The present article was written in recognition of the contribution that Ruth and Claudio Des Champs made to the psychotherapeutic community of Spanish-speaking America through the creation and the direction of the journal Perspectivas Sistémicas.

The integrative model of the development of resilience that we have adopted in this article is based on the lectures and workshops “Integrative cognitive-behavioural group therapy in the prevention and treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder”, presented within the “IV International Congress of Psychic Trauma and Traumatic Stress” held in Buenos Aires in June 2004, and “Family resilience from an integrative systemic and cognitive-behavioural perspective”, within the “World Congress of Group Therapy” held in São Paulo in July 2006.

Why a solution-focused model

Resilience as a psychological construct has undergone a great expansion in recent years, starting from the various disasters and mass crises that have occurred: the attack on the Jewish community of Buenos Aires (AMIA) on 18 July 1994, the Twin Towers in New York in September 2001, Atocha station (Madrid) and its surroundings in March 2004, London, Jerusalem and other Israeli cities over many years and in varied circumstances (buses, schools, hotels, and so on).

For these reasons, various articles have been published and various programmes developed with the aim of preventing psychopathologies in the affected population and of fostering the coping capacity of different vulnerable target groups.

Many of the articles published in Spanish refer in general to the psychosocial factors associated with resilience and, in some cases, to the characteristics of resilient children and adolescents.

Little has been published on brief, solution-focused interventions that allow effective learning for the development of resilience.

The aim of this article is precisely to make possible a reflection and, as far as possible, the implementation of an effective model suited to the development of resilience and grounded in concrete experiences in this field or in the face of existential problems.

Interesting and relevant books and articles have been published by recognised authors, such as Boris Cyrulnik, Aldo Melillo, Elbio Néstor Suárez Ojeda, Froma Walsh, Jacinto Inbar, Nan Henderson and Mike M. Milstein, Daniel Rodríguez, in various languages — Spanish, Hebrew and English — and, no doubt, in many other languages as well.

Many of these works rest on personal anecdotes, comparative studies and associated relations (correlations), while others, very few in number, have empirical support in the field of critical situations and adaptation, as well as in the studies carried out on resilience with vulnerable populations and with certain emotional disorders, as is the case with depression.

The objective of the present article is to share an applied approach implemented in Israel and in other Spanish-speaking countries, one with a strong potential for effectiveness in the field of the development of resilience, both individual and family: the solution-focused approach.

Among the various multidimensional strategies for developing individual and family resilience, we have chosen the solution-focused approach, which emphasises the perspective of the future, because it is systematic, relatively easy to learn and to implement, and because it allows transfer and generalisation to relevant and decisive fields and to emotional and behavioural difficulties.

This approach forms part of an integrative model, cognitive-behavioural and systemic, which will be briefly described below, in order to bring out what is relevant and specific in the solution-focused model, which places the emphasis on the search for solutions, as distinct from the emphasis placed on problem solving.

This differentiation is not merely semantic: it bears especially on present “reality”, insisting on effective adaptation and on the creation of a future that allows the continuity of the individual’s personal and family Project.

The proposed model of solution-based resilience is grounded in positive psychology and in multidimensional models for the promotion and development of mental health (Seligman, 2002; Snyder and López, 2000; Inbar, 2004).

Resilience, as a characteristic of the individual, can prevent or reduce the scope of psychopathologies following critical events, such as post-traumatic stress disorder, by means of positive functioning, and likewise the scope of frequent affective disorders such as depression.

Three concepts to define

As with any applied model, certain relevant concepts have to be defined: 1. resilience; 2. the problem; 3. the solving of the problem.

The conceptualisation of resilience is defined from different points of view, according to the paradigms and the models we adopt.

Resilience is a psychological construct defined as the capacity to:

• bear crises and adversities in a positive way;
• face effectively situations of stress, of anxiety and of mourning;
• adapt to changes in an efficient and intelligent way (“emotional competence”);
• resist obstacles and overcome them in situations of uncertainty;
• create individual, group, family and community processes in critical circumstances.

Managing to recover and to restore oneself so as to pursue one’s individual, couple, family and community life Project.

And to go on acting so as to reach one’s objectives — at the levels and in the fields that have become relevant on the basis of the crisis (Inbar, 1996).

The development of resilience grounded in problem solving (and focused on solutions) is an effective clinical intervention, one that can prevent and diminish psychopathologies, anxiety and stress arising from critical situations such as losses, bereavements, mass disasters, terrorism, unemployment, poverty and other events that modern society imposes on us daily.

Resilience and problem solving: a reciprocal relation

On the basis of clinical experience and of a few systematic empirical works, we might put forward the hypothesis of a reciprocal relation between resilience and the capacity for problem solving.

A critical situation that requires the identification of internal and external resources and their effective implementation — in other words effective problem solving — may lead to dysfunctional and maladaptive behaviour: high levels of anxiety, frequent avoidance conducts, depressive affect, and so on.

At the same time, dysfunctional cognitions, emotions and conducts bear on the capacity for problem solving and, consequently, on the psychological resilience needed to face the critical situation effectively: an ineffective circular process then arises, one that feeds back into and reinforces itself.

Resilience can be conceptualised, in a solution-focused perspective, as a set of behavioural (behavioural coping style), motivational (search for solutions and reduction of avoidance) and cognitive (schemas, core beliefs and information processing) skills (Inbar, 2004).

Perceived self-efficacy

Perceived self-efficacy in the face of adversity is a central characteristic among strengths and resources, and it has been widely studied in recent years.

It is linked to the capacity to cope and to resilience (Inbar, 1994) and contributes to decisions, actions and experiences.

Studies carried out in this field have shown that those who doubt their outcome efficacy — a component of self-efficacy — tend to:

• avoid challenges;
• give up activities when they meet obstacles;
• experience higher levels of anxiety (Bandura, 1997).

Different models, such as that of Kobasa (1979, 1982) or that of Inbar (1994), underline the importance of the acceptance of challenges, of the sense of control in getting past barriers and of the regulation of anxiety.

Strategies and techniques bring out the importance of humour, of physical activity and of intimate and sexual experiences, all of them stimulating the secretion of neuro-hormones that influence affective states, such as endorphins and DHEA (dehydroepiandrosterone), the latter being considered a reducer of depression.

Into our model we integrate contributions from the proposal by Susan Kobasa mentioned above, that of psychological hardiness, which comprises “personality” characteristics considered fundamental for effective adaptation in a critical situation: involvement-commitment, control and challenge. As can be seen, these components do not belong to “personality”: they result from cognitive processes, products of an intentional or fortuitous socialisation, and can therefore result from cognitive social learning, “à la Bandura” (Inbar, 2004).

Other models and approaches are mentioned in figure 1; because of the limits inherent in any article, we cannot develop them here, so as to be able to go deeper in particular into the solution-focused model.

The integrative model adopted includes approaches such as that of learned resourcefulness (Michael Rosenbaum, 1983), adaptive flexibility (Inbar, 1986), the multimodal model (A. Lazarus, 1981; 1991), learned optimism (Seligman, 1990), hope (Snyder, 1994), and others besides.

The areas of self-efficacy to be developed in individual resilience are mentioned below.

Defining problem solving

To return to the need to conceptualise, and in agreement with D’Zurilla and Nezu (1999, 2004), we may define problem solving as a self-directed cognitive-behavioural process by which an individual attempts to identify or discover effective or adaptive solutions to specific problems arising in daily life.

Related to resilience, this cognitive-behavioural process — problem solving — means an intentional and not a fortuitous conduct; directed towards objectives that are as far as possible conscious: subsisting, resisting, pursuing the life Project, growing despite adversity; a rational cognitive process: reflective, analysing the benefits and the costs of each alternative, in the immediate term and, as far as possible, in the medium and long term (Inbar, 2006).

Furthermore, problem solving requires emotional, cognitive and behavioural efforts: the motivation to cope, the importance and the values attached to coping effectively…