Psychologies working together

The Keil Centre, set up in 1983 by Dr Ian Tierney, was, according to Chiara, 'ahead of its time; a phenomenal idea. Since the NHS did not offer evening therapy sessions at that time Dr Tierney, a clinical psychologist with many other interests, founded the Centre as a private psychology practice offering precisely that service. The other aim was, and still is, to be a centre of different psychologies working together, a challenge to what is often seen as a siloed profession. That idea of bringing psychologists and other professions together still appeals to people.'

The Centre offers three primary areas of activity: human factors and ergonomics; business psychology and wellbeing; clinical and counselling psychology. 'These areas work together and we try to balance more organic co-operation with specific partnerships to meet particular needs of clients' projects. We hold awaydays and innovation meetings which mix people with different perspectives.'

A project on wellbeing, one of Chiara's 'great interests', gives a perfect example. 'We were asked to run workshops for people exposed to potentially traumatic material as part of their work. Occupational psychology can help with content on work demands and resilience, another of my interests; and a clinical colleague was able to advise on the issue of vicarious trauma. In fact wellbeing is the obvious golden thread here. You can approach it from clinical or occupational perspective. A less obvious connection between the three areas is in understanding accidents; here clinical psychologists' and ergonomists' perspectives can add to the insight from occupational psychologists.'  

Has the Keil Centre always offered this mix of approaches? 'I think occupational psychology was introduced four to five years after the company's founding; initially the focus was mostly on leadership development and assessment with human factors and ergonomics coming later. Nowadays, human factors is one of our largest areas of work and is largely international. A lot of business assessment work is based in Scotland whereas the wellbeing work can be international. A substantial percentage of our clinical work happens locally and about half is face-to-face.'

What's your view on online work? 'I think we're in a transition phase. Clinical work was the first to start moving back to person-to-person sessions after lockdown whereas most coaching work has stayed online. There are huge logistical benefits to online delivery; the negative issues are to do with the depth of reflection in an online environment. People travel to an in-person meeting and have time to consider the issues they've just discussed. Often, an online session is followed by a succession of other meetings, leaving no time for reflection and internalisation. So, the technology is here to stay, but some people do, for instance, prefer person-to-person coaching – and I would like to better understand the impact of technology on our practice.'

Are psychologists the only solution?

The Keil Centre has always seen psychology as its USP and has stressed the experience and qualification of its psychologists in its marketing and work, but Chiara sees the need to think about this issue deeply. 'In Occupational psychology we are addressing pretty much the same issues we have always looked at, but there are many different players involved now. The typical HR manager will get much wider advice from a greater range of sources:  the CIPD offers many resources, for instance. So, this begs the question: are psychologists the only solution to the issues we address, or can others provide the right sort of advice and intervention?'

Another thing that has changed is technology. '15 years ago I heard a speech by Binna Kandola in which he suggested occupational psychologists risked becoming assessment technicians. Companies are now beginning to trust AI with significant assessment-based recruitment decisions. Companies are developing coaching apps. What is valuable about what we do and is it true than an algorithm can do certain things better? If so, what is the role of technology in our work and where do chartered psychologists make their unique contribution?'

Chiara's deep interest and practice in coaching provides an example of what she is talking about. 'I'm in the process of becoming chartered for the new coaching psychology Division and the Keil Centre is recruiting for new coaching psychologists, but there are also good coaches who are not psychologists. What is the difference between the two? There are in fact many ways of being a coach and of "doing" coaching and, whilst my personal identity will always be that of a psychologist, I feel the need to better understand coaches who come from a different background.'

This leads Chiara to some other issues with the activity of coaching. 'We desperately need to understand diversity in coaching, and part of the answer might be to achieve more diversity within the coaching profession. Coaches and coaching psychologists are not a diverse bunch of people: there are too many older, middle-class, well-off, white people doing it – and I am one of them! Put all these issues together and there's a lot to think about for anyone involved in offering this sort of service.' 

Chiara adds that 'many practitioners do not feel that regulation by the Health and Care Professions Council is the right "fit'" for their work and this has exposed divisions within the Society and the profession. Whereas for some parts of the psychology profession there are relatively standardised training routes and jobs, for example, within the NHS, occupational psychologists work in a wide variety of roles, in different work environments and organisational structures and, increasingly, on their own; the BPS and Division of Occupational Psychology have not always been able to reflect the changing nature of occupational psychologists' work. And this situation will only change more. The Keil Centre still places psychology at the centre of what we do, but we need to think creatively about how to train and support future occupational psychologists. And the profession needs a serious debate around these issues.'

Stimulated by critical psychologists

Chiara's father is Italian and her mother English. She grew up in Italy, and her education was 'very humanities based. I learnt Latin and Greek and was fascinated by the Greek myths. My Greek teacher leant me a book which linked Greek myths to psychology and that was my unusual way into the subject, though I almost studied classics at university.' 

She moved to Scotland – 'I was lucky that I came to the most European part of the UK' – and spent two years studying sociology, social anthropology, and psychology (for honours) at Edinburgh. 'I loved the fact that we studied more than one subject in the first two years of our psychology degree. After I graduated, the advice was "be a clinical psychologist or nothing" but I quickly got a realistic view of that route from a practicing clinical psychologist. It wasn't for me. 

I got interested in counselling. Quite by chance I was talking to a lecturer in a – literally – dark corridor, who said to me "There's something about counselling in organisations." That introduced me to occupational psychology.'

Chiara took an MSc in occupational psychology but did not take a PhD, preferring to do a doctorate in business administration. 'This gave me the huge benefit  of seeing how other people viewed psychologists, and discovering that other professions could contribute to areas that I had thought of as purely psychological. 

For instance, learning the sociological view of engagement was revelatory. Anthropological and sociological views enriched my thinking. And I am always stimulated by critical psychologists who challenge the more dominant positivist approach to psychology and occupational psychology. I tend to find the European tradition of occupational psychology is more critical than the American tradition that is over-represented in research journals. We have to be careful that our thinking is not dominated by the US approach to the individual and to psychology, by US-developed models, case studies and research, particularly that carried out in large US corporates.' 

The Keil Centre helped Chiara through chartership and gave her experience of working internationally. 'Then I left to have children and worked for a while as a lecturer at Edinburgh Napier University. I loved lecturing, especially to MSc students, and toyed with the idea of becoming an academic. But in the end, I love the practical side of consultancy even more. The fascinating thing about becoming a director of the Centre is that I'm now addressing issues which I used to advise other people on: creating a great culture, being a good leader and other things. I'm having to do that myself. I love talking and thinking about work – and now I need to put into practice what I preach.'

In her formal CV, Chiara comments that she is 'a firm believer that a good job is central to an individual's well-being as well as performance'. This feeds into her genuinely enthusiastic but critical tone in talking about psychology, and her obvious enjoyment of her own job. I also took away from our conversation Chiara's commitment to different viewpoints; different types of psychologists and diverse voices outside psychology. This commitment has obviously enriched her own thinking and practice and she sees this sort of genuine, critical debate as central to the future of psychology as a profession.