There are those who embrace routine outcome monitoring (ROM), and those who shy away from it like the plague.
On one side of the fence, skeptical practitioners point their crucifix against the use of any client-focused outcome measures, while others who embrace ROM think that outcome measures are like the second coming, thinking that it can supersede decision making about the treatment process.
The adamant Non-ROMer would say, “How can a simple outcome measure tell me about whether my client is benefiting from treatment and how effective I am? Besides, change takes a long time to happen, and it’s gonna get worst before it gets better.”
While the rookie ROMer would say, “The outcome measure is sufficient to inform me about whether my client is benefiting from therapy and how effective I am. Change happens early all the time, and it won’t get worse before it gets better.”
Like all fundamentalism, such rigidity snaps easily under pressure. The words of Gregory Bateson reminds as that the test our stability is how flexible we are.