PRACTICE
5.2. EMPOWERMENT THEORY AS COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY'S WORLD VIEW AND PHENOMENON OF INTEREST
5.2.4. Models of empowerment
5.2.4.5. Zimmerman (1990a and 1995)
Zimmerman's model of psychological empowerment (Zimmerman, 1990a; 1995 and
Zimmerman, Israel, Schultz and Checkoway, 1992) also targets an individual level of analysis, although he argues that psychological empowerment also includes socio-political factors. He distinguishes between individual and psychological empowerment, with the former defined as a unitary personality trait, such as locus of control or self-efficacy. Psychological
empowerment, on the other hand, includes multiple intra-psychic traits, brought together with an analysis ofthe collective context in which individuals find themselves, as well as mediating factors, such as access to resources, that influence decision-making: "Psychological
empowerment is a contextual construct that requires an ecological analysis of individual knowledge, decision-making processes, and person-environment fit" (Zimmerman, 990a, p. 175).
Because psychological empowerment is dynamic and varies over time, involving different ideas, skills and behaviours in various contexts (Rappaport, 1984b), it is difficult to
operationalise. Zimmerman (1995) therefore argues that the best way of defining the construct may be as a complex network of possible components which may combine to lead
to empowerment (Zimmerman, 1995). These generic components should then be operationalised within the specific context under study.
Zimmerman's (1995) framework of psychological empowerment has three components. The intra-personal component focuses on one's perception of one's ability to exert control over the environment. Included here are such factors as context-specific self-efficacy, perceived skills and competencies, and the motivation to control one's environment as well as the absence of feelings of helplessness, powerlessness and alienation.
The interactional component is gained through interacting with others in one's community and acts as a bridge between intra-psychic perception of control, and actions taken to gain control.
Included here are interpersonal skills such as assertiveness, critical understanding of the
environmental resources needed to realise one's goals as well as the ability to access these.
This component has much in common with Kieffer's (1984) second stage of empowerment.
The third component is actual participation in the community. This is measured behaviourally, and involves actions that demonstrate one's sense of empowerment. These include
participation in community activities and organisations, thus linking psychological empowerment to broader organisational and community level processes.
The notion of psychological empowerment has been empirically tested. Zimmerman and Rappaport (1988) found moderate correlations between eleven measures of perceived control and identified one discriminant function, suggesting that all eleven measures were aspects of the same underlying construct, namely psychological empowerment. This composite measure of psychological empowerment correlated positively with leadership experiences and
participation in community activities and negatively with perceptions of alienation from socio- political life.
In an extension of this study, Zimmermanet al. (1992) reduced psychological empowerment to three measures, namely perceived personal and community control over decision-making, effectiveness of individual actions to influence community decisions and perceived difficulty to influence community issues. Participation was operationa1ised as the number of community groups belonged to and the extent of involvement, community activities participated in and leadership roles adopted. The reduction from 11 to three measures of control thus allows for tighter control, while the inclusion of four measures of participation allows for greater detail concerning participation. Results replicated the previous study. High participators scored highest on all three measures of control, and the combined variance of the three measures of controlled to a single discriminant function that separated high, low and non-participants.
The above studies provide empirical support for the construct of psychological empowerment and articulate the relationship between the intra-personal component ofZimmerman's (1995) model and participation in the community (the behavioural component). They also draw together the two key components of Rappaport' s (1987) definition of empowerment, namely the perception of control and actual democratic participation in the community. Both studies, however, focus on the intra-personal and behavioural aspects of psychological empowerment,
but exclude the interactional component, highlighting the need for further research exploring the relationship between all three components. A further weakness is their correlational rather than causal approach, making it impossible to determine whether participation leads to an increase in psychological empowerment, or whether empowered individuals are more likely to participate in the community than non-empowered ones.
5.2.4.6. Summary of models and relation to current intervention:
Taken together the above models provide a composite explanation of empowerment at multiple levels of analysis. Kieffer (1984) offers a thorough account of the stages through which
individuals progress on their way to empowerment, while Zimmerman (1995) adds to this
intra-psychic process, an understanding of the socio-political context and community
,
participation. Couto (1989), Richet al. (1995) and Speer and Hughey (1995) shift focus to the "'- organisational and community levels of analysis, with Richet al. providing an account of the multiple paths to empowerment and Speer and Hughey finding a reciprocal relationship between the development of social power in community organisations and the psychological empowerment of members.
While none of the models provide a complete account of empowerment, this should not be viewed as a criticism .The partial explanations offered are consistent with Rappaport (1984b) and Zimmerman's (1995) emphasis on the contextual and dynamic nature of empowerment varying according to setting and level of analysis. Thus the above models should be seen as guidelines, to be adapted according to the specific community and level of ecological analysis.
As the current intervention sought to empower students to take control of their learning, the models most relevant are those which target individuals, namely those of Kieffer (1984) and Zimmerman (1995). The current study adopted a view of empowerment as a process of both skills and self development, rather than a fixed, finite state (drawing from the work of Kieffer, 1984 and Richet al., 1995). Empowerment was also conceived as a network of interrelated aspects, specific to the context of academic study. Drawing from the work of Zimmerman (1995) these aspects were considered to be intra-psychic aspects of empowerment, such as motivation, self esteem and perceived control, interactional aspects including assertiveness and co-operation, and aspects of study behaviour, including active and autonomous learning styles.
'..
The current intervention also rested on Richet al.'sassumption (1995) that individual
empowerment precedes organisational empowerment, rather than adopting Speer and Hughey's view (1995) that individuals become empowered by participating in empowered organisations.
Thus formal empowerment opportunities were provided in the form of the tutorial programme, which empowered individuals, so that they gained the confidence, control and interpersonal skills to contribute to wider change processes (instrumental empowerment).
5.2.5. Empowerment interventions:
Drawing on the work of Trickett, Kelly and Todd (1972 in Rappaport, 1977) empowerment interventions are guided by four ecological principles. The principle of interdependence emphasises the importance of understanding a whole system before intervening therein, as all components are inter-related and change in one component leads to changes throughout the system. All interventions must therefore identify and target the most appropriate level of intervention, either individual, small group, organisational or community(Zimmerman, 1995).
The principle of cycling of resources focuses on how resources are distributed in a system. The goal of intervention is to mobilise and redistribute existing resources and natural competencies, rather than providing resources from without, as in a typical helper-helpee relationship. Expert and community thus collaborate in a process of mutual development, with the expert acting as facilitator and mentor, allowing for the expression of existing competencies (Kieffer, 1984).
This is in contrast to the traditional helper-helpee relationship characterised by large status differences and dependence on the expert (Helleret al., 1984). Emphasis is also placed on the nurturing role of the community, providing a caring context within which individual growth becomes possible. The intervention should therefore be guided by a set of philosophical principles specific to the context, developed jointly by consultant and community. In addition the working relationship should be one of co-operation and communication with all parties involved in decision making and participants assigned to tasks based on ability or potential not credentials (Reppucci and Sanders, 1974 in Omprakash,1989).
The principle of adaptation argues that systems continually change and adapt to an ever- changing environment, with each environment demanding a set of specific adaptive skills, unique to that particular context. This principle also implies that empowerment is not a scarce
commodity, soon depleted, but rather should be viewed as a self-perpetuating force that expands once shared among a community. Interventions must therefore acknowledge the dynamic and contextual nature of empowerment, rather than trying to impose a universally applicable solution. This requires the change agent to have a large repertoire of change strategies, which can be adapted to a specific situation (Rappaport, 1977). Interventions are best if constructed around a communal understanding of empowerment rather than the understanding of the expert or community leader (Strawn, 1994 in Foster-Fishman, Salem, Chibnall, Legler and Yapchai 1998). This ensures that the expectations of all participants are met by the intervention. Itoften requires the design of complex, multidimensional
interventions, however, allowing many possible pathways to empowerment to meet the varying needs of different participants, as in Rich et al.' s (1995) model.
Lastly, the principle of succession argues that because systems are in a state of dynamic flux, it is important to explore the effects of change over time (Rappaport, 1977).Itis also
important that the process of intervention be given adequate time to allow for self
development and the practising of new and existing skills, as empowerment cannot be taught, but only learnt through direct experience (Kieffer, 1984). At the same time, however,
empowerment should not be thought of simply as the development of new skills, but rather requires the reconstruction of one's entire way of experiencing oneself and one's context, as highlighted in Kieffer's (1984) model. For this reason, empowerment requires considerable time and resource investment in a community. According to Kieffer (1984), a thorough empowerment process can take as long as four years or more.