Understanding Behaviour Through Unclear Expectations in PBS: Making Daily Support Easier to Navigate

Positive Behaviour Support requires services to understand how unclear expectations affect behaviour. The Positive Behaviour Support knowledge hub supports providers to connect behaviour, communication, proactive support, rights and reduction of restrictive practice.

In specialist services, understanding behaviour through PBS means asking whether the person knew what was happening, what was expected, what choices were available, what would happen next and how to ask for help or a break.

This reflects PBS principles and values, because support should be understandable, respectful and predictable. Strong services do not expect people to comply with routines that have not been made clear in a way they can use.

Concept Explained Clearly

Unclear expectations happen when the person does not have enough accessible information about a task, routine, boundary, activity or transition. Staff may assume the expectation is obvious, but the person may experience uncertainty, pressure or confusion.

Behaviour linked to unclear expectations may include repeated questioning, refusal, leaving, shouting, withdrawal, pacing, grabbing objects or distress when staff change direction. In PBS, these behaviours are understood by asking what information was missing and whether the person had a clear way to understand the situation.

Why It Matters in Real Services

When expectations are unclear, staff may see behaviour as resistance. They may repeat instructions, increase urgency or correct the person, when the real issue is that support has not made the expectation understandable enough.

This creates avoidable risk. People may lose confidence, staff may become frustrated and routines may become more restrictive than necessary. Commissioners and CQC will expect providers to evidence that staff communicate effectively, support choice and adapt practice around individual needs.

What Good Looks Like

Strong services demonstrate that expectations are made clear before pressure builds. Staff use accessible communication, consistent wording, visual support, clear boundaries and realistic choices. They check understanding through the person’s response, not simply by asking whether they understand.

Good PBS practice makes the next step visible. The person knows what is happening now, what comes next, what they can choose, what cannot change and how staff will support them. This creates a clear line of sight from understandable support to reduced distress and better participation.

Operational Example 1: Unclear Morning Routine

Step 1 – Situation observed: A person in supported living became distressed during the morning routine, especially when staff moved between breakfast, medication and personal care without clear explanation.

Step 2 – Expectation reviewed: The provider found that staff knew the routine, but the person was being given information verbally and inconsistently. The person did not always know what was expected next.

Step 3 – Support adjusted: Staff introduced a simple morning sequence using photos for breakfast, medication, washing and preferred activity. The sequence stayed visible until the routine was complete.

Step 4 – Delivery detail: Staff used one agreed phrase before each stage and allowed time before moving on. If the person pointed to a later activity, staff showed where it sat in the sequence rather than saying “not yet” repeatedly.

Step 5 – Evidence of impact: Morning distress reduced, routine completion became more settled and staff records showed fewer repeated prompts. The provider evidenced that clearer expectations improved cooperation without adding pressure.

Deepening the Understanding: Boundaries Need Clarity Too

Expectations are not only about tasks. They also include boundaries. A person may become distressed if staff say no without explaining what is available instead, or if one worker allows something that another worker later refuses.

Strong PBS services make boundaries predictable and respectful. They use clear language, consistent responses and accessible alternatives. This helps the person understand limits without needing to escalate to test whether the boundary is real.

The related article on seeing behaviour as communication in PBS reinforces why behaviour around rules, routines and boundaries should be understood as communication about clarity, control and support.

Operational Example 2: Confusion Around Activity Choices

Step 1 – Presenting pattern: In a day service, a person shouted and left the room when staff asked what they wanted to do. Staff believed the person was rejecting activities.

Step 2 – What was unclear: The team reviewed the choice process and found that staff offered several options verbally, some of which were not actually available that day.

Step 3 – Support response: Staff introduced a daily activity board showing only available choices. The person chose from two options at a time, with a clear “later” option for activities not currently available.

Step 4 – Risk reduction: Staff stopped offering uncertain promises. If an activity was unavailable, they showed this visually and offered a realistic alternative rather than extended explanation.

Step 5 – Outcome evidence: The person made more choices, left the room less often and showed reduced frustration. The provider evidenced that honest, accessible expectations improved participation.

Systems, Workforce and Consistency

Clear expectations must be shared across the workforce. If one staff member explains routines visually and another relies on vague verbal direction, the person experiences mixed support. Strong services include expectation-setting in PBS plans, handovers, supervision and induction.

Managers should observe how staff introduce tasks, choices and boundaries. Supervision should explore whether staff use phrases such as “later,” “soon” or “be patient” when the person needs clearer information. Handovers should include what the person has already been told so staff do not accidentally change the message.

Operational Example 3: Unclear Rules in Shared Kitchen Use

Step 1 – Service concern: A person in a shared residential service became distressed when asked to leave the kitchen during another resident’s cooking time. They shouted and tried to re-enter repeatedly.

Step 2 – Expectation mapped: The provider found that kitchen access rules were informal and staff explained them differently. The person did not have a clear way to know when the kitchen was available.

Step 3 – Practical change: A shared kitchen timetable was created using photos and colour-coded time slots. The person had planned access times and a visible next available slot.

Step 4 – Staff response aligned: Staff used one agreed explanation and offered a holding activity when the kitchen was in use. They avoided debating at the doorway.

Step 5 – Evidence reviewed: Doorway distress reduced, kitchen access became calmer and peer conflict decreased. The provider evidenced that clear expectations improved shared-space safety and dignity.

Governance and Evidence

Governance should show how unclear expectations are identified and addressed. Providers should be able to evidence PBS plan updates, communication tools, incident analysis, staff observation, supervision notes and outcome monitoring.

Strong governance connects behaviour to support clarity. Records should show what expectation was unclear, what communication changed and whether outcomes improved. This creates a clear line of sight from behaviour to unclear expectation, from unclear expectation to staff action, and from staff action to outcome.

Commissioner and CQC Expectations

Commissioners expect providers to make support understandable because clarity affects stability, choice and independence. They need assurance that providers reduce avoidable distress through proactive communication rather than reactive control.

CQC will expect care to be person-centred, responsive and well led. Inspectors may review whether staff understand communication needs, whether routines and restrictions are explained clearly, and whether incidents lead to learning. Strong services demonstrate that expectations are clear, consistent and evidence-led.

Common Pitfalls

• Assuming expectations are obvious because staff understand the routine.
• Using vague words such as “soon” or “later” without accessible meaning.
• Offering choices that are not genuinely available.
• Changing boundaries between staff or shifts.
• Recording refusal without checking whether the person understood what was expected.
• Using verbal explanation when the person needs visual or practical support.

Conclusion

Understanding behaviour through unclear expectations helps PBS teams see distress as a possible response to confusion, uncertainty or inconsistent support. Behaviour may show that the person needs clearer information, accessible choices and predictable boundaries.

Strong providers make daily life easier to understand. They evidence how clear expectations reduce escalation, improve participation and protect dignity. This gives commissioners and CQC confidence that PBS is practical, consistent and rooted in real service delivery.