A solution-focused approach to family support 87 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xxx. © w&b A solution-focused approach to family support Sheila Cooper1 and Maura Daly2 Abstract: This article reports on a project to introduce a strengths-based and solution-focused model of practice within a small voluntary family support organisation that works with families affected by drug and alcohol abuse. It outlines a rationale for the project and discusses how the authors drew on learning in relation to change, leadership and project management. Keywords: creative arts; social work education; practice learning; non-traditional placements; relationship-based practice 1. Practice Learning & Development Manager Circle 2. Operations Manager Circle Address for correspondence: Circle, 18 West Pilton, Park,Edinburgh EH4 4EJ. Sheila.Cooper@Circlesctland.Org Date of first (online) publication: Practice Reflections Sheila Cooper and Maura Daly 88 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xx. © w&b Introduction This article reports on the authors’ work to embed a particular theoretical approach as a shared conceptual framework for practice in a small voluntary family support agency. The work was informed by and written up in the course of the authors’ participation in a Scottish Credit and Qualifications (SCQF) Level 11 (PG.Certificate) award in practice learning from Glasgow Caledonian University. In the article we identify the desirability of adopting a particular theoretical approach and report on how we sought to do so, drawing on relevant literature and on small-scale empirical findings. Agency context The agency has a specific focus on supporting families affected by drug and alcohol misuse and consists of various projects including outreach work with offenders leaving prison and group work initiatives. Specifically, following internal research into the needs of women leaving prison (Cavanagh et al, 2007), we developed a ‘parental rehabilitation’ project to support mothers from the local women’s prison into the community. Similarly as a result of our research into the needs of fathers (Cavanagh and Smith, 2002), which highlighted that fathers often feel excluded from support services, we set up specialist projects that sought to ensure that fathers are afforded equal status in our family support. We have recently extended our ‘parental rehabilitation’ work to include fathers, at two further prisons. Our prison work reflects the growing unease about rising prison populations, the growing recognition of the impact of parental imprisonment on children (Marshall, 2008) and the dearth of rehabilitation approaches that take adequate account of the significance of families as catalysts for change. The primary social work task is to provide holistic family based support to promote positive change, as opposed to the individual approach that tends to be adopted by other addiction agencies (Barnard 2007). The agency’s ethos and overall aims are guided by a range of Scottish and UK research and policies into the effects of drug and alcohol use on children and families. The most recent government policy is The Road to Recovery: A new approach to tackling Scotland’s drug problem (2008), which advocates a strengthened focus on early intervention to promote the well-being of children. The role of the family support worker is A solution-focused approach to family support 89 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xxx. © w&b somewhat fluid allowing for a flexible, needs led approach tailored to family circumstances. Current staff members come from a range of professional backgrounds and theoretical orientations. The agency aspires towards a model of a learning organisation ‘that through its constituent parts, and notably through the learning of the individuals who work within it, can learn, developing new ways of understanding and dealing with unfolding problems and issues’ (Baldwin, 2004:167). Practice learning, where students are allocated work from the different projects and the local Children & Families team is an integral part its function. Almost a third of practitioners are qualified as practice teachers and all practitioners are involved in varying degrees in student learning, so that any learning projects are designed to meet the needs of workers and students alike. From students’ perspective, the project has been an opportunity to learn alongside qualified staff, with positive benefits for both. Staff benefit from the fresh approach students bring while students gain from worker’s experience. In this sense the agency tends to be receptive to new ideas about practice. Project rationale The rationale for this project arose from a need to provide some form of common understanding of practice that could underpin the work of all staff. It was felt that a solution-focused model would build on the existing strengths-based philosophy of the organisation, giving staff and students additional tools to creatively meet individual need. The intention was for the approach to be used not only as a method of intervention but more importantly it is a style of communication applicable at personal and professional levels across the organisation, enabling staff and students to have more constructive conversations and relationships. Additional benefits that it was hoped would accrue to the agency are improved staff morale, skills in conflict resolution and a sense of cohesion. Funding applications may also be enhanced by having a clear strategy of intervention to underpin practice. Over recent years our approach has developed somewhat loosely and haphazardly in the direction of solution-focused, strengths-based approaches. It encourages seeing people as experts in their own lives and uses language and terminology that is empowering rather than labelling. Sheila Cooper and Maura Daly 90 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xx. © w&b The aim of the work reported on here is to conceptualise, strengthen and embed such approaches within the organisation. Proposed change was incremental rather than radical, involving conceptualising and strengthening existing practice. Solution focused theory One of the main underlying assumptions of a solution focused approach is that people have the capacity for growth and change. Historically, solutionfocused theory originates from the research of De Schazer (1988) based on studying successful people and identifying what works. Traditional therapies have concentrated on finding the root cause of the ‘problem’ whereas proponents of the solution focused approach argue that it is not necessary to understand the problem in order to find a solution. Essentially, a solution-focused model uses a range of skills designed to help the service user build a more positive vision of the future through a set of stages. Milner & O’Bryne (2002:151) argue that ‘the approach is intrinsically antioppressive because of its central emphasis on empowerment, respectful uncertainty and minimum intervention’, helping to rebalance the power dynamic between worker and service user. From an agency perspective, it is economical to use in terms of training costs, time taken to assimilate the basic techniques and is less intrusive than other methods of intervention. We now proceed to report on how we sought to implement our initiative to embed such approaches to practice. Defining the project Buchanan & Boddy (1992, p.8, cited in Field & Keller 1998) define a project as a ‘unique venture with a beginning and an end, constructed by people to meet established goals within parameters of cost, schedule and quality.’ To assess the feasibility of any proposed project requires knowledge and understanding of the social, technical, ecological, economic and political factors that may impact on it. The global recession has undoubtedly had a major impact on the financial stability of the agency with cuts to public funding and charitable institutions unable to make grants. Cuts in public spending have come at a time when society is becoming A solution-focused approach to family support 91 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xxx. © w&b increasingly polarised ‘with growing concentration of need in some communities’ (Scottish Government 2006:8). Children and families social work is characterised by complexity of need ‘driven by fluid and unstable relationships and chaotic lifestyles’ (Scottish Government 2006:15). Luecke & Katz (2003 cited in Jones & Murray 2008:2) define innovation as the ‘embodiment, combination or synthesis of knowledge in original, relevant valued new products, processes or services.’ Drivers for innovation arise from Changing Lives: 21st Century Review (2006), which highlighted the need to work closely with other universal providers in all sectors to find new ways to design and deliver services. Political and economic factors including the failure of the state to provide identified gaps in resources with the resultant increased competition for funding, places additional pressure on the agency to gain a competitive advantage. Implementation of the project Projects need to be planned in a systematic and sequential way with clearly defined outcomes and timescales (Nokes & Kelly 2007). The Project Life Cycle as defined by Burke (1993) & Jones & Murray (2008) sets out the various stages from project initiation to planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. It has the advantage of providing a flexible way of describing an activity in a single framework. Payne (2009) suggests that strategic planning maintains motivation and direction, and generates support and accountability. It communicates a vision and ensures the plan is consistent with organisational values. A plan incorporating a timetable and ascribing responsibilities was drawn up and was supported by the wider management team. Broadly it involved a series of formal training events with an external trainer – an introductory day, two days of more intensive input, and a follow-up day to consolidate the learning from practice. Our role as project managers involved building the project team to drive forward the initiative, nurturing team spirit and regularly reviewing progress. Change initiatives fail where there is poor leadership (Briner et al, 1996). Leadership and management capabilities are considered to be essential in addressing workforce challenges in social services (Scottish Executive, 2006). We were attracted to Banks and Gallagher’s (2009, p.7) ‘virtue-ethics’ approach to leadership with ‘its focus on the individual professional as a moral agent within a community of practitioners who share a core moral Sheila Cooper and Maura Daly 92 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xx. © w&b purpose or service ideal’. Heifetz (1994) also suggests an ethical aspect to leadership whereby leaders provide a holding environment of trust, empathy and nurturance where workers can feel safe to confront problems. The ability to lead and manage change requires planning, operational, communication and people skills. ‘Leadership research and theory seems to be consistent in arguing that a considerate, employee-centred, participative and democratic style is most effective’(Huczynski and Buchanan, 2001:719). Having the leadership responsibility shared by two people, with similar leadership styles, has served a number of advantages. Firstly, there has been an equal sharing out of responsibilities, with each drawing on the other’s complementary strengths. Secondly, it has kept up momentum, when other pressures of work threaten to take over. Finally it has provided an opportunity for critical reflection along the way. Smale, (1998) talks about the importance of understanding ‘self’ in the sea of change and reflection on personal leadership styles. Methodology We built in an evaluation strategy to gauge the effectiveness of our approach to roll out the model. Program evaluation is applied research, designed to focus on and improve human service delivery rather than uncover theoretical relationships (Nutley et al, 2007). Information is systematically gathered and assessed to provide useful feedback; the major goal is to influence practice development through the provision of empirically-driven feedback. We applied a participatory evaluation methodology, which stems from the view that knowledge is socially constructed and cognitive systems and memories are developed and shared by organisation members (Cousins and Earl, 1992). Because it takes place within a particular organisational context, it requires a skill set that includes group skills, management ability, and sensitivity to multiple stakeholders. Evaluation in this case was undertaken by requesting feedback in the form of written questionnaires from the staff team of 35-40 family support workers following each training session. This enabled tracking of the learning from each session, staff perception of the desirability of the model and the ‘buy-in’ of staff. Additionally, the trainer sought feedback in the form of written questionnaires, which more specifically addressed the quality of the training and future learning needs. The initial feedback indicated that the most effective way to introduce A solution-focused approach to family support 93 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xxx. © w&b the solution-focussed approach to practice was through each project team having a ‘champion’, who would take the lead and provide a ‘learning-inaction’ framework, learning from and with others. Involving key stakeholders including service users Bullivant (2000:7) proposes that the initial stage of the process is to establish ‘the views of stakeholders and managers so that the purpose of the project is clear.’ Stakeholders included not only staff and students, but more importantly service users whose lives hopefully will be enhanced by emphasising their strengths and taking a more inclusive approach. The introductory training day led by the external trainer allowed us to develop a shared vision which Briner et al (1996:89) suggest is essential to the success of the project: ‘The most significant success factor for project teams is that they have a common and shared idea of what difference they are trying to make as a result of the project.’ Evaluations completed by staff members confirmed a high level of commitment and enthusiasm for the idea of taking forward the approach and integrating the basic techniques into their practice. Effective communication and ‘buy-in’ is crucial to the success of the project to ensure that staff members support the project rather than it being a ‘top down’ initiative imposed by management. Baldwin (2008:331) argues that ‘for learning to be embedded in the behaviour of people, individually or collectively, it must have meaning for them within their own experience.’ Two further days were planned, this time more closely aligned to our family support work and more specific to our organisation’s context. Again the feedback to the trainer following these two days was extremely positive, giving us a mandate to continue with the project, in that it appeared to be suitable, acceptable and feasible, factors which Johnson and Scholes (1999) consider to be key requisites for a change management project. Project stages and milestones The initial project stage involved embedding the learning from the formal training.Nutleyetal(2007)suggestthatpassivedisseminationofknowledge is not enough and recognise the importance of context, interaction, dialogue and systems for the transfer of knowledge, as a process rather than event. Sheila Cooper and Maura Daly 94 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xx. © w&b With this in mind we considered how we could facilitate such a process. We set up a steering group comprising a representative from each team of the organisation to take forward the approach. We were acutely aware of the importance of this role and that the selection of team representatives would be crucial to the success of our project. Requesting nominations for team ‘champions’ at least ensured that staff members possessed the interest, enthusiasm and commitment to taking forward the approach. At the first meeting, we revisited the materials from the training days to ensure that those present felt confident enough to facilitate practice of the approach within their respective team meetings. We had a disappointing turn-out of ‘champions’ at this meeting. Theories of change management informed our understanding of resistance as a normal reaction to innovation, which understandably threatens the status quo. The Harvard Business School (2009) identify two types of resistance, explicit and hidden. Hidden resistance is ostensibly passive and therefore more difficult to recognise, usually coming to the fore during the ‘action phase’ of a project. Resistance is often symptomatic of some underlying cause such as workload concerns, fear of the unknown or a belief that innovation is unnecessary. At the second meeting some weeks later, the feedback was that although all the teams were committed to the approach and wanted additional practice, team meetings had too many competing demands. Those who had managed to practise reported positive outcomes but for some it had ‘fallen off the agenda’. Jones and Murray (2008) contend that project implementation is characterised by periods of good progress and periods when progress slows down. To complement and support the embedding of the learning through practice, we designed cards containing the basic principles of the solutionfocused approach which we had laminated for every worker and student in the organisation. These were to act as visual reminders, particularly for those whose learning style is strongly visual. To embed any new initiative within the organisation will require a range of options. It was suggested that staff members could use their team meetings as opportunities to practise some of the techniques. The guidelines for ‘Working with Children’ & ‘Group Work’ incorporated aspects of solution- focused including the concept of ‘exceptions’. For example, when working with children displaying challenging behaviour, seeking times when behaviour is acceptable. The second stage of the project involved building a solution-focused approach into the induction process so that new staff members and students have the opportunity to learn about the basic principles. To that end, we put A solution-focused approach to family support 95 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xxx. © w&b together a 3 hour training course with a range of materials taking account of the different ways in which people make sense of information. It was important to have a blended learning approach, one which would include some aspects of presentation methods, exemplified by giving participants information on background and principles. The power point presentation was reproduced and adapted with permission from the consultant to avoid issues of copyright. Participatory and discovery methods included the use of a case vignette which would give small groups the opportunity to put into practice some of the techniques described. In recognition that adults may have different learning styles, such as a preference for visual, audio or kinaesthetic material, we used video clips of solution focused interviews to model good practice. Impact of the project Lishman (1998: 101) argues that evaluation should be an integral part of practice in that it ‘examines our effectiveness and can help us improve it, can increase our accountability to users and clients, develops our knowledge and gaps in knowledge, and helps us develop new models of practice and service delivery. For the purposes of evaluating this project a relevant approach was what Alston and Bowles (2003) describe as outcome analysis conducted to determine whether the stated objectives of a project have been met, and whether therefore, the project is worth continuing. Our first intended outcome was that family support workers and students would develop a stronger, conceptual base upon which to build their practice, namely a strengths-based, solution-focused approach. To measure this, questionnaires were completed by workers immediately after the first introductory day (See Appendix 1 for details of the questionnaire). The same questionnaire was then completed after the two follow-up days. The response rate was encouraging with 68% of staff members completing the questionnaire. In response to the first question which focused on a general understanding of the term solution-focused, 47% of the participants reported a slight improvement. The remaining 53% participants recorded no change, although one person had already rated herself at the top of the scale. The second question asked participants to rate their knowledge of solution-focused concepts. Similarly, 47% of the participants reported increased knowledge of concepts with the remaining 53% recording no Sheila Cooper and Maura Daly 96 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xx. © w&b change. The third question related to confidence in using concepts, which produced an interesting response. 40% of participants felt more confident, 47% reported no change, while 13% felt they had regressed. The final question required participants to state whether they had been able to apply the concepts to practice. 27% reported they were still using concepts frequently, 40% were using concepts occasionally, 20% had moved from using concepts rarely to occasionally and 13% rarely. Results from the quantitative data record a slight increase in knowledge, understanding and confidence with the most significant increase being in the knowledge of concepts. This may indicate that respondents value the pragmatic use of tool over theoretical understanding, perhaps reflecting the diverse professional backgrounds of respondents. The time factor may also be relevant with a gap of only four months between the two questionnaires, which is insufficient time to allow for assimilation and opportunities to try out new techniques. On a positive note, the solution focused model appeared to reinforce the existing strengths based approach of workers, with one staff member commenting that she ‘generally worked from a strengths perspective with strong themes around problem-solving in partnership.’ The second intended outcome was that workers and students would develop professional confidence and competence in using the approach. Feedback from the questionnaires also gave insight and understanding into some of the difficulties experienced by staff members. For example, lack of confidence; ‘the process feels a little stilted’, and ‘getting stuck’ were statements about putting techniques into practice. The lack of opportunities to practise was also highlighted by the Steering group ‘champions’ as an on-going issue. Role play was incorporated into the two day training course and also the Induction training programme, giving further opportunities for practise. There is some evidence of developing professional competence through increased reference to solution-focused practice. For example, • Two workers, when charged with the task of reviewing our lone worker policies, used a ‘solution-focused’ approach to guide their discussions with staff • Through meetings with the ‘champions’, there were several accounts of workers having success with aspects of the approach in practice. • Case records are increasingly using strengths-based, solution-focused language. A solution-focused approach to family support 97 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xxx. © w&b The final outcome was that the approach would be embedded within all aspects of the organisation’s work, both in direct practice and in wider organisational tasks. Some evidence of this was available in the following examples: • In compiling annual project reports, teams drew on the approach in considering their goals for the year ahead and the challenges inherent in the current economic climate • Line-managers and practice teachers reported beneficial use during supervision of staff and students. Discussion of methodology and outcome analysis While it was evident that the outcomes of the project were at least partly met, the evaluation highlighted weaknesses in the methodology of implementing the project. Despite the fact that the feedback collected by the external trainer at the end of the training days was extremely positive about the quality of the training, the responses to questionnaires reflected that the majority of respondents did not evidence increased knowledge of the approach or a greater confidence in using it in practice. From this we can deduce that while training might be enjoyable and participants might feel they are deriving benefit from it, it does not always impact significantly on knowledge or practical application. Burgess and Carpenter (2010) suggest questionnaires can give some immediate feedback on the strengths and weaknesses of what is taught but do not capture what has been learnt, and that more robust pedagogic research is needed. There is evidence from discussion in the organisation and observation of practice that learning around the model has taken place and will be consolidated through the continued activity of the ‘champions’ groups. The responses to the open-ended questions provided some useful data. Q5 which asked if there were particular aspects of the approach that worked or would work well confirmed that workers were positive about the approach. Responses to Q6 identified obstacles in using the approach, which generally referred to a lack of confidence and the need for more practise. There was little variation between workers’ first responses and those following the fuller two-day training. The phrasing of the question did not allow for a measurement of change. Open-ended questions such as these however have the advantage of making no assumptions about how Sheila Cooper and Maura Daly 98 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xx. © w&b the respondent will reply, allowing them to express thoughts and feelings (Alston and Bowles, 2003). Carpenter (2005) describes the Outcomes of Educational Programs in terms of four levels – learners’ reactions, modification in attitudes and perceptions/acquisition of knowledge and skills, changes in behaviour and in organisational practice, and benefits to users and carers. We were able to measure the first three. However measurement of the benefits to service-users was not achievable within the confines of this project and requires further consideration. The learning we have derived from involvement in this project and which might offer pointers for future such change initiatives is that the process through which change happens is neither a linear nor, necessarily, a predictable one. It is also difficult to gauge the nature of how learning translates into changes to practice through tools such as conventional questionnaires, which are perhaps too static to capture the diffuse way in which new knowledge and ideas can seep into practice. What does seem to be important is that staff are presented with a model (in this case a strengths-based, solution focussed approach) which ‘fits’ with the task they want to undertake. Finally, the role of ‘champions’ seems to be crucial to ensuring that any changes ‘stick’. Conclusion We set out to develop a consistent theoretical framework in relation to practice for family support workers, students and managers throughout our organisation. We planned and implemented a project that provided opportunities for training, practice and reflection in a strengths-based, solution-focused approach. At the early stages of a project, it was anticipated that with good planning and a clear process for implementation, the project would succeed seamlessly. The reality however is that change is a complex and non-linear process. We have made significant progress, and most importantly continue to have the will and the support of everyone involved to continue the work. A solution-focused approach to family support 99 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xxx. © w&b References Alston, A. and Bowles,W. (2003) Research for Social Workers: An introduction to methods. (2nd ed.), London: Routledge Baldwin, M. (2004) Critical reflection: Opportunities and threats to professional learning and service development in social work organizations. in N. Gould and M. Baldwin (Eds.) Social Work, Critical Reflection and the Learning Organisation. Aldershot, Ashgate Baldwin, M. (2008) Promoting and managing innovation. Qualitative Social Work., Volume 7, 3, 330-348) Banks, S. and Gallagher, A. (2009) Ethics in Professional Life. Basingstoke, Palgrave Barnard, M. (2007) Drug Addiction and Families, London and Philadelphia, Jessica Kingsley Briner, W., Hastings, C. and Geddes, M. (1996) Project Leadership. (2nd ed.) Aldershot: Gower Bullivant, J. (2000) Managing Projects to a Successful Conclusion. London, Office for Public Management Burk, R. (1993) Project Management – Planning and Control. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Carpenter, J. (2005) Evaluating Outcomes in Social Work Education. Dundee and London: Scottish Institute for Excellence in Social Work Education (SIESWE) and Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE) Cavanagh, B., Daly, M., and Flaherty, A. (2007) What Life after Prison? Voices of women of Cornton Vale. Edinburgh: Circle Scotland Cavanagh, B. and Smith, M. (2002) Dad’s the Word. Edinburgh: FSU Cousins, J.B and Earl, M.E (1992), The case for participatory evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 4, 397-418 De Schazer, S. (1998) Clues: Investigating solutions in brief therapy. New York: Norton Field ,M. and Keller, L. (1998) Project Management,. London : The Open University/ Thomson Learning Forrester, D., Kershaw, S., Moss H, and Hughes, L (2008) Communication skills in child protection: How do social workers talk to parents? Child and Family Social Work, 13, 41-51 Harvard Business School (2009) Executing Innovation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press Heifetz, R.A. (1994) Leadership Without Easy Answers. Cambridge: Belknap Press Huczynski, A. and Buchanan D (2001) Organisational Behaviour: An introductory text. (4th ed.) Harlow: Prentice Hall Johnson, G. and Scholes, K. (1999) Exploring Corporate Strategy.(5th ed). Sheila Cooper and Maura Daly 100 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xx. © w&b Milton Keynes: The Open University Jones, R. and Murray, N. (2008) Change, Strategy and Projects at Work. Milton Keynes: The Open University Lishman, J. (1998) Personal and Professional Development. cited in Adams, R, Dominelli, L, Payne, M. Social Work: Themes, Issues and Critical Debate.London: MacMillan Marshall, K. (2008) Not Seen. Not Heard. Not Guilty. The rights and status of the children of prisoners in Scotland. Edinburgh: Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People (SCCYP) Milner, J. and O’Bryne, P. (2002) Assessment in Social Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan Nokes, S. and Kelly, S. (2007) The Definitive Guide to Project Management. Harlow, Pearson Education Limited Nutley, S., Walter, I., and Davis, H. (2007) Using Evidence. Bristol, Policy Press Rogers, A. (2002) Teaching Adults. (3rd ed.) Maidenhead: Open University Press Scottish Government (2006) Changing Lives: Report of the 21st Century Social Work Review Scottish Government (2008) The Road to Recovery: A New Approach To Tackling Scotland’s Drug Problem. Smale, G. (1998) Managing Change through Innovation. London: The Stationery Office A solution-focused approach to family support 101 J. of Practice Teaching & Learning 12(2), pp.87-101. DOI: 10.1921/xxx. © w&b Appendix 1. The questionnaire