by Duncan Campbell
An interview with Duncan Campbell, Founder of Friends of the Children,
a revolutionary program working with seriously at-risk children that utilizes the
principles and tools of "thriving".
What has been the catalyst for your interest in thriving children?
As a child activist, a person who has worked with delinquents, and a founder of a mentoring program for seriously at-risk children, I always am asking myself what makes a young person, especially those at risk, thrive, and what are effective tools to improve these children's lives.
Recognizing that these also are the reflections of a business person, you can probably tell that I come at the questions, tasks, outcomes and activities of the positive youth development movement with a different approach. Yet I also have had the great fortune to be a small part of a group that has been researching, discussing, writing, and doing critical thinking about what makes a child thrive. Hopefully, my insights will add a perspective that is helpful and pragmatic to this pioneering effort. Even more important for me, the tools and techniques that are developed from this work can help to create real and positive change for seriously at-risk children.
Your perspective is somewhat different from that of the academics. Why is that?
I come more from a "practitioner's" perspective - more pragmatic and more interested in the application of the academic's ideas and principles. Another difference is that my own very personal definition of a "thriving" person has been one who is friendly, good-natured, caring, warm, kind, moral - that is, a "good person." They hopefully, but not necessarily, would be spirited. As you can see, there is no mention of intelligence, skill level or worldly standards of success.
What do you mean by the "application" of the ideas and principles of "thriving?"
For me, it is better to look at "thriving" as if there are levels, or tranches, or increments of "thriving". I also believe that you need to realistically apply the concepts of thriving to four different groups of children. These groups are:
- Gifted children
- "Good" children
- Children in general
- At-risk children
Recognizing these categories, it becomes easier to think about the different dimensions. If you think of thriving in terms of the capacity of a child to reach their fullest potential, as I do, then the different indicators tend to naturally form around each of the four categories.
Take, for example, the first Thriving Index that Thrive Foundation established several years ago, which I really like because it is so inclusive and, in addition, it provides a more detailed list of attributes. Now look at the following chart, which has all their attributes spread out into four levels of functioning:
| Good Outcomes | Very Good Outcomes | Excellent Outcomes | Optimal Outcomes |
| Honest | Open | Loved/Embraced | Joyful |
| Self-controlled | Safe | Giving | Creative |
| Respectful | Contributive | Self-confident | Authentic |
| Equipped | Hard-working | Values friendships | Content |
| Socially skilled | Comfortable | Successful | Realized potential |
| Resilient | Communicative | Understands their uniqueness |
For "at-risk children" to reach a "good" level, it is enough that they have at least some of the THRIVE attributes of being "competent," "respectful," "socially skilled," having "self-control," and "resilience" (the latter being the most important attribute of this group of children). These are solid, fundamental attributes, which can make these children healthy and productive members of our community.
Moving to "very good outcomes," you see that some children have an increased capacity to be "hard working," "adaptive," "open," "comfortable," and "contributive."
As we move towards "excellent thriving outcomes," some children are able to regularly practice these attributes and become "successful," "giving," "communicative," "self-confident," and, most importantly, knowing they are "loved and embraced" and, in turn, "loving."
In the case of "optimal outcomes," Bill Damon's work about "noble purpose" and "moral exemplars" most clearly sets the highest standard and, consequently, the highest expectations. Using the Thrive Index, the attributes that most clearly align with Bill's work are optimal terms like "cultured," "creative," "authentic," "realize potential," and "understand their uniqueness." These are qualities that not all of us will be able to reach.
Are you suggesting that at-risk children can only attain levels of thriving in the first category?
No, not at all. There are many examples of young people who have experienced great prejudice, personal limitations, and/or other challenges who have attained levels of thriving that surprise and inspire all of us. But my point here is that we must approach our work with youth using the hard-earned lens of realism and pragmatism. Should we say that an at-risk child will be successful only if he or she gets straight A's? It may be a great accomplishment for that young person to develop self-control, to find a vocation that earns him or her an honest living, and to develop social skills that may not have been easy to attain. The strengths-based approach that we practice at Friends of the Children honors the full spectrum of young persons' potential.
What do you like about Peter Benson's and Search Institute's "Thriving" Indicators and Rich Lerner's 5 "C's" in relation to at- risk children?
Peter's work to date has emphasized "healthy development" with "positive outcomes," such as academic success; caring for others and their communities; the affirmation of cultural and ethnic diversity; and commitment to healthy lifestyles. For me, these outcomes are reasonable for those children who have both the capacity and environment which can help a child fulfill what I would call "high expectations." Our work with "seriously at-risk" children emphasizes "attainable expectations," which means they are realistic outcomes for these children who usually do not have the enhanced capacity and/or environment. For our children, graduating from high school could be "academic success," since most of them were not expected to finish grade school, let alone high school. As to "caring for others and their communities," just for "at-risk children" to respect themselves and others could be a sufficient outcome as they may not have the extra wherewithal to extend themselves to caring for others and their communities other than on a limited basis. To put it another way, as some commentators have expressed, children who survive dysfunctional backgrounds rarely have enough left when they reach adulthood to move from being a "good citizen" to an "optimal citizen". These same comments would also apply to Rich's 5 "C's" of character, caring/compassion, competence, connection, and confidence. In relation to both Peter's and Rich's work, the prior thoughts on Thrive Foundation's Index about the relevance of different children's background on their capacity to acquire or achieve certain attributes are very applicable to their ideas.
What other works around "thriving" do you like?
Since I am very outcome and results oriented, I really like the Kaufman Foundation's focus on long-term student outcomes (including student performance and commitment), and young adult outcomes (including economic self-sufficiency). In addition, since I personally value the importance of "relationships," an important outcome in Kaufman's work on thriving is the capacity to have healthy family and social relationships.
Beyond the work I've mentioned, there are a number of other attributes which I think are essential to any meaningful discussion around "thriving." They are empathy, hopefulness, spiritual engagement, initiative, motivation, curiosity, resourcefulness, enjoyment of life, the ability to overcome adversity, the capacity to delay gratification and, most importantly, the ability to have healthy and loving relationships with others.
You mentioned earlier the need for specific tools for children, families and practitioners; what are a couple of examples of those?
The Search Institute, out of Minneapolis, Minnesota, has developed a number of specific tools, which are centered on the 40 Assets model, written about in Peter Benson's All Kids Are Our Kids. Peter Benson and Peter Scales also are in the process of developing new tools that will help communities assess strengths-based outcomes, based on the work of the Thriving Indicators Project that I've had the chance to participate in during the past number of years.
Cynthia King-Guffey and Thrive Foundation for Youth also are working on a very useful and practical tool, the Thrive-O-Gram™, which is being developed for use not only within the parent-child relationship, but for youth workers, mentors, teachers, pediatricians, and other practitioners who work with diverse youth. The work of the Thrive-O-Gram parallels the development of a strengths-based assessment tool that is being developed by our mentoring organization for seriously at-risk children, Friends of the Children. This tool will be useful to gather information and facilitate communication which will enable each child to make constructive and positive changes in their lives.
It is critical that these tools are developed in a manner that will make them practical, easy to use, and outcome oriented. Such tools are important because they lead to deeper, more realistic and meaningful assessments, and communications which in turn lead to positive change for children and families.
In closing, do you have any further observations and/or suggestions?
In order to achieve a "national transformation" around "thriving children," we need to strengthen our efforts in order to influence policy makers and opinion makers. Specifically, we need to enhance the strategy on how to further engage national youth organizations, as Rich Lerner is doing with 4H and Peter Benson is doing with the YMCA. In addition, Search Institute needs to increase its tools and training around the 40 Assets. It is imperative that we deepen our involvement with mentoring initiatives, ranging from Big Brothers, Big Sisters to Friends of the Children.
Furthermore, we need to accept limitations for certain children ranging from unrealistic expectations about certain children attending college or becoming an NBA player or rock star. This means having a vision of the positive potential of a child with both optimism and realism.
For me, what is most exciting about this work on "thriving" is that it can raise the expectation level of our children, families, and communities. The reason I am so committed to both the mentoring model and the thriving movement is that they both promote the two most critical ingredients fueling genuine positive development in all youth: relationships and expectations. As communities, families and mentors more effectively provide these ingredients in a young person's life - sustained, loving relationships combined with optimistic, realistic expectations - more children will have a shot at living lives rich with meaning and fulfillment.
The "Thriving" movement has been described by certain commentators as a dramatic sea of change with the potential for "a groundswell of action." This can only occur if we begin a major effort by which "thriving" is embedded not only as a goal but as a way of life. Not only will young people thrive, but there will be a more hopeful future for each of us and our communities.
Posts
