Working with knowledge complementarity: support and self-reflection tools for competency development

Anick SAUVAGEAU1,2,4, Anick BRIAND1,2,4, Martine VALLARINO1,2,3, Joanie THÉRIAULT1,2,4, Myreille BÉDARD2,4, Kathy DAHL4,5

1Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, Canada
2CRIUSMM, Montréal, Canada
3University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
4Centre d'apprentissage santé et rétablissement, Montréal, Canada
5CIUSSS EMTL, Montréal, Canada

Introduction: The importance of experiential knowledge in the delivery of mental health services is well established. The complementarity of knowledge (experiential, clinical and theoretical) brings an important richness to mental health intervention, whether through the involvement of patient-partners, peer-helpers, peer-resource trainers, and so on (Repper et al., 2013; Shalaby et al., 2020). However, the consideration of experiential knowledge on the same level as clinical and theoretical knowledge challenges the predominant professional culture in healthcare. The aim of this presentation is to outline the components of a training program designed to support the competency development of trainers working in knowledge complementarity.

 

Method: The components of the Health and Recovery Learning Center's train-the-trainer program (Recovery College model, Perkins et al., 2017) and the self-reflection tools developed is described, highlighting the values and principles that defined them. The challenges encountered (between discomforts and tensions) in knowledge complementarity work is addressed and considered beyond the Recovery College context.

 

Results: The train-the-trainer program and the development of tools are based on five domains of competency: (1)knowing oneself and mobilizing one's knowledge, (2)communicating and listening, (3)working together, complementing, and adapting, (4)facilitating in a diversity of learners, (5)mobilizing integrated knowledge and supporting change. Here are the training themes that enable reflective practice in knowledge complementarity work: (reflecting on) my posture in a context of co-learning and personal self-determination; possible tensions in knowledge complementarity work; the judicious and balanced use of experiential knowledge, clinical knowledge, and theoretical knowledge; the importance of plurality of expertise; values and issues related to equality and power sharing.

 

Conclusion: The knowledge complementarity work requires ongoing support focused on reflective practice and competency development. To achieve this culture transformation, we need practical tools based on self-reflection. The tools developed can serve as models for other contexts.