would be good enough for you to say you don't need to come any more?"
Watch for: Don't challenge the client's number. A drop is information to explore with coping questions (4.10). Keep next steps small. A client's own 'good enough' of 7 or 8 is normal. [SFBTA 2025 p. 31]

4.10 Coping questions (and coping scale)

Purpose / when: Use these when the client is in crisis, grieving or hopeless, or reports that nothing is better or things are worse. They bring out the strengths the client is using just to keep going. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 29, 34; SFBTA 2013 p. 19; Iveson 2002]
Steps:
1. Acknowledge how hard things are, without challenging the client's view.
2. Ask how they have managed to keep going, or kept things from getting worse.
3. Use EARS on whatever helped, even a little.
4. Optionally scale coping, from 0 = not coping at all to 10 = coping as well as anyone could. Ask what one point higher would look like.
5. Ask what their best friend or partner would say they are doing to cope. [SFBTA 2025 p. 34]
Example language (illustrative): "With all of that going on, how have you managed to get yourself here today?" / "What's stopped things getting even worse?"
Watch for: Don't move to the miracle question too soon with a client in acute pain. It's working when the client names their own actions or resources, such as courage or perseverance. [Iveson 2002]

4.11 EARS: working with "What's better?"

Purpose / when: Use this at the opening of every later session, and whenever an exception appears. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 25–28; Iveson 2002]
Steps:
1. Elicit: ask what's better, even a little.
2. Amplify: ask for detail (who, what, when, where), how it happened, what the client did, and who noticed.
3. Reinforce: compliment directly, and use questions that assume competence.
4. Start again: ask "What else is better?" and repeat until the client runs out.
5. Ask which strengths they used, and what the next small sign of progress would be. [Iveson 2002]
Example language (illustrative): "So, what's been better since we last met?" / "How did you do that?" / "Who else noticed?" / "What else?"
Watch for: Ask "What's better?", not "Is anything better?". [synthesis, consistent with SFBTA 2025 p. 14] If the client says "nothing", see section 5.

4.12 Compliments (direct, indirect, self-compliments)

Purpose / when: Use these throughout the session and in the ending message. They validate what the client does well and support hope and agency. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 29–30; SFBTA 2013 p. 12]
Steps:
1. Direct: say what you admire, based on something specific the client said.
2. Indirect: ask a question that assumes competence ("How did you know to do that?").
3. Self-compliment: when the client credits themselves, invite them to say more.
Example language (illustrative): "I'm struck that you kept going to work through all of this." / "How did you work out that walking first thing would help?"
Watch for: Make compliments specific and based on evidence. Generic praise can sound hollow, and some cultures may find direct praise uncomfortable, so lean on indirect compliments there. [synthesis]

4.13 Formulations, echoing and summaries (co-constructive sequences)

Purpose / when: Use these all the time. They are the micro-skill behind listen, select, build. You select the part of the client's last answer that you will build on. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 10–12]
Steps:
1. Listen for solution fragments: wants, exceptions, resources.
2. Repeat the client's key words exactly.
3. Formulate briefly: a summary that keeps the useful part and leaves out the problem talk.
4. Ask a next question built on that selection.
5. Check that the client accepts your formulation.
Example language (illustrative): "So on Tuesday you 'just got up and did it'. What helped you just get up and do it?"
Watch for: Formulations that bring in your own interpretation. The manual stresses staying close to the client's words. [SFBTA 2025 p. 10]

4.14 Consulting break and end-of-session message

Purpose / when: Use this near the end of a session, alone or with a team. The break is optional, and you can build the message into the session instead. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 30–31; SFBTA 2013 p. 19]
Steps:
1. Tell the client at the start that you will pause near the end to think.
2. During the break, review the client's goals, miracle picture, exceptions, scale position and progress.
3. Return and give, in order: compliments; a statement of the client's goals; a bridging rationale linking the two (the rationale step is [uncertain]: not explicit in the parts of the 3rd edition opened); and a suggestion (4.15).
4. Keep it short and in the client's language.
Example language (illustrative): "I've been impressed by how clearly you know what you want for your kids, and by the fact that on two mornings this week you already managed it. Because those mornings matter so much, I'd suggest…"
Watch for: The client should nod or agree. Iveson's BRIEF ends with compliments but prescribes no homework. [Iveson 2002]

4.15 Suggestions, experiments and tasks

[source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 6–7, 25, 30; SFBTA 2013 pp. 20–22; Miller & de Shazer] Base suggestions on the client's own exceptions and descriptions. They are invitations, and the client may decline. The selection logic is: if exceptions exist, suggest doing more; if none exist, use pretend or observation tasks. [Miller & de Shazer] This applies to the BFTC line only; BRIEF gives none. [Iveson interview c. 2010]

Formula First Session Task (FFST):
- Purpose: Turns attention to what the client wants to keep. In an early study, 89% of clients reported something worthwhile at the next session. [SFBTA 2025 p. 7]
- Steps: At the end of the first session, ask the client to notice what happens in their life (or family or relationship) that they want to continue, and bring it back next time.
- Example (illustrative): "Between now and next time, just notice what happens that you'd like to keep happening."
Observational suggestion:
- Purpose: Use it when the goal is vague or exceptions seem random.
- Steps: Ask the client to notice times when a piece of the preferred future happens, or what they do when they overcome the problem. [SFBTA 2025 p. 30]
Behavioural suggestion / "do more of what works":
- Purpose: Use it when there is a clear exception the client produced themselves.
- Steps: Suggest doing more of exactly that, or the specific actions linked to it (Miller & de Shazer give going for a walk or phoning a friend as examples). [SFBTA 2013 pp. 12, 22; Miller & de Shazer]
Pretend the miracle:
- Purpose: Use it when there are no exceptions.
- Steps: The client picks one day to act as if the miracle had happened, starting with the smallest, easiest piece they described. They watch how others react, and don't say which day it was. [SFBTA 2025 p. 25; Miller & de Shazer] The "don't tell" element is [uncertain]: commonly taught, not confirmed in the sources.
Prediction task:
- Purpose: Use it when exceptions occur but the client can't say why.
- Steps: Each evening the client predicts whether tomorrow will be a better day. The next evening they check the prediction and account for what happened. Miller & de Shazer say this tends to increase exceptions.
Client-generated experiment: Ask what small thing the client might try, based on their own scaling answer about the next step. [SFBTA 2013 p. 20]
"Do something different": When the client keeps repeating something that doesn't work, invite them to try something different (not more of the same). This rests on the tenet "if it doesn't work, do something different". [Loue ch. 1] A formal BFTC task wording is not given in the sources. [uncertain]
Watch for: Don't ask about task compliance directly in the next session. Ask what's better. A task that wasn't done is not a failure: drop it, or ask what the client did instead that helped. [SFBTA 2013 pp. 21–22]

4.16 Ending and spacing sessions

Purpose / when: Use when the client approaches their good-enough number. [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 31; Iveson 2002]
Steps:
1. Check the scale against the good-enough number the client gave.
2. Ask what will tell them they're staying at that level, and what would get them back on track if they slip. (The second question is [synthesis].)
3. Lengthen the intervals between sessions, or end.
4. Tell them the door is open to return.
Example language (illustrative): "You said seven would be enough, and today you're at seven. What do you make of that?"
Watch for: Agree whether to end with the client. Don't end on your own schedule.

4.17 Working with problem talk

Purpose / when: Use when the client needs to tell the problem story. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 31–32]
Steps:
1. Listen with empathy and acknowledge.
2. Listen for solution fragments inside the problem talk: what the client wants, what they've tried, when it's less bad.
3. Use the problem as a contrast: "So when it's not like that, what would be happening?"
4. Return to the hope.
Example language (illustrative): "That sounds exhausting. What would you rather be happening on those evenings?"
Watch for: A client who feels unheard. If so, slow down and validate more before redirecting ("not problem-phobic"). [SFBTA 2025 pp. 13–14]

4.18 Engaging involuntary or mandated clients

Purpose / when: Use with clients referred by courts, child welfare or schools. [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 24–25, 37–38; Miller & de Shazer]
Steps:
1. Know the reason for referral before the session.
2. Clarify your role and purpose plainly.
3. Ask for the client's view of the situation, what matters to them, what they want given the circumstances, and what resources they have.
4. Accept their perceptions, including anger at the referrer, without judging. Don't start with problem assessment.
5. State your solution-focused stance and invite collaboration.
6. Use relationship questions about the referrer: "What would your social worker need to see?"
7. A goal such as getting the referrer "off my back" is workable. [Miller & de Shazer] If the client has no goal at all, decide whether to continue or hand back to the referrer. [Miller & de Shazer]
Example language (illustrative): "I know the court asked you to come. What would need to happen for this to be worth your time?" / "What would your probation officer need to see to feel they could step back?"
Watch for: Avoid making promises about what you will report. Be transparent about any reporting duties from the start. [synthesis]

4.19 Responding to "I don't know" and silence

Purpose / when: Use after a difficult question. [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 32; Iveson 2002]
Steps:
1. Assume you've asked a hard, unfamiliar question. Wait in silence.
2. If the client still doesn't know, invite a guess, using "What do you think?" or similar, as Iveson describes.
3. Rephrase the question using the client's own words.
4. Offer a relationship version ("What would your friend guess?").
Example language (illustrative): "It's a hard question. Take your time." / "If you did know, what might it be?" / "Have a guess."
Watch for: Don't answer for the client. Repeated "I don't know" may mean the question doesn't fit, or that there are cognitive, developmental or mood barriers. If so, simplify, or use scaling with visual aids. [synthesis]

5. Handling problems

"Nothing is better" / "things are worse" [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 34; SFBTA 2013 pp. 13, 21; Iveson 2002]

Accept the client's report without argument and acknowledge how hard things have been.
Ask coping questions (4.10): how they stopped it getting worse, and what a best friend would say they're doing to cope.
If the client is unsure anything is better, ask whether any single day was even a little better, and what made it so.
Use EARS on any coping success.

Recurrence or setback (e.g. return to substance use) [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 35]

Acknowledge the discouragement.
Then turn to the days the client used less or not at all. These almost always exist, even when the client focuses on the relapse.
Ask how they managed those days, and what they learned that they can use. [synthesis for the second question]

Unrealistic or fantastical answers (e.g. to the miracle question) [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 35]

Pause and show understanding non-verbally. Don't correct the client.
Ask with curiosity what tells them it is or isn't likely.
Then ask what difference it would make to them, which usually leads to a realistic element. [synthesis]
With grief, for example a wish that the dead person were back, use coping questions and ask what the lost person would want to see them doing. [synthesis]

Stuck: no progress after about three sessions [Iveson 2002 for the three-session marker; responses are synthesis]

Check whose goal it is. Is it the client's, or a referrer's or yours?
Re-ask best hopes from scratch, and check that the description is concrete and in the client's control.
Lower the step size (half a point on the scale).
Check the motivation and confidence scales separately.
Stop giving tasks and simply ask questions.
Ask the client directly what would make the sessions more useful.
If there is still no movement, consider referral to a problem-specific treatment, or adding one (for example medication review or trauma-focused therapy). The 2013 manual supports combining SFBT with other helpful services. [SFBTA 2013 p. 22]

"Resistance" and non-adherence to suggestions [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 15; SFBTA 2013 pp. 11, 21–22; McKergow 2023; Iveson interview c. 2010]

Treat apparent resistance as a sign you haven't yet found how this client cooperates. It may also be protective caution, or a therapist error.
Don't check homework directly. Ask what's better.
If a suggestion wasn't done, drop it or explore what the client did instead.
Change your approach. If the client prefers to observe, give observation tasks. If they act, give action tasks. If they ignore tasks, stop giving them. [synthesis built on the cooperation principle; BRIEF found task completion didn't matter]
Relationship-type typology [uncertain]: older SFBT teaching sorts the therapist–client relationship into "visitor", "complainant" and "customer" and matches feedback to each. It is widely attributed to BFTC-era texts, but it does not appear in the 2013 or 2025 manuals. If you use it, use it as a guide to your own pacing, not as a label for the client. A practical version [synthesis]: if the client sees no problem, give compliments only. If they see a problem that others should fix, give compliments and an observation task. If they want to act themselves, give compliments and a behavioural suggestion.

Client insists on talking about the problem or the past [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 13–14, 31–32]

Listen and validate, and select the solution fragments in what they say.
Use the problem as a contrast to what they want.
If they feel unheard, say so openly and give more room. Don't force solution talk. [synthesis]

Client wants advice or expert answers [synthesis]

Ask what they have already tried that helped even a little, and what people who know them would advise.
If they still want information, such as psychoeducation about sleep, give it briefly and then return to what fits for them.

Overwhelm and acute distress in session [synthesis, aligned with SFBTA 2025 p. 29]

Slow down and acknowledge.
Move from future questions to coping questions about the present hour ("What is helping you stay with this conversation right now?").
Scale how the client is managing right now, and ask what would help them go up half a point before they leave.
End with concrete plans for the next 24 hours.

Suicide and self-harm risk [source: SFBTA 2025 p. 35; Iveson 2002; protocol is synthesis]

The SFBT sources describe solution-focused responses to suicidal clients:
- not challenging a client's own risk rating;
- asking what they know about themselves that supports it;
- asking how someone close would rate it;
- acknowledging courage and earlier achievements in a high-risk inpatient.
They give no risk-assessment or safety protocol.
Use SFBT questions alongside, not instead of, your service's standard risk assessment: ask directly about suicidal thoughts, intent, plans, history and protective factors. Do collaborative safety planning (warning signs, coping steps, people and places, professional contacts, and reducing access to means through safe storage or removal). Follow your duty-of-care and escalation procedures.
SFBT questions fit naturally into safety planning, for example: "What has helped you get through the worst moments before?" and "Who would you want to know?"

Trauma and dissociation [synthesis; trauma practice is noted only in SFBTA 2025 p. 36]

SFBT is not a memory-processing method. The sources give no exposure dosing or readiness criteria because there is no processing step.
Don't elicit detailed trauma narratives. Focus on safety, coping, current resources and the preferred future.
Never use the miracle question or any imagery to explore or "recover" memories. Treat whatever the client says about the past as their experience.
If the client dissociates: stop future questions, ground them in the present (name the room and the date, notice feet on the floor), ask a simple coping question, and close with a plan.
Refer for trauma-focused treatment if intrusive symptoms persist.

Ruptures [synthesis, using SFBT stance]

Signs include annoyance at "positive" questions, or a sense of being minimised.
Name it without defending ("I may have moved too quickly to what's better").
Ask what would make the conversation more useful.
Give the client's view priority, and adjust pace or focus.

Mandated clients who reject any goal [source: SFBTA 2025 pp. 37–38; Miller & de Shazer]

Accept their anger and clarify your role.
Look for any goal of their own, including "getting them off my back".
If there is none, be transparent with the client and the referrer about whether work can continue.

Couples or families with conflicting hopes [source: Loue ch. 1 for "SF tennis"; rest synthesis]

Give each person equal turns ("SF tennis").
Look for a shared overarching hope ("a calmer home"), and scale each person's view separately.

Cultural, developmental or cognitive fit [SFBTA 2013 pp. 22–23 notes limited evidence with minority groups; rest synthesis]

If "miracle" jars, use the tomorrow question (4.5) or a "best day" question.
With children or people with cognitive impairment, use visual scales (steps, faces), concrete language and shorter sequences.
Indirect compliments may fit better where direct praise is culturally awkward.

Therapist drift into problem talk [source: SFBTA 2013 p. 24]

Use supervision, ideally live supervision or review of recordings, to catch it.
Self-check after a session [synthesis]: what share of your questions were about the preferred future, exceptions or resources?

Severe or complex presentations [source: SFBTA 2013 p. 22]

Clients with severe psychiatric or medical conditions, or unstable living situations, probably need additional services.
Coordinate care. Use SFBT as the conversational frame within a broader plan.

Sources

Sources

Further reading (not drawn on; cited via the above)

de Shazer, S. (1984). The death of resistance. Family Process.
de Shazer, S. (1985). Keys to Solution in Brief Therapy. Norton.
de Shazer, S., Berg, I. K., Lipchik, E., Nunnally, E., Molnar, A., Gingerich, W., & Weiner-Davis, M. (1986). Brief therapy: Focused solution development. Family Process, 25(2), 207–221.
de Shazer, S., Dolan, Y., Korman, H., Trepper, T., McCollum, E., & Berg, I. K. (2007). More Than Miracles: The State of the Art of Solution-Focused Brief Therapy. Haworth.
De Jong, P., & Berg, I. K. Interviewing for Solutions (several editions). Brooks/Cole. [the visitor/complainant/customer material is marked uncertain]
Weiner-Davis, M., de Shazer, S., & Gingerich, W. (1987). Building on pretreatment change to construct the therapeutic solution. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy.

← Previous · V-182Land-based cultural programmes Next · VI-002 →Narrative therapy