How do we know if and when we’re getting better at what we do? It’s a seemingly simple question, but there are some fields—like psychotherapy—in which measuring progress and outcomes, and then applying that information to practice, is harder to do than in other fields. For example, in math, it’s pretty clear-cut—either the answer to a specific problem is right or wrong, although the process by which you get to the answer may differ. But when it comes to the mental health profession, how do we measure clinical mastery? How do we measure when we’re “right” and when we’re “wrong?” And is the process we use—the specific methods and techniques—significant or not?

Scott Miller, the founder of the International Center for Clinical Excellence, has been a driving force in applying the science of expertise to the practicalities of the consulting room. He coauthored a feature article on clinical excellence in our May 2011 issue, offered a session on the same topic in our webcast series on excellence, and will be presenting the luncheon address on Friday—“Charting Your Path to Clinical Excellence”—at the upcoming March Symposium.

Here are some of the questions he’ll be discussing in his luncheon keynote. Although there’s been a boom in resources on the field of psychotherapy during the last few decades, have individual therapists actually gotten better? Are we getting better as a field? How do we measure our progress as therapists and clients’ progress with their treatment goals? How do we then take what we’ve learned and apply it to becoming better therapists?

Hear Miller present in person to learn the answers to these important questions and much more. Want to hear even more details? He’ll also be presenting a workshop on Friday at Symposium 2012 to go more in-depth on the subject. Learning about Miller’s insights and applying these methods in your practice may forever change the way you work with clients and think about therapy.

I just have to say “wow.” What an incredible session. I always love hearing Mary Jo present because she’s such an incredibly clear speaker and seems so down-to-earth. I have this overriding feeling of trust in her—she knows what she’s doing, based on both her experience and research, and although she’s confident in her work, she’s organized and meticulous about staying in the moment and being deliberate.

Read more