Material on Theory
Material on the Practice of AMBIT
Theory and Practice in AMBIT
Linking Theory and Practice:
AMBIT is not a single "thing", but an
orientation that is primarily about
linking Theory to
Practice, and developing an organisational structure that can provide the kind of well-structured supervisory/support sytems that can sustain such
Service Delivery. It is a framework for developing attuned, evidence-based practice, as much as ready-made thing-in-itself.
Practitioners should have an understanding of the theoretical models that underpin their practice, not least because this instils confidence in their technique. They are encouraged to browse this via links from manualized practical instructions (or to add such links if they wish - see instructions on how to
Edit the manual.
This is not a comprehensive textbook. The descriptions of theory contained in this manual are designed to provide the
KeyWorker with a sufficient conceptual grasp to:
- Understand why she is doing what she is doing in respect of any particular intervention technique.
- Provide a corresponding level of confidence in the technique and its evidence-based effectiveness which will inevitably be conveyed to the patient.
In other words
Theory (and an evidence base) underpins individual interventions but the manual's focus is on supporting and framing clinical
Practice in newly integrated and integrative ways (see
Taking Responsibility for integration.)
As one of a new breed of
BarefootPractitioners the
KeyWorker is not expected to be a theoretician or indeed an expert in any specific theoretical or interventionist framework, but to understand basic concepts insofar as this empowers him or her to deploy
techniques - the expertise is in deploying existing "technologies" in integrated ways, to a target group that has previously been poorly served by conventional services, rather than in brand new (and "branded") technologies.
The
KeyWorker is supported in the work by strong
SupervisoryStructures within the wider team, but also through possession of a 'toolbox' of different techniques (see
Specific interventions and
WhichInterventionWhen) which are themselves drawn from a range of theoretical and explanatory frameworks.
Will a young person and family in crisis be able to
make sense of and to use such a wide range of interventions? Perhaps the sheer diversity of the different interventions could simply confuse the recipient? This question of
UserAcceptability is particularly relevant if we consider that the interventions are being delivered in the midst of a crisis.
An important question regarding this notion of Theory in Practice is
Why intervene simultaneously in multiple domains?