The social worker as manager: a practical guide to success / [Seventh edition.] 9780205957910, 0205957919

Table of contents :
page1
page2
page3
page4
page5
page6
page7
page8
page9
page10
page11
page12
page13
page14
page15
page16
page17
page18
page19
page20
page21
page22
page23
page24
page25
page26
page27
page28
page29
page30
page31
page32
page33
page34
page35
page36
page37
page38
page39
page40
page41
page42
page43
page44
page45
page46
page47
page48
page49
page50
page51
page52
page53
page54
page55
page56
page57
page58
page59
page60
page61
page62
page63
page64
page65
page66
page67
page68
page69
page70
page71
page72
page73
page74
page75
page76
page77
page78
page79
page80
page81
page82
page83
page84
page85
page86
page87
page88
page89
page90
page91
page92
page93
page94
page95
page96
page97
page98
page99
page100
page101
page102
page103
page104
page105
page106
page107
page108
page109
page110
page111
page112
page113
page114
page115
page116
page117
page118
page119
page120
page121
page122
page123
page124
page125
page126
page127
page128
page129
page130
page131
page132
page133
page134
page135
page136
page137
page138
page139
page140
page141
page142
page143
page144
page145
page146
page147
page148
page149
page150
page151
page152
page153
page154
page155
page156
page157
page158
page159
page160
page161
page162
page163
page164
page165
page166
page167
page168
page169
page171
page172
page173
page174
page175
page176
page177
page178
page179
page180
page181
page182
page183
page184
page185
page186
page187
page188
page189
page190
page191
page192
page193
page194
page195
page196
page197
page198
page199
page200
page201
page202
page203
page204
page205
page206
page207
page208
page209
page210
page211
page212
page213
page214
page215
page216
page217
page218
page219
page220
page221
page222
page223
page224
page225
page226
page227
page228
page229
page230
page231
page232
page233
page234
page235
page236
page237
page238
page239
page240
page241
page242
page243
page244
page245
page246
page247
page248
page249
page250
page251
page252
page253
page254
page255
page256
page257
page258
page259
page260
page261
page262
page263
page264
page265
page266
page267
page268
page269
page270
page271
page272
page273
page274
page275
page276
page277
page278
page279
page280
page281
page282
page283
page284
page285
page286
page287
page288
page289
page290
page291
page292
page293
page294
page295
page296
page297
page298
page299
page300
page301
page302
page303
page304
page305
page306
page307
page308
page309
page310
page311
page312
page313
page314
page315
page316
page317
page318
page319
page320
page321
page322
page323
page324
page325
page326
page327
page328
page329
page330
page331
page332
page333
page334
page335
page336
page337
page338
page339
page340
page341
page342
page343
page344
page345
page346
page347
page348
page349
page350
page351
page352
page353
page354
page355
page356
page357
page358
page359
page360
page361
page362
page363
page364
page365
page366
page367
page368
page383
page384

Citation preview

The Social Worker as Manager

Seventh Edition

The Social Worker as Manager A Practical Guide to Success Robert W Weinbach University of South Carolina

Lynne M. Taylor The Council on Social Work Education

PEARSON Boston Columbus Indianapolis New York San Francisco Upper Saddle River Amsterdam Cape Town Dubai London Madrid Milan Munich Paris Montreal Toronto Delhi Mexico City Sao Paulo Sydney Hong Kong Seoul Singapore Taipei Tokyo

VP and Editorial Director: Jeffery W. Johnston Acquisitions Editor: Julie Peters Program Manager: Alicia Ritchey Editorial Assistant: Andrea Hall Executive Marketing Manager : Krista Clark Marketing Coordinator : Elizabeth Mackenzie Lamb Operations Sp ecialist: Maura Zaldivar-Garcia

Art Director: Diane Ernsberger C over Art: michaelj ung/Fotolia Media Producer : Allison Longley Full-Service Project Managem ent: Integral George Jacob C omposition: lntegra Printer /Binder : RR Donnelley C over Printer: RR Donnelly Text Font: 10/12, MinionPro-Regular

Credits and acknowledgn1ents borro\ved from other sources and reproduced, with permission, in this textbook appear on appropriate page within text.

If you purchased this book within the United States or Canada you should be aware that it has been imported \Vithout the approval of the Publisher or the Author.

Copyright © 2015, 2011, 2008, 2003 Pearson Education, Inc., One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. All rights reserved. Manufactured in the United States of America. This publication is protected by Copyright, and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transn1ission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or likewise. To obtain permission(s) to use n1aterial from this work, please submit a written request to Pearson Education, Inc., Permissions Department, One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458.

Many of the designations by manufacturers and seller to distinguish their products are claimed as trademarks. \>Vhere those designations appear in this book, and the publisher was a\vare of a trade1nark claim, the designations have been printed in initial caps or all caps.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Weinbach, Robert W. The social \VOrker as manager : a practical guide to success I Robert W. Weinbach, University of South Carolina, Lynne M. Taylor, The Council on Social Work Education.-Seventh edition. pages cm ISBN- 13: 978-0-205-95791-0 ISBN- 10: 0-205-95791-9 1. Social work administration-United States. I. Taylor, Lynne M. II. Title. HV95.W43 2015 36 l.3068-dc23 2014007705

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

PEARSON

0-205-95791 -9 ISBN- 10: ISBN- 13: 978-0-205-95791-0

Contents Preface x111 Acknowledgments

xiv

PART ONE: HUMAN SERVICES MANAGEMENT IN PERSPECTIVE 1 1. Defining and Describing Management Management Is Not an Option What Is Management?

3

4

5

\iVhat Do Managers Do? 6 Management Activities 6 What Management Seeks to Accomplish 6 Some of the Tasks of Management 8 Management as Both a Science and an Art 8 Four Basic Assumptions about Management 13 Management Is Everyone's Work 13 Management and Services Are Interdependent 15 Good Management Requires Technical, Conceptual, and Interpersonal Skills 16 Management Knowledge Is Out There 17 Social Work Ethics and Management

17

Social Work Core Competencies and Management The Presence of Management Summary Application

19

20

20 21

2. What Makes Human Services Management Different? The Task Environment 22 Different Types of Task Environments 24 Improving Relationships with the Task Environment

22

27

v

VI

Contents Other Characteristics of Human Service Organizations Focus on Efficiency

34

Loyalty and Dependency

35

Attitudes about Competition Marketing Strategies

37

38

Available Cause-and-Effect Knowledge Interaction with the Consumer Indicators of Success Role of Supervisors

39

40 41

Non-Profit Organizations 47 Types of Non -Profit Organizations 49

Advocacy

49

Summary Application

38

40

The Prime Beneficiary

Lobbying

34

47

50 50

3. Historical Origins of Current Management Practices Scientific Management 52 Limitations of Scientific Management 53 Current Applications of Scientific Management 55 Administrative Management 55 Limitations of Administrative Management 57 Current Application ofAdministrative Management 58 Bureaucratic Management 58 Limitations of Bureaucratic Management 60 Current Applications of Bureaucratic Management 63 Common Shortcomings of the Classical Management Theories Responses to Classical Management Theories 66 The Modern Structuralists Human Relations

67

Contingency Theory

68

Participative Management Organizational Culture

Summary Application

75 76

67

74

69

65

51

Contents

vu

PART TWO : THE MAJOR MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 4. Leading 79 The Elements of Leadership 80 Leadership Tasks at Different Levels Leadership at the Board Level Leadership among Managers

81 81 83

Theories of Leadership 84 Trait Theories 84 Behavioral Theories 85 "Style" Theories 86 Contingency Theories

89

Leadership and Followership 91 Creating a Favorable Organizational Climate Teamwork 92 Mutual Respect and Confidence 93 Understanding of Respective Roles 94 Advocacy

95

Maximum Autonomy

98

Good Communication

98

Summary

101

Application

5 . Planning

102

103

Five Types of Plans l 04 Missions 104 Goals

109

Objectives

110

Strategies Budgets

112 113

Strategic Planning

114

Planning for What Might Happen Summary Application

119 119

115

92

77

Vlll

Contents

6. Influencing Day-to-Day Activities of Others Setting Limits

121

The Power to Influence 122 Legitimiz ed Power 122 Power and the Informal Organization

122

Methods for Influencing 126 Formal Guides for Action 126 Information 135 Advice 136 Directives 136 The Manager's Example 138 The Ideal Mix 139 The Optimum Amount of Influence What Is Micromanaging? Summary Application

142

143

144 145

7. Organizing People and Tasks

146

Creating Manageable Work Units 147 Simple Numbers 148 Time Worked 149 Discipline 149 Enterprise 150 Territory Served 151 Service Offered 153 Client Problem 154 Multidisciplinary Teams 155 Marketing Channels 156 Combining Two or More Methods 157 Time Management

158

Delegation 159 Key Terminology 160 Types of Authority 161 Delegation to Groups 166 Desirable Characteristics for Delegation How Much Organizing Is Optimal? Summary Application

171 172

170

169

120

Contents

ix

8 . Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity

173

Recruitment and Hiring 173 Recruitment 173 Other Issues in Hiring 175 Staff Member "Types" within Human Service Organizations Professionals 180 Preprofessionals 183 Paraprofessionals 183 Indigenous Nonprofessionals 184 Support Staff Members 185 Volunteers 186 What Is the Optimal Mix? 192

180

Managing Diversity in the Workplace 192 Types of Diversity 192 Diversity among Staff Members 193 Diversity among Managers 195 Discrimination, Prejudice, and Stereotypes 196 Negative Stereotypes and Discrimination 197 "Positive" Stereotypes and Discrimination 199 Another Form of Diversity in the Workplace

199

Summary 202 Application

203

9 . Promoting a Productive Work Environment 204 Understanding Individual Motivation 204 Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs 205 Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory 207 McClelland's Needs Theory 211 Other Theories of Individual Motivation Other Factors That Affect Job Performance Professional Values and Ethics 213 Influence of the Work Group 214 Loyalties 218 Supervision 219 Supervisory Roles and Responsibilities Attributes of Good Supervision 220 Alternative Supervisory Models 221 Summary 223 Application

224

212

213

219

x

Contents

10. Promoting Professional Growth

225

Staff Performance Evaluations 225 Why Do Social Workers Dislike Performance Evaluations? The Benefits of Performance Evaluations 226 Characteristics of a Good Evaluation 229 Conducting Performance Evaluations 236 Problems That Sometimes Occur 237 Trends in Performance Evaluations 238 Continuing Education 241 Types of Continuing Education 242 Providers of Continuing Education 245 Agreements for Providing Continuing Education Promotions 252 Common Issues 252 Other Issues That May Be Relevant Transfers

255

Summary

256

Application

248

255

257

11 . Managing Staff Problems

258

Addressing Specific Problem Behaviors Natural Consequences 259 Penalties and Sanctions 259

258

Inadequate Job Performance 260 Verbal Reprimands 261 Written Reprimands 262 Warnings and Contracts 264 Termination 264 Job Abandonment

270

Gross Misconduct

270

Exit Interviews Summary Application

271

272 273

12. Financial and Technology Management 274 Managing and Acquiring Resources 274 Managing Resources Well 274 Fund Acquisition 276 Nontraditional Funding Sources 280

225

Contents

x1

Technology Management 282 Changes That Have Occurred 282 The Technology Deluge 284 The Internet 284 E-Mail 288 Other Confidentiality Threats to Organizations Looking Ahead 291

290

Summary 294 Application

295

PART THREE: COMPLETING THE MANAGEMENT PICTURE 13. Other Important Management Responsibilities 299 Change Management 299 Resistance to Change 301 Implementing Change 303 Preventing Staff Turnover 306 Burnout 307 Lack of Stimulation 307 Lack of Opportunity for Advancement 308 Program Management 312 Programs and Logic Models 313 Management and Program Evaluation Board Management Summary Application

315

317

318 318

14. Becoming and Remaining a Successful Manager 319 Common Sources of Stress among Managers 319 Criticism and Conflict 320 Loss of Client Contact 320 Responsibility for Decision Making 321 Power Issues 322 Interpersonal Relationships with Subordinates Is a Management Career Right for You? 326 Errors in Decision Making 326 Changes to Expect 330 A Guide for Decision Making 333

323

297

Xll

Contents Taking the Job 334 Managers New to the Organization 334 Managers Promoted from Within 335 New and Preexisting Positions 337 Following the Popular Manager 337 Following the Less Popular Manager 338 Surviving and Succeeding as a Manager 340 Developing an Effective Management Style 340 Managers' Needs and Organizational Needs 342 Growing as a Manager 344 Summary Application Endnotes Index

355

345 346 347

Preface The first edition of this book was published in 1990. Each subsequent edition has attempted to keep pace with changes in the field and to enrich content from the previous edition. The book is still designed to be easy to read, conversational, and full of real-life examples (more than ever) and practical applications. It is also based on the same premises that guided earlier editions. For example, we still contend that management is performed by every social worker; we are all managers in our personal lives, but also for a greater or lesser part of our workday. The book is written for use in a one-term course in management for BSW or MSW students. It should also prove helpful for those social work practitioners who, by choice or necessity, now find themselves with significant management responsibilities and can benefit from a little help. Many of the content areas are the same as in earlier editions; nlanagement is still management. However, with the collective suggestions of a knowledgeable group of reviewers, and our own continued experiences in teaching social work students about management, we have made some important changes, too. With few exceptions, we have maintained the same framework and sequence of contents that were first introduced in the previous edition because they have been well received. Most of the content that we included in this edition is applicable to those social workers usually identified as managers, that is, for first-level supervisors on through directors of public or private human service organizations. To a lesser degree, it also addresses management issues faced by those who spend much of their day delivering direct service to clients but who may supervise volunteers, students, or clerical staff, and who also have to manage their own professional lives. There are a few topics and issues that are the exclusive do1nain of only higher-level managers (e.g., board functioning and board management). They were included because of our belief that social workers working in organizations need to understand how and why they occur and how they may impact their jobs, even if they are not directly involved with them. What is new or different about this edition? Here are the major changes: 1. Addition of an "Applications" section at the end of each chapter that can be assigned for individual completion by students and/or can be used for group class discussion. 2. Revised real life case examples (and one new one), all with additional and revised questions. 3. Content on CSWE's Basic Competencies is introduced in Chapter 1 and referred to throughout the book in discussing the skills needed to perform the various tasks of 1nanagement. 4. Updated information on technology, with emphasis on such current issues as use of social media and personal electronic devices in the workplace.

Xlll

XIV

Preface Of course, we have also revised and updated all chapters. We have added many new examples drawn from social work practice and recent current events to provide clarification of some of the more difficult concepts and ideas. We've added additional content on such topics as hostile task environments (Chapter 2), nlanagement style (Chapters 4 and 14), organizations as systems (Chapter 6), tall and flatter organizations (Chapter 7), use of volunteer coordinators (Chapter 8), new trends in uses of technology in the workplace (Chapter 12), and staff retention (Chapter 13). In order to add all of the new content while still keeping the book at a practical and affordable length, some content from earlier editions was condensed or, less frequently, deleted. We kept quotations and references to the writings of others to a minimum, a practice which we believe is justifiable since tllis book is primarily a compilation of our own ideas (and biases) about what constitutes good social work 1nanagement. Besides, others' ideas are easily located and readily available in other books on the topic of management and also in professional journals, on the Internet, and even in those in-flight magazines!

Acknowledgments Many people made this revision possible. Ashley Dodge and Carly Czech at Allyn & Bacon were supportive and helpful in many ways. They acquired reviews of the 6th edition from: Gregg Allinson, Beaufort County Community College; Yvonne Barry, John Tyler Community College; Lettie Lockhart, University of Georgia; and Kimberley ZittelPalamara, Buffalo State College. We are most grateful to these colleagues for their valuable critiques and thoughtful suggestions, many of which we have incorporated in this edition. Responding to reviews is always a difficult task, especially when one reviewer's suggestion conflicts with that of another reviewer. Choices must be made, and so we made them. Ultimately, the revisions that we made and the ways that we made them are our own responsibility. We are hopeful that they will be well received by students and faculty alike. As always, any criticisms and suggestions are always welcome. We are still a long way from perfection! Robert W Weinbach University of South Carolina Lynne M. Taylor The Council on Social Work Education

HUMAN SERVICES MANAGEMENT IN

PERSPECTIVE anagement is an essential part of life. It occurs in all organisms, all societies, and (most relevant to our discussion) in those organizations where social workers are employed. In Chapter 1, we begin by defining management, both directly and indirectly. We rely on traditional definitions and descriptions drawn primarily from the literature of business and organizational theory. We illustrate why management is so essential to effective social work practice through a description of what a huma.n service organization \vouJd look like without management and why it would be dysfunctional We list four assumptions \Vhich are central to the discussions that \vill follow. Perhaps, the most important assumption that underlies all of social work nlanagement is this: management is an integral part of social work practice. It leads logically to the topics of ethics and competencies, specifically to the ilnportant role that the National Association of Social Workers document, the NASW Code of Ethics, and the Council on Social Work Education's (CSWE's) Educational Policy 2.1- Core Competencies play in shaping the behaviors of the social work manager. Chapter 2 focuses on the ways in which management in human service agencies differs from nlanagement in for-profit businesses and manufacturing organizations. We rely heavily on two especiaJly useful concepts, the task environment and the prime beneficiary. They go a long way toward explaining how human service nianagers often find themselves performing difficult "balancing acts:' Chapter 3 reflects our belief that we can only make sense of the present by understanding the past. We review the major twentieth-century management theories, and the assumptions on which they were based. We describe not only their shortcomings, but also how they continue to mfluence current management practices.

Chapter 1 '

Defining and Describing Management Learning Outcomes At the end of this chapter, you should be able to: • Describe why management is essential if human service organizations are to achieve their objectives. • Contrast the activities and ti.me spent in managing of an executive director and a direct service social work practitioner. • List some ethical con flicts that are commonly faced by managers in human service organizations. • List several misconceptions about manage·ment and how they can cause problems within human service organizations.

he last years of the twentieth century and the early decades of this one have been a time of uncertainty and change for all social workers in the human services, especially for those who spend most of their time performing management functions. Human services are multibillion-dollar enterprises. They are an integral part of the economy of all nations in the Western Hemisphere. They represent an increasing percentage of the gross national product of Western nations, a fact that has not gone unnoticed by politicians and lay citizens. The Great Recession of the first decade of the twenty-first century with its double digit unemployment, increased numbers of people who are homeless, and other economic impacts on individuals and families required human service agencies to serve more people and provide new and expanded services. This occurred at the very time when the cost of government programs was becoming a convenient target for cost cutting. Even as the economic recovery continues, human service programs remain under close scrutiny and criticism for their "wasteful spending~' Managers continue to be asked to find ways to do more with less. The need to adjust to changes in the economy and to respond to critics' arguments provides adequate justification alone for social workers to study management and to gain the necessary competencies to become effective managers. But there is another and more compelling reason. We are committed to providing the best possible services to clients. Management, when performed well at all levels, contributes greatly to achieving this objective. Thus, it is an important part of social work practice that deserves the careful attention of all present and future social work practitioners. 3

4

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective

MANAGEMENT IS NOT AN OPTION A world without management is almost unimaginable. Every human activity involves management. In fact, the human brain is someti1nes offered as an example of a full-time manager, managing our respiration, our locomotion, our thought processes, our digestion, and so on-even our dreams while we sleep. A brain is a special kind of manager. Unlike any other manager, it never really takes a break or slips into another role. It is on duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Without our brains functioning as managers, we will not be able to continue to breathe or move a muscle. No human organism could exist without the management activities of the brain. The situation is "manage or die." It is no exaggeration to say that much the same situation exists within organizations. No organization could exist for long, much less thrive, without management. Management is not a choice; it is a necessity. Think how ineffective an organization would be without management. Try to imagine a human service organization where no one even attempted to perform the functions of management. What would it look like? A few of its more dramatic features might be: • There would be no mission, goals, or objectives to differentiate the organization from any other organization. Thus, it would have no identity and no real purpose. • There would be no budget to limit and influence spending or activities. • Staff members and volunteers would be selected without regard to their abilities or potential contributions. Once on board, they might show up or not depending on their mood. If and when they showed up, they alone would decide what they wanted to do that day. There would be no guidelines available to tell them what they should be doing and how best to do it, or what behaviors are unacceptable. • Every individual's behaviors would be independent of the behaviors of others; there would be no coordinated activities. • There would be no guidelines or yardsticks to evaluate the quality of an individual's job performance. Among paid staff members, decisions about promotions, compensation, and even continued employment would be made in a purely arbitrary {and, perhaps, capricious) manner. • Clients might be offered needed services, or they might not. Nothing would protect them fro1n staff apathy, incompetence, laziness, or malpractice. No one would know, or care, what services and programs are effective and which are a waste of time and money. What we have just described is really chaos-really, a non-organization. Without management, organizations as we know them would not exist. Management is what makes an organization different from just somewhere that people rattle around in random, purposeless activity. Social workers cannot choose whether or not they want to perform management functions. Even if we choose not to take a "management job" that demands that a high percentage of our time be spent in certain higher level management activities, we cannot choose to avoid management altogether. We need to w1derstand management in order to interact effectively with our colleagues in their manage1nent roles. And, we need to perform a variety of management tasks ourselves. Effective social work practice, at any level, requires no less. People generally enter into their personal manage1nent activities with little preparation and formal instruction. They learn "on the job" to manage their checkbooks, their social lives, or their budget through a combination of trial and error and, perhaps, so1ne help from friends or relatives. They discover that they have to learn how to manage after they quickly learn the consequences of insufficient management or mismanagement of

Defining and Descri bing Management their activities. Unfortunately, many social workers, anticipating a career offering direct services to clients, have "backed into" management in their professional lives in a similar way. Though they had planned to spend their day offering individual, family, or group services to clients, they soon find themselves promoted into a supervisory position or simply have certain management tasks delegated to them that normally might fall to others. Until this happens, they probably did not recognize the importance and inevitability of management and, most likely, had not prepared themselves for it. (In contrast, social workers who planned for a career in "macro" social work practice are n1ore likely to have recognized the need for studying the topic of management and to have taken one or more courses devoted to it.) Some of us are convinced about the importance of good management only when we observe poor management on the part of others and its impact on our ability to do our jobs effectively. Others are convinced only when we make poor managen1ent decisions ourselves or engage in management behaviors that prove to be ineffective, or even worse. While we readily acknowledge the importance of "best practices" in our direct interventions with clients, there is so1neti1nes a tendency to rely nlore on guesswork or impulse when faced with a management decision, or to simply manage as we have seen others do it. Only belatedly, do we come to recognize the importance of availing ourselves of the vast an1ount of knowledge that is out there to help us perform management functions. All of us have worked in or been around organizations where mismanagement has occurred. A certain amount of it is inevitable. Mistakes will always be made. No one can be a perfect manager, any more than anyone can be a perfect clinician or social change agent. But that does not relieve us of the professional and ethical responsibility to be the best manager that we can be. And that requires, among other things, the study of management.

WHAT IS MANAGEMENT? Management is often misunderstood. Even the word management itself is used in different ways that connote different images. It is sometimes used as a proper noun (as in "the Management") in referring collectively to a few people who occupy the highest positions on the organizational chart-the old "1nanagement/labor" dichoton1y in labor union terminology. In social work, it is also used frequently as a verb to suggest a wide range of seemingly unrelated activities that consist of virtually anything except direct services to clients. Either misuse of the word can only produce dangerous 1nisunderstandings about this in1portant activity. Complicating matters even further, the word management frequently is used interchangeably with another term, administration, within the social work literature and else1 where. Efforts to differentiate the two have usually met with limited success. One writer seems to suggest that a critical difference between managen1ent and administration is that administration entails primarily policymaking, while management entails primarily implementation of policy. Thus, administration in, for example, a public social welfare agency would be primarily the work of its director; management \vould be performed by others lo\ver in the organizational hierarchy, so-called mid-level managers. However, in a non-profit human service organization (described in Chapter 2), administration might be primarily the work of the board of directors, while management would be the primary function of its director! It gets confusing!

5

6

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective

WHAT DO MANAGERS DO? Perhaps, management is best described by looking at the work of managers, and what their usual job responsibilities are. Based on our review of the work of others, here is a single, broad working definition that will get us started. Management is "certain activities performed by social workers at all administrative levels within human service organizations that are designed to facilitate the accomplishment of organizational goals:' While this definition is broad enough to encompass all of management, its breadth is also its greatest weakness. It will need considerable "fleshing out:'

Management Activities What is a 1nanagement activity? How is it different from what we do in meeting the expectations of our other roles such as "therapist;' "counselor;' or "community organizer"? The authors of one classic text, still widely used in public administration and business, classify 1nanagement activities into five categories: planning, organizing, staffing, leading, and controlling.2 Another author condenses this list to only planning, organizing, and controlling.3 A third contains just organizing, coordinating, planning, and controlling. 4 And a fourth list contains planning, organizing, leading, and controlling.5 Some people have even suggested, perhaps correctly, that management is really all about one functionleading. We will address this issue in Chapter 4. As we begin our study of management, perhaps the best use of these lists is to identify the "common denominators;' those activities that they all encompass. For example, all of then1 suggest the efforts of a manager to take an active role in influencing or shaping various aspects of the work environment. They also suggest attempting to avoid or at least improve on what might happen spontaneously if the manager did not take charge and did not manage. And all of these activities are designed to increase the likelihood of organizational goal achievement and, for social workers, the delivery of effective services to our clients.

What Management Seeks to Accomplish Management also can be conceptualized as various ways of shaping and exerting an influence over the work environment. Social workers in the role of manager attempt to build and to nurture an optimal work environment, one that promotes desirable activities, including the efficient delivery of effective services to clients. Thus, management is primarily a proactive (rather than a reactive) activity. It entails taking charge, not allo,ving events to simply happen. However, when problems do occur, it entails reacting to them in a rational, positive way and addressing them promptly and fairly. The work environ1nent of any organization can range from being highly supportive of goal attainment to being an impediment to it. Thus, in a human service organization the work environment can be fully supportive of the delivery of effective services at one extreme, and getting in the way of their delivery at the opposite extreme. Of course, both extremes are rare. Nevertheless, management can also be conceptualized as a variety of methods that are used to build in sources of support for goal achievement, and to remove or minimize the effects of those conditions that might tend to work against it. Thus, 1nanagement is designed to enhance organizational success.

Defining and Describing Manageinent

Some business-oriented definitions of management focus heavily on management's role in promoting efficiency as a means to organizational success. The goal of management is sometimes described as the creation of surplus.6 In a business, surplus is profit. It is how much more money the business takes in than the costs of doing business (employee salaries, advertising, rent and utilities, etc.). Managers are expected to make the organization function more efficiently (usually by finding \Vays to reduce costs), thereby increasing the likelihood that surplus (profit) will be greater. Are social \VOrk managers concerned with increasing efficiency, too? Definitely, cost of services and programs is always an issue. So, are we also supposed to create "surplus" in human service organizations? The "surplus" concept is not as "foreign" or inappropriate as we might initia!Jy think, especially in organizations in the for-profit sector, such as many long-term care facilities or private mental health agencies. A surplus in dollars and cents in the form of profit may be feasible and thus sought. A well-managed program may generate more in client fees and outside funding than the total of its annual expenses (a surplus). (Hopefully, part of this surplus could be used to offer some free or reduced services to clients who are unable to pay for them.) Even in the non-profit sector, a social work manager might construct and manage a program designed to create a surplus. However, the surplus would not be profit but costsaving, for that progra1n itself, or even for some other one. Some human service programs have little difficulty de1nonstrating a financial surplus in the fonn of cost-saving. They are most often prevention programs that seek to avoid some potentially more expensive problem, often one with greater human costs as well For example, it is believed that: • The cost of an HIV infection prevention program is less than the cost of treating HIV/AIDS patients with expensive medications and/or hospitalization. • The cost of an education program for la\v enforcement officers about the dangers of exposure to methamphetarnines is less expensive than the medical treatment they and others in the home will need if they do not take proper precautions while making arrests. • The cost of a short-term family preservation program is less than the cost of longterm foster care for children at risk for abuse or neglect. • An in-home hospice program for terminally ill people is less expensive than the cost of long-term hospitalization. How much surplus any of these and similar programs generate is greatly influenced by how well they are managed-that is, how efficiently they are run and what the n1anager can do to increase the likelihood that they will be effective. T he better managed they are, the greater the surplus that is likely to accrue. In many other human services organizations, even the best management cannot always generate a surplus in dollars and cents, nor is this even a goal. By its very nature, many forms of social work intervention are often a very expensive, inefficient enterprise. Critics of human services like to point this out. Our response is often that the benefits of many human services are more "human" than monetary. However, such benefits also are difficult to document. For exan1ple, a well-managed program in a family counseling agency may produce important human benefits (reduction in verbal abuse, improved parenting skills, better family communication, etc.), but they cannot be measured in dolJars and cents. Even if we could assign a dollar value to them, the cost of the services provided most likely exceeds the dolJar value of the benefits. And, we may also have difficulty measuring these

7

8

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective benefits and/or attributing them directly to either services themselves or to the management activities that supported them. The unlikelihood of producing and documenting the existence of surplus in the form of either profit or cost-saving in some human service organizations still does not preclude our viewing increased efficiency as an appropriate goal of management. The practice of good management in programs where even the production of a surplus is virtually impossible can still increase the likelihood that a program can "cut its losses:' Also, while an organization or program may not be able to generate a surplus, this does not preclude some individual managers within it from doing so. For example, in an organization whose costs exceed its monetary benefits, the training director may produce a surplus by designing and implementing an orientation curriculum for new workers that, over time, will more than pay for itself in reduced supervisory demands or costly errors by new employees.

Some of the Tasks of Management Social workers in the role of manager rely on a wide variety of technical, conceptual, and interpersonal skills to perform some widely diverse tasks. Here are just a few of them: • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Analyzing situations and conceptualizing what is happening Identifying problems and opportunities for addressing them Balancing competing goals Setting priorities for themselves and others Working effectively with others who may not share all of the same values Representing the organization to staff members and in the com1nunity Serving as a role model for paid staff and volunteers Keeping others on-track Resolving interpersonal conflicts Adhering to and ensuring that others adhere to ethical standards Handling finances responsibly, and reducing expenses whenever possible Making difficult (often unpopular) decisions Supporting decisions of others with which they may disagree

Is it any wonder that management is often described as "doing just about anything that is not direct services to clients"? Clearly, managers have to be knowledgeable and competent in many areas, or they will not be successful. However, isn't this true of all areas of social work practice?

Management as Both a Science and an Art As in other areas of practice, social workers in the role of manager should be committed to making decisions based, at least in part, on the knowledge that is gleaned through rigorous research methods, which is essential to evidence-based practice (EBP). There exists a body of empirical knowledge relevant to the practice of management. Some of it, for example, that related to such phenomena as human motivation, group dyna1nics, and morale, have been derived from the work of researchers in fields such as industrial psychology, education, sociology, and social work. Another sizable body of relevant knowledge has been accumulated in the business field, for example, from studies on fund-raising or marketing.

Defining and Describing Management

9

Case Example

R

amon was hired as the district director of the state health department. He was the first social worker in the state to hold such a position. He came high ly recommended by his boss in another district where he had been a case supervisor for five years. When he took the new job, the organizat ion was in disarray. The district office was notorious for its poor performance. Various errors in judgment by staff had led to several "expose" articles in the local newspaper. There were th reats of loss of federal funding. The state director told Ramon that (within the limits of civil service requiremen ts) he could "clean house." He was told to fire those probationary employees whose poor performance had been previously documented and replace them with new people. He also was given authorization to fill six other job positions that had previously been frozen. Ramon wasted no time. He fired any staff member who he was allowed to fire and replaced them with people he knew from his previous jobs, who were recommended by trusted colleagues, or who were personal friends. Within two months, over half of the staff members in his office were people that he had hired. After he had put together his new staff. he called them together for a meeting. He outlined the problems that had previously existed and rem inded them that things needed to change. He told them that he had great confidence in them and that he knew that soon the office would be "running like a finely tuned mach ine." He told them that they knew what they had to do and how to do it or were capable of researching it, but that he would be available at any time should they need his advice on anything. He wished them good luck. Over the next year. Ramon was true to his word. He was available for consultation. but did little else. He could usually be found surfing the Internet on his computer or swapping stories with a supervisor who, like him, had previously lived overseas for a while. He organized a college football pool and a pool for the NCAA basketball tournaments

and gave the best holiday party that anyone could remember. Despite staff suggestions that a rules. policies. and procedures manual might be helpful. Ramon told them they did not need one. They were asked to "just use your own j udgment-1 trust you." He had also told everyone when they were hired to just relax and do their jobs; they could all expect to receive "outstanding" performance evaluations since he knew they were good workers or he would not have hired them. And. he kept his word. despite the fact that some staff members clearly were doing a better job than others. When one employee consistently refused to assume her share of the work. he refused to deal with her directly but sent a memo to everyone stating his expectation that they were professionals and should work as a team. He avoided organizing the staff (which consisted of 22 people) into smaller work groups. and often stated that "you all just need to learn how to work together." When mistakes were made, he reprimanded everyone with a staff memo. He never called staff meetings. Soon staff did not bother to even come to Ramon with problems anymore. They had learned that, while free with advice. he rarely gave them any specific recommenda tions or provided support for them to implement them. The mistakes contin ued. Staff morale was very low. Two good staff members resigned and were replaced by two more of Ramon's friends. Finally, an investigative reporter ran an article on how a school superintendent had called twice to report several newly diagnosed cases of tuberculosis among students. It was revealed that the staff member who took the calls had never bothered to follow up on them. At about the same time. another feature story told of the 70 percent rise in new cases of sexually transmitted diseases in his district. The state director demanded that Ramon meet with her immed iately. (Ramon did not know it but the director's cousin was also a longtime secretary in Ramon's office who had been keep.i ng (continued)

10

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective

Case Example Continued her inform ed of how Ramon approached his job.) The director demanded to know just what Ramon had been doing. She told him that. as best she could determ ine, he had been a manager in name only. She waited for his response. Ramon had an explanation. He said, "I employ a hands-off management style. We hire the very best people and just stay out of their way and let them do their jobs." The director reminded him that he was paid to manage and that things needed to im prove or he would be looking for another job. Six weeks later another story hit the newspaper. This one was about an outbreak of food poisoning in a restaurant that had not been checked out, despite numerous complaints by the public to Ramon's office. The next day the state director called Ramon in again. This time she fired him.

Discussion Questions 1.

Was it a good idea for Ramon to fire so many staff members and replace them with people he knew? Why or why not?

2.

Given Ramon's style of management, why might a rules, policies, and procedures manual have been helpful?

3. What are some of the things that Ramon should have done that he failed to do? 4. What are some of the things that Ramon did that are not ever good management behavior? 5. Why was Ramon's style of management not well suited to this situation? Is a hands-off approach to management ever appropriate? Why or why not? 6. Was it fair that Ramon was blamed for errors made by his staff? Why or why not?

Certain fields of study, such as organizational theory or social psychology, bridge two or more disciplines. A relatively new phenomenon is the accumulation of a variety of relevant material into a category loosely identified as management theory or some similar term. Over the past several decades, scholars attempted to define a body of knowledge that is essential for the practice of management in any setting. More recently, research has been conducted by social workers on management tasks and issues that are specific to our profession. We have witnessed the publication of a large number of books about management and the professional journal Administration in Social Work. Like other areas of social work practice, social workers who need help in perforn1ing the functions of management take helpful knowledge wherever they can find it and then use it. Much of our knowledge is still "borrowed" from other fields, because it is highly applicable to human service organizations. In order to understand the kno\vledge con1ponent of management, it is important to recognize both the nature and the limitations of the knowledge that is available. Knowledge related to management (as in other areas of social work practice) can be thought of as existing in three somewhat overlapping categories: descriptive, predictive, and prescriptive.7 The mix of management knowledge among these categories is also very similar to that available for other areas of social work practice. Because of the complexity of the problems that social workers encounter and the phenomenon involved (i.e., human behavior) and because, for ethical and other reasons, our research is often limited to the use of certain types of research designs (pre-experimental ones), the preponderance of the available knowledge is descriptive. Specifically, it consists of observations of patterns that have been recorded in the natural setting or in some setting where management was more or less effective.

Defining and Descri bing Management

11

When descriptive knowledge begins to accumulate from a variety of methods of empirical observation and there is consensus among those who interpret and classify these observations, we feel sufficiently bold to begin to make predictions. Predictive knowledge is knowledge that provides an educated guess regarding what \vill occur in the future in a given situation. It is based on patterns of \Vhat has been observed to occur in the past when similar conditions were present. Predictive kno\vledge is thus an extension of descriptive knowledge. It is based on the assumption that what occurred in the past is generally a pretty good indicator of what will occur in the future (see Figure 1.1). However, there are no guarantees that it will occur in exactly the same way, or that it will occur at all. Predictive knowledge just offers a "best guess~· Frequently in social work practice, we rely on the past in making decisions that involve predicting the future. We might predict a legislator's reaction to certain con101unity action tactics, the likelihood that a client will benefit from a treatment group, or we assess the likelihood of further abuse if an abused child is returned to the ho1ne. When we do any of these we feel reasonably comfortable with our decisions because our predictions are based on what has occurred most frequently in similar situations in the past. Similarly, in the role of 1nanager, a social work supervisor might make 1nanagement decisions based on past observations. For example, she might decide to suggest to a staff nlember that he make a collateral phone call to a client's family member. Or she might assign another individual

Figure 1 .1

Prediction Based upon Past Experience

You \viU have to make management decisions in your work.

~ 1.00 -

ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY OF OCCURRENCE You will continue to pursue a social work career.

You will be offered a job as a higher level manager some day. _..._ ,__ 0.75 You will agree to take a job as a higher level manager.

~

0.50 -

Your best friend will understand what you do for a living. -t-• You will take additional management courses. ~

0.25 -

Your neighbors will understand \Vhat you do for a living. -1-•

You \viii ever hear the announcement, ··is there a social worker in the house?"

You \vill be able to retire at age 50.

-+-• - 0.00 -

NO POSSIBILITY OF OCCURRENCE

12

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective to represent her at a meeting that she is unable to attend. She feels quite confident that the decisions are good ones, based on available predictive knowledge. She knows that the first individual has responded positively to previous suggestions, and that the second one has performed well and been well accepted in the past when assigned similar responsibilities. But she is always well aware that past behaviors do not guarantee future events- either decision may still prove to be a bad one this time. While there is a limited amount of predictive knowledge available for management, there is even less prescriptive knowledge. Again , the parallel to other areas of practice is a strong one. Prescriptive knowledge is knowledge about how to intervene, to act so that what can be predicted to occur can be changed or avoided. Total prescriptive knowledge for child-protection workers (which, of course, does not exist) would tell them exactly what to say and do with the perpetrator and the child to guarantee that another instance of abuse will never occur. Prescriptive knowledge for supervisors functioning as managers would enable them to write the perfect annual evaluation (containing useful feedback and only constructive criticism) for their supervisees, which would guarantee that they would reach maximum productivity. Not likely! Our knowledge does not even approach this level, primarily because we are dealing with the complexities of human behavior. While researchers hope to ultimately generate prescriptive knowledge in an area of inquiry, getting to that point is often difficult, if not impossible. In management, as in other areas of social work, evidence-based practice or the use of "best practices" is a laudable goal. We understand that management wants to be as "scientific" as possible. The problem is, though, if we adhere to this imperative, we would have to reject many newer approaches to management that might prove helpful, but in ways that have not yet been documented to be effective. Or, we might precipitously reject so1ne management strategy that might work for us but that has been found ineffective for other managers. Reality dictates that we often have to simply take whatever knowledge is available and use it to the best of our ability. Management cannot be a science, any more than psychotherapy can.8 The knowledge presented in this book will be representative of the mix of knowledge levels most frequently found in management. There will be much more description than prediction and very little prescription in the form of specific "how-to:' "what should work" suggestions. When the latter do creep in, they may be nothing more than what we have observed or even "what has worked for us:' Because management involves so many different human and situational variables, often it is impossible to say what will work and what will not for any individual manager in some more or less unique situation. For example, there is no telling just what one or a group of human beings can and will do within an organization in order to under1nine a "sound" management decision or, conversely, to support even a "bad" decision in such a way that it produces a successful outcome! Just like other areas of social work practice, management has so1ne elements of a science, but it is also an art. The art factor enters in when we actually apply the best available knowledge to a specific situation or problem. Even when there is evidence available to help us to make a decision, whether the decision can be successfully implemented or not is to a large degree a function of art factors. What are some of these art factors? Some are the personal characteristics of the manager, such as charisma, intuition, self-confidence, or experience. Others develop through extended interaction between the manager and others, such as personal loyalties, group confidence, or trust. All of these factors and others can be viewed as variables that differ in degree and form from one manager to another and fro1n one situation to another. It is the combination of these that allows any given manager to

Defining and Descri bing Management succeed in implementing a decision while another may fail. They explain why, for example, one manager can make the decision to implement a policy on professional travel and gain widespread support for it, while another manager can make the same decision in a similar situation and provoke only resentment and resistance. A management decision is often not inherently right or wrong; its success is dependent on the knowledge and skills of the manager, the human beings through which it is "processed" and their relationships with each other, and the unique situation in \vhich it occurs. Where kno,vledge exists, it is art factors (the human elements) that can either increase or decrease the likelihood of occurrence of a predictable event. This is why the probabilities in Figure 1.1 may be reasonably accurate in a collective sense but seem a little "off" from any one reader's perspective. As an extreme example, an especially adept and respected manager with the right con1bination of art factors for a given situation could gain support for staff furloughs during difficult econon1ic ti1nes without jeopardizing morale or causing resentment. In contrast, a particularly ineffective rnanager who is nlistrusted by staff as a leader could hire additional support staff nlembers and still cause a nlinor rebellion. The idea that art and knowledge interact to influence the likelihood of success in management should not be new or foreign to social work practitioners. Insightful clinical social ~vorkers may know, for example, that confrontation may be appropriate with some client problems. But they may also know that they could not "pull it off" successfully because it is so contradictory to their usual helping styles. Similarly, one competent macro-level practitioner may not possess the "art" of \vorking successfully with legislators for passage of a stricter state licensure bill, whereas a colleague might garner their support \vith ease. Some of the mystery that surrounds management disappears if \Ve remember that management is a form of practice and that there are many similarities between it and the other roles of the social worker. In all areas of practice, certain innate abilities and personality characteristics can be supportive of or can present obstacles to the performance of a task. Of course, while some of us may have a "knack" in one area or another, we can also learn to perform any task better. Art in management, as in other areas of practice, is a combination of innate and learned. We will be emphasizing the importance of recognizing the innate while still acquiring the knowledge necessary to assist us to learn those skills necessary for successful manage1nent practice.

FOUR BASIC ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT MANAGEMENT As already implied, many people hold mistaken ideas about what rnanagement is and about who should assume responsibility for it. They can lead to destructive attitudes and practices. Before we go any further in our study of management, we will state four important, interrelated assun1ptions about nianagement that underlie all of the discussion that follows. 1'hey are in addition to our most basic assumption stated above: management is an integral part of practice.

Management Is Everyone's Work In a successful organization, everyone is a manager at least some of the time. If we believe and act otherwise, problems 'viii inevitably occur. Management is not the sole responsibility of a certain elite group of "senior" individuals within an organization \vho are called

13

14

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective directors, administrators, or (unfortunately, for our purposes) managers. In fact, in many human service organizations (especially smaller ones) there has never been any such distinct division of labor whereby managers manage, supervisors supervise, only directservice practitioners deliver services, and so on. But with the advent of conte1nporary theories and practices of management >vi th their emphasis on increased involvement of workers at all levels in some management decision making, such a misconception is even more inaccurate than in earlier times. If social workers, whose primary responsibility is direct practice \vith clients or client systems, nlistakenly believe that 1nanagement is what "someone else" is paid to do, various problems can result. As frustrations occur on the job or when things go wrong, as they inevitably \vill sometimes, a very human response is to blame someone else, often those higher up-"management:' When members of an organization view the job of management as solely the work of certain other individuals, it allows them to project the responsibility for nearly any misfortune or unhappy circumstance on the work of a few higher-level individuals. Instead of sharing in the responsibility for problems and working together toward their solution, others are simply scapegoated. Resentment builds and may be further fueled by the fact that people who hold management positions also probably make more money, have a more glamorous title, have more freedom (or so they think), and enjoy greater status in the community. Thus, an adversarial relationship, rather than a cooperative one, develops. People who do not perceive themselves as managers >vill not bother to understand what managers do or why they are compelled to do it. They are likely to make accusations that, for exa1nple, "they" are insensitive to client needs, obsessed \vith efficiency, out of touch with the realities of social work practice, self-serving, or even unethical. Let us be clear. Even in large human service organizations, people who carry the title of executive director or administrator are primarily managers. But they do not have a monopoly on all of management, just on certain specific management tasks that cannot be delegated. Supervisors and other middle-level employees manage too, though their specific responsibilities are different. Even social workers who spend m ost of their day offering direct services assume the role of manager sometimes, usually every day, and perform some management tasks. Thus, most management is not the exclusive province of a small group of elite individuals. Management consists of important activities that are performed by all persons \vithin a work setting. However, the contention that, like it or not, all staff members "manage" \vithin public social work organizations, private practice, or the non-profit sector does not suggest that all persons in these settings necessarily devote as much time to management. Those people who carry titles such as director or administrator usually spend a larger percentage of their time performing management functions than others >vithin the organization. In turn, mid-level managers and supervisors generally spend more of their time in management functions than do those with titles such as case manager, therapist, or group worker. However, even this difference is not as dramatic as it was 10 or 20 years ago. Management decision making is increasingly becoming the work of teams, often made up of people from different sectors and levels of the organization, rather than that of individuals. Despite the fact that management occurs at all levels \vithin an organization and is increasingly being shared, the specific tasks or activities that fall \vithin the various management functions still tend to differ. For example, organizing (Chapter 7) is a management function performed by everyone. For the executive director, it might involve (among other tasks) breaking the organization into units or assigning staff me1nbers into multidisciplinary teams. A middle-level supervisor might organize by developing a weekly schedule

Defining and Descri bing Management for providing case supervision to those whom he supervises. For a social worker whom he supervises, organizing might entail designing a personalized travel itinerary for conducting home visits that \viJJ minimize time spent in travel and reduce travel expenses. All three individuals need to understand and perform the managerial function of organizing, but their specific organizing tasks are different. When everyone is acknowledged to be a manager, a '\ve-they" dichotomy is less likely to occur. Everyone assumes ownership for management In addition, while some people may spend most of their day delivering services to clients and n1ay lack complete understanding of the specific management tasks of the director, they still need to possess a general understanding of what management entails. Both mystery and suspicion are less likely when we are all perceived as performing similar functions designed to achieve a shared goal.

Management and Services Are Interdependent Managen1ent decision making at all levels can serve to either support or jeopardize the delivery of effective services. T his occurs in both direct and subtle ways. Those management decisions that determine how services will be delivered exert a direct impact on the effectiveness of the services themselves. For example, policy decisions regarding the criteria for assignment to treatment groups vis-a-vis individual counseling have clear implications for the potential for treatment success \\Tith a given clien t or fanlily. Other management influences on service delivery are a little more subtle. For example, as role models, the attitudes of managers toward staff n1embers, as reflected in their behaviors, tend to get played out again in the attitudes of their staff members toward clients. For example, a respect for the value of self-determination in working \\Tith clients is more likely to exist in organizations where managers make seek input from staff members in making decisions than in settings \vhere managers make only unilateral decisions, never asking for input from others. The best nlanagement practice in human service organizations is probably carried out by social workers who possess not only a clear identity as social work professionals but also a clear understanding of their role as managers. Sometimes, management decisions may appear to be in conflict \\Tith practice values. For example, the decision to refer rather than to treat people who are diagnosed \\Tith alcoholism rnay appear on the surface to be in conflict with the "right to help" value of the profession, at least as it affects a given client. This decision may, however, be quite consistent \\Tith practice values emphasizing that a person is entitled to the best assistan ce available, which may only be available elsewhere. It may also be reflective of the precarious fmancial situation of the organization, something that inay not be known or understood by anyone other than the executive director and th e board of directors. Manage1nent and services are closely intert\vined. To believe otherwise can cause problems, such as the erroneous belief that competent direct-service workers should avoid regular communication \\Tith higher level managers and simply go about their business. It can promote a belief in a false dichotomy and to statements such as, "I want to be a social worker, not a manager." Obviously, if \Ve view an activity as outside the mainstream of professional practice (research is often thought of in the same \vay), we value it less and tend to distance ourselves from it. We begin to believe that management functions derive from a different set of values that are often in opposition to those of the social work profession. We tend to make

15

16

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective certain assumptions about the motivation of those who spend large portions of their day making management decisions. This can result in antagonism and unnecessary conflict among those who are really working toward the same goals. Most importantly, it can negatively affect services to clients.

Good Management Requires Technical, Conceptual, and Interpersonal Skills Technical skills are important to effective management, especially at certain levels. For example, for a director of an organization, knowing how to construct a budget, write a grant proposal, or design and implement a fair program evaluation are important skills. They require considerable instruction and experience. Once the basic skills are acquired, they can be applied in a variety of situations. But while all managers can benefit from the acquisition of certain technical skills, they are not in themselves a guarantee of success in management. One important characteristic of effective managers, in addition to some of the "art" factors mentioned earlier, is good conceptual skills. Managers need to be able to do more than just observe what is occurring around them-they need to be able to accurately identify its origins, interpret what it means, and to put it in perspective. Unless they can do this effectively, the decisions they make and the actions they take will fail more often than not. Why? If >ve fail to accurately interpret what is going on and why it may be occurring, our response to it v.rill be inappropriate. For example, suppose a manager in a medical setting observes that the staff members whom she supervises are spending more and more time using their personal electronic communication devices (ECDs) while at work. She conceptualizes the problem of not making timely referrals at the time of discharge as "too 1nuch time is being spent socializing~' She fails to recognize that what she mistakenly perceives as "socializing" is really developing more efficient communication with other medical professionals and referral networks with colleagues in other organizations. Therefore, she implements a rule that states that ECDs are not allowed in the office, thus limiting her staff members even more in their capacity to complete timely referrals in the future. Interpersonal skills are also very important to good management. Coworkers expect to be treated as adults, knowledgeable colleagues, even though they understand that in any organization there are bosses and there are subordinates. In short, they expect to be treated with respect, and not be reminded unnecessarily of the power differential that exists. Good managers understand that a higher position on an organizational chart does not mean "superior in every respect" or "all knowing;' and do not act as if that were the case. Not only is this good for interpersonal relationships, it also can benefit the organization. Why? The persons best able to address some area of organizational need so1netimes are found in unlikely places within the organization. Good managers are able to acknowledge this, to ask for help when needed, to use it effectively, and to still maintain the integrity of the organizational hierarchy. That requires interpersonal skills and mutual respect. In the chapters that follow, we will place considerable emphasis on the interpersonal aspects of management as they impact the different functions performed by managers. Most management tasks still cannot be performed by a co1nputer. True, management involves tasks like research design, accurate prediction of future events, and application of the laws of probability to empirical data. But none of these tasks can be performed successfully without knowledge of and reference to unique situations and the characteristics of the other "actors" within the work environment. That means getting out and getting to know others

Defining and Describing Manageinent

professionally and, to a 1nore limited degree, personally. Management decision making is greatly hindered when managers remain isolated in their own mysterious world and relate to other personnel only when absolutely necessary and as interchangeable parts. Skills can be learned, but personality and style also have important places in the work of management. Management entails "working \vith and through individuals and groups to accomplish organizational goals:' 9 That requires good interpersonal skills. Thus, a successful manager cannot remain isolated from the rest of the organization and those people who work within it. A \Vord of caution may be in order here. If we approach management from the perspective that it requires interpersonal interaction and relationships that are no different from what is successful in work with clients, we will be unsuccessful as managers. While critical to management success at any level, too much reliance on "charm" and the interpersonal skills that social workers generally possess can quickly antagonize others who can start to feel manipulated, "caseworked:' or demeaned in some other way.

Management Knowledge Is Out There As we indicated earlier, there is much scientifically acquired knowledge in fields other than social work that can both help us to becon1e more evidence-based practitioners and make the job of manager easier. It can enhance our skills, assist in conceptualizing just what is occurring, and help us to relate better on an interpersonal level. We would cheat ourselves as managers if we failed to take advantage of the wealth of relevant knowledge that has been generated by those outside of our profession. This text relies heavily on the work of n1any people who may never have studied human service organizations and vvho certainly would not identify themselves as social workers. Yet some of what they have learned has universal application to management within all work settings. The kno\vledge and theory of other fields, often with a little translation and adaptation here and there, can provide us with valuable insights to assist us in our work as managers. While knowledge derived from empirical research conducted within the business and manufacturing sectors is not al\vays applicable to human service organizations or social work private practice, neither is it inllerently inapplicable. Contemporary business literature is often on the cutting edge of management theory. It is both controversial and exciting; it provides the social worker with interesting reading while offering valuable assistance in performing the tasks of the manager. We will be examining some of these theories and conceptualizations that seem to have particular utility for social workers in their work as managers throughout all chapters of this book.

SOCIAL WORK ETHICS AND MANAGEMENT Usually, social workers are first exposed to the NASW Code of Ethics in their social work practice courses. They encounter it again in research courses, usually with an emphasis on the importance of ethical treatment of human research participants. Since management is an integral part of social work practice, we might expect, and it is true, that ethics plays an important role in management practice as \veil. The same constellation of core values that define the other areas of social work practice (service, social justice, dignity and worth of the person, integrity, and so forth) also define what is ethical social \¥Ork management practice. They also tend to create ethical

17

18

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective conflicts that social workers in other roles may not experience. For example, social work managers often must function in a work environment characterized by limited resources and both internal and external political pressures to demonstrate that they are used efficiently and effectively. This can (and often does) create ethical conflicts. While such conflicts are present in any activity or setting, they often take on a particular form. They center on the issue of whose rights and needs should take priority over those of others. An ethical conflict occurs because of the necessity of "paying the bills" while still showing compassion for clients and/or consideration for the needs and wishes of staff men1bers. For example, should a manager limit the number of treatment hours for clients to the maximum number that will be reimbursed under insurance coverage? Or, should clients with a particular diagnosis always be assigned to group treatment, since it is more efficient than individual counseling? Or, should supervisors be required to begin carrying a small caseload (or others have their caseloads increased) in order to handle an increase in clients at a time when there is a freeze in hiring? Whatever action or decision a manager makes may benefit one individual or group at the expense of another individual or group. And, the latter may be unhappy. In the role of clinician, the primary ethical obligation of a social worker is to meet and advocate for the rights and needs of his or her individual client or client system. Ethical conflicts are relatively rare, and can often be resolved by consulting the NASW Code of Ethics. But in the role of manager the social worker must not only consider the rights and needs of the individual client or client system, but also those of all clients and client systems collectively, those presently served by the organization as well as those who might be served in ilie future. Add to iliat ilie need to please a variety of stakeholders outside the organization, to maintain the organization's fiscal viability and reputation in the community, to address the needs of its staff members, and to meet numerous oilier obligations. There are certain ethical conflicts in which any decision iliat ilie manager takes may result in criticism and charges of unethical behavior. For example, if a manager protects ilie rights of a given staff member to be suspended with pay pending a hearing about charges brought against her, those of oilier staff members \vho must cover her cases in ilie interim or her clients may believe that they have been treated unfairly. Or, if ilie rights and needs of ilie oilier staff members or her clients are given priority by firing and replacing her, her rights may have been violated. And, of course, the organization has been placed in legal jeopardy. Not surprisingly, ethical management often requires taking actions and making unpopular decisions that lead to accusations of "selling out" to one person or group or another. Sometimes, trade-offs and compromises can be made. In ilie previous example, it may be possible to hire temporary help or cover ilie social workers' cases one's self, at least until ilie hearing takes place. However, trade-offs often are not feasible, and compromises are often overrated. Sometimes compromises can work, but frequently iliey just end up pleasing no one. The authors of the NASW Code of Ethics recognized that ethical conflicts are inevitable in all areas of social work practice. They are especially so for managers who are often "caught in ilie middle" when conflicts occur. As social workers consult them when ethical issues arise (as we will see in later chapters of iliis book), it is i1nportant to remember ilie authors' disclaimer in ilie preamble, which defines ilie limits of the Code: The Code offers a set of values, principles, and standards to guide decision making and conduct when eiliical issues arise. It does not provide a set of rules iliat prescribe how social workers should act in all situations. Specific applications of

Defining and Descri bing Management the Code must take into account the context in which it is being considered and the possibility of conflicts among the Code's values, principles, and standards. Ethical responsibilities flow from all human relationships, from the personal and familial to the social and professional. Further, the NASW Code of Ethics does not specify \vhich values, principles, and standards are most important and ought to ounveigh others in instances when they conflict Reasonable differences of opinion can and do exist among social workers with respect to the ways in which values, ethical principles, and ethical standards should be rank ordered when they conflict. 10 Another statement in the preamble seems especially relevant to social workers in the role of manager. It is a reminder that the Code of Ethics is just one source that managers need to consider when seeking the ethical course of action. It states, "In addition to this Code, there are many other sources of information about ethical thinking that 1nay be useful. Social workers should consider ethical theory and principles generally, social work theory and research, laws, regulations, agency policies, and other relevant codes of ethics, recognizing that among codes of ethics social workers should consider the NASW Code of Ethics as their primary source~' 11

SOCIAL WORK CORE COMPETENCIES AND MANAGEMENT The Council on Social Work Education has identified 10 competencies 12 that are essential for effective social work practice in any role. The accreditation standards employed by CSWE are designed to insure that graduates of accredited programs possess all of these competencies. As we shall see \vhen \Ve discuss the various functions of the manager in later chapters of this book, some of the competencies are especially applicable in performing certain functions; others are still applicable but perhaps, less directly. We will return to them throughout this text, elaborating on how they relate to specific managen1ent functions and activities. The ten competencies are: I. Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. 2. Apply social work ethical principles to guide professional decision making. 3. Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. 4. Engage diversity and difference in practice. 5. Advance human rights and social and economic justice. 6. Engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research. 7. Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. 8. Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and to deliver effective social work services. 9. Respond to contexts that shape practice. 10. Engage, assess, intervene, and evaluate with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities.

19

20

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective

Box 1.1 Life in Prison and Life in a Human Service Organizatio n •

On the job, good behavior gets you more work.

• In prison, you get three free meals.

•

On the job, you get to have one meal and to pay for it.

•

In prison, you can join programs and quit if you like. • In prison, you can play games or watch TV.

•

On the job, you are assigned to programs and cannot quit.

•

On the job, you are reprimanded for playing games or watch,ing TV.

•

In prison, family and friends are encouraged to visit.

•

On the job, you are not supposed to speak to famHy and friends.

• In prison, antisocial behavior got you there.

• •

On the job, antisocial behavior can get you out. On the job, there are Managers.

•

•

In prison, there is time off for good behavior.

In prison there are sadistic guards.

Clearly, the expectation is that a graduate of a CSWE-accredited program should be a well-rounded social work "citizen:' capable of performing many different tasks in the interests of human well-being. And, that is just what effective management requires.

THE PRESENCE OF MANAGEMENT We have attempted to describe management in a number of ways. Now that we have at least an initial understanding of what management is, it might be interesting to see if we can identify how it sometimes manifests itself in an organization. Box 1.1 is a facetious comparison of life in a prison and life on the job. It is adapted from a joke that appears now and then on the Internet. However, if we look at it seriously for a 1noment, it seems to underline some points from our discussion to this point. For example, we can see how within the human service organization, managers have attempted to organize and control the activities of others. They have shaped the work environn1ent and made it conducive to productivity. They have made efforts to minimize distractions and to focus staff attention on organizational goal achievement. Box 1.1 also makes the point that managers are not always appreciated for their efforts. However, as we shall see in later chapters, there are many other sources of gratification for a manager within a hu1nan service organization.

SUMMARY In this chapter, we emphasized the importance of management to organizational survival and success. It was broadly defined as "certain activities performed by social workers at all administrative levels >vithin human service organizations that are designed to facilitate the accomplishment of organizational goals." These activities are intended to enhance worker productivity in a variety of ways and, whenever possible, to produce what the business literature describes as a "surplus" by increasing efficiency.

Defining and Descri bing Management We stated some assumptions that underlie the positions that we take throughout this book. Good management was described as both a science and an art and the work of social work practitioners anywhere in the organizational hierarchy. It requires a balance of technical, conceptual, and interpersonal skills. Management knowledge is derived from the work of researchers and the experiences of managers in a wide variety of disciplines. Management is not some mysterious function performed by a limited number of "higher-ups:' It is an integral part of evidence-based practice that is more similar to the other activities performed by social workers than it is dissimilar to them. It en1ploys some of the same knowledge, values, and skills. However, as we shall see, being a social worker is not always an asset as a manager; it can make certain tasks especially difficult. Like other areas of social work practice, management decision making is guided by professional values and ethical principles. While ethical conflicts cannot be avoided, there is guidance available in the fon11 of the NASW Code of Ethics as \veil as other sources. We will quote especially relevant portions of the Code in later chapters. Effective managen1ent also requires the same core competencies that are required for effective social work practice in any role. In the chapters that follow we will see how these core competencies are essential for social workers in the role of manager.

APPLICATION 1. The class instructor can be considered a manager. How do the responsibilities of a class instructor fit with the definitions of management that we provided in this chapter? Which of the CSWE Core Competencies would be most important for an instructor to be effective in his or her job? 2. It has been said that 90 percent of good parenting is good management. a. Why is this an accurate description of good parenting? What are some of the similarities of the two roles? b . What are some things that effective parents do to try to generate a surplus for their families.7 c. Why do parents as managers depend on a mix of knowledge and art? What would be some examples of knowledge and art factors in good parenting? d . Both parents and managers have sometimes been accused of acting like they are running for election rather than acting like they already hold the position. What do you think this means? Can you give an example of a manager you know who has been guilty of this? What did he or she do, or not do?

21

Chapter 2

What Makes Human Services Management Different? Leaming Outcomes At the end of this chapter, you should be able to: • List the characteristics of those organizations that enjoy a friendly task environment. • Discuss several important differences between human service organizations and business or manufacturing organizations and how they impact the job of managers. • Describe how non-profit organizations differ from other human service organizations and the advantages of maintaining their non-profit status. • Describe how the role of managers is made more difficult in those human service organizations where more than one group has a legitimate claim to being its prime beneficiary.

ost management literature is based on research studies of the business or manufacturing sectors. There is much that can be learned from it. However, human service organizations are different in some important ways. The most obvious difference is that human service organizations offer services, whereas business or manufacturing organizations market or produce goods. But there are other differences between businesses or manufacturing organizations and human service organizations, too. v\Thile these differences are less distinct in some human service organizations than in others and are less distinct overall than they were 20 years ago, they still exist. A failure to acknowledge them and to respond appropriately to them can result in bad decisions by managers and potentially can even threaten the very existence of the organization.

THE TASK ENVIRONMENT

22

To be successful as a manager in any organization, one cannot ignore the organization's environment. No organization operates in a vacuum. The nature of an organization's environment greatly affects the role of its managers and many of the activities that occur within the organization. Many years ago, a researcher who studied Norwegian manufacturing provided us with a concept that is still useful today in understanding the effect of external influences on social work inanagement. It is also helpful in understanding both how human service organizations differ from businesses or manufacturing organizations and also how they differ from each other. William Dill identified those parts of an organization's environment that are "relevant or potentially relevant to goal setting and goal attainment:' He referred to these as an organization's "task environment:' 1

What Makes 1-luman Seivices Management Differen t? An organization is bdieved to be more or less successful in its goal achievement based largely on its capacity to interact successfully with its task environment. Consequently, many of the activities of (especially) its higher-level managers involve efforts to negotiate support from the task environment or at least to minimize its potential to threaten or undermine achievement of the organization's goals. In a manufacturing corporation like those that Dill studied, the components of the task environment are easily specified. They include its customers, suppliers of raw materials and resources needed to manufacture the organization's products, its competitors, and regulatory groups that might restrict its ability to operate in the most profitable manner. But, what is the task environment of a human service organization? There are many parallels with manufacturing corporations, but there are some important differences, too. Generally, the task environment of a human service organization consists of any persons, organizations, or groups on '.vho1n it is dependent for goal achievement and who have the potential to support or to interfere with its efforts to achieve its goals. Many of these are its stakeholders, a term that, in silnple terms, refers to those individuals or groups who have a "stake" or interest (an investment) in the organization and what occurs within it. For exan1ple, a hun1an service organization's task environment might consist of past, present, and potential clients; other human service organizations with which it must interact; funding organizations like United Way; private msurance companies or health maintenance organizations (HMOs); government programs like Medicaid and Medicare; professional organizations such as the National Association of Social Workers (NASW); and the general public. Manufacturing corporations and businesses usually tend to have the support of the general public. Unless they pollute the environment, produce unsafe products, exploit their employees, or other,vise threaten the members of their community, they receive support for their goal achievement. Producing a socially accepted and wanted product, providing employment, and contributing to the tax base are other "pluses" for a manufacturing firm. Sometimes, special concessions are even made in the form of tax incentives, attractive leases, or relaxing of local codes to lure a given industry into an area. As a general rule, manufacturing corporations and businesses have much to offer to the general public and, therefore, find that it is likely to be friendly and supportive in return (especially in free market societies such as the United States or Canada). In most human service organizations, the general public gets involved as potential customers (clients), too. Some people come voluntarily and appreciate the help they are offered; however, others may come involuntarily (they may be court-ordered to seek help). They 1nay resent even the presence of the organization and its staff members. In addition, nlany people who are part of the general public will never use 1nany hwnan services such as income 1naintenance or child protection, but they pay for then1 anyway, and they don't like it. Much of human service funding (especially in the public sector) co1nes from tax revenues, either directly or indirectly. The clients of these organizations are frequently people who many members of the general public perceive as (unlike themselves) benefiting from services that they don't pay for, but that are paid for by their tax dollars. In fact, people who receive assistance from public agencies are not all that different from those who do not. We all are "on the dole" in some way; that is, we all benefit from some form of entitlement program paid for out of tax dollars. Frequently, we receive more in benefits than \\le paid in. (Social Security and Medicare are good examples.) As is often the case, ho,vever, it is the perception of human service programs as benefiting others at their expense that negatively influences the attitudes of large segments of the general public. This perception (and the

23

24

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective resentment that accompanies it) represents an important difference between manufacturing corporations and businesses that tend to have a more favorable relationship with the general public than many human service organizations. Like other differences that we shall discuss, it influences the work of social workers in the role of manager.

Different Types of Task Environments Human service organizations, based primarily on their missions, goals, and objectives, operate in a task environment v.rhere some of its components are likely to be friendly, others less friendly. The primary threat within the task environment of a manufacturing corporation or business is often its competitors, those other organizations producing and selling similar products who are forever trying to increase their own "share of the market" and, if possible, put them out of business. However, depending on certain conditions, other components of the task environ1nent may also represent a threat to goal achievement (e.g., owners and stockholders, government regulatory commissions, or the media). How friendly is the task environment of a human service organization? It depends. Some human service organizations are fortunate enough to work in a task environment where mostly all of its components are relatively friendly. What are their characteristics? More favorable task environments are found in organizations where: 1. Their services cost the taxpayer little or nothing;

2. Their services are seen as desirable, that is, consistent with the society's predominant values; 3. Their services are those that most people can envision that they (or someone they care about) may need to use some day; and 4. There is general consensus within the task environment that their understanding of the problem and their approach to addressing it is the correct one; that is, their mission has been endorsed as "legitimate" by their task environment. As we know, the definition of a problem is the major factor in determining how it will be addressed. For example, if a problem like homelessness is defined as avoidable, programs will focus on prevention. If it is defined pri1narily as a problem of mental illness, solutions will focus on management and treatment. If it is seen as the failing of a society, social change solutions will be proposed. If it is defined as a choice in lifestyle, programs would focus on protection of the rights of people to be homeless and to not be harassed because of their lifestyle. Approaches to any social problem tend to fall into one or more of several categories: • • • • •

Prevention (efforts to prevent the problem from continuing to occur) Social care (custodial services designed to maximize individual potential) Social control (efforts to stop and/or punish "deviance") Rehabilitation (making beneficial changes in individuals) Social change (changing the society that created the problem)

Unfortunately, the fourth characteristic of an organization with a favorable task environment (a legitimized mission) is not characteristic of many human service organizations. And sometimes little can be done by managers to change it. The organizations (often

What Makes 1-luman Seivices Management Differen t? because of their basis in social work values) do not define the problem as elements of their task environment do, and thus their proposed solutions (programs) are often unwelcome. For example, we are more Hkely to blame society than the "victim;' or to believe that rehabilitation is possible and preferable to punishment A private adoption agency would be a good example of a human service organization with a favorable task environment. Costs are borne by those seeking the service; taxpayers contribute nothing. The placement of an unwanted child into a home where the child is wanted (and one that has been determined to be able to provide the n ecessary support for the child) is viewed by the general public and other components of the task environment as a noble enterprise. While not everyone would choose to adopt a child, most people would consider it under certain circumstances, or at least they know someone who has adopted. Finally, there is general (if not universal) consensus that adoption is a good solution for abused or abandoned children or for children of un\vanted pregnancies. An organization that offers in-home hospice services to terminally ill patients and their fa1nilies would also be expected to operate in a relatively supportive and friendly task environment. It would meet all four of the previously 1nentioned criteria. Hospice services are less expensive than long-ter1n hospitalization; they are less of a drain on tax-supported programs like Medicaid and Medicare. As a society, we also value dying at hon1e in the presence of family and other loved ones and in familiar surroundings rather than in a sterile hospital setting. Most of us recognize that we and/or those we love might benefit from hospice services someday. Perhaps we had a friend or relative who received hospice services and this experience taught us to appreciate them. And, most everyone would agree that palliative care (rather than, for example, life support to prolong life at any cost) seems to be the most logical and humane approach to terminal illness. In those hun1an service organizations fortunate enough to operate in a relatively friendly and supportive task environment, managers can focus on doing \Vhat is necessary to facilitate the flO\V of \York and services. Threats and attacks from the task environment are infrequent. Little management time and effort need be spent on trying to placate and to buffer out the assaults of the task environment-they just do not occur very often. This is not to say that management is less important than in an organization where the task environn1ent is less friendly. But it explains why, within a friendly task environment, management activities may take on different forms than in, for example, a community organization agency in which various elements of the task environment are in opposition to the organization's mission, goals, and objectives, and would like nothing better than to close it down. Among other differences, the manager in the organization with the friendly task environment generally does not need to spend large portions of the day establishing and enforcing the trappings of bureaucracies (to be discussed in Chapter 3). In the more hostile task environment, these n1anagement tasks become more necessary. What would be the characteristics of a human service organization with a more hostile task environment, the kind more frequently seen and experienced by social workers? The financial assistance division of a county department of social services is a good example. Managers (at whatever administrative level) involved \vith a financial assistance program such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) almost certainly will encounter a hostile task environment. This is largely because of both the realities and public misperceptions of their work. T he organization's employees are dispensing tax dollars collected from \vage earners-that is reality. Generally, they are giving funds to persons who are not gainfully employed or are underemployed and \Vho are also victims of public stereotyping

25

26

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective

that assumes that they are unwilling to work, sexually promiscuous, dishonest, and so on. Toss in the general public's misinformation about the demographic characteristics ofTANF recipients such as their race or number of children and it is no surprise that the general public neither seems to value nor support the work of the public assistance caseworker. A large number of Americans would probably vote to discontinue public assistance altogether if a public referendum were to be held. Other components of the public welfare organization's task environment sometimes are not much friendlier than the general public. Professional organizations may push for tighter licensure requirements and other forms of credentialing that may have the ultimate effect of removing many public welfare employees from their ranks as "nonprofessionals." Even individual professionals who work in related areas of practice may be far from supportive. They may be eager to point out that many staff in the public organization "are not really trained social workers:' They tend to blame public welfare bureaucracies for many of the client proble1ns that they see. They are 1nore likely to describe instances of public assistance "incompetence" than they are to report instances when a financial assistance caseworker was effective and highly competent. In short, they attempt to disassociate themselves from public assistance organizations, partly in order to create a more favorable task environment for themselves. Among public assistance organizations, even clients often bear resentment toward the organization and the staff members who are seeking to help them. They nlay perceive that the bureaucratic structures in place may be designed to discourage them from seeking assistance or to hwniliate them. They are often embarrassed and angry at having to request help irI the first place; they may resent having their privacy invaded as a prerequisite to receiving it. They may express their hostility directly to their caseworkers or, fearful of antagonizing them, communicate it by denigrating the organization and its staff within the community. Of course, this only serves to make the general public more hostile. It lends support to the perception that the organization is poorly managed. Sometimes, it seems as though elements of the task environment only become 1nore favorable toward public social service organizations when an effort to expose fraud is launched, eligibility requirements are tightened, or the organization takes some other action consistent with the general public's stereotypes and values. While public social service organizations with programs offering temporary financial assistance such as TANF present the 1nost dramatic examples of human service organizations that operate within a hostile task environment, their situations are far from unique. Other human service organizations, while receiving widespread social support on the surface, operate in a task environment that may not be much friendlier. For example, while the deinstitutionalization of people with developmental disabilities is acknowledged as a worthwhile endeavor, the general public rarely welcomes them into their community when a group home is proposed. Similarly, programs engaged in refugee resettlement often encounter resistance to their efforts, despite statements of concern about the plight of victims of political and/or religious oppression. This is especially true if the people who are refugees come from the Middle East or certain parts of Sub-Saharan Africa. Religious stereotyping may be used to support a belief that they are all "potential terrorists:' and thus a threat to the co1nmunity. Responses of "not in our neighborhood" or "not taking our jobs" are common. Child-protection services also often experience their share of hostility from their task environment. No one publicly advocates child abuse or neglect and most people believe that

What Makes I luman Se1v ices Management Different? the public sector has a right to intervene when it is believed to have occurred. So, why do child-protection organizations not have the benefit of a friendly task environment? For one thing, their employees are engaged in investigating and exposing a problem that the general public prefers to believe "doesn't happen here:' They embarrass politicians, clergy, and educators who may take pride in the well-being of citizens 'vithin "their" community. They also create more work for already overburdened judges. Case\vorkers can find themselves working as advocates for children whose credibility and perceptions of events are often questioned. Revelations that children have been successfully coached to lie about allegations of abuse during divorce custody battles or have done so to "get back" at an adult have further weakened children's credibility as well as that of those seeking to protect them. Caseworkers often find themselves in an adversarial role, pitted against some of the community's leading professionals and other individuals such as Guardians ad Litem \vith only children's allegations and limited medical evidence (often refuted by other "expert will1esses") on their sides. Even the children who they seek to protect may be unappreciative of their efforts, especially if they fear being removed from the familiarity of their homes and moved to an w1familiar setting like a foster home or institutional setting. Along with public assistance workers, child-protection workers perform a job that the general public may endorse in a general \Vay, but resent as it is played out and as it impacts them personally. Is it any wonder that they encounter passive aggressiveness and "stonewalling" and, in some cases, the overt animosity and efforts to discredit them that is characteristic of a hostile task environment? It is not surprising that many of the activities of 1nanagement that occupy the time of social \Vorkers in organizations involved in services such as public assistance, deinstitutionalization, criminal justice, refugee resettlement, and child protection are devoted to buffering out or, in some other way, protecting the organization from its hostile task environment. The many bureaucratic controls in the form of policies, procedures, and rules that exist are designed to defend the organization against charges of mismanagement, waste, uncontrolled staff activities, and other phenomena that could leave the organization vulnerable to \Vithholding of funds or other tactics that could halt or curtail the achievement of objectives. These organizations also find themselves operating with uncertain futures. They are left vulnerable to shifting service priorities and funding as perceived by legislators who may be seeking to court public support. In contrast, a manufacturer or business with a friendlier task environment and more predictable funding sources (steady, high sales) worries less about protecting itself from the general public or about maintaining a good relationship with its sources of funding and can devote more of its management activities to production and/or sales. Upper-level managers can concentrate on other threats from the task environment, most frequently the competition, or, perhaps, the possibility that its sources of supply might be cut off. Similarly, managers in those human service organizations that possess a relatively friendly task environment can focus much of their energies on working to improve the quality of services offered or on other tasks of management.

Improving Relationships with the Task Environment A hostile task environment promotes a sense of uncertainty within an organization. While a limited amount of uncertainty is inevitable and possibly even desirable to "keep the organization on its toes:' too much of it is stressful and debilitating. No one can work well in an organization \vhose task environment is constantly watching, \Vaiting for a mistake or a

27

28

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective sign of weakness to occur. In those human service organizations that lack the good fortune of having a friendly task environment, a social worker's management tasks must be devoted in part to negotiating with the hostile environment in order to improve relationships. The goal is to do this at the least possible cost in terms of waste of its financial resources, loss of autonomy, or service effectiveness. It also must be accomplished without compromising professional values and ethics. Because a task environment that is essentially hostile is not likely to spontaneously become friendlier, the only realistic way to negotiate successfully with it is to find ways to make the organization less vulnerable to it. Several methods for accomplishing this are cited in the business literature. 2 Most have applicability to the job of the social work manager. We will suggest how some of these might work and assess their relative costs.

Acquiring Prestige The organization that can become recognized for its first-class products or services has an easy time dealing with its task environment. Develop a reputation as being the best, and hostility from the task environment diminishes. Acquiring prestige, particularly for those organizations offering services valued by the general public, is a relatively "inexpensive" way of negotiating with the task environment. Medical treatment facilities such as Johns Hopkins University Hospital, The Mayo Clinic, Duke University Medical Center, or The Cleveland Clinic meet little hostility from their task environment, in part because they are acknowledged as among the best at what they do. Of course, what they do, namely medical treatment and research, makes acquiring prestige relatively easy, too. These activities are more valued in the first place than are, for example, public assistance or child protection. That is the problem with acquiring prestige-it is much easier for those organizations that begin with one or more of the criteria for a relatively favorable task environment. It is far more difficult for those whose task environment is most naturally inclined to be hostile. Acquiring prestige, in the usual sense of the word, may be an unattainable goal for most public, tax-supported human service organizations and for other organizations that offer unpopular services to those who are stigmatized within a society. Have we ever heard the general public refer to a county welfare department as "really fust-rate"? While a reputation for first-class services may be a less attainable goal for a public social services organization than for a cancer research institute, there is one way that such an organization can increase its power over a hostile task environment-through its management practices. (This is sometimes referred to as "running a tight ship:') The general public may not embrace the services or the clientele of a human service organization, but may grudgingly acknowledge the inevitability and need for its existence. And, an organization that exerts considerable control over its employees and their activities and is financially accountable for the funding that it receives will face less hostility from its task environment (especially the general public) than will one that has a reputation for slack management. A reputation for tight management while "giving away tax dollars;' may be a worthwhile goal for a human service organization. It can help to make the general public less critical and more supportive, even if the services themselves remain largely resented. However, notice that we did not describe this as necessarily "good management." The very management practices that the task environment often values and rewards (such as obsessive compliance with rules or strict oversight of staff activities and expenditures) can have their own costs to the organization. For example, overly restrictive supervision can result in low staff

What Makes 1-luma n Seivices Management Differen t? morale, absenteeisn1, and/or turnover. Or, strict con1pliance with client eligibility standards can result in decisions that border on the unethical, or at least appear to be in conflict with social work values. Then, the cost of a friendlier task environment may be just too great.

Contracting Contracting is a special kind of cooperation with the task environment. It is designed primarily to make interaction with the task environment more predictable and, therefore, potentially less threatening. In human service organizations, it is most often used to increase an organization's power over those components of the task environment that are essential for the organization to function, often sufficient clients or staff members. Contracting is a strategy that is well known to the profit sector and is becoming increasingly familiar to many human service organizations. In manufacturing, a corporation might sign long-range leases for facilities or contracts for supply of those raw materials that are needed to manufacture its products. It nlay even contract with various marketing outlets to guarantee purchase of a certain number of its products. Contracting of this nature increases certainty. It also results in fairly predictable manufacturing costs. How do human service organizations contract to increase control over the task environment? Beginning in the mid-1970s, Title XX of the Federal Social Security Act provided reimbursement to state public welfare organizations that purchased services for their clients from other human service organizations. Services were bought by one organization from another. Costs were fixed and both organizations \¥ere able to operate with more certainty. One gained assurances regarding availability of services.; the other, a fixed market for its services. A common form of contracting used by some human service organizations today is another form of purchase of services. It is the use of Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs). Organizations such as Family Services agree to provide a specified number of hours of family counseling, counseling for substance abuse, marriage counseling, or intervention with some other problem that may be affecting the job performance of employees of a business or industry. In turn, the human service organization is given an agreed-upon amount of money. The corporation can accurately project its costs. The organization in turn is guaranteed a sizable number of fee-for-services clients, a source ofboili guaranteed client input and of fw1ding. Contracting with another organization, like acquiring prestige, is inexpensive as a method to increase control over the task environment. It actually may save money that might be lost because of canceled appointments or other non-revenue producing time. However, it is not without cost, usually in the form of some loss of autonomy in decision nlaking for ilie organization providing ilie services. In son1e respects, tlle purchaser often buys more than just services. For example, if an organization has a contract to provide services to a manufacturing corporation's employees under an EAP contract, it generally cannot refuse to see a client referred for services, sometimes even if professional staff members do not see the need for treatment. The corporation may also seek to have input into decisions relating to diagnosis, the nature of treatment, time of termination, when an employee can or cannot return to work, and so fortll. The corporation, paying for treatment, may also feel that it has a right to know more about the nature of the client's problem ilian the social worker feels is in the best interest of tlle client. This can create ethical dilemmas relating to confidentiality. Another dangerous situation can occur if a human service organization becomes too dependent on contracts such as EAPs. Most contracts are put out for bids periodicaUy and

29

30

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective an organization can easily lose its contract to a competitor if the other organization promises to offer more for the same ainount of money or to offer the same ainount of services for less. Awarding of contracts is supposed to be performed in a fair and unbiased manner, but that does not always happen in the real world. Political issues and personal friendships can be deciding factors in who receives the contract. Although it is generally regarded as unethical, some individuals who have administered contracts for an organization have been known to leave the organization to go into private practice or to work in a competing organization. "Miraculously;' the contracts have followed them, leaving their old organization in a situation where it is overstaffed and short on revenue. Most managers are aware of the dangers of overdependence on contracts. They are reluctant to commit too large a percentage of organizational activities to programs and services that are contract funded. They also plan for contingencies (Chapter 5) in \Vhich contracts may not be renewed. Many social work students have experience with contracts of a different nature. In situations where an organization has difficulty hiring social workers (e.g., they may be located in a remote, rural community or cannot offer a competitive salary and/or benefits), it often contracts with potential employees (students). The organization may offer a stipend, paid internship, or "work study" arrangement to a social work student in exchange for a commitment to one or more years of employment. As in our earlier examples of contracting, the contract is mutually beneficial to the organization that might otherwise not be able to hire enough social workers and to that part of the task environment (potential employees) who receive some financial help for their education and the likelihood of a job upon graduation. Organizations that have bought work commitn1ents from students usually risk relatively little in terms of loss of autonomy. They may not have to hire new graduates with whom they have contracted if they later decide they do not want to hire them or no longer need them as employees. If they do hire them (and they usually do), they can still fire them if they do not work out well during a probationary period. Of course, the up-front cost in dollars cai1not be ignored in deciding whether this type of contracting is worth the cost. "Guaranteed hires" may be expensive to the organization in other ways, too. They may feel "trapped" in their job, seek a way out of their commitment, and spend work hours searching for other employment. In recent years we have witnessed a new trend: contracting of government institutions with the private, for-profit sector to provide human services (privatization). For example, some states have contracted with corporations within the private sector to provide correctional services for juveniles and adults or mental health services. The corporations then may turn around and hire professionals such as social workers to provide the services that clients receive. Contracting, in one form or another, is likely to occupy an increasingly larger portion of time spent by social work managers. It can be an effective method of reducing both costs and uncertainty related to the inputs of prograins or organizations. However, contracting generally does little or nothing to reduce the hostility of the general public toward programs and organizations that are viewed as undesirable or that serve clients perceived as "unworthy" of the goods and/or services that they receive.

Co-opting Most everyone knows about co-opting. Children usually learn early in life that they can reduce opposition to a request by a parent or deflect criticism if they can bring the parent

What Makes 1-luman Seivices Management Differen t? "on board" and allow the parent to take partial ownership of it. ("Mom, remember that great idea you had about going out for pizza once a week?" "But Dad, you checked over all of my homework!") Doctoral candidates \vriting a dissertation or master's students writing a thesis usually learn to co-opt their advisors, if they hope to finish. They meet regularly 'Yi.th them, get plenty of suggestions, and carefully include the advisors' suggestions in the final product. It is likely to be approved because the advisors see many of their own "brilliant" ideas and suggestions incorporated into it, perhaps even a q uotation from one of their publications. How do organizations co-opt a potentially hostile task environment? Co-opting involves bringing a potentially hostile or threatening portion of the task environment "into" the organization, giving it "partial ownership:' Co-opting is not always merely skillful manipulation or a kind of political ploy. Son1etimes it is beneficial to the organization in other ways. It provides a fresh perspective to the organization (from its potential enemies) that may not be available among its natural "friends:' How does co-opting increase control over the task environn1ent for an organization? An assun1ption is that if the boundary lines between the organization and its environment can beco1ne nlore blurred by giving the task environment more input into its operation, hostility will dissipate. Why would the task environment then want to oppose decisions and activities into which it had input? One common method of co-opting the task environment is to place a political opponent or otherwise outspoken critic within the community on an advisory board or even its board of directors. Vocal opponents of an organization and its programs and services may be invited to serve on a board primarily because of their opposition. For example, conservative opponents of certain educational programs in a health organization may be invited to serve on its advisory board. It is hoped that they will become less vocal in their opposition to, for example, HIV prevention programs or a program to inoculate pre-teens against certain sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) if they are given input into decisions about how the programs will be implemented. Similarly, the invited presence of vocal opponents of "entitlement" programs on a county welfare organization's advisory board may also be reflective of efforts to co-opt. They are more likely to have been invited to join the board because they may represent a threat to the organization than because they have important contributions to make to its operation. Placing an opponent of an organization and its programs and services in a position of influence sometimes can be an effective way to create a friendlier task environment. However, it can also be dangerous. It entails giving power to son1eone who may just refuse to be co-opted, and who may use the position to cause more har1n to the organization than would have been possible as an "outsider." Even one obstructive person, particularly if the individual is politically powerful and tends to elicit deference fron1 others, can seriously jeopardize an organization's potential for achieving its objectives. What, on the surface, would seem to be a less costly method of co-opting a part of a hostile task environment entails the strategic selection of volunteers. They are selected from fanillies and groups that are known to be critical of the organization and its services. Because volunteers can also make a real and valued contribution to the organization and because they are not in a position to influence organizational policy, this tactic is frequently used. But, as we "'ill discuss in Chapter 8, there are costs and even potential dangers in the use of volunteers. Among other things, they may not be easily co-opted, and may remain vocal critics, now armed with "inside information:'

31

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective

32

Case Example

T

atesha was the new director of a shelter for batL ered women in a politically conservative rural community. She was the only professional social worker on a paid staff of six. The organization had been established only three years earlier by a retired social worker and two other women who themselves had been victims of spousal abuse. Ever since its establishment. the shelter had fa ced a hostile task environment. It was situated in an old house that had been donated by one of its founders. There had been complaints to the local zoning board by several neighbors seeking to get the organization to either move or close. Two local politicians had stated that they saw no need for such an organization. One stated in a town meeting that "we don't have that problem here." Even the local United Way chapter seemed to be delaying in responding to the shelter's request for fi nancial assistance. One Un ited Way employee confided to Latesha "off the record" that there were some board members who feared that their financial contributions might suffer if the shelter was given any United Way money. Latesha knew that she had to do something to weaken the local opposition to her organization. She decided to attempt to co-opt some of those who had been most openly hostile to try to make them more sympathetic to the work of the shelter. She created an advisory board, but carefully made sure that three of its five members could be counted on as friends who had been supportive of the shelter in the past (including one of its founders). But for the other two members (who quickly accepted the invitation to join the board) she chose one of the two politicians who had been highly critical of the shelter and a prominent local minister who also had stated his doubts about the need for such an organization on several . occasions. The first two times that the board met. the politician (an attorney) and the minister were most cordial. They said little and seemed genuinely interested in what the other members and Latesha had to say. However, during the third meeting, the minister began to tell the others what his true feelings were

about women who are victims of spouse abuse"most of them probably provoked it." The politician clearly agreed. Before long, both men began to dominate discussion and seemed to become bolder in their statements. Latesha anxiously looked to the other board members to challenge what they were saying. They looked at the table, and said nothing. They clearly were intimidated. During the next few months the politician and the minister argued convincingly against most of Latesha's plans for expansion of services. They frequently recommended a variety of changes that would actually weaken the organization's programs. Another board member consistently supported them. (She learned later that his sister was a paralegal who worked in the politician's law firm.) When she dared to go against the recommendations of her advisory board, Latesha was criticized by people in the community who always seemed to find out about the board's recommendations. Her uncle, who attended the minister's church, told Latesha that he had even criticized her from his pulpit. He reminded his parishioners. "I know for a fact that those people, unless we stop them, have every intention of violating the sanctity of the family any way that they can." Finally, in desperation, Latesha decided to expand her board by adding four more members who she hoped would be friendlier to the shelter. The newly constituted board was more supportive. Soon the minister and politician both resigned, but not before wri ting an angry "letter to the editor" stating that Latesha had "stacked the board to promote her own liberal agenda." It was several years before the shelter was no longer threatened with efforts to close it down.

Discussion Questions 1.

Do you think that creating an advisory board was a good idea. given the level of hostility toward Latesha's organization? Why or why not?

2.

Do you think Latesha should have consulted with or gotten approval from anyone else before forming her advisory board? If so, who?

(continued)

What Makes Human Se1Vices Management Different?

Case Example

33

Continued

3. Do you think that a legislator and a minister were good "cand idates" for co-opting? Why or why not? 4. What else should Latesha have "checked out" before inviting the legislator and the minister to join the advisory board?

5. Was Latesha's later decision to expand the membership of the advisory board by adding four more members a good one? Why or why not? 6. What other methods for dealing with her organization's hostile task environment could Latesha have tried? Which ones might have been successful?

Other Ways to Increase Control over the Task Environment The business literature suggests other approaches that would also seem to have some utility for the social work manager who is seeking to create a friendlier task environment. These include expanding alternatives, diversification, and coalescing.3 Expanding alternatives in manufacturing includes using many different suppliers for raw materials. If the supply is disrupted from one supplier, more can be purchased from another. In human service organizations, this might translate as development of a variety of different client referral sources and networks, especially non-traditional ones, such as sororities and fraternities or "club" sports organizations for adolescents. Diversification, if you are a manufacturer, means manufacturing a variety of products so that if, for example, demand for one product drops, demand for another can balance it off and/or the corporation can shift its resources into the manufacture of the more profitable product. In business, it may mean offering a wider array of products for sale as, for example, "dollar stores" have done by adding freezers and refrigerated areas to enable them to sell perishable food items as well as other grocery staples. Many "gas stations" have been added or been rebuilt with "convenience stores;' where more profits are inade from snacks and other similar items than from gasoline. In human service organizations, we might similarly create more certainty and leave ourselves less vulnerable to a reduced need for services if we were to offer a variety of programs and services. It is hoped that some of these would generate wide public acceptance and would also "carry" the organization if support for other programs and services erodes or they must be discontinued. However, some businesses and manufacturing concerns have run into trouble when they did not "stick to the knitting:' The same thing can happen in human service organizations that diversify too much. The organization can lose its identity, its niche, and develop a reputation for trying to be "everything to all people." Thus over-diversification may result in a loss of prestige. Coalescing can be an extremely costly method of increasing control over a hostile task environment. It is often a "last resort" tactic of survival. In manufacturing, the environment (often the competition) is brought in and shares in the profit, often through a "friendly takeover" or merger. Autonomy, jobs, and influence of certain individuals generally suffer. While relatively rare in human services, coalescing does occur. For example, in South Carolina, two state organizations that offered similar adoption programs and services were forced to merge because state legislators concluded that wasteful duplication existed. Other coalescing arrangements that are not a result of legislative coercion may promote efficiency, but at a cost. The creation of certain "umbrella'' organizations is a type of coalescing that results in some loss of autonomy but one that can reduce a considerable amount of

34

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective uncertainty and hostility within the task environment. [t can result in a new organization with considerably more clout for negotiating with the task environment than that possessed by any one of its smaller components.

OTHER CHARACTERISTICS OF HUMAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS We have already noted that manufacturers and businesses are far more likely to operate in a task environment with a supportive public-at-large than are most human service organizations, particularly publicly supported ones. We have chosen to explore this phenomenon in depth because it goes a long way toward explaining why many of the activities of social workers, when they are managing, must be devoted to buffering hostility from outside the organization. In Chapter 3 we will see how the hostile task environment faced by most human service organizations contributed to the proliferation of bureaucracies. We will no\v examine other similarities and differences between manufacturers and businesses and hu1nan service organizations. As we look at some of these, reme1nber that it is becoming increasingly difficult to make many generalizations about either human service organizations or about other types of organizations that will apply across the board. Large public welfare organizations, such as state departments of social services, for example, are less similar in some ways to private psychiatric treatment centers, hospitals, or long-term care facilities (many of which are really corporations) than they are to some businesses that offer a service. Many for-profit treatJnent organizations and private practices bear close resemblance to businesses and manufacturers, at least in terms of their goals and indicators of success. Many so-called non-profit organizations really generate surpluses in the form of "profits:' but they hide them in salary increments, generous fringe benefits, and other methods of profit sharing.

Focus on Efficiency A manufacturer or business exists to make a profit. Consequently, it is "efficiency driven:' For a 1nanufacturer, any activity that will reduce the cost of production of a product has the potential to increase profit ("surplus" as we described it in Chapter 1). If, after a reasonable time, efficiency methods still cannot generate a profit, the product will be dropped from the manufacturer's line, or, in the case of a large conglo1nerate, the manufacturing division may be sold, usually at some tax advantage to the corporation. The decision is purely an econo1nic one; there is no place for a product that cannot contribute to profit and that may even affect the profitability of the company's other products by consuming valuable resources of the organization. Sentiment and concerns over fairness rarely enter into the decision to drop a product or division. \.\Then they do, they usually are prompted by either a need to retain good public relations or to respond to the demands of another component of the task environment-organized labor. Human service organizations cannot ignore efficiency. They must pay utility bills, salaries, and address other fiscal issues. But they must also meet ethical obligations to provide quality client services to people in need of help and to consider the human impact of any decisions that they make. They cannot afford to develop a reputation for being overly preoccupied with efficiency (or, in the case of certain organizations, with profit) at the expense

What Makes 1-luman Seivices Management Differen t? of fairness or "what is right:' The decision to discontinue a service that is costly and represents a financial drain on resources will sometimes have to be made, but not without a good deal of soul-searching and justifying not usually required in a manufacturing corporation. For example, the decision to refer out rather than to treat people who sexually abuse children or mothers \vho are addicted to methamphetamines would be a simpler one if a human service organization were just a business. Treatment of either group is unpopular, expensive, and the success rate does not justify the drain on resources required. It \vould certainly not enhance the image of the organization within the community. Thus, a social work manager may have to make a decision and implement a policy to not offer treatment, but only after carefully factoring in professional ethics and values. Having made the decision, the 1nanager can anticipate some criticism both within and outside the organization. Sometimes, for professional and ethical reasons, a human service organization will choose to do what a manufacturing corporation v;ould rarely, if ever, do-operate at a loss. For example, if the more efficient use of group services for treatment of clients who are diagnosed with some proble1n is not viewed as best practice, individual treatment may continue to be offered, despite the fact that client fees in no way pay for all of the cost of treatn1ent. As noted in the previous chapter, many human service organizations, by their very nahue, regularly operate at a loss, at least in the financial sense. Hu1nan services are very costly and, frequently, very inefficient. The cost of services may be more than what the client is willing or able to pay or what an insurance company or other third-party payer will reimburse. Of course, no organization can do this on a consistent basis and continue to exist unless they have other sources of funding. Client needs, social responsibility, fairness, and professional ethics often dictate more loudly to social \vork managers than do demands for efficiency, or at least they should. However, managers do compromise sometimes by making some concessions to efficiency when they must be made, especially \.vhen the survival of the organization is at stake. Simultaneously, because \Ve are social \vorkers we listen to our professional conscience and "stonewall" many demand s for efficiency that we see as ethically unacceptable. This is one of the most difficult tasks for a social \vork manager in a human service organization. It occurs at every level in some form or another and often leaves managers feeling as if they are in no-win situations. Managers are vulnerable to criticism whether they opt for efficiency or for equity (fairness). Manufacturing or business managers, possessing a much clearer set of priorities, usually have a much easier job of decision making-they know that opting for efficiency is the defensible and popular decision to make, at least among their stockholders and/or other components of their task environment.

Loyalty and Dependency A manufacturing organization actively courts the loyalty of its customers. A goal is to have repeat customers who buy their products again and again and will "accept no substitutes:' Manufacturers love to hear comments like "My fanilly has always bought GM cars; we •vould never buy anything else:' And, "I may pay a little more, but I know it will be worth it:' Advertising dollars are often devoted to promoting the idea of repeat sales. The reason that customer loyalty is so desirable for a manufacturer is pretty obvious. Having a customer "locked in" to a product is a real advantage. Knowing that they can count on a certain percentage of repeat sales allows manufacttuers to predict accurately the sales cycles and market for a product. Costly inventories will never get too large. A challenge

35

36

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective for management sometimes entails determining how a product can be improved to attract new customers while sufficiently retaining its identity so as not to lose those whose loyalty provides a cushion of certainty for the organization. In contrast, professionals within hun1an service organizations do not generally seek to promote client loyalty. They hope that clients will speak positively about ilie services iliey receive and perhaps recom1nend the organization and its services to others, but iliey do not promote loyalty in ilie way that a manufacturing firm might promote it. That type of loyalty would take the form of long-term dependency on the organization an d its services. It would be contrary to social work values iliat emphasize client self-sufficiency and independence. In fact, while a manufacturer sees loyalty in the form of repeat sales as an indicator of success, social workers are more likely to see client dependency and the repeated return of clients for more help as a clear warning that services may have been ineffective and iliat ilie goals of intervention were not achieved. What manufacturer or business would offer a product wiili ilie hope iliat it will soon not be needed? It would not survive long if it did. Yet in human service organizations, we espouse such treatment approaches as crisis intervention that are designed for brief client exposure to the organization. If successful, they will result in a client never having any contact with the organization again. We may be skeptical of those social workers who seem to favor long-term intervention; we may wonder just who is dependent on whom. We begin termination sometimes when clients would prefer to continue to be seen, but when in our professional judgment we think that iliey are ready to function on their own. By not promoting dependency among our clients, we lack the relatively certain and predictable market for our "product:' However, given our professional values, it can be no oilier way. There would be more certainty and more predictability in long-term client dependency. For exan1ple, it might appear desirable to know that "Ms. Johnson has Tuesday at lO:OO;' is always on time, and always pays for her counseling in cash. Her guaranteed presence might be preferable to iliat of a new client who feels ambivalent about coming, may not show up or show up just once or twice, and who n1ay not be able to pay for services. Some social workers might railier see clients like Ms. Johnson; they know and like her and may receive a certain personal gratification from the realization that Ms. Johnson has not made an important decision in her life since 2011 without first discussing it wiili them. But professional values regarding dependence must take precedence over the comforts of Ms. Johnson's weekly presence. Increasingly, financial considerations also argue against client dependency. Wiili recent emphasis on cost containment, professional staff must increasingly place greater emphasis on short-ter1n intervention. If, for example, an HMO will reimburse the organization for only six counseling sessions, it might be fiscally impossible to offer longer-term counseling to clients. Higher-level managers also have had to adapt. They now must devote more of ilieir time to marketing and outreach activities designed to seek new clients who will never establish a relationship of long-term dependency on the organization or its services. In proprietary organizations that are publicly owned, in private practices, and in similar types of human service organizations that seek to make a profit, long-term client dependence may be viewed as either undesirable or desirable. If clients have insurance that offers limited benefits, they may not be allowed to stay in treatment as long as they might wish or even need. Clients who wish to remain (and who can pay for it or have good longterm insurance coverage) may get ilieir wish. Unoccupied beds and/or open treatment ti1ne cost money. Some organizations have been known to give out staff bonuses if monthly

What Makes I luman Se1v ices Management Different? bed occupancy does not fall below a certain percentage level. In such settings, professional values about client dependence may be in direct opposition to the fiscal needs of the organization or even the personal needs of staff members. Social workers can get caught in an ethical conflict between professional values and fiscal necessities in their role as manager. Any decision regarding client discharge or termination can leave someone unhappy. In such situations, the best a social work manager may be able to do is sort out his or her O\vn allegiances and priorities and strive to make difficult but ethical decisions in a consistent and defensible manner.

Attitudes abo ut Competition In manufacturing or business, the con1petition is a major component of the task environment. It is always waiting for a marketing error or a bad product decision so that it can 1nove in and take a larger share of the market. What is more, competition is inevitablepart of the American free-enterprise system. If you are well managed and produce goods or services and a profit results, competition will quickly pop up to copy you to try to share in the benefits. Monopolies are disliked in Western society; they either have been broken up or never allowed to occur. For example, efforts to merge major airlines have sometimes been disallowed because it was feared that they would drive up ticket prices in markets where competition vvould no longer exist. Even when, on rare occasion, a monopoly has been allowed to occur, once it starts to look too self-serving or appears not to be in the best interests of the general public, competition is encouraged or even required by law. The inevitable presence of competition in industry and business results in a variety of management activities designed to gain an advantage. Competition keeps an organization "in touch" with the consumer. Stale, old approaches to consumer needs and preferences can cause the organization to lose ground quickly. Competition provides a driving force in manufacturing and business that requires it to be dynamic and planful. Historically, the specter of competition has been less important for most human service organizations (once again, those in the for-profit sector and certain health care providers always have been notable exceptions). Client waiting lists and service gaps, which no one organization could fill, were often more typical of many human service organizations. In many human service organizations we might have been delighted if another organization opened up down the block to offer sinillar services and take away a few of our clientswe were probably overloaded anyvvay. Who feared competition? We welcomed the help. This happy or unhappy situation (depending on how we wish to view it) is rapidly changing. Today, in most human service organizations, there is stiff competition, especially for external funding. Developing efficient referral networks and implementing inter-organization coordination remain in1portant 1nanagement activities. Getting another organization to take a referral through some reciprocal agreement is still desirable in some situations. But an increasing ainount of the time of higher-level 1nanagers is now devoted to attempting to successfully con1pete with other organizations for funding fro1n private foundations or organizations such as United Way. That entails (among other tasks) writing grant proposals for programs that will get funded and then managing the progran1s \veil so that they will be successful and 'vill continue to be funded. Overall, the relationship with other sinillar organizations in the human services sector remains generally cordial and congenial, if occasionally a little strained by the tensions of competition. But in an era of competition for limited funding and the related demands

37

38

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective for accountability, social work managers must provide leadership in keeping an organization flexible and responsive. They must remain knowledgeable about the needs of potential clients but also must have an awareness of shifting sources of financial support. And, they must be able to demonstrate the success of their programs and services.

Marketing Strategies Competition naturally increases the need for good marketing. Both manufacturing and business as well as human service organizations seek out potential customers/clients and seek to enhance their visibility and their reputations through some form of advertisement. They all have limited financial resources available for these activities, and they may deploy them quite differently. In manufacturing and business, marketing research is used to determine if there are large groups of people with sufficient interest and enough money to purchase a product under consideration. If so, the product may be manufactured and sold. But if the market potential for a product is found to be small, the product is simply not produced. Similarly, human service organizations often conduct needs assessments (Chapter 13) before they offer a program or service, in part to be sure that there is really a need for it and that potential clients will use it if it is offered. But the resemblance to manufacturing may end at the point of evaluating the results of the research. Human service organizations, seeing that a large number of potential clients exist, will likely offer the service if sufficient funding is available. But, and this is an important difference, they may occasionally offer a service even if only relatively few potential clients indicate a need for it. If they do, it will be offered at a fair price, or even free. This occurs when the need of the few is great or when a need is implied, even though not many potential clients acknowledge it. The ethical necessity of addressing a problem takes precedence over efficiency. A manufacturer would be unlikely to produce a product that few people show an interest in purchasing, no matter how badly it is needed by them. If it did, the cost of the "specialty" item would likely be very high to recoup the high cost of research, manufacturing, and marketing the product. Drug manufacturers have received sharp criticism from social workers and others because of their refusal to 1nanufacture "orphan" drugs for persons afflicted with very rare diseases or when they manufacture them but sell them at very high prices. From a business perspective, either alternative just makes sense. It is unrealistic to expect people with a profit-driven orientation to make decisions that detract from the "bottom line:' However, in some human service organizations, we will sometimes devote great effort and time to seeking out and serving small numbers of clients with relatively rare problems or problems that they do not acknowledge. What's more, we do this at a financial loss to the organization.

Available Cause-and-Effect Knowledge A manufacturing plant is likely to have many of its employees engaged in simple, repetitive tasks. The product of their work is predictable. For example, add two ounces of blue dye to the plastic compound and a toy of the desired hue will result. Or, grind a 1netal replacement part to within a certain tolerance as measured electronically or by a micrometer and it will be acceptable. Si1nilarly, a business may be able to accurately adjust inventory based on past sales (that's why they still scan the bar code even when all items in the store cost a dollar), and predict with reasonable accuracy what future sales of the item will be. Thus, employees

What Makes 1-luman Seivices Management Differen t? in these organizations operate in an environment of"reasonable certainty:' No comparable level of knowledge exists in many areas of the human services. Cause-and-effect knowledge is simply not available for many forms of practice intervention, primarily because of the complexity of the human behavior that is involved. For example, in direct practice, \'le cannot predict with reasonable certainty that a social \vork response of"how did that make you feel?" or "thank you for sharing that" to a client description of a difficult life experience "vill produce ne\v insights or otherwise help to alleviate a problem. It could also result in a disgusted look, a fit of laughter, an obscene gesture directed at the social worker, or any one of an infmite number of other behaviors. Similarly, a social worker's professional judgment that an HIV education program will reduce the rate of anonymous sex may be correct, but it also may not be. Still another practitioner's use of confrontational strategies with a landlord to attempt to get changes in his client's unhealthy living conditions may produce the desired result, or, the client may get an eviction notice. Of course, even managers in a hwnan service agency must make personnel decisions, imple1nent progran1s, establish policies, and so forth with little assurance that they will be successful. That is because, as we noted in the previous chapter, there is so little prescriptive knowledge at a n1anager's disposal. Managers in all organizations wish they had more cause-and-effect knowledge. However, an organization whose product (its services) must be produced with limited cause-and-effect knowledge requires different management skills than an organization in which standardized activities produce predictable results. While research has produced evidence of best practices in many areas of services, we often cannot know with certainty what is the "right" (i.e., effective) \Vay to intervene with a specific client or client group. Supervisors may not know either. All that they can do is nurture a work climate conducive to the exercise of professional judgment and discretion, one in which some risk-taking is perceived as necessary and desirable. Managers in manufacturing or business, in contrast, \vould be more likely to emphasize and enforce conformity. They \vould attempt to create an environment in which only the "right" way of doing something will be tolerated.

Interaction with the Consumer An organization that manufactures a product or one that sells one has one primary occasion to interact with consumers-when consurners face the decision of whether to buy or not to buy their product. Consumers vote on the desirability of the product through their decision to buy or not buy. This decision is influenced by their evaluation of the product itself, of who is selling it, of how it is displayed, of how well it was advertised, and so forth. The constuner never n1eets those within the organization who manufactured the product or who made nlanagement decisions relative to its manufacture and marketing. They nlay write a letter to complain if dissatisfied with the product or even bring suit if it causes them some harm, but generally there is no direct interaction with the organization that produced it Consumer interaction and feedback in human service organizations is usually different. It tends to be more direct, face-to-face, and, often, frequent. Contact with the consun1er is somewhat similar to that of others who offer a service (e.g., plumbers, HVAC repair people, and electricians), though they usually interact with the consumer only sporadically rather than regularly. In a hurnan service organization, the consumer is not some unknown person (perhaps, in another state or country) as they are for a manufacturer; they

39

40

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective are present and we interact directly with them. If, for whatever reason, they are not satisfied with the services that they are receiving, supervisors and other managers may have to meet them, perhaps several times, to address their dissatisfaction.

Indicators of Success In addition to processing and addressing consumer feedback, management requires ongoing evaluation of many other aspects of organizational functioning. A manager in a manufacturing corporation or in a business has available good, clear indicators of success-sales and earnings. Managers can devote most of their evaluation time to identifying factors that either contributed to, had no influence on, or diminished sales and earnings, and responding to them. In human service organizations, social workers who offer direct services often cannot know if they are being successful. Was the breakup of Ms. Ramirez' abusive inarriage an indicator of successful counseling? Was the fact that Dorothy never kept her appointment after her third visit an indicator the counseling was successful or unsuccessful? Was Jamaal's leaving a secure job for a less secure, but higher paying, one an indication that he is achieving the treatment goal of becoming a more responsible parent? In the role of manager we also spend an inordinate amount of time just attempting to document whether or not services and programs have been successful. Lacking clear indicators, any conclusions must be regarded as tentative and are arrived at from a variety of evaluation criteria that are often more qualitative than those used in business or industry. So1netimes, for example, in a substance abuse treatment program it cannot easily be determined if clients in the program have really made progress in addressing their problem. Qualitative indicators of success (e.g., statements made in treatment groups, direct observation, or inperson interviews) can be employed. However, inost of these would make a manufacturer or business person cringe. In the role of manager, social workers sometimes must evaluate an organization's programs (a task discussed in more detail in Chapter 13) by focusing on, for example, their structure {facilities and personnel) or impact (presence of long-term permanent change).4 The stage of development of the progra1n influences what evaluation criteria are appropriate.5 All of these evaluative foci result in management tasks that differ from those required by the manufacturing corporation or business. Because of their "softness:' they also may be regarded suspiciously by members of an already hostile task environment that is demanding proof of the effectiveness of the organization's services and programs.

Role of Supervisors In a business or manufacturing corporation, a supervisor's primary function is task assignment and oversight of their subordinates, or what is called administrative supervision. Supervisors ensure that workers are present on time; comply with rules, policies, and procedures; attend to their work; don't take too long for lunch and breaks; use any equipment safely; and so forth. However, as we will describe in Chapter 9, the management func tions of supervisors in human service agencies are much more comprehensive, since many staff me1nbers are professionals who have different supervisory needs. For example, material support for subordinates (being sure that they have what they need to do their jobs) still needs to be provided, but so does emotional support for dealing with the stressors

What Makes 1-luman Seivices Management Differen t? inherent in their \vork. Support for professional growth is another expectation, even if it results in subordinates becoming more marketable and leaving the organization for better job opportunities.

The Prime Beneficiary One more difference between the manufacturing sector and most human service organizations goes a long \Vay toward understanding the role of social work managers. In their classic 1962 study of public social agencies, Blau and Scott first introduced the concept of prime beneficiary.6 They identified four categories of individuals as potential beneficiaries of any formal organization:

1. Its members 2. Its owners 3. Its custo1ners 4. The public-at-large While more than one of these groups may benefit fron1 an organization's activities, Blau and Scott suggest that there is (or should be) only one prune beneficiary for an organization. An organization is expected to be most accountable for its actions to that group. (Thus, the degree to which an organization satisfies its prime beneficiary is an important mdicator of its success.) Any benefits that accrue to other beneficiaries are viewed as cost, since they usually result in fewer benefits for the prime beneficiary. For some organizations, identification of the prime beneficiary is quite simple. For example, in "mutual-benefit associations" such as social clubs, credit unions, buying services, or other organizations where members share equally in costs and benefits, the membership is clearly the prime beneficiary. For most manufacturing corporations and businesses that are either privately or publicly o\vned, the prilne beneficiary is the owners or stockholders (despite the fact that they often attempt to convince the public that their prime beneficiary is the customer). A police department or public utility would have as its prilne beneficiary the public-at-large. It \vould seem obvious that, for human service organizations, clients (their customers) should be their prime beneficiary. This position is clearly stated in Standard 1.01 of the NASW Code of Ethics. It reads, "Social workers' primary responsibility is to promote the well-being of clients. In general, clients' interests are primary:'7 However, the words "in general" open the door to exceptions. As we shall see, the issue of who is our prime beneficiary can be a source of ethical conflicts for managers. The right of owners to be the prune beneficiary of a n1anufacturer or business is rarely challenged by the public in our society. It may be threatened if, for example, there is evidence of "price-gouging" {e.g., an "excessive" rise in food prices following a drought or flood, dramatic rises in gasoline prices during a crisis in the Middle East, or exorbitant prices for portable generators, ice, or other emergency supplies during a natural disaster). It may also be threatened ifthe organization engaged in environmental pollution, destruction of natural resources, or labor exploitation. But, short of these relatively unusual occurrences, the right to n1ake a reasonable profit is usually acknowledged by the public in our society. We do not expect the organization to operate at a loss, and we expect its managers to make decisions that will contribute to the production of surplus, that is, a profit. Managers need not apologize for their actions. Owners demand profits.

41

42

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective The owners or stockholders of a manufacturing corporation or business have a right to "call the shots." They have invested their savings with the hope that they will grow; they also run the risk that their investment will diminish or be lost. Neither the organization nor its owners and stockholders are there to perform a public service. If there is any public service taking place, it is generally viewed as an investment in community relations, such as when a business sponsors a youth baseball team or a manufacturing plant is a corporate sponsor of the local symphony orchestra. It is hoped that the goodwill generated will ultimately justify its cost by increasing sales and profits. The presence of a clear-cut and societal-sanctioned prime beneficiary (owners or stockholders) puts a manufacturer or business in a position that is envied by most human service organizations. There is only one master to please. As long as sales and profit figures are good, the prime beneficiary is pleased with the organization. There is general agreement between the organization and its prime beneficiary about what is a desirable goal, greater profit. Managers can focus 1nany of their activities on i1nproving efficiency as a means to greater profit. In human service organizations, while there is general agreement among social workers about who should be the prime beneficiary (the organization's clients), there is also a recognition that the needs and wishes of other components of the task environment cannot be ignored. Consequently, much of a manager's time may be spent in trying to find ways to better address client needs, while also attempting to satisfy the demands of other groups and individuals who 1nay believe (and often act as if) each is the prime beneficiary. This requires some skill and diplomacy. As one author has noted, "Managers are confronted almost daily with the need to satisfy different and so1netimes competing values and stakeholder interests:'8 The lack of a universally acknowledged prime beneficiary creates an ongoing tension within many human service organizations and between the organization and its task environment. Often, the "competition" for the role of prime beneficiary is between clients and the public-at-large. Especially in the public sector, a social work manager may face an ongoing battle to attempt to gain acceptance for the client as being the prime beneficiary. Members of the public-at-large, because they contribute money through the tax structure to fund these organizations, often believe, logically enough, that they should be the pri1ne beneficiary. For example, social workers employed in a state in-patient psychiatric hospital regularly have their activities shaped by a lack of agreement regarding just who is the prime beneficiary. To social workers and other professional staff, the organization is there to treat and to serve the patients. Their best interests should always take precedence over other factors. They are the prime beneficiary, right? How would such an assumption affect one's daily activities? Treat1nent staff would take the position that a person should be released from the hospital when, in their judgment, discharge is a more therapeutic alternative to continued hospitalization. Occasional errors in judgment, present in all professional decision making, would be both tolerable and inevitable. Operating from this perspective, a social work manager might also devote considerable effort to try to make the physical environment more homelike, less threatening or oppressive, and thus more conducive to treatment. In contrast, members of the public-at-large, believing themselves to be the prime beneficiary, 1night take a very different attitude toward the same organization and what it should be doing. While paying lip service to treatment goals, they may demand protection of the public and react with outrage when a patient is discharged "prematurely" and engages in violent or embarrassing behavior. (One wonders, sometimes, whether premature is not

What Makes 1-luman Seivices Management Differen t? synonymous with "prior to death:' as evidenced by the comments of some members of the public-at-large.) They may see no reason to spend public funds to make hospital settings more "friendly:' Security would be a high priority. They might advocate building walls to separate patients from the community rather than bridges to it (sometimes, even literally). Social \Yorkers employed in public correctional settings see even more extreme examples of the same phenomenon. Members of the public-at-large, believing themselves to be the prime beneficiary, demand what they see as their rights. They are likely to insist on long sentences (punishment) for crimes and protection of the public from possible future offenses. However, professional staff members who view the prisoner as the prime beneficiary would probably view rehabilitation as the principal mission of the organization. This basic disagreement in perception explains, at least in part, the position taken by both advocates and opponents of early release programs or even of capital pw1ishment. If correctional services are being provided by a for-profit organization through a contract with state or local government, things can become even 1nore co1nplicated. Then owners or stockholders would be a third group that might clain1 the position of prime beneficiary. Their primary concern would be efficiency of operation; they would demand efforts to reduce costs, and thus to increase profit. In public child-protection organizations, members of the public-at-large pay the bills through the tax structure. But their right to "call the shots" takes a slightly different form. Believing themselves to be the prime beneficiary, they assert that they have a right to influence the policies and actions of employees of the organization. They also may believe that their definition of who is a client, a family, or even a community should be the accepted one. While not denying the need for child protection and not beyond a reaction of rage and charges of incompetence \vhen a child is severely injured or killed, they are equally likely to fight against "precipitous" removal of the child from the home or investigations that may embarrass the family and/or the community. In contrast, social workers viewing the child as the client and thus the organization's prime beneficiary are likely to see child protection and child advocacy as their primary functions and to view their responsibilities to protect parents from false accusations or to protect the community from bad publicity as secondary. It is not surprising that a similar conflict is also played out in many other settings in which social workers are employed, but where funding does not come from tax revenues. Sometimes disagreements about who should be the prune beneficiary may not be quite as drainatic as in mental health, corrections, or child protection, but the lack of consensus over the identity of the prime beneficiary exists nevertheless. Many other social workers work in settings where a lack of consensus regarding the prin1e beneficiary is inevitable. There is a prevailing belief in Western nations that "they who pay the fiddler get to call the tune:' In those hu1nan service organizations that receive prin1ary funding from private donations, for example, many non-profit organizations that provide services to people who are homeless, members of the general public are likely to act as if they are the prime beneficiary and will demand a say in ho\v, when, where, and even what kind of services will be delivered. For example, local merchants might favor dispensing bus tickets to homeless people so that they can be transported away from their place of business and served somewhere else where they will not offend or harass potential customers. Local residents agree that they need to be helped, but they will not \Vant them housed in their neighborhoods where they may believe people who are homeless represent a threat to their families and their property values.

43

44

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective For those organizations in the private, for-profit sector (e.g., many extended care facili ties, private psychiatric treatment centers, or those that have contracts with state or local governments), tension over the issue of who is the prime beneficiary also exists. However, in these organizations it is likely to center arow1d whether the prime beneficiary is the client or the owners or stockholders. The latter groups cannot simply be ignored. For example, suppose that, in a private psychiatric facility, a patient or client is viewed by professional staff as ready to go hon1e, but still has days left under insurance coverage. Perhaps there is not another patient awaiting admission. However, as we noted earlier, empty beds do not generate profit. So should the patient go home, despite a loss in revenue to the organization? Or, what if the reverse situation is true? Suppose that in the professional judgment of a social worker, a patient needs to remain hospitalized for health reasons or for the protection of others, but insurance coverage has run out and other patients with coverage are waiting to be admitted? There is no easy answer to these dilemmas. Social workers in the role of manager cannot simply pretend that fiscal concerns are unimportant and go about their business as if the interests of clients are all that matters. An organization that fails to respond to the demands of the various groups that view themselves as the prime beneficiary will soon cease to be an organization. Yet, at the same time, ethical obligations to our clients cannot be ignored either. Especially in those organizations where employees are unionized or have organized to protect their interests in some other ways, another interesting phenomenon may exist. Is the prime beneficiary the clients or the members (employees) of the organization? Employees themselves may struggle over the answer to this question. The issue can produce conflicts for the manager over, for example, whether staff should work evenings and weekends when clients are most available for services or whether overtime pay or compensatory time should be awarded for work performed after 5:00 PM. If managers naively asswne that professionals just naturally adhere to the beliefthat the client is the prime beneficiary and that self-interest should always be of lesser importance, they will continue to be puzzled by the resistance that they observe. To some staff in highly unionized settings, particularly those at lower administrative levels, their own interests will appear to take precedence over those of their clients. This is a reality that a manager may dislike or even regard as unethical, but it cannot be ignored.

Misuses of the Prime Beneficiary Concept The concept of prime beneficiary is helpful in understanding the feeling of being "caught in the middle'' that a social work manager often experiences. While it can help to explain a manager's ethical dilemmas, the presence of two or more groups with a claim to being the prime beneficiary is never a valid excuse for poor management. In the past, some managers have attempted to justify inattention to the demands of the public-at-large, of owners, or of employee labor unions on the grounds that they have done their job by concerning themselves primarily with the needs of their prime beneficiary-the client. They have helped to manage a very inefficient, but client-centered organization and have reacted with indignation when accused of mismanagement or under-management. Especially in the public sector but in other settings as well, managers need to remind staff members and themselves of who the prime beneficiary should be, while negotiating with (and sometimes making concessions to) those groups who think they ought to be the prime beneficiary. Conversely, managers cannot use the presence of tension over who is the prime beneficiary as a convenient alibi for a lack of sensitivity to client needs and demands. So1ne managers have done a good job of courting the favor of the public-at-large, its owners or

What Makes 1-luman Seivices Management Differen t? stockholders, or even its staff members. But they have accomplished this at the expense of needed client services. The "creaming" approach to client selection-choosing to serve only those clients for whom the likelihood of successful intervention is high-is a good example of a way in which managers can make an organization appear successful and thus court the favor of the public. Another way is through strict adherence to ruJes and policies that assure maximum payment for services from insurance companies or other third parties. This practice demonstrates an approach to management that can be considered fiscally sound. But it may also be inconsistent \.vith social work professional ethics and values. Too much focus on pleasing a prime beneficiary other than the client can resuJt in services that are insensitive and unresponsive to client needs. Managers who use the concept of prime beneficiary (whether they call it that or not) to justify a myopic focus on either meeting the needs of clients or on pleasing some other constituency do not fully understand the role of the social work manager. Good social work management is often an ongoing balancing act in which trade-offs are inevitable and in which satisfaction with management decisions on the part of all parties rarely occurs. Please one and you are almost certain to displease another. So1netimes the best interests of one must prevail; sometimes it is those of another. A good manager can derive some satisfaction from maintaining a balance between the best interests of a co1npeting group of constituencies, all of whom have some claim to being a prime beneficiary of the organization. In some situations where it seems like any decision will end up antagonizing someone, this may be the only source of satisfaction for the manager. Managers in most human service organizations where there is a lack of consensus as to the prime beneficiary often must attempt to "serve two masters:· sometimes even more. They face frequent ethical issues and challenges. They may also lack job security, since they invariably antagonize one group or another.

Accountability Implications of the Prime Beneficiary Question Because of a lack of consensus regarding the prime beneficiary of the organization, social work managers often find themselves walking a narrow path. They recognize the need to be accountable, but to whom? Accountability is measured in terms of efficiency and effectiveness. When used in the context of accountability, efficiency relates directly to the cost of services, usually by a comparison with the costs within other organizations that offer similar services. However, effectiveness relates to an organization's ability to demonstrate that it does what it says it does and the degree to which it acco1nplishes its outcome objectives. Sometimes, efficiency is more valued by one group with a claiin to being the prime beneficiary; sometimes effectiveness is more valued by another. For example, it 1nay be n1ore important to demonstrate effectiveness to clients but to demonstrate efficiency to a members of a hostile public-at-large tl1at is critical of the goals of the organization. A government entity or private foundation tl1at is providing financial support may en1phasize the need for both. As previously noted, certain services such as counseling are very costly in comparison with their benefits that are derived and even the effectiveness of the intervention is not easy to prove. For example, can a social worker really document that counseling resuJted in Ms. Jones's leaving an abusive living situation? Ho\.v much did it contribute? Can the social worker claim credit for any improvement that occurred, or were other factors such as finding employment or the opportunity to move in with her sister the real reasons for the change? Can we even say with certainty that her "having to see a social \.vorker" has not actually delayed her progress toward independence?

45

46

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective The emphasis on accountability that began in the twentieth century stressed responsibility to the public-at-large, especially to taxpayers who provided the funding for social programs. Many programs, especially those that had difficulty demonstrating that they were successful, were threatened. Many social workers believed that the "age of accountability" \Vas less focused on client needs than on cost saving. They feared that, with a greater focus on efficiency, professional standards of services would suffer. Clients would be "processed;' but not helped. Services and programs that were not cost-efficient might be eliminated. In response, an "anti-efficiency" climate developed in some human service organizations. Demands for fiscal accountability in human services reached a new peak in the early 1970s in the United States, in part in response to what was perceived as social workers' failures to reduce welfare caseloads during times of relatively generous funding for social services during the Lyndon Johnson administration.9 Waste and inefficiency in human service organizations \Vere exposed with glee by government leaders such as John Ehrlichman who announced that social workers and others would "have to make an honest living" 10 in the future. The presence of inefficiency and even ineffectiveness within human service organizations was not totally the imagination of a politically 1notivated or vindictive group of fed eral officials. A lack of accountability over the years had allowed some ineffective programs to develop and continue. Some services and methods for their delivery were also inefficient and/or ineffective. The emphasis on accountability and, in some cases, the application of business methods of evaluation \Vas not without some value. As organizations were forced to become more accountable, the social worker's prime beneficiary, the client, often benefited. Those organizations that really were delivering effective services in an efficient manner had little problem in demonstrating accountability. Those that were not were forced to ilnprove their management methods or risk loss of funding. While undoubtedly some good organizations were evaluated out of existence and some helpful but inefficient services had to be discontinued, in retrospect the accountability focus may have been more beneficial than harmful. Those managers who were able to look beyond the threats that accountability posed and to see demands for it as an opportunity to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of programs and services made beneficial changes, which made their organizations both stronger and more acceptable to the public-at-large. More recently, the escalating cost of health care has produced another dramatic example of the ethical issues that human service managers can face when there is a lack of consen sus as to who should be the prime beneficiary. Health insurance companies, threatened with reduced profits and losses, cut benefits and instituted a variety of health care cost containment measures that culminated in what is referred to collectively as 1nanaged care. Social workers and other health care professionals who viewed patients as the prime beneficiary cried "foul" and predicted the demise of responsible, medically sound treatment. Did the HMOs and other health insurance providers have a legitimate claim to being the prime beneficiary (since they paid most of the bills)? Did that give them a right to, for example, severely limit the reimbursable days of hospitalization for a prostatectomy or to declare a simple mastectomy an outpatient procedure? Did they have a right to allow non-medically trained bureaucrats to make such determinations? But perhaps the people whose employers paid for all or most of their health insurance or who paid for it directly, that is, the patients, could also claim prime beneficiary status and thus were entitled to the best care available. While managed care has not been as disastrous as 1nany social workers predicted it would be, it has undoubtedly resulted in a reduction in quality of medical and psychiatric treatment

What Makes I luman Se1v ices Management Different? for some patients. Like other developments that have exacerbated the tension between different groups who believe they have the right to be the prime beneficiary, it has made the working lives of managers more difficult. It has produced numerous ethical dilemmas as managers attempted to "serve two (or more) masters:' each of \vhom had a claim to being the prime beneficiary. Satisfy one, and the other was almost certain to be dissatisfied.

NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS What we have described up to this point are the general characteristics of human service organizations and how they affect the work of managers. However, there is a special type of organization, the non-profit (sometimes nlore accurately described as "not-for profit") organization that differs in important ways from, for example, the public social agency often associated with human services. Whichever term is used (and sometimes the terms also are not hyphenated), it is so1nething of a inisnomer: Non-profit organizations can generate a cash surplus if they do not do it consistently (i.e., they take in more money than they spend). However the surplus must go back into the organization's benefits, reserves, expansion, and so on, or the organization risks losing its non-profit status and the benefits that go with it. Unlike a for-profit business or corporation, non-profits don't redistribute profits to shareholders, or get returns on equity. However, they can nlake capital investments and use profits in other ways similar to businesses and for-profit organizations. T hey attempt to show neither a loss nor a profit at the end of the business year. Other features of non-profit organizations include: • The issue is not ho'v much or where money is made and where it flo,vs, but \vhere it ends up. • If the non-profit organization is a public charity, for instance, money should end up in services to the public; if it is a membership, to members; if a political organization, to services and lobbying ('vithin special limits); and so forth. • If the non-profit organization is a "think tank," money goes to academic-like resources, new hires, publications, and so forth. A critical indicator of the viability of a non-profit organization is its reserves. Reserves are necessary for any non-profit, organization in order to \Veather economic downturns. Amounts of reserves vary, but generally enough for 1- 1.5 operating years is recommended. While very large non-profits organizations may have millions of dollars in reserves, they are more the exception than the rule. Most managers in non-profit organizations 1nake the decision to "live on the edge:• ineaning that the majority of non-profit organizations operate virtually fron1 month to month financially. Until recent years of economic downturn, employees of non-profit organizations were usually at greater risks of layoffs than employees in the public sector; during the economic recession of the past decade, the risk of layoffs in government employment equaled that of other types of organizations.

Types of Non-Profit Organizations Gaining non-profit status is not an easy process, as it is in, for example, a Linlited Liability Corporation (LLC), which can be done easily and quickly using a kit that can be acquired. Qualifying as a non-profit organization (especially certain types) is much more involved.

47

48

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective It generally takes one to two years to register and requires the work of an attorney. Issues often arise as to how salaries are to be paid and how funds can be raised during the startup period. Types of non-profit organizations include membership or non-membership, trade association, charity, "think tank;' and political advocacy organizations. Each is managed differently. A1nong non-profit organizations, there are some important differences relating to tax status. In describing them, federal and state governments use the code SOl(c), followed by a number from 1to6. When a manager is to be responsible for some or all fundraising, these numbers are especially significant. For example: • Services and donations to a SOl(c) 3 are generally tax deductible and therefore make soliciting donations or raising revenue relatively easy. No documentation is required for donors of small amounts of cash or commodities to deduct them on tlleir tax returns. • For a SOl(c) 6 non-profit organization (e.g., Goodwill Industries or animal rescue charities), documentation is required for a tax deduction-a receipt with the estimated value of the donation. • A foundation, a SOl(c) 4 non-profit organization, can take donations; a co1npany without a foundation cannot. Thus, some organizations (within both human services and elsewhere) set up foundations to perform charitable services and distribute grants. An example of one in the human service area is the Sisters of Charity Foundation in South Carolina. The group of business-savvy nuns has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars to promote health and education in poverty-stricken areas. Some foundations in other sectors are set up to indirectly compensate management personnel. Good examples are the foundations that often exist within large universities. Managers/administrators collect base salaries from the university, but those numbers often pale in comparison to the money they receive fro1n the w1iversity's foundations. Another example of a foundation is the one used by Harley Davidson. It allows ilie for-profit company to get revenue from customers it otherwise could not get-through charitable foundation donations. This revenue cannot fund capital improven1ents or operations for the for-profit arm of the company. However, foundation donations can promote events that benefit the company by gathering customers who buy and use products (Harley conventions, etc.). Foundations have a number of ways of collecting revenue. They include: • • • • •

Selling products and services to members (but not the general public); Collecting membership dues; Collecting donations to the foundation; Owning real estate and renting out surplus space; Collecting returns on revenues/investment reserves. Historically these investments were very conservative; now foundations often follow the Yale and Harvard endowment models-investments are much more aggressively managed; there is an increased tolerance for risk. (In the past, most foundations were very self-conscious of the fact that funds were other people's money, and not the organization's); and

What Makes 1-luman Seivices Management Differen t? • Offering endorsements-these can be quasi-endorsements by simply allowing the organization's name to be associated with a service or product without a statement of quality. In exchange, there may be benefits to the members of the organization. An example is American Automobile Association (AAA) or AARP (formerly kno\vn as the American Association of Retired Persons) discounts at hotels, which may help the organization to recruit new members or retain existing ones.

Lobbying Some non-profit organizations register one or more of their employees as lobbyists, a term for persons representing the organization who formally declare that they intend to influence the laws and policies made by legislatures. However, non-profit organizations do not get a "blank check" to register a lobbyist to advocate for certain laws and policies just because they represent causes that are consistent with the organization's 1nission. State and the federal governments have laws governing who can register as a lobbyist. These are often governed by the size of the organization, the percent of the non-profit organization's budget allocated to advocating for legislation, and the percent of ti1ne that individuals in the nonprofit organization spend on advocacy. The effectiveness of lobbying by non-profit organizations often is directly proportional to the size of its membership (and thus to the number of potential voters it contains). AARP is the United States' largest non-profit organization \vith over 40 million members. It is part insurance company (available to members only) and part membership organization. It is also one of the nation's strongest lobbying groups for many issues that affect older Americans, including health care and Social Security benefits.

Advocacy There is a second, less direct way that non-profit organizations seek to pron1ote their agenda. Managers and other staff members within non-profit organizations have the freedom to advocate for issues that government employees usually do not have. Ho\v do they learn advocacy skills for issues relevant to the organization and its interests? One way is to ask to "apprentice" with an experienced lobbyist who will offer to introduce you to lawmakers and policymakers in the state capital. A second method is to e-mail, text, or call me1nbers of, or donors to, the organization and ask them to contact law1nakers concerning issues of i1nportance. The advent of 1nass e-mails (also called e-blasts) allows managers within the organizations to contact hundreds, if not thousands, of 1nembers or donors asking that they contact their elected officials, requesting they vote positively or negatively on an issue. If the organization is small, seeking to partner with other, larger non-profit organizations on advocacy efforts with similar agenda can be highly effective. For example, in 2002 the State of South Carolina had the third lowest tax on cigarettes in the nation at seven cents a pack. Numerous studies have shown that raising the tax lowers the rate of smoking among adults and discourages teenagers from beginning to smoke. Year after year, more than a dozen small non-profit organizations in the state partnered with the powerful AARP to seek an increase in the tax. Finally in 2010, the tax was raised; hO\'Vever, in 2014 it still ranked as the seventh lowest in the nation.

49

50

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective Managers in non-profit human service agencies face many of the same challenges and perform many of the same tasks as managers in the for-profit sector. However, as we have described, they have some unique challenges and have different tasks to accomplish as well, often relating to the necessity of maintaining their organization's non-profit status. They often experience a near-constant need for additional fund-raising and to satisfy the providers of resources that funds are being used efficiently and effectively. They also are responsible to a board of directors consisting of people who may have widely diverse backgrounds, and thus different ideas of where the organization should be heading and how it should get there. One or more of them may simply dislike the current director's "style:' and may be looking for an excuse to fire him or her and hire a replacement! We will return to some of these situations in later chapters of this book.

SUMMARY In this chapter, we examined the context of human services in order to better understand >vhat often makes the role of social work manager in human service agencies different from that of other managers. For example, the presence of a task environment that is not always friendly, and sometimes quite hostile, suggests why the tasks of management in social work take certain directions that would seem illogical to many people in business or industry. Ways to try to make the task environment friendlier were discussed. We reviewed the ways in which manufacturers and businesses are similar to, but also how they differ from human service organizations and how these differences shape the actions of their respective managers. We singled out an old but still very serviceable concept, namely prime beneficiary, to explain an especially important difference. A lack of consensus regarding who should be the prime beneficiary in many human service organizations presents problems and occupies much of the energies of social work managers, particularly in public agencies, but in an increasing number of other settings as well. We also looked at a related issue-accountability-and at the special problems faced by managers in addressing it. Social workers as managers must demonstrate effectiveness and efficiency to the public-at-large and/or to others who regard themselves as the organization's prime beneficiary. At the sa1ne time, they 1nust address the needs of clients, the group that social work professionals regard as the prime beneficiary of human service organizations. Finally, we described a special type of organization found widely among human service organizations, the non-profit organization, and what makes it unique. We looked at different types of non-profit organizations, and how they differ from each other. We also looked at two activities that are important work of social workers within non-profit organizations-lobbying and advocacy.

APP LI CATI 0 N 1. Who do you think should be the prime beneficiary for your school or program of social

work education? 2. What other groups have a legitimate claim to being the prime beneficiary? Why can't they be ignored? 3. How does the possible presence of two or more "prime beneficiaries" affect the job of managers (e.g., a dean, department chair, or curriculum chair)?

Chapter 3 '

Historical Origins of Current Management Practices Leaming Outcomes At the end of this chapter, you should be able to: • List the primary contribution of the three classical schools of management to management theory as we know it today. • List the common shortcomings of the classical schools of management. • Explain why human service organizations that operate in a hostile task environment often possess the characteristics of bureaucracies. • Discuss why excessive use of participative management methods can result in inefficiency and morale proble·ms.

o understand the theories and practices of management that are prevalent today, it is helpful to examine those earlier theories whose successes and failures were the impetus for how management has evolved. However, there is a second reason to study the history of management theory. As social workers, we know that change in human behavior is slow and difficult. While few current social work managers today would admit to heavy reliance on, say, scientific management or adininistrative management theories, their behavior as managers suggests that earlier theories are alive and well, and continue to be a major direct influence on their behavior. Earlier conceptualizations of workers and of the role of managers continue to have an unmistakable imprint on management within human service organizations. In exan1ining historical approaches to management we will provide only a brief description of them-just enough to describe the assumptions underlying them, their major characteristics, and some of their strengths and weaknesses. A vast amount of writings (and sometimes the life's work of individual theorists) has been summarized (in some cases, into just a few paragraphs) and greatly simplified. Our goal \Vas not to provide an in-depth understanding of them, but rather to focus on these aspects: (1) what they have to offer today's social workers in the role of manager, and (2) where they fall short of their needs. With relatively few exceptions, early management theories were based on research conducted within work settings such as manufacturing plants or large businesses where increased efficiency was the major objective. It was viewed as a desirable means to an even more desirable end-increased profit. As was discussed in Chapter 2, human service organizations reflect some very basic differences from these organizations. But these differences are not nearly as distinct as they once were and, even if they persist, they do not preclude our learning from the work of those who have studied manage1nent in the manufacturing or business sectors.

51

52

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective Past, present, and emerging management theories all have something to offer for today's social work managers. In the early and mid-nineteenth century, when family businesses and cottage industries were the norm, there was little interest in the development of a systematic body of knowledge relating to management. The coining of the industrial revolution to North America produced a new pheno1nenon, namely the large-scale business or manufacturing organization. Individuals found themselves working with hundreds and sometimes thousands of other employees in the production and sales of their products. The growth of large and complex businesses and industries prompted the arrival of a new kind of specialist-the manager. The manager's role was neither that of worker nor that of owner. Managers neither helped to make a product with their own hands nor were directly involved in its sale. They were paid to oversee and support the work of others and were evaluated on their ability to perform these tasks. In some large organizations, some managers had no direct dealings at all with workers >vho produced a product; they performed only higher-level management tasks, such as supervising lower-level managers. Those who found themselves in the role of managers at any level often had little preparation for their new roles. They stood to benefit from the development of a systematic body of knowledge to help them to do their jobs. The discussion that follows provides a brief overview of some of the best-known, identifiable management theories that evolved during the past cenhrry. Each reflects a "school" or philosophy of management that is based on (1) certain assumptions about what motivates people; (2) the correct role for a manager to play; and (3) how organizations function. They provide a series of related (but largely unproven) postulates that provide the rationale for making management decisions and for taking action when there is no cause-effect knowledge or empirical research available to guide the manager.

SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT The earliest identifiable theories of management, collectively labeled "scientific management:' really had their origins in the apprenticeship methods of the nineteenth century. Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856- 1915), an engineer by profession, is the name most often associated with scientific management. Taylor was heavily influenced by the work ethic that was prevalent in his ti1ne. Scientific management was based on a number of assumptions about people and their behavior in the workplace. Taylor assumed that workers are motivated primarily by economic concerns. They act rationally. They prefer simple tasks, and they require and want guidance and supervision to help them with their work. What they are really seeking in their work is financial security and a stable work environment that guarantees good, regular pay. If one subscribes to this view of human beings, certain management principles and behaviors follow. The work of the manager should involve the design and application of better ways to increase worker productivity, which in turn are rewarded with extra pay. To accomplish this, scientific management relied heavily on methods such as incentive pay, commissions, and piecework (pay based on number of units of work produced). All of these methods provided financial incentives to workers under the belief that, because of the presence of these incentives, they would devote more of their time and effort to production. If someone works primarily to earn money, that person will work harder if more money is offered as a reward. It makes sense, particularly if your perception of human beings is that of Frederick Taylor, that is, "economic man" (sometimes referred to as "machine man").

J-listorical Origins of Current Management Practices Because workers, managers, and owners all tend to benefit when efficiency and productivity increase, proponents of scientific management argued that conflict within an organization ought to be minimal. If conflict existed it was only because of a lack of scientific kno\vledge and management expertise. Again, there was a compelling logic to this line of thought, given Taylor's basic assumptions about people. Why \Vould any rational, economicaUy motivated worker not \vant to be productive, contributing to organizational profit as \VeJI as to one's own fmancial well-being? Scientific management theory, because it was based on the belief that employees wanted work to be simple and financially rewarding, placed great emphasis on the selection and careful training of workers. Managerial and worker roles are clearly differentiated. "Hands-on" \vorkers perform simple tasks and managers relieve them of the responsibility to think and make decisions. Because their work is so unco1nplicated, workers quickly learn to do it correctly and become increasingly more productive. The assembly line, first widely publicized for its efficient production of Model T and Model "Pl.' Fords, was one of the applications of scientific 1nanagement theories. It relied heavily on strict adherence to the principle of division of labor. Taylor was a perfectionist and an efficiency expert. A phrase that is commonly regarded as critical to an understanding of scientific management is the "one best way:• If one assumes that people are rational and that their motivation is uncomplicated, it is only logical to conclude that a best way to bring them to full productivity can be identified. The role of managers was to discover that way through a combination of their own scientific research and the application of the research studies of management that were conducted by others. Scientific management assumed that the best way (to maximize worker productivity) exists; it just needs to be found. Taylor aspired to n1aking management a science based on an accumulation of research knowledge about the best \vay to perform tasks. Frank Gilbreth ( 1868-1924) and Lillian Gilbreth ( 1878-1972), folJo,vers of Taylor, are credited \vith inventing the application of the scientific method known as the time-and-motion study. It sought to identify and eliminate waste and to increase the quantity of worker output through, for example, the use of devices like stopwatches and the careful observations and recordings of hand and eye movements of \Vorkers.

Limitations of Scientific Management Taylor once wrote, "Under scientific management you ask no one. Every little trifle-there is nothing too small-becomes the subject of experiment. The ex1'erilnents develop into a law: they save n1oney:· 1 Thus, Taylor and his followers conducted research studies that see1ned to lend e1npirical support to the management methods that they advocated. Later theorists sought to discredit their findings based in part on the researchers' methods. 2 It was pointed out that Taylor and his followers generally did not use a control group when "testing" for the effectiveness of the application of scientific management principles. It was also suggested that the findings were influenced by what later became known as the Hawthorne effect,3 a measurement bias that is introduced by the presence of the researcher. The findings of his research and the theories that they produced suffer in their scientific credibility because Taylor himself, \vhile not an especially good speaker, was a convincing salesperson. When he conducted his research, his personality and charismatic presence may have had more to do with a rise in worker productivity than did the management methods he employed.

53

54

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective Other criticisms of scientific management focused on the assumptions about people on which it was based. Some critics saw it as condescending and insulting to workers. For example, his use of the term "first -class man" (his method of identifying or even recruiting the fastest workers, studying them, and then requiring other workers to duplicate their performance) antagonized some people in government and elsewhere. He sometimes seemed to be viewing workers less as individuals than as interchangeable parts. Taylor was also accused of a lack of sensitivity to the possible long-term physiological and psychological damage that can occur to an individual who, day after day, must perform simple, repetitive tasks. This accusation may be a little unfair, as at least one author points out. 4 Taylor was not totally insensitive to human needs or to the potentially damaging effects of routinized tasks on the worker. His writings also reflect a beginning understanding of group dynamics and their influence on productivity. His emphasis on individual motivation through economic incentives was probably more designed to overcome negative group influences on worker behavior than an indication of Taylor's naivete about them. The "one best way" focus of management met opposition from both contemporaries and later critics. Employees and managers of his day were used to making decisions based on "art" factors such as instinct, experience, and tradition. Therefore, they resented what they saw as an effort to develop a body of scientific knowledge that might suggest that some current practices were simply wrong. Identifying what Taylor believed to be the "one best way" had the potential to limit their available options as managers. Later, criticism >vas leveled at the idea that there could ever be a single best way to perform management activities that would always be best in different situations and with people who differed markedly from each other. Critics also questioned Taylor's contention that conflict was unnecessary within organizations if managers just did their jobs well and built in financial rewards for productivity. Especially as unionization spread, organized resistance to Taylor's methods grew. Workers often argued that they were not sharing equally with owners in the profits of their productivity. They began to resent the constant pressure to produce more and 1nore without co1nmensurate rewards. Labor union leaders argued that scientific management methods were used to undermine the limited progress that had been made by workers in, for example, getting better working conditions. In fairness to Taylor, his conception of human beings, particularly his ideas about economic 1notivation, may not have been as far off-base for his time as they might appear to be today. Many of us have grown up with the belief that our work should be interesting, challenging, varied, and should be something we genuinely enjoy, at least some of the time. Workers in the late nineteenth and early hventieth centuries often had quite different (lower) expectations for their jobs than what we might have today. Many of the workers of Taylor's time were recent immigrants who came to the United States primarily to better their economic lot in life. They were inclined to see their jobs as a means to escape poverty, to get a financial start that would put them on the road to prosperity. They wanted financial security first (having often had little in the past) and were less inclined to expect or seek higher-level need gratification. They were not looking for a career; they wanted a job that would pay well and offer job security. In short, Taylor's perception of "economic man" may have been largely accurate (if a little overgeneralized), given many of the workers that he encountered. It would be a mistake to precipitously judge his assumptions and methods based on our understandings of the dynamics of organizational behavior as they exist in the hventy-first century.

J-listorical Origins of Current Management Practices

Current Applications of Scientific Management On the surface, given the many criticisms of scientific management that have been made, it would seem that the theories would offer little to social workers today in the role as manager within human service organizations. However, Taylor and his colleagues made major contributions to management, many of \Vhich are still valid and useful. Remember that scientific management was a major departure from management practices of the preindustrial Revolution era. It was a first step in the right direction. Prior to the era of scientific managen1ent, managers operated and often made decisions based on nothing more than precedent, preference, their instincts, or even impulses. There were no principles of management or any other conceptual frame\vork available to assist them. Only profit, and whatever they believed would produce it, guided management decision 1naking. Managers often appeared to be arbitrary and even capricious in their handling of individual employees. Workers were vulnerable to abuse and exploitation and generally were made to feel powerless. Scientific management was at least based on certain assumptions and principles; it offered a more objective approach to management and to the treatinent of workers. 'fhe search for the one best way, the belief that people are motivated by money, and other assumptions of scientific management did not disappear with Taylor. His followers such as Henry Gantt (1861-1919), the inventor of the Gantt chart, and Hugo Munsterberg ( 1863-1916), who advocated the use of psychological testing in the selection of employees, continued to develop Taylor's theories. An active organization called the Taylor Society exists today. Its members continue to discuss and apply Taylor's ideas a century after his death. Social \VOrkers in the role of manager continue to see the presence of scientific management ideas, sometimes in the management of others and occasionally in their own management practice. They are not always inappropriate. For example, there are occasions \vhen there is a best way and there are times when financial considerations are powerful influences on staff members' behaviors. Scientific management theory contributed many insights into organizational behavior that remain relevant today.

ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT Another approach to management was also taking shape during the first half of the twentieth century. The theories collectively referred to as adnunistrative management evolved from the writings of Henry Fayol (1841 - 1925) and others. Fayol was a French industrialist (mining) who believed that there are certain management principles that are universally appropriate, especially for higher administrative levels in certain work settings. He first published his observations in 1916, but they were not generally known in the United States until the 1940s when they were widely discussed among management theorists. Fayol has been widely misunderstood. While it was probably never his intention that his 14 management principles be perceived as rules or laws, a common misunderstanding about them is that they were meant to be quite rigid. Such supervisory principles as "span of control shall not exceed eight" (no one should supervise more than eight people) or "one man-one boss" were assumed to be prescriptive, yet they really were more like general principles. Unfortunately, they are \vhat is generally remembered about administrative management, \vhereas the broader ideas of Fayol are less well kno\vn.

55

56

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective Fayol believed that good management could be taught. He took the position that persons who applied his principles could be successful in performing the tasks of the manager. His list of managerial activities (see Chapter 1) consisted of planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling. He observed, as we have noted earlier, that management is not confined to the workplace. We engage in management in all human activities. But, Fayol argued, people can be taught to do a better job of management wherever they 1nanage if they adhere to his basic principles. These principles are outlined below:

1. Division of lYork. Fayol believed that specialization will produce more and better work without increased effort. 2. Authority and responsibility. For Fayol, authority (the right to give orders and expect obedience) is closely related to responsibility. Responsibility is a natural consequence of authority. A good manager not only possesses but also encourages others to accept responsibility. 3. Discipline. Fayol saw discipline as part of the "contract" between workers and employers and as absolutely essential for the smooth functioning of an organization. 4. Unity ofcommand. Fayol believed that an employee should receive instructions and be accountable to only one boss. Any other situation undermines authority and causes major problems for the organization. 5. Unity of direction. Fayol believed that a group of activities that are designed to achieve the same objective should have one plan (and one leader). 6. Subordination of individual interest to the general interest. Fayol believed that such human characteristics as selfishness and laziness could produce an organization in which self-interest would take precedence over the best interests of the organization unless supervision, certain agreements, firmness, and the example of superiors precluded it. 7. Remuneration. Fayol believed that it should be fair and, whenever possible, satisfactory to both employer and employee. He advocated some innovative (for his time) methods of compensation such as bonuses and profit-sharing. 8. Centralization. Fayol viewed centralization as always present (to a greater or lesser degree) within an organization. However, he thought that the balance between centralization and decentralization should vary, based largely on the characteristics of managers and their subordinates. He believed that a manager's job was to achieve the most appropriate balance between them, given the uniqueness of the situation. 9. Scalar chain. Fayol believed that strict adherence to the chain of command (especially in large organizations) could cause problems, especially when prompt communication is required. He suggested that organizations sometimes need to create shorter, 1nore direct routes ("gang planks") that are much more efficient for communication flow, even if they do not coincide with the chain of command. 10. Order. Fayol believed strongly that everything and everyone in an organization needs to be in their proper place. He placed great emphasis on matching employees to appropriate positions so that they find themselves in a job where they could make their greatest possible contributions.

His tori cal Origins of Current Manage1nent Practices 11.

Equity. Fayol viewed fairness as being more than justice based on convention. He stressed the need for common sense and kindliness in making decisions that \vould be perceived as fair.

12. Stability of tenure ofpersonnel. Fayol observed that prosperous firms tend to be stable; they tend to have relatively little staff turnover. He noted the high cost of training ne\v personnel, especially managers, and, therefore, advocated job security through such methods as the granting of tenure or permanent employee status. However, he also recognized the problems that could result if too large a proportion of an organization's employees \Vere tenured and became too secure in their jobs. 13. Initiative. Fayol recognized the importance of managers promoting initiative among employees of an organization. But he believed that this must be balanced by respect for authority and discipline. 14.

Esprit de corps. Fayal valued harmony within an organization. He believed it should be promoted by 1nanagers, for example, by not splitting up work groups or by not insisting on written communication among employees when verbal co1nmunication would be 1nore efficient and would be more likely to produce positive interpersonal relationships. 5

It might seem logical to conclude that Taylor's scientific management and Fayol's (and others') administrative management theories were rivals, and were thus incompatible. In fact, they were neither. For one thing, Fayol's principles were designed primarily to assist managers in performing higher-level management activities. Taylor's approaches focused on ways for nianagers to positively affect the productivity of individual \vorkers. Both contributed to management theory, but from a slightly different perspective. Actually, their insights are quite complementary. They shared, along with advocates of the bureaucratic model (discussed later in this chapter), very similar beliefs about human beings and, especially, what motivates them. One of the theorists who took some of Fayol's ideas and developed them a little further \Vas Mary Parker Follett (1868-1933). She relied heavily on the idea of universal management principles, but her writings are based on different experiences and, therefore, have a somewhat different emphasis. Follett knew and understood government and business administration. She also understood the importance of psychological and social factors in the practice of management. While, she is sometimes described as a social worker in her early life, she was not trained as a social worker per se. However, her writings reflect more the need for a manager's sensitivity to human individuality than do those of Fayol or most other writers identified with administrative n1anagement theories. Not surprisingly, a social work manager is likely to feel more at ho1ne with Follett's work than with those of the others. Her insights are more compatible with our profession's emphasis on tile needs of the individual worker than those of most other contemporary theorists.

Limitations of Administrative Management As suggested above, much of the criticism of Fayal and those who extended his work \Vas based on a misunderstanding of just how rigidly his principles were designed to be enforced. lf mistakenly viewed as laws, it is not hard to discredit them. It was pointed out,

57

58

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective for example, that in real life the principles did not always work for the manager. In addition, the limits of each (the situations in which they fail) were not defined. Also, the literature rarely discussed the consequences of noncompliance with the principles. While the principles are logical, they are not always factual in the real world of work. Herbert Simon ( 1916-2001) went to great pains to demonstrate the lack of consistency of some principles with others. He demonstrated that, in some situations, compliance with one principle would require the violation of a second one. 6 Although critics of administrative management may have been somewhat unfair in their attacks, advocates of administrative 1nanagement probably did rely too heavily on the 14 principles. Management cannot be based on 14 or even 400 principles. Overemphasis on principles can result in a situation in which managers pay insufficient attention to some very important situational variables, especially the unique human beings affected by management activities and the unique person who is the manager. Follett reflected a beginning recognition of the importance of these, but her insights still fell short of those needed by the social work manager of the twenty-first century.

Current Application of Administrative Management Although the 14 principles of administrative management have their limits, they are still worthy of our study today. They are far more valuable than misleading. In fact, adherence to them will result in management decisions that will be sound far more often than not. Many of the ideas implicit in this and other current texts are consistent with them and probably evolved from them, at least indirectly. The reader will also note that Fayol's five activities of management are reflected in current literature. We might argue that organizing and coordinating are not discreet activities. But the manage1nent activities specified by Fayol constitute a rather co1nplete description of management activities in any environment, whether personal or professional. Besides, as we shall see, there is overlap in even the most commonly used lists of management activities. The idea that management can be taught may be administrative management's most relevant contribution to current management theory. It is consistent with social work values that contend that people can change, that they can learn to function better if given a chance and some assistance. It would be most unfortunate if we still adhered to earlier attitudes about management that held that good management practice is a gift, given to some and not to others. Because all social work practitioners are managers, as we contend throughout this book, such a belief would not bode well for many of us. However, believing that we can learn to become better 1nanagers not only provides justification for the study of management, it also suggests that we can become successful in the role of managers through study and skill building.

BUREAUCRATIC MANAGEMENT The third "school" of what is collectively referred to as classical management theory, bureaucratic management, is quite familiar to most social workers. Bureaucracies are very much in evidence within the h1unan services, especially in the public sector. They are often favorite targets for criticism when social workers become frustrated by their inability to

J-listorical Origins of Current Management Practices offer services to their clients. It is even a fairly common practice among those \.Vho are not social workers to use large government agencies and organizations, such as county welfare departments, as examples of everything that can go wrong when bureaucratic principles dominate \.vithin an organization. As with the hvo theories discussed previously, one name is most frequently associated with bureaucracies: Max Weber (1864- 1920). While Weber's \.vritings began to appear at the same time that scientific management and administrative management theories were taking shape, translation and widespread implementation of his ideas did not occur in the United States until after World War II. The bureaucracy, believed Weber, was ideal structure for nventieth-century organizations. It remains a dominant model in many organizations today. A bureaucracy is really an organizational design, one specifically constructed along certain principles that are believed to promote efficiency. These principles are familiar to anyone who has ever worked in the public sector. They are logical and, at this point, time-honored and time-tested. For example, bureaucracies are usually characterized by the following: I . A vertical organizational hierarchy. The person on the top is the boss; power decreases at each respective lower level of the hierarchy. Everyone's behavior is monitored by somebody else. 2. Well-defined guidelines that limit fu nction s. Rules, policies, and procedures are in place and enforced. There are even decision-making rules to govern and control behavior when no other formal guidance exists. The idea is that they will function within organizations much as habits work for individuals. 3. Promotion and other rewards based on demonstrated technical cornpetence. "Do your job \.Vell and you will be re\.¥arded:' often with promotion to the next level in the organization's hierarchy.

4. Formal, rigid contmunication channels. There is strict adherence to the chain of command in communication (and in other activities). 5. fob security for full-tin1e employees. "Do your job and you cannot be fired~' 6. Division oflabor. People have very specific jobs to do. They know exactly what their job entails and so does everyone else. Detailed job descriptions are used. 7. Emphasis on written docum entation. "When in doubt, always put it in writing~· A bureaucracy's strict adherence to rath er i1npersonal, unresponsive principles nlakes it especially well-suited to many human service organizations. Organization around bureaucratic principles nlakes it possible to retain control over large numbers of people and their activities. A bureaucracy offers a high level of certainty to employees who might otherwise have difficulty navigating their way within a large organization. If your immediate supervisor is satisfied \.Vith your work, you are OK. Adhere to rules, policies, and procedures (you can look them up if you have to) and you are likely to be rewarded with job security and promotion. Since many social welfare programs receive financing from federal sources and the federal government is itself a highly structured bureaucracy, it is not surprising that bureaucracies also occur at the state and local organization levels. Bureaucracies interact \.veil with other bureaucracies. (They interact less efficiently with organizations that are

59

60

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective structured around other principles.) Internal rules and other controls can easily be tailored to meet federal guidelines and requirements. This promotes even more certainty-it increases the likelihood that funding and reimbursement will be forthcoming. Bureaucracies are even credited with providing a desirable level of certainty to clients. Client advantages of bureaucracies include uniform treatment (no favorites) and protection of clients from discrilnination by those who inight try to withhold needed goods or services to which they are entitled. The ilnpersonality of a bureaucracy can work to assure clients that (at least in theory) they will be treated no differently from anyone else and that they will get all that they are entitled to, assuming that they meet all eligibility requirements. Bureaucracies can also work in the interest ofclients in another way. Experienced bureaucrats often know how to circumvent some of the rules and policies that seem overly restrictive toward their clients in order to get them the help they require. They know the "loopholes" that inevitably exist and how to use them. For example, we know of one public assistance agency in which a client could not get financial assistance to purchase a dress to attend her daughter's graduation. However, her caseworker knev• that rules allowed her to periodically receive a check to purchase linens and that she could choose to use the check for any purchase in a store that sold both linens and clothing. While we might raise ethical questions about the practice, the caseworker issued an extra check for linens and the client attended the graduation with a new dress. Higher-level managers, those most responsible for the long-range survival of the organization, find bureaucracies to be an especially useful way of dealing with a hostile task environ1nent. If, as in the case of public financial assistance, the primary enterprise is the distribution of tax dollars to those often stereotyped by the general public as lazy or unworthy, managers need all the protection from the task environment that they can muster. It is not surprising that bureaucracies have evolved in organizations that live under constant assault from a hostile task environment. A bureaucracy can insulate and protect itself from criticism. It does this through the use of organizational principles that promote and communicate to the task environment a sense of control and accountability. Careful and rigid adherence to federal guidelines, documentation, voluminous record keeping, close monitoring of everyone's work, and rules that control behavior even when the supervisor is unavailable are some of the bureaucratic methods used to minimize embarrassing mistakes and keep criticism by the general public down to a tolerable level. An organizational structure that pro1notes efficiency and the reduction of errors {e.g., in eligibility determination) is far less likely to risk critical attack from a hostile task environment than one based on principles of individualization of clients, flexibility, or professional judgment in decision making. A bureaucracy is ideally suited to silencing those critics who are eager to accuse an organization of overly zealous distribution of public funds and publicly supported services. When challenged, a record of strict adherence to rules can be presented in the form of statistics, records of correspondence, and other data.

Limitations of Bureaucratic Management Anyone who has ever experienced the frustrations of working in a bureaucracy is well aware of the lilnitations of bureaucratic principles. While bureaucracies are logical, rational, and would, on the surface, seem to have high potential for promoting efficiency, sometimes just the opposite occurs. We will mention some of the most con1monly acknowledged flaws; the reader can undoubtedly add to the list.

J-listorical Origins of Current Management Practices

Job Descriptions In bureaucracies, the responsibilities of all job positions are supposed to be fully described. However, this is often not feasible in the real \vorld of human services and, to a lesser degree, even in business or manufacturing. What if, as so often happens with client services, there is a need for a service that falls within no one's job description? Ethically, it is difficult to deny a person in need of help just because a service is not anyone's responsibility. For example, a bureaucracy that is tightly structured using job descriptions written only a few years ago might not be able to address the current needs of adolescents experiencing unanticipated problems associated with sexting or cyber bullying. The nature of our work is constantly evolving along with the needs of our current clients and those who we will serve next year. The manager who relies too heavily on job descriptions fails to recognize both the inevitability of some overlap in function and the need for some flexibility to meet the ever-changing needs for services.

"Put It in Writing» This principle also seems like a good idea but it som eti1nes can cause problems. While designed to promote efficiency, it can result in a very inefficient use of time. Effort and resources (personnel, computer software, or time) that could be used for client services frequently are expended in the support of unnecessary documentation and record keeping. The "memo barrage" (now frequently in the form of e-mail) that is seen in bureaucracies presents a clear example of this kind of waste. Employees have been known to exchange dozens of memos or e-mail messages in a work week with another employee whose office is 10 feet from their own! They could have gone over, talked directly to the coworker, and completed the communication in two minutes or less. However, bureaucratic principles discourage this type of behavior because it does not produce documentation of the exchange of information. In addition, some communication among professionals is sometimes not best put in \Vriting, whether it be a text message, an e-n1ail, or a part of a client's record. While the privacy of medical records may have the protection of H IPAA laws, other communications that were never meant to go public (e.g., a private text message sent to a colleague in a moment of frustration) can sometimes find their way to others, even into a court of law.

Promotion Based on Proven Competency This principle has a compelling logic, but it is also flawed. As we suggested earlier, different knowledge skills, motivation, and abilities are needed for different jobs. There is no guarantee that a good direct-practice worker will be successful as a supervisor or that a good con1munity organizer will be equally comp etent as the director of a community-based organization. Sometimes the principle results in p eople being promoted out of jobs where they perform well and into other jobs where they struggle (and often must ren1ain), a double loss for the organization.

Stability Bureaucracies are best suited to relatively stable, unchanging environments. This, of course, is not characteristic of most human service enterprises-bureaucracies often have trouble "keeping up." Bureaucracies have a way of breeding conformity and stifling creativity and promoting resistance to change. The re\vard system promotes behavior that is "by the book:' However, the behavior may not be consistent with the needs of the current situation.

61

62

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective Stability within bureaucracies can be undesirable in another way. Frequently, the heavily bureaucratized organization seems to be populated by survivors, namely those willing to learn and comply with the rules and to "make no waves:' Those innovative individuals who seek new and better ways of doing things and who agitate for change in order to adapt to new situations inevitably find themselves at odds with the bureaucratic power structure. They remain frustrated or go to work elsewhere where they believe that their flexibility will be more appreciated.

Job Security Like tenure in an academic setting, job security theoretically should provide workers with the freedom to do their work better without danger of losing their jobs. Sometimes increased productivity is the result. There are some very able civil service employees who, we would all agree, deserve to know that their job is secure. Their security helps them to do their jobs well. However, there are those who have been awarded permanent employee status based on evaluation of a brief (often six months) probationary period and who have later proven to be a liability to their organization. Job security can promote good job performance. However, it can also result in apathy, complacency, and a feeling of invulnerability among those who lack the necessary dedication and desire to perform well. Bureaucracies can become overpopulated with the latter, particularly if work conditions and rewards are so limited that the more marketable and more creative employees tend not to stay around long.

Continued Growth Bureaucracies seem to want to grow and to become increasingly inflexible. A written guideline, when reinforced by tradition over time, seems to take on even more controlling force. Even solutions to problems and structures that were intended to be only temporary soon become institutionalized. For example, task forces (designed to address a specific problem) are a common approach to the solution of problems in bureaucracies. They seem especially well suited to those situations where involvement of all persons who have an interest in solving the problem is logistically i1npractical, and would be an inefficient use of their time. Form a small, representative task force and let them look into it and propose a solution. It sounds like it should work, and sometimes it does. However, in bureaucracies, task forces often evolve into permanent groups-committees. Committees then can become self-perpetuating, always identifying additional work that needs to be done or issues that need to be discussed. Sometimes a committee seems able to meet for 30 minutes only to produce nothing tangible other than a time and place for the next meeting. Unfortunately, the reduced need for it and/or the lack of its productivity rarely leads to the termination of a committee within a bureaucracy. Of course, task forces are not the only "temporary" structures that tend to "live on" in bureaucracies. This is why bureaucracies often grow so large. Programs also sometimes exist long after a need for their services has dissipated. Because of staff members' vested interest in their continuation and the overall tendency of bureaucracies to grow rather than to shrink, some social programs have remained and continued to drain needed funds long after they could have been phased out. For example, the drastic reduction in influx of Southeast Asian i1nmigrants into the United States in the late twentieth century that resulted from declining immigration had little immediate effect on the size and scope of many programs

J-listorical Origins of Current Management Practices in state bureaucracies that were created to address an earlier need. Valuable resources that, for example, could have been used to address the needs of a growing Hispanic population were \Vasted. Sometimes, "sunset provisions" provide for programs to be terminated at a given time unless a convincing new demonstration of need can be provided. They are an effort to address the tendency of programs in bureaucracies to exist beyond the point where they are no longer needed. Unfortunately, they are not all that common.

Goal Displacement We would be remiss if we did not mention one other problem that seems to pervade most bureaucracies. Just the sheer size of many bureaucracies nlakes it difficult to retain a focus on the organization's goals and objectives. Vehicles that were originally designed to achieve goals and objectives more efficiently (e.g., compliance with rules, policies, and procedures) can quickly become goals themselves. The true goal (effective service to clients) becomes forgotten. This specific type of goal displacement is what is referred to as a "means-end displacemenf' Means-end displacements are com1non in bureaucracies. They often occur subtly and incre1nentally over time. They may go unnoticed until someone (perhaps, a new nlanager or an outsider) calls attention to them. They can be extremely detrimental to the goal achievement that social workers hope to promote in their role as managers. Persons immersed in meeting the requirements of their job may be unaware of their presence and may even resist "changing the rules" to regain a focus on what was the original goal or objective.

Current Applications of Bureaucratic Management OK, the bureaucracy is not the ideal organization envisioned by Max Weber. It may result in over-conformity, it may promote mediocrity, and it may, in fact, promote inefficiency. However, the continued widespread use of bureaucratic methods in many human service organizations cannot be totaUy in error. Bureaucracies can and do work effectively for the delivery of human services. The fact that certain undesirable phenomena tend to occur naturally within bureaucracies does not negate their value. Their existence, however, underlines the need for alert and skilled management. The nlanager must be adept at deriving the benefits from a bureaucratically oriented organization while using certain knowledge and skills to prevent the problems that can readily occur. A bureaucracy can be a very effective vehicle for coordinating activities within organizations that must, of necessity, be large and/or possess a variety of functions. Problems in bureaucracies occur when bureaucratic methods are allowed to feed on then1selves and to ha1nstring the service activities that deserve top priority. Bureaucracies work best in those larger organizations in which tasks are fairly routine and standardization of their perforn1ance is generally desirable, if not necessary. A bureaucratic structure imposed on an organization that is small and uncomplicated and that does not need the tight control and accountability benefits that the model offers is inappropriate and can result in problems. Not surprisingly, few social workers have many good things to say about bureaucracies. But most of our negative experiences with bureaucracies have occurred when principles were used inappropriately or were overzealously applied-over-bureaucratization given the needs of a situation. SkilJed social work managers who understand the merits and the shortcomings of the bureaucratic model can make decisions that will minimize any abuses of what is potentially a very serviceable body of theoretical knowledge.

63

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective

64

Case Example

W

hen she was promoted to Child Protection Supervisor, Arlene set out to do the job right. While previously working as a caseworker in the same organization, she frequently had been frustrated when she had to pick up cases from other caseworkers who had been reassigned or who left the organization. She sometimes inherited case records from caseworkers who were months behind in their recording. As a result, she did not know what work had been done with her clients and she felt that continuity of service suffered badly. She determined that, as a supervisor, this type of irresponsibility would not be tolerated. Arlene received excellent support from the district director when, as a new supervisor, she proposed implementi ng strict new rules about case recording. The director had recently received a call from an angry and prominent citizen who wanted to know why his brother-in-law was being "harassed" by a caseworker about how he disciplined his child. He requested and received the case record and was unable to either understand or defend the caseworker's actions because there was no record of an investigation. He agreed with Arlene that her new rules were in the best interest of service to clients and for defending the organization from outside criticism, or even legal action. Arlene clearly communicated the new rules to her caseworkers. A minimum of a 100-word summary must be placed in the record for each telephone contact or in-person interview with clients or other persons contributing relevant information about the alleged abuse incident. All recording must be completed within 72 hours of the contact. She announced that "adherence to recording rules" would be a part of annual employee performance evaluations. With in a short time, most caseworkers in Arlene's unit were in compliance with the new recording rules. However, gradually over a period of three years, a means- end displacement occurred. New workers had learned the importance of timely compliance with the rules. One individual who provided good services was denied a merit

raise because her records were not up-to-date and she complained loudly about the amount of record keeping required. Others, whose records were up-to-date but whose client services were of only marginal quality, were rewarded with superior annual performance evaluations. Over time, most caseworkers became aware that complete, up-to-date records were perceived as evidence of competence. They spent a considerable amount of time counting words in their records. Certain cliche phrases occurred regularly to pad a case note to the req uired 100-word min imum. Some reports of client contacts appeared to be simply an electronic "cut and paste" from other records. One very good worker left the organ ization because she felt that she no longer had time to conduct thorough investigations because of heavy paperwork requirements. Others. who were less conscientious, simply made fewer collateral calls in order to avoid having to write notes in the records. Useful calls that contained important information were sometimes described by workers as "providing no relevant information," to avoid the requirement of a written record. Things got worse. The director again expressed pleasure with Arlene's rules. He now felt that he was in a much more defensible position when complaints from the community occurred. He complimented Arlene for her work during supervisors' meetings and he gave her high annual performance evaluations. Other supervisors, seeing this happen, implemented even more demanding rules for recording within their work units. An implicit message was sent out at all levels of the organizationa good worker is one whose records are up-to-date; an incompetent one does not always comply with the recording rules. Employees who could accept this definition stayed on and were rewarded for their attention to rules. Those who could not, because they saw other child-protection tasks as a higher priority than record keeping, soon left. Before long, the pro fessional community learned of the

(continued)

Historical Origins of Current l'vlanagement Practices

65

Case Example Continued organization's strict rules about recording; some very good potential employees chose not to apply as jobs became open. Finally, the district director retired. The new director was dismayed to observe that the need for record keeping had become an unhealthy obsession. What had begun as a method for im proving client services had become the goal for many workers. Record keeping had taken on a higher priority than services themselves. The director moved quickly to regain an organizational focus on professional services. Service priorities were outlined and it was made clear that. while timely and complete record ing is desirable. it should never take precedence over protection and the service needs of children. The new director's rem inder about the appropriate place of recording as a means to an end (services) and not an end in itself brought relief to some employees and produced anger and anxiety among others. Some of those who had fared well in the

earlier environment were able to adjust their priorities. Those who could not simply resigned.

Discussion Questions 1.

2.

What was the problem that Arlene identified? Why was she correct in attempting to do something about it? How did the way that the new rules were written make it likely that a means- end displacement would occur?

3. How did the staff responses to the new rules affect client services? 4. What else could Arlene have done to help address the problem without fostering a means- end displacement? 5. Why do you think that the first district director was so supportive of Arlene's new rules? 6. What are some other means- end displacements that frequently occur in a large bureaucracy such as the one in which Arlene worked?

COMMON SHORTCOMINGS OF THE CLASSICAL MANAGEMENT THEORIES In addition to the problems noted above, four common problems can be seen in the scientific management, administrative management, and bureaucratic approaches to management. We discuss each of the four in greater detail in other contexts within this book and only briefly mention them here. All three classical management theories tend to pay insufficient attention to (1) the power of group norms on individual behavior; (2) the degree of individual differences that exist ainong people, particularly differences in their motivation; (3) the irrational side of human beings that results in their doing things that are not al\vays in their best interests; and (4) the existence of a very powerful force, nainely the informal organization, that may bear little resemblance to what appears on a tidy organizational chart. Limited attention to these factors can result in a great amount of false confidence regarding what behaviors will succeed for a manager. If one views people as relatively simple and easily understood, various prescriptive approaches to management make sense. While the classical schools tended to ignore the complexities of hwnan behavior, later theories, based more on those ideas closer to social work's understanding of behavior (multiple causation, systems theory, etc.), were less

66

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective presumptive. They focused 1nore on general descriptions of observed patterns of behavior and did not presume to be able to suggest ways to guarantee success in influencing it. Certainly, the three classical management theories all had their shortcomings, as have the other theories and schools of management that followed them. Yet, if we had to summarize each classical theory's major contribution in a single sentence, it \vould be obvious just how important each was, and continues to be: • Scientific Management. Principles replaced precedent, instinct, or impulse in decision making. • Administrative Management. Good management is not an inherent characteristic among a limited number of individuals; it can be taught. • Bureaucratic Management. Written guidelines, job descriptions and requirements, and coordination of activities can improve organizational functioning.

Responses to Classical Management Theories Taylor, Fayol, Weber, and other classical theorists saw managers as rational people capable of possessing the necessary knowledge to make the right decisions. Managers simply identify the various available alternatives and project the consequences of each. Then, based on previously identified priorities, they decide and act. It all sounds perfectly logical. The idea is to seek out the perfect solution (referred to in the literature as "optimizing"). Based chiefly on a recognition of the complexity of human behavior, those writers who have been especially critical of the classical theorists held a somewhat different perception of managers. They viewed managers more as prag1natists, making acceptable decisions based on limited information and with the knowledge that even good decisions cannot guarantee success. As opposed to the optimizing of the classical theorists, Herbert Simon7 viewed managers as "satisficing;' that is, searching until they find an acceptable solution, one that is good enough rather than optin1al. The ter1n "bounded rationality" was used to describe managers' approach to decision making. Because they cannot consider all possible alternatives and cannot fully understand all the variables involved and face time constraints, limits (boundaries) are placed around the amount of information that will be processed prior to making a decision. We make decisions using bounded rationality every day of our lives. If, for example, we need to buy a used car, we first identify the most important criteria that must be met. It must cost under $5,000, get at least 25 mpg, seat four or more people, be any color but red, and so on. Many cars would qualify. Obviously we cannot afford to examine every car in the Western Hemisphere that might meet our criteria in order to be able to identify the very best one. That would be very expensive and time conswning (even via the Internet) and we never would be able to make a decision anyway, because different cars would keep beco1ning available, some would be sold, and so on. A reasonable approach to the decision of which car to buy would be to go to five or ten local dealers who are regarded as relatively reputable, see what they have available, and choose among those cars that 1neet our criteria. This is satisficing through the use of bounded rationality. Whether we like to admit it or not, even more important decisions in life-for example, selection of a college, a career, or even a partner- also tend to be made through a process of satisficing. We do our research and select from among a limited number of acceptable alternatives. Any other approach might result in the decision maker becoming cognitively immobilized and unable to ever make a decision.

His tori cal Origins of Current Manage1nent Practices There are several identifiable "schools" of management theory that seem to address the perceived shortcomings of classical management theory. There is considerable overlap among them and a lack of consensus in the literature as to exactly how they relate to each other, \Vhich school is a variation of which other one, and so on. We \viii briefly mention several of these. They are those most frequently discussed in the management literature. We will identify only the more important concepts usually associated with them and note the major contributions of each to the current practice of management within human service organizations.

The Modem Structuralists Structuralist writers describe the organization as heavily influenced by its outside environment. This is consistent with much of our discussion in Chapter 2. As we noted, managers, particularly those at the higher levels, spend much of their time addressing the demands and pressures of an ever-changing task environment. Structuralist theorists also assume that there is in evitably a lack of total goal congruence among persons who work in an organization. Some employees, but certainly not all, share the goals formally espoused by the organization. Others have their own quite different goals and agenda. This, necessarily, results in conflict. The inevitability of conflict, it is proposed, need not be destructive or unhealthy for the organization. Lewis Coser ( 1913-2003) suggested that conflict has many positive functions, including producing small group cohesiveness, promoting changes in norms and values, informing leaders of problen1s that exist, and preventing stagnation.8 An important function of managers at all levels, the structuralists suggest, is the control and management of conflict to keep it at a tolerable and productive level. Insights into conflict \vithin organizations and the inevitable stress benveen the organization and its external environment are important contributions to our understanding of management. They help us to better understand the importance of managers and their role in relation to these phenomena.

Human Relations Those theorists generally associated with human relations theories of management stress the complexity of human motivation. We examine in some detail the contributions of a few of the best known of them (Abraham Maslow, Frederick Herzberg, David McClelland) in Chapter 9. T he work of others will be discussed briefly elsewhere. Their focus is on the ways in which levels of productivity, attitudes toward one's work, and various behaviors on the job are influenced by working conditions and are socially determined-that is, influenced by group norms. Social needs, largely ignored by people like Taylor, Fayol, and Weber, are viewed as important influences. They are used to explain, at least in part, why people in organizations behave in ways that appear irrational given the classical theorists' limited perception of what motivates people (money). Elton Mayo (1880-1949) is probably the best known of the theorists of the human relations school of management. His research led him to the conclusion that social issues {such as group affiliation, recognition, and management consideration) as well as the content of the job itself can influence worker productivity. Mayo's most famous research was the Hawthorne experiments in \vhich he adjusted the working conditions of young women at the Ha\vthorne Works (a Western Electric telephone assembly factory in Illinois) in order

67

68

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective to study their effect on productivity. His conclusions were that {among other factors) the presence of and attention given to the women by the researcher may itself have produced changes in their productivity. (This is the so-called "Hawthorne effect" mentioned earlier in this chapter that is sometimes used to explain the increased productivity in organizations when Frederick Taylor's scientific management methods were introduced.) The importance of social issues and the belief that non1nonetary factors can influence behavior would explain, for example, why a person might decline a promotion in order to avoid having to supervise those people who are her best friends or why another person might not be interested in working for extra pay during evenings when none of his coworkers would be present. The classical management theorists would have been puzzled by either decision. Human relations theorists also depart drastically from classical writers in their attitudes about specialization. Simple tasks are not regarded as necessarily better. Instead, more complex and integrated (with those of others) work is seen as more consistent with human social needs. The production line is viewed as a demeaning, stultifying way of organizing work that tends to make people hate their jobs and to devalue productivity. Unlike the structuralist theoreticians, human relations writers do not see conflict as inevitable within organizations. They note that it occurs frequently but that sensitive and responsive management can prevent much of it and resolve the rest, primarily through creating an environment that promotes open com1nunication, mutual respect, and trust. Human relations theorists based their understanding primarily on empirical research that studied the behavior of people in formal organizations. Their theories formed the basis for the field of industrial psychology and contributed a major component to our understanding of systems theory. There was a heavy emphasis on problem solving and decision making that was based on a manager's understanding of both the rational and the more irrational (i.e., social, affective) determinants of human behavior within organizations. The contributions of the human relations management theorists are, of course, very consistent with the social work knowledge base and with our professional values. In fact, many schools of social work rely heavily on content taken from human relations research, particularly in discussing the influences of the organization as one of several social systems that impact on individual behavior.

Contingency Theory Another loose grouping of ideas about management became identified as the contingency school of management. A well-known theoretician within it during the twentieth century >vas Fred E. Fiedler (1922-). Fiedler's research concluded (among other findings) that there is no such thing as an ideal leader or a universally one best way to manage. Instead, he proposed that a good leadership style is one that matches the needs of a given situation. The contingency theories were largely a response to the classical emphasis on optimizing and, specifically, to the "one best way" approach of scientific management. They also were a response to the trait and behavioral theories of leadership that we will discuss in Chapter 4. In contrast, contingency approaches to management argue that there is no one best way, no correct decision, or no leadership style that will work for all situations. Different situations require different decisions and managerial behaviors. Managers will, however, make good, acceptable decisions if they have the sensitivity to make a valid assessment of the needs of a situation and exercise skill in decision making.

J-listorical Origins of Current Management Practices Contingency theories of management seem quite relevant to social work management needs. They are also consistent with other areas of social work practice. In management or in treatment situations, we rarely find ourselves in identical situations. A managerial response that works weU in one situation is by no means certain to work in another situation any more than a successful treatment intervention in one situation \¥ill produce the same results in another situation. We make most of our decisions in a "one-time-only" environment. As in other areas of social work practice, \Ve make managerial decisions that affect professionals and other staff members \vho are definitely not interchangeable parts. Contingency approaches to management emphasize decision making that considers the individual person affected and the likely impact of the decision on that person's behavior. Contingency theories, of course, may be less appropriate in those relatively rare situations in human service organizations where we 1nust make the same decision again and again. In such a situation, we may know from experience \Vhat will work and what will not work. OveraU though, contingency approaches to thinking about manage1nent have much to say to the social work manager. Their basic concepts are woven throughout much of the content of the chapters that follow.

Participative Management Another identifiable approach to management that often is described as especially well suited to non-profit organizations is based heavily on the application of the democratic process. While there are certain techniques associated with participative management,9 it is probably better understood as an application of a manager's belief that human beings are more productive, more loyal, and are more trustworthy if they are granted a role in decision making in areas that affect them and their jobs. Leaders \-vho practice participative management are believed to promote consensus between individual goals and the goals of the organization. It is also believed that it promotes a desirable "team" atmosphere by requiring groups of employees rather than individuals to examine issues and make decisions. Organizations that employ participative management methods often use labels such as "Quality Assurance Team" or "Executive Management Team" for their decision-making groups. A prerequisite for participation in decision making is that individuals must have knowledge, experience, and/or expertise that they can contribute to a decision. If they do not, they should not be involved. Consequently, the degree of involvement of employees in management decision making will vary, depending on the decision to be made or the problem to be addressed. Even the type of involvement will vary-an employee's role may be simply to share a perspective in regard to one decision but nlay include a vote in another. However, certain areas of decision making are generally off-limits to all employees not specifically charged with their responsibility (e.g., expenditure of funds in another organizational unit or evaluation of individual staff performance). The inclusion of staff members (not normaUy involved in certain decision ma.king) into the decision-making process can do wonders for morale, it is argued This approach is based on certain assumptions about human beings- for exanlple, that they are more likely to support a decision when they have been involved in the decision making. It does not \VOrk when staff members perceive their involvement as merely "token" or little more than a manipulative attempt to co-opt them by pretending to care what they think or pretending to want their input. Participative management theorists insist that employee involvement in decision making should be genuine, based on strongly held beliefs about the higher nature of people.

69

70

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective Most of the criticisms of participative management are based on observation of its misuse or overuse and the consequences that have ensued. An additional criterion for its successful use often is overlooked. Knowledge, experience, and/or expertise may not be enough to include a person in decision making. The individual should also express an interest in being part of the decision making and its outcome. The concept of "zone of indifference" 10 is relevant here. It is based on the assumption that we all have many areas of our life where we really do not have much investn1ent in a decision one way or another. We simply don't care. The decision is within our zone of indifference. In such situations, we would rather that someone just go ahead and make the decision for us. For example, some students may have a strong preference regarding whether a course requires a term paper or an examination. They might appreciate input into the decision of which will be required. But for others, the decision is within their zone of indifference. They would really rather the professor just tell them what the course requirement is so they can use their time and energies preparing to meet it. Critics of participative management note that many managers who employ it may underestimate the scope of their employees' zones of indifference. The manager may inappropriately tend to ask for input on decisions where staff members just do not care about the decision. For example, they might ask employees to debate and vote on whether monthly or weekly calendars should be ordered or the color of new office carpet. In some cases, where individual preferences of just a few employees may be especially strong, it is their individual preferences, not those of the entire work group that should be sought. A vote of the entire group is neither desirable nor necessary and time spent in trying to achieve it is likely to be nonproductive and even resented by those for who1n the issue is within their zone of indifference. Besides, those who have strong preferences will probably dominate the discussion and influence the vote anyway. Participative management is also misused in situations where other influences of which the manager is aware-for example, some political necessity-limit the decision that can realistically be made. If a certain decision must be inade anyway, why involve others in it at all? The manager might be fortunate and staff members might arrive at the inevitable decision. Successful co-opting will have occurred. But staff might also vote for another alternative. They may then become angry, frustrated, and resentful of the time that was wasted when, ulti1nately, their decision was not implemented. Their response may be, "Why did you ask us if you knew what you had to do in the first place?" Correctly applied, participative management is used only in those situations where any reasonable group recommendations can at least be seriously considered and, ideally, implemented. Another criticism often leveled against participative management methods is that they tend to confuse (some would say corrupt) the role of the manager. If used to excess, group decision inaking can make a manager feel and be perceived like more of a chairperson than a leader. Managers might even be perceived as abdicating their leadership responsibilities. Most importantly, their ability to possess the required respect to make necessary but unpopular decisions may be weakened by too much participative management. The question is, "What is too much?" There is no easy answer to this question. However, when participative management approaches begin to be viewed as more a burden than a blessing by managers and/or their coworkers, a manager should consider if it is not time to cut back on unnecessary collaboration. However, this too can cause problems. It is easier to grant input into decision making than it is to take it away. Staff may secretly welcome the opportunity to avoid participating in decisions that are within their zone of indifference or

J-listorical Origins of Current Management Practices are otherwise burdensome. But they still may express some concern if the manager starts to make more unilateral decisions or grant them only occasional involvement Participative management also can create an environment of uncertainty that can interfere with morale and productivity. When a manager takes major responsibility for decision making, decisions tend to follow a pattern based on the manager's priorities, values, style, and so on. Staff can learn to predict the behavior of the manager. This affords security for them-they know what to expect and what is expected of them in most situations. But if a decision is delegated to a work group, many different and unpredictable results can occur. This can produce anxiety among staff. With participative management, politics, friendships, hidden agenda, power groups, and other dynamics and forces that operate within groups can produce some surprising recommendations and decisions. These dynamics and forces can sometimes even take priority over organization needs or client services. The result is that employees and even clients are sometimes subject to decisions that may be based nlore on, for example, loyalties to or dislike of others in the group than on what is rational or sound or even the will of the nlajority. Participative management thus sometimes pron1otes rational decision making, but sometimes it precludes it. Participative management 1nethods can be very appealing to the social work n1anager. It sets aside the organizational hierarchy to tap the best available knowledge for decision making and problem solving. Often that is available only from staff members who are "closest to the action;' that is, those with regular client contact. The greatest knowledge in an area (e.g., of a particular intervention technique or of current electronic technology) is as likely, or even more likely, to be found with a newer, lower-ranking employee than with a higher-level administrator. Other staff members may have gained knowledge during prior employment elsewhere. They may feel insulted and constrained when their input is not sought in areas where they have knowledge and expertise. A note of \varning is in order. Many social work managers state that their philosophy of management is participatory. (It is difficult in our democratic society to be opposed to it.) But a much smaller percentage actually practice it Some may try it initially and then retreat from it when they find themselves having to live with decisions that they find difficult to implement or enforce, or when their authority or control over events begins to feel threatened. A statement of a belief in participatory management has been known to please search con1mittees and get managers hired. But within a short tin1e after the manager is hired, all traces of participation in decision making may h ave vanished (along with the "open-door policy"). When this happens, staff members often feel angry and betrayed. They might feel less resentment if no assurances of regular e1nployee input into decision making had been n1ade in the first place. The san1e three variables that are so important in other managen1ent decisions-the n1anager, the other people involved (staff members), and the situation-need to be considered before deciding to implement a policy of participatory management. Participative management can work, but only in certain situations involving certain staff members and certain managers. For example, there are some managers who should never attempt it (they have too strong a need for control). Others, for whom it is just a logical extension of their style and personality, use it with great success. Some staff members, for whatever reasons, cannot be trusted to make good decisions; others do an extremely conscientious and competent job when asked for their input. Some situations (e.g., when deadlines are approaching) may not allow for the time needed for group decision making; others are well suited

71

72

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective to it. If a manager does decide to give participative 1nanagement a try, it is probably a good idea to do it in an incremental way, that is, a little at a time, stopping periodically to evaluate how it is working before expanding its use.

Variations on Participative Management Ironically, approaches to managen1ent that e1nphasized wide worker participation in decision making initially were not well accepted in the United States and Canada. They were given a second look and more careful consideration in the 1970s and 1980s, largely because of their successful application in Japan. The so-called Japanese management, Theory Z, and other related concepts are applications of participative management ideas originally developed in the United States, where they had met with a lukewarm reception by North Alnerican industry. But better quality control and financial success have a way of getting the attention of the for-profit sector. The effectiveness of Japanese management techniques was seen most dramatically in the success of the Japanese automobile industry. During the last decades of the twentieth century, U.S. car sales declined while the sales of Japanese automobiles flourished. Import quotas were set and heavy import taxes were levied to limit foreign car sales and to drive foreign car prices up to a point where U.S. cars would be able to compete. When surveyed, North American car buyers replied that they preferred Japanese cars largely because they perceived them to be better 1nade and more reliable (a perception that has continued into the early twenty-first century). There were fewer flaws and defects. Quality control was better; Japanese workers seemed to really care more about the quality of the product they produced. They did not, for example, deliberately drop bolts into inaccessible door panels to annoy future car owners, as U.S. workers were known to do, or allow cars to leave assembly lines with mechanical defects that would require re-calls. Such behavior was unheard of among Japanese workers who viewed their job as a career, had considerable input into decision making that affected production, received rewards and extensive fringe benefits tied to the quality of their work, and generally took pride in their work and their association with their employer. The 1980s and 1990s were years of experimentation with the application of Japanese management techniques within U.S. industry and, to a lesser degree, within human service organizations. Probably the best known of the Japanese participative management methods is the use of quality circles (known as quality control circles when they were first discussed earlier in the United States). 11 Asa1neans of solving problems, these methods have been credited with helping to change the meaning of "Made in Japan" from a connotation of shoddy product quality in the 1950s to one of high quality by the 1980s and 1990s. A quality circle is a voluntary group led by a supervisor and consisting of fewer than 15 (seven or eight is ideal) workers. The group might meet one hour per week at a regular time (during regular work hours) to discuss problems that have been identified. Circle leaders are trained in step-by-step problem-solving methods. The circle members discuss possible solutions to the problem and decide on the best one. If it can be immediately implemented, it will be. If it cannot be implemented without higher-level approval, a presentation to sell it to the next level is developed. The emphasis is on developing solutions to problems, not simply complaining about them. In turn, higher-level management assumes a position of receptiveness to ideas and to solutions that are proposed. Problems for quality-circle work must be production-related {work flow, product defects, etc.). Such areas as salary, promotions, grievances, personalities, or anything outside of the group's work responsibilities are not discussed. The group leader (supervisor) must be

J-listorical Origins of Current Management Practices a good facilitator. He or she must be comfortable in stepping out of and back into an authoritarian role. Leaders must be able to create a group climate of trust where even "half-baked" ideas can be proposed by the most timid of members without fear of ridicule or reprisal. Leaders must be able to give recognition to the group for solutions that work while not blaming group members for solutions that do not \vork. Clearly, quality circles require the type of manager, staff, and \Vork situation that are also conducive to other forms of participative management. A manager needs to be sensitive to the presence of situations \Vhere they can be appropriately and productively employed. One approach to management with origins in participatory management has been implemented in a sizable number of human service organizations. It is referred to as Total Quality Management (TQM) or some similar term (e.g., Continuous Quality Improvement or Total Quality Control). TQM and its variations owe much of their theoretical underpinnings to the \.York of W. E. Deming (1900-1993). 12 His 14 principles, while clearly designed for the business and manufacturing sectors, have recently been adapted to a wide variety of hwnan service organizations. TQM is largely a response to the shortcomings of an earlier management 1nodel called Quality Assurance (QA). QA focused on outcome measures, that is, indicators of service effectiveness in organizations like hospitals and public welfare or mental health centers. It was characterized by case audits and the evaluation of staff's clinical activities. While there is nothing essentially wrong with emphasizing the clinical effectiveness of social workers and other professionals, QA offered little help in understanding all of those other activities that occur within human service organizations and that contribute to overall goal achievement. Therefore, it was criticized for its narrowness of focus. Besides its greater attention to all of the activities of an organization, TQM differs from Quality Assurance in a number of other important ways. Consistent with the general principles of participative management, TQM is initiated by the leadership \vithin the organization, not imposed by outside authorities or funding organizations as QA often is. It also employs a more equal distribution of power for decision making than does QA. The customer (most often the client in our work settings) plays an important role. A basic premise of TQM is that quality of products (services in human service organizations) should be defined by the needs and wishes of the customers (clients). Heavy emphasis is placed on knowing what they need and want. TQM entails knowing who clients are, being able to anticipate their needs, translating needs into services that are responsive to them, and designing a system that efficiently delivers them. TQM is based on several basic assumptions or tenets. There is the beliefthat what constitutes quality is dynamic, that is, never fixed. It is also detern1ined to a great extent by the process used to produce it. Quality thus requires a total organizational com1nitment, from the chief executive to the lowest-ranking member of the orgru1ization's staff. TQM en1phasizes continuous improvement and the elinlination of defects within an organization and its activities. While (like QA) it acknowledges the importance of service outcome measurements, it really focuses most heavily on the process of service delivery. In doing this, TQM relies on graphs and statistical analyses to monitor activities and to provide accurate data for decision making. Use of control charts, flow charts, bar graphs, pareto charts, histograms, fishbone diagrams, run (trend) charts, and scattergrams is common. At the same time, such common attributes of organizations as numerical quotas, slogans, and targets are eliminated. There is an effort to remove anything perceived as a barrier to staff's pride in their work itself.

73

74

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective TQM has been described as "holistic:' Ersoz has identified seven elements that all must be present for an organization to function effectively as a system. She notes that if any of the elements (organizational philosophy, vision, strategy, skilled personnel, resources, reward system, or organizational structure) are absent, the system will be jeopardized in predictable ways. 13 It should not surprise us that T QM has received an enthusiastic response from many social workers in the role of manager. Like other management models that have elements of participative management, it has a democratic flavor that is consistent with our professional value system. It is very consistent with both "client-centered treatment" and the practice principle of"beginning where the client is:' It also involves a problem-solving process that is systems-oriented. It is designed to empower staff at all levels of an organization, as well as its clients. Still another variation of participation management that began to be widely used in the business sphere late in the last century is Open Book Management (OBM). It is designed to treat all staff members as if they are a community of people who think more like owners than employees, who have an investment in the organization and its success. It entails: 1. An environment or culture of trust, in which there is easy access to any informa-

tion needed to do one's job and to evaluate overall organizational performance. 2. A system of incentive co1npensation (such as profit-sharing) that gives employees a stake in the success of the organization. 3. Training to help employees understand the work of the organization ("business literacy training" in the business sphere). Clearly, OBM is better suited to for-profit human service organizations than for the public or non-profit sectors. However, with a little creativity, a manager in even these settings can implement some of its principles. The goal of thinking like an owner may also be attainable in any human service organization, since employees (especially professional staff) often are especially dedicated to their work and committed to the success of the . . ' programs. organizations

Organizational Culture Recent writings in management theory make widespread use of the concept of organizational culture. They express the belief that organizations, just like societies, have a unique culture that must be understood if managers are to succeed. It consists of the experiences, beliefs, values, and attitudes that exist among its employees and how they are reflected in their actions. For example, organizations seem to have certain customs, rituals, informal rules, symbols, paradigins, power structures, shared meanings, traditions, stories and myths, and group norms that have developed over time and are not easily understood. Managers must learn to understand them to be successful, especially if they hope to overcome resistance to changes that must be implemented. This entails taking an almost anthropological approach to understanding the organization and what occurs within it. The presence of one or more "old-timers" can be helpful in this regard. They may be able to explain, for exainple, why "we never do it that way" or why there is so much staff resistance to what seems like a perfectly reasonable request. Organizational cultures also can be described as on a continuu1n fro1n "strong" (when staff are committed to and closely aligned to organizational goals) to "weak" (in which

J-listorical Origins of Current Management Practices there is little commitment to, or alignment with. organizational goals, and staff members require the controls generalJy imposed by bureaucracies). The literature on organizational 14 culture provides numerous examples of typologies of cultures that can exist. Perhaps the best-known proponent of organizational culture theories is Edgar Schein (1928-). 15 His model of organizational culture consists of three levels. One level can be easily seen, if not always easily understood. It consists of such things as how staff dress and how they interact with each other and ivith visitors, ho\v items such as office furniture are arranged, or the ways that staff are recognized for good work. The second level is what staff members profess and what they consciously believe to be \vhat the organization is about, for example, mission statements, slogans, and the values widely stated by staff n1embers. It is also easily identified and described. The third level is the most deeply embedded and the most difficult to discern. Staff me1nbers are unlikely to be aware of it (it is at the subconscious level) and may contain some of what would be considered taboo. It often reflects values very different from those identified at the second level. The third level would explain the behaviors of staff members that are often paradoxical to n1anagers unless they understand it. For example, it might explain why staff members see nothing wrong with using the supply cabinet to provide school supplies for their children or why they might try to avoid serving clients who exhibit a certain behavior. Organizational culture can provide many valuable insights for managers. As social workers, we are welJ aware of the effects that culture has on human behavior; it is not a great leap for us to also conclude that the culture of an organization not only exists, but also plays an important part in the behavior of staff members. Despite the criticisms sometimes made of organizational culture theories (e.g., larger organizations may have many different cultures or much of the theories is really not ne\v), they can be extremely useful to a social worker in the role of manager. They have definitely helped to shape our thinking about management as it is reflected in the chapters that follo\v.

SUMMARY This chapter has presented an overview of some of the major management theories that have influenced the behaviors of managers during the late nineteenth and the twentieth centuries. We began with the "classics"- scientific management, administrative management, and bureaucratic management. Then, more recent approaches to and theories of manage1nent were presented-those that were a response to the classical theories but that also built on them and on each other. They included the nlodern structuralists, human relations, contingency theories, participative management (with several variations), and, finally, theories that are currently in favor, those relating to organizational culture. By understanding the principles and ideas that have been and continue to be influential, we can better understand why people approach the work of management the way they do in the twenty-first century. Today's management theory is perhaps best understood as a combination of: 1. Reactions (sometimes overreactions) to the shortcomings of older theories.

2. Retention of those theories that were valid and are still valid. 3. Retention of those tlieories that \Vere once valid (under other conditions) but are now not as valid-anachronisms.

75

76

Part One: Human Services Management in Perspective Each of the respective theories has left a rich legacy. To some degree, all continue to affect how managers think, how they perceive situations and people, and why they respond to situations in the ways they do. All the theories that we examined had a compelling logic for the times in which they were developed. None are totally obsolete or have nothing to offer us. The classical theories may have been based on a different perception of human beings and their motivation, but they increased objectivity within organizations, suggested son1e still-useful management principles, and proposed many ways to increase worker productivity. Later theories offered better insight into social and psychological influences on behavior, while stressing the limits of what a manager can know and process in order to make decisions. We have not finished with any of the theories examined in this chapter. Their influence will be seen again and again in the chapters that follow.

APP LI CATI 0 N You are the director of a new program for the treatment of adolescent eating disorders. You are a believer in participative managen1ent n1ethods. Which of the following decisions should be made with input from the professional staff? Should they be asked to even discuss it and make a recommendation? 1. Who should be interviewed about the new program by a reporter for the local

2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

newspaper? What will be the lunch schedule for staff members? What computer software should be purchased for staff use? What criteria should be used for referring patients for inpatient treatment? You have found $600 in the budget that can be used for additional office equipment. How should it be spent? Which professional staff member should receive the title "Senior Clinician" and the $500 salary increase that goes with the title?

ACTIVITIES n Chapters 4-12, we will examine what comprises the majority of the work of the manager. We broke management down into its primary activities. However, the break is not always a clear-cut one. In the real world, the activities tend to overlap. For example, managers must exert leadership when they are engaged in all of the other activities. And, they might be engaged in two or more major management activities simultaneously. Successful performance of all management activities requires "people skills:· Tasks like hiring and deploying a diverse staff, enhancing their professional development, evaluating their work performance, or dealing with problems of individual staff members afford social workers an opportunity to directly apply their knowledge of hun1an behavior. Therefore, on the surface, they should be "second nature" for us. Yet, paradoxically, social workers often find some of these tasks to be among the most distasteful and stressful of all management activities. In the chapters that follow, we will see why this occurs and what can be done to 1nake them easier for social \Vorkers.

Chapter 4 '

Leading Leaming Outcomes At the end of this chapter. you should be able to: • List the leadership functions that the members of a board of directors are supposed to perform. • Explain why both the trait and behavioral schools of leadership were not always effective in identifying potential good leaders. • List the characteristics of those organizations that possess a healthy organizational climate. • Assess the organizational climate of a human service organization and how the behaviors of its managers may contribute to it.

e begin with leadership, as it is so important to everything else that a social worker does in the role of manager. Leadership has been defined as "the ability of an individual to influence, motivate, and enable others to contribute toward the effectiveness and success of the organizations of which they are members:' 1 It entails the manager's conscious efforts to influence other people within the organization to engage willingly in those behaviors that contribute to the achievement of organizational goals. It could easily be argued that leadership is what management is all about; it transcends all other management activities and makes it possible for a manager to be successful in performing them. Hersey and Blanchard note that "management is a kind of leadership in which the achievement of organizational goals is paramount:'2 That is consistent with the broad definitions of management we offered in Chapter 1. Other writers (with whom we would not totally agree) have taken the position that the activities of a manager are different fro1n those of a leader. They suggest that a leader is more of a visionary, while a manager is 1nore concerned with shaping the day-to-day processes that help an organization to achieve that vision. For example, Warren Bennis3 (1925-) suggested 12 ways in which managers and leaders differ: 1. Managers administer; leaders innovate.

2. Managers ask how and when; leaders ask what and why. 3. Managers focus on systems; leaders focus on people. 4. Managers do things right; leaders do the right things. 5. Managers maintain; leaders develop. 6. Managers rely on control; leaders inspire trust. 7. Managers have a short-term perspective; leaders have a longer-term perspective. 8. Managers accept the status quo; leaders challenge the status quo. 79

80

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities 9. Managers have an eye on the bottom line; leaders have an eye on the horizon. 10. Managers imitate; leaders originate. 11 . Managers emulate the classic good soldier; leaders are their own person.

12. Managers imitate; leaders show originality. Bennis's list seems to suggest a false dichotomy. There are leaders and there are just managers. Only leaders are supposed to be creative and forward thinking; managers are more myopic and lacking in creativity. Managers are, perhaps, what is often described disparagingly as "good bureaucrats~' If this were indeed the case, few managers would be successful in performing the other activities and tasks of management, all of v.rhich require the characteristics that he describes as the unique province of leaders. The leaders that Bennis is describing probably are upper level managers (executive directors, CEOs of large corporations) and the managers may be mid-level managers such as supervisors. However, we contend that leading must occur at all levels of management. We have included Bennis' list here because, if we look only at his description of leaders (the second part of each item in the list), it is helpful in delineating just what is meant by the focus of this chapter-the leadership function of the manager. We all would agree that good leadership is desirable and that poor leadership or the absence of leadership is undesirable within human service organizations. We probably can give examples of leadership behaviors that we have observed that were either good or bad. But when we are asked to specify why leadership was good or bad, or why we perceive one manager to be an effective leader and why another manager is viewed as ineffective in a leadership role, we may struggle a little. The difficulty of defining good leadership is one that has perplexed theorists for many years. Researchers and academicians have devoted their entire careers to the pursuit of a better understanding of leadership.

THE ELEMENTS OF LEADERSHIP Like the other activities of management, leadership is about influence. Leadership seeks to influence and to shape the work environment and the behaviors of staff members so that they are supportive (rather than obstructive) of organizational goal achievement. In human service organizations, managers hope to lead in such a way that they will influence the behavior of others to maximize their contributions to efficient and effective client services. Man agers will be more successful in their efforts to perform the other activities of management only if they are first perceived as effective leaders. People want to follow the directives and the example of good leaders. They may ignore or may circumvent the management efforts of ineffective leaders. Leadership employs a combination of personal characteristics {of the manager), kno\vledge, and skills that provide a positive influence on others in the organization. Thus, it is closely related to the concept of motivation (see Chapter 9). Ideally, we would like to have our fellow employees willingly do what is in the best interests of the organization and of the clients whom it serves. With good leadership, this can occur. But those tasks that, by their very nature, are regarded as unpleasant or that are perceived as in conflict with the self-interest of staff members may require especially adept leadership. For example, special leadership may be required to elicit any kind of enthusiasm for performing cumbersome record keeping, which is required for federal reimbursement in large public welfare agencies and which may leave less time for meeting other, more enjoyable job expectations.

Leading Staff members are just not naturally motivated to do it. Yet some managers are able to lead in such a way that they spend very little time complaining and approach this task in a relatively "upbeat" fashion. The managers' requests are viewed as reasonable and credible, and their motives are not suspect. Clearly, trust is a component of effective leadership. This should come as no surprise to us; we will mention it again as an important element for success in performing many of the other major activities of the manager.

LEADERSHIP TASKS AT DIFFERENT LEVELS In the broadest sense, the prilnary task of leaders is to help the members of an organization to work "in concert~' They do this by helping them to share a desirable vision for the organization and to energize them to work together toward achieving it. Not surprisingly, a leader has been compared with an orchestra conductor. It is a pretty good analogy. What do conductors do? T hey take a group of talented, diverse people, some of whom are very accomplished or even famous, and attempt to get them to work har1noniously toward a con1mon goal-a pleasing product. Along the way, conductors nlust attempt to both use and constrain the creativity and unique gifts of the orchestra members. They must find a way to use their talents while emphasizing the importance of teamwork for success. Especially in larger human service organizations, the specific tasks of leadership tend to vary depending on the position that the leader occupies on the organizational chart. At the highest levels, tasks entail doing what is required for the long-range survival and success of the organization. At midd.le levels, they involve mainly takmg initiatives to insure a supportive work climate for staff members. At lower levels, most leading is done through example and sharing of knowledge and expertise. However, managers at any level in the organization will not be successful leaders unless they understand the responsibilities of other leaders at other levels ,vithin the organization and how they relate to their work.

Leadership at the Board Level Generally, unless other\vise specified in our discussions, a board refers to a policymaking board or board of directors, such as that required for all non-profit agencies. However, there are two other types of boards that are seen less frequently in human service organizations. They are characterized by smaller spheres of influence than a policymaking board. An advisory board does not make organizational policy or hire or fire the director. As the na1ne suggests, its primary role is to provide advice. Thus, me1nbers exercise very little leadership per se, although they are often chosen from among leaders in the community or runong leaders of other related organizations. For exa1nple, a social work education program may for1n an advisory board consisting of local social agency directors. The function of its members would be to share their perspectives (as practitioners and managers) of the program's curriculum, how well the program is preparing its graduates to enter the workplace, tile image of the program in ·t he professional conm1unity, and so forth. Ideally, advisory boards help an organization to "stay in touch" \Vith its task environment, to receive input from it, and to adjust and change as indicated. This can happen. However, sometimes the formation of an advisory board (\vhen it is done voluntarily) is little more tllan an attempt to co-opt the community, a tl1in.ly disguised attempt to create a less critical and friendlier task environment (Chapter 2). On other occasions, advisory boards are

81

82

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities formed because they are required. For example, a private foundation or govern1nent agency that is providing funding for a program may make the formation of an advisory board a requirement in order to ensure community input. Whether formed voluntarily or because of a requirement, if men1bers are carefully selected and invited to participate because they have valuable perspectives to offer, advisory boards can be valuable assets to an organization. A second type of board that is seen even less frequently in a human service organization is an administrative board. It consists of people who are part of the organization. Members are either appointed or elected (or a combination of the two) and make and implement policy. A fainiliar example is a college disciplinary board consisting of a mixture of current students and faculty. Complaints about students are referred to it (student conduct, academic dishonesty, and so forth). The board investigates and reviews available information. It has the power to dismiss the complaint or suspend or even expel students. Among human service organizations, administrative boards are most likely to be seen in private, for-profit organizations. Certain individuals (often the most high-ranking or those with the most seniority) are selected and/or elected to serve. Their membership gives them authority in certain areas that they would otherwise not have, such as setting fees or developing personnel standards. As we noted, the most common type of board, a board of directors, serves as the governing body for the organization. It acts as a kind of "trustee" and has legal responsibility to the people who provide funding for the organization for its operation. The board makes higher-level policy decisions and, in theory at least, provides strong leadership and direction to the organization. The by-laws of the organization generally specify the number of members on the board, the length of their term of service, board member responsibilities, and so forth. Often, they also include requirements that are designed to influence the composition of the board. For example, they may specify that a certain percentage of members must live in the geographical area served or that the board must reflect the demographic diversity of the organization's clients. A chairperson is elected from among members, and usually works with an executive committee (consisting of some of the most active board members) to do much of the day-to-day work of the board. Boards generally are divided into various other committees and subcommittees in order to divide up the work and to recommend needed action to the full board. Board members serve a specified term (often three years), and men1bers usually can be re-elected to additional terms. Terms are staggered so that only a portion of the board's members complete their term of service any given year. As vacancies occur, new board members are selected in accordance with the by-laws, often through recommendation by a nominating committee of the current board. In nominating new board members, committee members also may consider the expertise that a prospective board me1nber may bring to the organization. For example, if a board member who is about to complete service is the only attorney on the board, committee members 1nay seek another attorney to replace her. Or, when considering moving to new facilities, they may seek to nominate another prospective member who is a real estate agent, who may be useful in helping the organization to locate and acquire new offices. Unlike the corporate sector, board members are not paid and there are few benefits to service besides the gratification that goes with performing a service. (In fact, some organizations expect board members to make a sizable financial donation annually to the organization.) Boards tend to be large-it is not unusual for a board to consist of 20 or more members. They may be individuals who serve on many boards. Some may hold responsible leadership positions in other organizations or they may simply be individuals who have agreed to serve because of an interest in the organization and its mission.

Leading While there is some variation from organization to organization, here are the most common responsibilities of board members: • • • •

Recruit, hire, and regularly evaluate the director. Fire him or her as necessary. Regularly conduct (with the director) strategic planning for the organization. Make policy for the organization. Conduct fundraising (through solicitation, "personal contacts:• and their own financial contributions). • Provide general financial oversight of the finances of the organization. • Maintain good public relations. • Maintain self-maintenance (e.g., avoidance of conflicts of interest). That sounds like a lot of work for people who are volunteers and are often overly committed to their work elsewhere, and it is. In reality, there is nluch variation in the leadership provided by boards and among individual board members. Here is some of what we have observed: • Attendance at 1neetings and degree of involvement ainong 1ne1nbers varies widely. • Boards are often large and consist of a mixture of"names" designed to lend credibility and visibility to the organization and (often fewer) workers. • Some members may not understand human services (they possess more of a business mentality) and/or they prefer to simply delegate their responsibilities to those who do. • Members consist of a mix of members who seek to maintain the status quo and those "new school" members who advocate for change, for example, to move the organization in a different direction, to implement technological advances, and so forth. • One or a few members (often the members of an executive committee) often dominate the other board members, who routinely defer to them. While some boards are extremely conscientious and provide excellent leadership, many others fall short in one or more areas. Board members sometimes seen1 not to understand (or prefer not to understand) that fundraising and financial nianagement are primary board responsibilities. Because they have the responsibility to hire the director, some board members also may mistakenly see then1selves as the director's supervisor. This can result in micromanaging (Chapter 6) and even attempting to usurp the role of the director. For exainple, they may try to influence or control personnel decisions that are the responsibility of the director. Another co1nmon problem that we have seen is that performance evaluations of the director often do not get conducted or are not conducted on tiine. (It is not unusual for a director to go three years or longer without a comprehensive evaluation.) When this occurs, the organization can be put in a bad light if, for example, it decides to fire the director, perhaps in violation of its 0\¥11 by-laws.

Leadership among Managers The leadership activities of others in an organization (the social work managers \vho are the primary focus of this book) are different from those of board members. Sometimes, however, \Vhen boards do not perform their leadership activities, they fall to the organization's managers. For example, a board may "unofficially" delegate the task of fundraising to

83

84

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities the director or authorize a staff member to be hired for this purpose. Or, they may require that the director take the leadership role for strategic planning. And when you hold your job at the pleasure of the board (as the director does) it is difficult to say no! In most organizations, as we move down the hierarchy the leadership tasks of managers become more and more specific and focus increasingly on the present or the near future. For exa1nple, we expect higher-level managers such as the director to lead through such diverse activities as implementing the policies set by the board, formulating standards for the delivery of professional services, representing the organization to the media, seeking sources of potential funding, or "schmoozing" with politicians and community leaders. In contrast, lower level managers are more likely to lead by ensuring that staff members do not become so immersed in their work that they lose sight of organizational goals of service, or they may show leadership by allocating resources in ways that promote professional growth and that support lower-level staff members in their job performance. Leadership also may entail such activities as resolving interpersonal conflicts, advocating for better fringe benefits for staff members, or promoting pleasant working relationships by scheduling "attitude adjustment" social occasions.

THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP There has been much research on leadership. It has produced theories that reflect a number of schools of thought. Each has had its vocal advocates and each continues to contribute to our current understanding of leadership.

Trait Theories Some of the earliest studies of leadership in the United States were based on the assumption that good leadership is synonymous with the possession of certain traits. Research was based in part on studies of persons generally believed to have exhibited good leadership. Attempts were made to identify those "common denominators" possessed by them. One, Ralph Stogdill (1904-1978),4 compiled a list of22 traits including assertive, cooperative, energetic, diplomatic and tactful, fluent in speaking, and socially skilled. Another researcher, Edwin Ghiselli (1907-1980), developed another list that contained such traits as ability to supervise, intelligence, initiative, self-assurance, and decisiveness.5 In a 1983 study involving both success and failure in leadership, McCall and Lombardo identified four primary traits which were critical for successful leadership: emotional stability and composure; admitting error, rather than covering up mistakes; good interpersonal skills in communicating and persuading; and intellectual breadth.6 Many such lists were constructed. Ability to communicate was mentioned in many of them, as were credibility and vision. All of the lists appeared logical. Unfortunately, they rarely agreed with each other. A few traits (flexibility, initiative, selfconfidence, intelligence, and extroversion) appeared in virtually every list in some related form. Yet this observation was not, in itself, much of a contribution to our understanding of leadership. True, these traits probably are associated with good leadership, but they are also traits con1mon to good followers, good friends, and even to preferred pets! They are assets that increase the likelihood of success in most any arena or at any level in life. Besides, some people who lack one or more of these traits have nevertheless demonstrated themselves to be good leaders. Others have failed as leaders despite the presence of all of them.

Leading Trait theories of leadership had other problems. They seemed to suggest in a rather undemocratic way that some people are born with the characteristics that are required to become leaders, and some decidedly are not. This is not a view that sits well with social workers, who believe that individuals can change and grow. It also does not hold out much hope for leadership training or education. Instead, selecting a leader would entail simply identifying a person who already has the requisite traits, rather than \VOrking with available staff members to help them to acquire the knowledge and skills needed. Still another shortcoming of the trait theories of leadership relates to the problem of measurement. Most personality characteristics are not easily measured. Researchers have labored for most of the past century to measure intelligence in ways that do not reflect cultural, ethnic, racial, gender, age, or other types of bias. The other traits believed to be common to good leaders have received even less attention . Standardized instrwnents designed to 1neasure the1n are probably even less valid than those used to measure intelligence. Often a thin line separates a desirable leadership trait from a closely related but undesirable one. Often the undesirable trait is really just too 1nuch of the desirable one. Efforts at nleasurement may miss th is fine d istinction. For example, can we say with certainty that a standardized instrument that clain1s to measure initiative is really valid, that is, it measures what it claims to measure? Or is it possible that what might appear to be initiative is really an undesirable lack of caution or impetuousness? Similarly, \vhile we may agree that selfconfidence is desirable for leading, arrogan ce is n ot. But can we say with certainty that what we are measuring is the former and not the latter? Can we even be certain that a potential leader has not successfully feigned self-confidence? Can we say with certainty that what we are measuring is flexibility and not an unwillingness or inability to enforce needed controls? We kno\v that too much flexibility can be undesirable-but just how much is too much? Where does extroversion end and a lack of appropriate social boundaries begin? Measurements of personality characteristics exist, but they are simply not refined to the point where it is possible to use them to make good decisions about the leadership potential of human beings. Those researchers who advocated the trait theories of leadership contributed to our understanding of leadership. But the traits that they identified are not enough to guarantee good leadership behavior- they just help to explain why so1ne people struggle as leaders and others have an easier time of it. They also may go a long way toward explaining why some managers struggle to promote loyalty both to themselves and to the goals that they are attempting to attain, whereas other managers find that loyalties develop more naturally.

Behavioral Theories During the 1950s and 1960s, the behavioral theories of leadership were developed. T hey were based on the assumption that if one could identify exactly how strong leaders act d ifferently from weak leaders, tl1en we would know what good leadership behavior is. Then others could be taught to behave in a way more consistent with good leadership through training and education. A major advantage of the behavioral theories of leadership (over the trait theories) is the relative ease \Vith which behavior can be measured (compared to personality characteristics). Unlike traits, behaviors can be seen, recorded, and verified. Current staff can be taught to practice desirable leadership behaviors. Leader replacement can be accomplished by retraining rather than by seeking people with certain characteristics.

85

86

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities Advocates of the behavioral approaches to leadership shared a problem with trait theory researchers, however. They had difficulty in achieving any real consensus about which behaviors are reflective of good leadership and which are not. Early research sought to classify leadership behavior based on how leaders used the authority granted to them. For example, some leaders tended to be democratic, others authoritarian, and still others seemed to exert little direct influence over subordinates. None of the three types were found to be consistently effective leadership styles or consistently ineffective ones.7

"Style" Theories Behavioral approaches to the study of leadership evolved into a focus on leadership style that has persisted into the twenty-first century. Blake and McCanse's Leadership Grid© is a widely known method for plotting a manager's leadership style.8 It assumes that everyone has a leadership style and it can be plotted along a grid based on behaviors. The points on the grid that represent one's leadership style are based on (1) the degree to which the individual exhibits concern for production and (2) the degree to which the individual exhibits concern for people. Individuals can receive a "score" of between 1 and 9 for either behavior. Thus, a manager may be characterized as a 2,6 or a 7,4, and so forth. Blake and McCanse have identified the characteristics of leaders who fall at some of the most common positions on the grid and assigned labels and descriptions to their leadership styles. For example, 9,1 managers, referred to as having an "authority-co1npliance" style (those who are autocratic), are concerned primarily with tasks, and much less with people's n eeds. They control and direct their subordinates with little concern for their personal needs. At the opposite extreme, a 1,9 manager, referred to as having a "country club management" style, offers a very friendly, people-oriented environment, but provides very little emphasis on production. A 9,9 leadership style, described as "team management:' places heavy emphasis on both, whereas a 5,5 style, described as "middle of the road;' puts a balanced but moderate emphasis on both production and the creation of a supportive work environment. The Leadership Grid© is useful for identifying the leadership style of a given manager and what that manager offers. It does not suggest how managers can develop a particular style or how an ineffective style can be improved. It also does not seem to assert that any one style of leadership is best overall, although the description of a 9,9 style certainly sounds the most like what modern management theorists advocate. However, descriptions of the other styles also are quite positive- each inay be the most appropriate to get the job done in a given situation. Even a 1,1 type manager, one with a leadership style referred to as "impoverished manage1nent:' may, in very rare situations, be suited to the needs of an organization. For example, it inight be appropriate with a staff of experienced "self-starters" who know exactly what needs to be done and just do it. Managers with a 1,1 style offer very little concern for production and very little concern for people. They are active as managers, but just barely. There is another very useful way in which the Leadership Grid© can be employed. It can be very effective as a way for managers to learn how they are perceived by subordinates. It can sometimes be a real revelation to learn that our own perception of our management style differs markedly from the way subordinates view our approach to management. We may also be surprised to observe the difference in the way that two or n1ore subordinates

Leading perceive our style as a manager. This can provide valuable feedback and, in some cases, impetus for needed change. Few of us really have an accurate perception of how we "come across~· The Leadership Grid 0 , plotted by ourselves (how \Ve perceive our style) and by subordinates (how they perceive our style), can produce some interesting and productive contrasts and insights. At the same time that the Leadership Grid 0 has continued to be refined and revised, other researchers and theorists also focused on leadership styles, often by attempting to identify the styles associated with successful leaders. In 1994, House and Podsakoff9 attempted to summarize previous research. Unlike the Leadership Grid0 , \Vhich categories leaders along just two dimensions., the authors suggest that many more variables go into making up one's leadership style. Some of the more interesting ones (for managers in human service organizations) are inspirational communication, vision, concern with their o\vn image among staff members, passion, self-sacrifice, and ability to represent the organization effectively to the outside. Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y 10 is one of the best-known explanations of leadership style. McGregor ( 1906-1964) proposed that there are two rather dia1netrically opposed views (theories) ofhu1nan nature and people's attitudes to,vard work. Theory X holds that (among other things) people have an inherent dislike for work and must be threatened and controlled in order to make them be productive. They want security in the form of financial rewards, but dislike responsibility. If a 1nanager adheres to this theory, his or her management style will reflect it. How would managers who are "Theory X" act? They would be inclined to use tangible rewards and punishment (or threat of it) to get others to do what needs to be done. They would assume that their authority is resented and would adopt a "we-they" attitude, employing coercion \vhen it might not be needed. They \vould institute an oppressive, controlling collection of rules, policies, and procedures designed to enforce compliance. They would regularly "check up" on subordinates., expecting (perhaps hoping) to catch them in a moment of idleness or making a mistake. A Theory X manager may eventually cause staff members to respond by acting like people in Theory X-a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy. Theory Y, in contrast, assumes that people are willing to work and to accept responsibility. They want to control their own behavior and are capable of creative solutions to problems. Work is a natural activity for them. If committed to a goal, they will willingly do what is required to achieve it without the need for threats of punishment or special rewards. They will seek the authority necessary to do what needs to be done. Most human beings would be perceived as having an underutilized potential for growth, i1nagination, and creativity; that is, they are 1notivated by a need for self-actualization {see Chapter 9). Not surprisingly, 1nanagers who possess a Theory Y orientation toward people exert a style of leadership designed to capitalize on what they believe to be true of their subordinates. They act in a way that communicates trust and a belief in their good intentions. They treat staff members respectfully, as valued, responsible team members. They promote staff "ownership" of their work. They assume that subordinates want to work toward organization goal achievement. They maintain a work environment that enhances growth and creativity and would use no more restrictive controls than are absolutely necessary. Of course, purely Theory X and Theory Y styles of leadership are extremes on a continuum. They rarely, if ever, exist. A purely Theory Y orientation might be too idealistic. Although it might be descriptive of most staff members, there \vill be exceptions. Even in

87

88

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities the human services, not everyone wants to work and accept responsibility. It would produce a leadership style that might be too permissive, and that would almost certainly lead to problems and abuses by a few people. A purely Theory X orientation would produce a leadership style that would be so repressive and "heavy-handed" that it would ahnost certainly lead to staff inembers' dissatisfaction (and perhaps turnover) and a breakdown in group inorale. The attitudes of most managers (and thus their management styles) fall son1ewhere in between these two extremes. As social workers, most of us probably tend to be more Theory Y than Theory X in our assumptions about human beings. But as realists we must also acknowledge that it is not unusual to encounter people who tend to lend support to Theory X stereotypes. We also become more Theory X or more Theory Y as a result of our life experiences. For example, some social work managers see1n to enter large bureaucracies with Theory Y beliefs about people. However, after observing the behaviors (laziness, irresponsibility, resistance to change, and so forth) of some staff members, they may become inore Theory X in their beliefs about people. (Perhaps, as suggested earlier, it is the bureaucracy that promotes behavior that fits the Theory X stereotype; perhaps only people who fit the stereotype can survive in bureaucracies for very long.) Changes in orientation can occur in the opposite direction too. Sometimes, managers with Theory X orientations are pleasantly surprised to find that their staff members are hardworking, eager for responsibility, creative, and so forth. They then change their attitudes about people and become more Theory Y oriented in their leadership styles. McGregor's contribution to our understanding of leadership lies in the insight that, frequently, our leadership styles are based largely on our perceptions of people and their attitudes and preferences regarding work. If we as managers allow our assumptions (lying anywhere along the continuum) to dictate our leadership styles without bothering to form an accurate assessment of who our staff members really are and how they regard work, we are destined to have problems. Leading, like other functions of management and other areas of social work practice, is a people skill. It requires knowledge of human behavior and the capacity to recognize individual differences in the needs of staff members, and what they require from us. However, we must also remember that good inanagement and an appropriate management style are also influenced by several other factors besides the needs and expectations of others. Successful managers are aware of them and attempt to balance the needs of staff members with our capacity to address them. Doing this is not easy, since they often seem to be in conflict with each other. What are these other factors that influence management style? They include:

• The requirements of the situation. Different situations (e.g., time pressures, threats to funding, or other threats from segments of the task environment) require flexibility and different approaches to leading. • Wha t our superiors expect from us as managers. As managers, we cannot ignore our bosses and their definition of what are good management practices. Although our style may differ somewhat from theirs, it cannot be all that different without causing problems for us and for the organization. • What our peers expect from us. Fellow managers, especially those at the same level >vithin the organization, cannot be ignored. We cannot get too out-of-step in our management style, causing resentment by our peers and, perhaps, dissatisfaction among their subordinates who might prefer our management style to theirs.

Leading • What we expect fron1 ourselves. Based on both our observations of other managers whom we have known and our study of management theories, we have arrived at our own definition of good management practice. In order to live up to this standard, we need to develop a management style that is consistent with it. • Wha t the organizational culture expects. Rules, policies, and procedures, as \Veil as group norms, also help to influence what is and is not an appropriate management style.

Contingency Theories Contingency theories of leadership take the position that, in effect, good leadership depends on the needs of the situation. They contend that the trait, behavioral, or style approaches to leadership did not place sufficient emphasis on the different situations in which managers must function; thus, they lack a comprehensive understanding of what makes a good leader. They are both a response to the perceived shortcomings of the other leadership theories and an extension of them. They are among the most widely accepted theories today. Ralph Stogdill conducted leadership studies over several decades. In 1nany ways his conclusions about leadership paralleled the changing attitudes about leadership that occurred from the time that he frrst studied it until his later work. As we noted earlier, Stogdill began as an advocate of the trait theories in the 1940s. 11 He later focused more on behaviors, identifying two behaviors- consideration and structure-as essential to good leadership. 12 These two behaviors are very similar to the two axes on the Blake and Mouton managerial grid: concern for people and concern for production. Consideration can be understood as, for example, being supportive, acting friendly and warm to subordinates, and being open to suggestions. Structure relates to a regular emphasis on budgets, deadlines, and objectives. It is often difficult for the social worker in the role of manager to find the appropriate balance behveen consideration and structure. Subordinates love consideration, but one's superiors may view it with suspicion or perceive it as being too "nice" or allowing too much freedom for the requirements of a situation. Conversely, use of structure is well liked by one's superiors, but it can be viewed as unnecessarily controlling by subordinates. Can a manager really offer both simultaneously, or are the two behaviors really in conflict with each other? Eventually, in his later work, Stogdill found a way to resolve the theoretical dilemma of how managers can offer the optimal a1nounts of both consideration and structure. He concluded that the best mix of the two (i.e., good leadership) depends on situational factors. So1netimes more structure is needed, sometiJnes 1nore consideration. This line of thinking, consistent with contingency management theory that we first introduced in Chapter 3, takes the position that a person is not inherently a good or a bad leader, or a capable or an incon1petent one. Good or bad leadership depends on the leadership qualities of an individual and how weLJ they match the kind of leadership that is needed in a given situation. Characteristics or behaviors that meet the leadership needs of one situation may not be right for another. There are no characteristics or behaviors that guarantee that one will be a good leader in any situation. Ho\vever, there are some (e.g., an inability to provide either consideration or structure) that will almost invariably produce failure as a leader. Generally, nations, communities, and organizations have selected leaders who they believe possess those leadership qualities that are needed at the time. Yet the same qualities may have made them ill-suited as leaders at another time and place. For example, Winston

89

90

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities Churchill, Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meir, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Adolf Hitler, Mahatma Gandhi, Ayatollah Khornieni, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden-all of these people (despite our personal assessments of them) fit the leadership needs of their respective nations, religious groups, or political movements at the time. In twentieth-century U.S. history, Franklin D. Roosevelt had the leadership qualities necessary to restore the confidence of a nation reeling from the Great Depression. John F. Kennedy's relatively young, vigorous, and idealistic leadership was what was desired and needed following the more paternal style of the Eisenhower years. Gerald Ford's leadership, with its emphasis on integrity and openness, was what was needed to restore credibility in the presidency in the years after Watergate, despite the fact that in other times Ford might have been viewed as an ineffective leader. Jimmy Carter was initially welcomed as a newcomer to voters who had grown tired of Washington politics. A nation disillusioned \vith inflation and cynicism also welcomed the leadership style of Ronald Reagan and reelected him by an overwhelming 1nargin in 1984. Reagan's characteristic optimism, his belief in traditional values, and his conservative political policies made him a natural leader for the 1980s. Only late in his second term of office did the "Teflon" begin to wear thin as his laid-back approach to management and m isplaced trust of subordinates became increasingly problematic. Reagan's approaches to leadership were no different in 1988 than they were in 1980, but conditions had changed and they were no longer what was needed and wanted. George H. W. Bush's early popularity was largely attributable to his more "hands-on" management style, a welcome change from the Reagan administrations. His failure to be reelected in 1992 and Bill Clinton's continued popularity in 1996 tell us what were perceived to be the leadership qualities that were needed in those years. Following Clinton's embarrassing personal problems, the voting public (or at least almost 50 percent of them) elected George W Bush in what may have been a wish to return to the values and policies of the conservative Reagan- Bush years of the 1980s. Following the terrorist acts of September 11, 2001, his pugnacious style made him widely popular. Later, in his second term of office, he lost favor among people who questioned his conduct of the war in Iraq and his policies on human rights. Barack Obama was first elected at a time when the majority of voters sought new leadership with different ideas to lead the nation out of an economic recession, to address social issues such as universal health care, and to try a different approach to working with world leaders. However, extreme political polarization in Congress, a growing antagonism toward federal programs, and weariness over military involvement in the Middle East all contributed to questions about his leadership, especially during his second term. Contingency theories of management emphasize that certain leadership traits and behaviors are more or less desirable, depending on the situation. There are certain situations in which consideration by leaders is more important to organizational functioning than structure; sometimes, it is the other way around. For example, when strangers must work together and when time deadlines or other emergency situations exist, it is probably structure that is needed most from the leader. In related research in a social agency, York13 found that, in times of rapid change, concern for production may be a more valued leadership characteristic than concern for people. Fred Fiedler, the theoretician most frequently associated with the contingency theories of leadership, saw a leader's capacity to influence subordinates as largely a matter of fit among the leader's style and personality, the characteristics of the work group, and the needs of the work situation. 14 Fiedler observed that the attitudes and needs of individual managers

Leading tend to change little; leaders do not adapt well to changing situations. He concluded that it is probably more efficient for organizations to create managerial positions to fit the leadership characteristics of existing personnel than to try to change people through training to fit the needs of existing positions. Fiedler took the position that, as managers, a good portion of our management style may be a "given." But \Vhile our style may be reasonably "fixed;' there are skills that can be learned (e.g., delegation, grant writing, constructing budgets).

LEADERSHIP AND FOLLOWERSHIP Earlier in this chapter, we discussed the importance of leaders being able to identify staff me1nbers' individual needs and motivators. However, staff members also have their own styles and expectations as followers; they can have a great effect on a manager's ability to lead. Successful leaders develop good followers; unsuccessful ones do not. How does a person develop a followership style? Usually, from experience. There are 1nany different ways in which one can follow. We learn which of these works best in response to the style and requirements of a sup ervisor or other manager. For example, many social workers in public human service organizations have experienced only authoritarian leadership styles. They have learned from experience that good followership entailed primarily doing what their boss told them to do, doing it promptly and consistent with established rules, policies and procedures, and so forth. But when they leave to take a job in another organization that is less bureaucratic and encounter a different leader who advocates a participatory management approach to decision making, the old definition of good follo,vership no longer applies. In fact, their old good followership behaviors will be dysfunctional both for them and for the new leader. A whole ne\v set of expectations (for \Vhat constitutes good followership) must be learned and old expectations and behaviors must be unlearned. They must adapt, if they are to become good followers. What is good followership? Some of what constitutes good follo,vership is pretty universal. In fact, many of the same traits and behaviors that make good followers are the same ones that make good leaders. For example, a good follower is dependable, is a good team player, possesses needed technical knowledge, uses sound judgment, makes rational decisions, keeps others informed of developments, knows when to ask for assistance, and understands and supports organizational 1nissions, goals, and objectives. However, there are certain other attributes of good followers. Good followers are able to manage themselves, their job, and their boss. For the good follower, self-1nan agement involves the ability to handle relationships with clients and coworkers and the ability to take resp onsibility for one's own feelings, decisions, and behaviors. It involves nlaintaining a confident, positive attitude toward one's work and a belief in the mission, goals, and objectives of the organization. Job management involves the skillful organization and management of time, duties, and workload. It entails knowing how to find and access needed knowledge for doing one's job. It also entails skill in problem solving and making the relatively routine decisions that go with the job so that the follo\ver need not be overly dependent on the supervisor or other manager. Boss management requires followers to be able to accurately read and assess both the boss's strengths and \Veaknesses, (as well as those of other members of the work group). A good follo,ver \vill find \vays to complement the boss's functioning and to thereby

91

92

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities improve the functioning of the entire work unit. Boss management is closely related to a concept called "managing up" that has been formulated by Austin. He notes that managing up not only helps the boss but also the follower. If the boss is helped to do a better job, the subordinate's job is made easier and both look good. 15 As we have noted, a leader's management style greatly influences what constitutes good followership. But influence can flow in the other direction too. The followership style of staff members son1etimes can influence the leadership style of their boss. For example, an inexperienced and overly dependent group of followers can elicit certain leader behaviors such as verifying compliance with rules, giving detailed instructions, or allowing very little autonomy in decision making. Or, a leader who naturally tends to be very controlling may loosen up a little as followers demonstrate that they can assume more responsibility, require little oversight, or otherwise convince their boss that they function just fine on their own most of the tiJne. Good followers can help to produce more effective leaders in another way too. They can contribute a valuable perspective that a manager may lack. They are often in closer touch with clients and the community than are managers. Thus they may be able to identify developing problems early, allowing managers to address them before they become more severe. They also can identify opportunities or needs for additional services as they develop. Thus they can help their bosses to stay in touch with "life in the trenches" and to respond appropriately.

CREATING A FAVORABLE ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE The concept of organizational climate was introduced in Chapter 3. We are all familiar with the term climate as it relates to cities or other geographical entities. The term is also used in describing organizations or their subunits. One element of an organization's climate is the feeling that one gets while working there. Like the weather, that feeling can be warm and hospitable; it can also be cold and hostile. Of course, like the weather, it can be too warm, almost stifling. Usually it takes a while to get an accurate reading of organizational climate; however, sometimes one can spend five minutes in a work setting and accurately sense it. Effective leaders recognize that productivity and performance are influenced by the overall environment in which people do their jobs. They strive to create a work environment that is as favorable as it can be, given the nature of the work that must be done and the needs of those doing the work. Ideally, the climate of an organization should be pleasant and supportive of good work. Effective leaders understand that even undesirable tasks do not seem as bad in a favorable organizational climate; however, even a task that should be enjoyable can be unpleasant in an unfavorable one. We shall examine some of the characteristics that generally are found within favorable organizational climates, the kind that leaders attempt to create and nurture.

Teamwork When they lead, managers sometimes function much like athletic coaches. They endeavor to make staff members (including then1selves) feel as if they all are members of a team, working together to achieve common objectives. Leaders help others to see that they are more likely to be achieved through team play than through unhealthy conflict or by pursuing a course of self-interest.

Leading

Box 4 .1 1.

93

Responses to the Same Situations: Teamwork (T) and Self-Interest (S-1)

People see things going wrong. • (1) "Let's deal with it now. It may only get worse." • (S-1) "Forget about it. It hasn't affected me yet."

2.

There is an unpleasant job to be done. • (1) "How can we get it done?"

6. A mistake is made. • (1) "What can we all learn from this?" • (S-0 "Who did it and what will happen to them?"

7- A personal conflict occurs. • (1) "Can we get together and talk this out? This is doing nobody any good."

• (S-1) "Whose job is it anyway?" 3. A coworker receives recognition. • (1) "Congratulations1This makes us all look good!"

• (S-1) "I don't get mad; I get even." 8. A suggestion is made for how to improve one's own work. • (1) "Thanks. I'll certainly consider it."

• (S-1) "Let me tell you why it is no big deal."

4. A suggestion for a policy change is made. • (1) "Let's consider it. It may be a good idea." • (S-1) "What will the boss want?" 5. Someone offers help with a problem. • (1) "Thanks. Maybe I can return the favor someday." • (S-1) "It's not your problem. Why do you want to help me?"

• (S-1) "Mind your own business. I don't tell you how to do your job."

9. A job is performed well. • (1) "I'm proud to have been a part of it." • (S-1) "Who will get the credit?" 10.

A job is performed poorly.

• (1) "We have to share the responsibility and keep it from happening again." • (S-1) "Who is to blame for this?"

Healthy and successful organizations are those in which all participants have a sense of "team" and appreciate the value of teamwork. Managers sometimes devote staff development time to sessions that teach about teamwork and contain various team-building exercises designed to demonstrate that some tasks can only be accomplished by teamwork. Such exercises can make their point. However, they are not a substitute for actual workrelated tasks that demonstrate the value of teamwork and provide practice in working as a team. Teamwork can be felt in the way that staff members approach various situations. Members work cooperatively and for the common good. A lack of teamwork (usually characterized by self-interest) similarly can be sensed within other organizations. What are the differences in the way people act? Box 4.1 gives some examples of how the presence or absence of a sense of teamwork can produce different responses to the same situations.

Mutual Respect and Confidence A work climate conducive to productivity reflects mutual respect and confidence. There is an absence of any unnecessary reminders of the power differentials that exist. Leaders are charged with certain responsibilities and with making certain decisions based upon their place on an organizational chart and their job descriptions. But this does not mean that they are 1nore intelligent, 1nore knowledgeable about everything, or that only their perception of a situation is the correct one. They may be no more experienced, creative, or better

94

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities informed about an issue than those whom they supervise. They simply occupy a different position, have different job responsibilities, and make decisions with access to different information. Failure to remember this and to act accordingly can seriously damage morale. Managers usually are more similar to those who work under them than they are dissimilar. It is easy to forget this in the role of manager and to 1nake erroneous assumptions about the motivation, capacities, and knowledge of people who occupy a lower place on an organizational chart. Individuals treated as inferiors frequently respond as inferiors. There is no reason why managers, while leading, need to treat others in a condescending manner when their inferior status is limited to only one rather narrow sphere of lifetheir place on the organizational chart. Subtle and less-than-subtle reminders of the relative status of staff members are only appropriate in matters that relate to this sphere. Even then, such reminders should be used only as a last resort. They usually are appropriate only when other efforts to influence, those that convey mutual respect, have failed. Unnecessary reminders of subordinate status can quickly threaten the mutual respect that is critical to maintaining a healthy work climate. Mutual confidence is closely related to mutual respect. It evolves in those work settings where the leader and his or her staff members have had experience working together successfully. To achieve it, leaders need to develop a "track record" for competence and skilled leadership under pressure. In turn, staff members need to show that they too can "deliver" under stress. Confidence also involves feelings of integrity and trustworthiness on the part of all parties involved. There must be a shared understanding that both leaders and their subordinates will be judged fairly. But perceptions of fairness (or lack of it) run in both directions. Managers are also sensitive to how their own performance is evaluated by their staff members. They may receive regularly scheduled and written evaluations by them (a practice that is growing in popularity). Or, their "evaluations" may consist of overheard comments made by staff members within the organization or staff member comments made in the community that are reported back to them. In organizations, as in other spheres of life, fairness often begets fairness. If we are fair to others, they are generally fair to us. However, as some managers have learned, treating staff members fairly is no guarantee that they will respond in kind. Some people see1n to resent managers and are unfairly critical of them no matter how they are treated. (Perhaps they just resent the power differential that exists, or it may be more personal.) Others seem to perceive fairness on the part of a manager as a sign of weakness or that they have been successful in intimidating the manager. For example, they may perceive a second chance following a costly error as an indication that a manager is unwilling or unable to punish unacceptable behaviors. It often is difficult to be fair to staff when one knows that they are not being fair in return. But it should be done anyway. The real reasons managers treat others fairly is not so they will be treated fairly in return. It is because (1) it is the right thing to do; (2) they need to develop a reputation for fairness to be able to manage effectively; and (3) it sets a good example for others.

Understanding of Respective Roles A clilnate of mutual fairness requires an understanding of the respective roles of all parties. Do other staff members really understand the responsibilities of managers? If not, they may evaluate a manager's performance unfairly based on mistaken notions of what they think the manager should be doing and how he or she should be doing it. Effective leaders dispel

Leading the mystery that often surrounds the role of manager. They convey the message that, while they necessarily have different perspectives on some things and go about their jobs a little differently than other staff members, much of \vhat they do is (or should be) directed at achieving the same objectives. It helps to remind others of this sometimes. Understanding, like fairness, works both \Vays in those organizations where leaders have created and nurtured a good organizational clin1ate. Managers need to remain in touch 'vith their staff members. Good leaders understand their staff members' jobs and, perhaps m ore importantly, how they feel about them. Staff members need to knO\V that, despite assUilling a job with major management responsibilities, their boss can still empathize with their concerns. While we would not contend that managers should always have previously occupied lower-ranking positions in the hierarchy, it helps to have this experience. If they have not had it, it is essential that they get dose enough to the jobs of their staff 1ne1nbers to have a real understanding of the rewards and stressors that go with their jobs. Even those n1anagers who have "come up through the ranks" often have a tendency to forget what their old jobs were like and to lose sight of the pressures that govern day-to-day activities. As leaders, managers need to stay in touch. This 1nay entail getting out of one's office and just stopping and talking to staff about their jobs from tin1e to time, what has con1e to be referred to as "managing by wandering around:' In so1ne human service agencies, some supervisors have also chosen (or even been required) to carry a smaJJ nu~mber of cases in order to better understand the real world in which others have to function.

Advocacy In an organization \vith a healthy organizational climate, leaders som etimes serve as advocates for their staff members, even risking their own position of favor with higher-ups to battle for their rights and well-being. Managers can easily slip into a comfortable pattern of behavior that entails courting the favor of superiors while showing less regard for the interests of their staff members. After all, any evaluations (formal or informal) by their staff members generally represent Little more than feedback to them. However, their careers are generally more dependent on evaluations by their bosses. Rewards in the form of praise, additional pron1otion, salary increases, and job security are given for compliance with their wishes, not for doing battle with them in an advocacy role. It is also easy for a n1anager to rationalize that a avoidance of conflict with one's bosses is in everyone's best interest. So why risk antagonizing them? There is a very good reason. If managers are preoccupied with currying the favor of their bosses and do not occasionaJJy take a stand to advocate for their staff members' interests, they are reneging on their leadership responsibilities as managers. Every organization experiences occasions when managers are asked to make decisions or implement policies that are not in the best interests of their staff nlembers. For example, they may be asked to reduce costs by not replacing staff members who resign, thus increasing tlle workload of those who ren1ain, or to enforce an unpopular rule or policy that unnecessarily restricts staff members' use of their personal electronic devices. If they fail to advocate for their staff members in these situations, they will eventuaJJy pay a price in the form of a loss of respect and confidence. Respect will only begin to be restored when they start advocating for staff interests in situations \Vhere they have nothing personally to gain and may even be inviting the temporary disfavor of their bosses. Social workers who assume management responsibilities are stiJl social \Yorkers. They also have an obligation to be an advocate for change that will benefit clients and the society

95

Part 1\vo: The Major Managemen t Activities

96

as a whole. Social work 1nanagers in human service organizations are often stereotyped as conservative and unwilling to "rock the boat:' However, research has demonstrated that this perception is no longer valid, if it ever was. It was found that higher-level "administrators devote more time to advocacy and are more politically active than other social \Vorkers:>1 6 Promoting a climate of client advocacy within an organization also entails helping others to fulfill their professional obligations as advocates for change. Being a good role model goes a long way, but it may not be enough. Specific actions often can be taken. Managers may be able to help to write client advocacy expectations into staff members' job descriptions and develop personnel policies to protect staff members who advocate for change. They may also be able to provide continuing education on advocacy methods for staff members to teach then1, for example, which methods are most effective and \vhat legal protections are available to them.

Case Example

A

mber was a supervisor in a large daycare center that em ployed several social workers. One of the social workers who she supervised. Jerome. was accused of sexually abusing a four-year-old girl who was a client at the center. His accuser. the child's parent. demanded an investigation. The local child-protection unit of the Department of Social Services thoroughly investigated the complaint, concluded that there was no indication that abuse had occurred, and closed the case as unfounded. No criminal charges were filed. Jerome. who had been suspended from work until he was cleared of charges, was reinstated. The director of the organization called him in and expressed her delight that Jerome. who was regarded as an excellent worker. had been found not guilty of the charges. She assured him of her complete confidence in him. Jerome returned to his job and again demonstrated the competence and dedication that he had shown in his previous work. A year later. Jerome's former wife sued for full custody of their three-year-old daughter. In a deposition. she charged that Jerome had "inappropriately fond led" the child during a recent visit and that she suspected that he had been sexually abusing her in the past. She also initiated criminal charges against him that were reported in a local newspaper. The chairman of the board of directors, who knew about

the previous charge, called the executive director at 7:00 AM on a Saturday. The executive director immediately called Amber and demanded that she meet with Jerome at 9:00 the following Monday morning to learn more about the situation. Despite the fact that the newspaper notice gave few details and did not mention Jerome's place of employment, the executive director was fearful of a telephone call from a parent and wanted to have all available information to be able to respond to inquiries. Amber was very anxious as she anticipated her meeting with Jerome. The meeting did not go well. Jerom e uneq uivocally den ied any wrongdoing. He had a ready explanation for his former wife's charges. His wife's sister had recently been involved in a child custody battle and had ga ined custody of her children a~er threatening to charge her husband with sexual abuse. He explained that his former wife. who had threatened to "get" him anyway, was simply trying a tactic that had worked well for her sister. Amber felt herself getting annoyed with Jerome's seeming lack of concern about the charges. She didn't seem to be able to get him to understand the potential harm that the allegations might cause the center. He remarked that he felt that Amber was "making a big deal over nothing." He demanded. "So. what do you expect me to do?" Amber replied. "Perhaps you

(continued)

Leading

Case Example

97

Continued

should consider resigning. If the executive director asks for your resignation. I certainly cannot support you." Jerome left and slammed the door. Later. the executive director expressed satisfaction with the way that Amber had handled the matter. Jerome tendered his resignation. But before he left. he gave the other staff members his explanation of his wife's charges and also told them that Amber had requested his resignation. Three staff members came to see Amber to request that she ask Jerome to reconsider. She stated simply that she could not discuss a personnel matter with them. On his last day on the job. Jerome came in for his exit interview. He told Amber that he had generally been pleased with his job at the center and with her as his supervisor. But he felt he had not been treated fairly when his wife's charges were made public. In his opin ion. Amber should have supported him since "people are considered innocent until proven guilty." By this t ime, Amber was no longer angry with Jerome. She told him that she personally believed that he was innocent. as did the executive director and other staff members. But as a manager. she had to consider the best interests of the center. which, she feared, could be destroyed by charges of sexual abuse. Jerome just looked disgusted and shook his head. He glared at her. and walked out. Amber believed that the whole messy business was over. It was not. Within the next three weeks. the other two men on the staff resigned. In their exit interviews. they told Amber that the job just was "not worth the risk." They knew that. as males. they were particularly vulnerable to reputation-destroying charges of ch ild abuse. But prior to Jerome's problems. they had believed that. if charged. the organization would come to their defense and support. They no longer believed this. They stated that they could not work for a leader who would not serve as their advocate when needed. The departure of the three men and the general animosity of the remaining staff made Amber's

job very difficult. She hired two new social workers (both female; no males applied) but both the two new employees quickly adopted the attitude toward Amber that the others exhibited. She suspected that they had been "oriented" by Megan. the staff member who had been most openly supportive of Jerome. Amber held a special meeting of her staff to discuss morale problems. She stated that she felt that she owed them an explanation for her actions. She told them that. while she could not reveal the specifics of their conversations. she believed that Jerome's resignation was best for the center. Besides. she emphasized, she had not asked for his resignation; it had been his decision. Megan sarcastically replied. "Obviously, Jerome remembered your conversation a little differently." The meeting accomplished little. If anyth ing. the other staff members were even angrier. When three additional months passed and she began to feel even more isolated from the group. Amber left to take another job. The staff clearly no longer t rusted her and she felt that her ability to be an effective supervisor had been irreparably damaged.

Discussion Ques tions 1.

Was Amber's suggestion that Jerome consider resign ing appropriate? Why or why not?

2.

What were Amber's ethical obligations to Jerome, to her organization. and to the organization's clients?

3. How did meeting her ethical obligations prod uce an ethicaI conflict for Amber? 4. Were the other staff members justified in reacting to Amber's handling of the situation the way they did? Why or why not? 5. What might have been a better way for Amber to handle her second meeting with Jerome? 6. What characteristics of a healthy organizational climate were damaged by the way that the situation was handled?

98

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

Maximum Autonomy Another characteristic of a human service organization with a healthy climate is the presence of maximum autonomy at all levels. Professional staff and other personnel frequently possess widely diverse knowledge and skills. They can use them most effectively if they are given the autonomy to do so. Good managers seek to create an environment that fosters independence and the responsible use of autonomy. An opti1nal level of autonomy is one in which persons are constrained in tl1e use of their professional judgment no more than is absolutely necessary. The goal is to promote, not to stifle, creative thinking and decision making. Thus, good leaders are able to accurately delineate between those activities where: I. Creativity is not desirable and conformity is necessary. 2. Creativity can be employed, and support for it can be offered. Staff members need to feel free to act without always consulting others first. As long as a decision or behavior is within established formal guidelines, they need to be able to assume that they will be supported, even if things go wrong.

Good Communication The type and purpose of communication within an organization is a major factor in shaping its climate. Communication occurs in two forms. In its more desirable form, it consists of information directly related to and supportive of the organization's mission. For example, it 1nay consist of policy information, advice on how to do a job, and feedback about progress toward achievement of objectives. There are many different vehicles for desirable communication. For example, we can communicate through notices on bulletin boards, memos, newsletters, staff meetings, phone, or electronic mail. A second form of communication that exists within organizations does not relate directly to the organization's mission. It consists of emotional reactions to what is occurring within the organization and the ways that they are shared with others. This type of communication generally is not desirable; it can have a negative effect on group and individual morale.

Formal Communication Breakdowns As a leader, the manager's task is to promote the flow of good, useful, supportive communication while limiting the flow of communication that is destructive of morale and that sidetracks individual and group energies that could be put to more constructive use. This would seem to be a goal that is easily attainable. But why do efforts to promote positive communication so often fail? Sometimes it is the fault of managers who initiate communication-messages are not well thought out or articulated. Why? Managers may assume that the receiver will understand the jargon that they use or they may assume that the receiver will want to understand. They may asstune that staff members will regularly read the bulletin board or their e-mail {but, they often do not). Managers may mistakenly believe that a receiver will read or hear the entire message before concluding what the essence of the communication is, or they may even asstune that commtmication is unnecessary because "everyone already knows:' Communication of even well-articulated messages can break down and cause problems. Anyone who has ever played the childhood game where participants whisper a message from one person to another around a circle will recall that the message received back by the initiator

Leading rarely bears much resemblance to the original one. This is known as line loss. A tragic example of it occurred in a 2006 mine disaster in West Virginia when relatives \Vere erroneously informed that 12 trapped miners had been rescued alive. In fact, only one survived. The miscommunication was blamed on the fact that the message of a rescue had to "be relayed four to seven tin1es before it got to the outside:'17 Line loss usually occurs \vithout any malevolence or self-interest on the part of those doing the communicating. It is a function of the number of times that a message is transferred. Of course, it may also result from an intentional selective emphasis, addition, or omission designed to modify the message to reflect what the person relaying it wanted it to say. The presence ofa power differential also can hinder good communication from managers to staff members. Even a well-stated message can be misconstrued because of who initiated it and the sender's assumed intent. For example, the request to make no unnecessary home visits may be incorrectly perceived as a warning tllat major funding cuts (and probably staff reductions) are in1minent. Sometimes, a manager m ay intend to make a suggestion and state it as such, but the suggestion is perceived as a directive and staff n1embers respond accordingly. The fact that a power differe ntial exists between a n1anager and staff members can also lead to a manager being denied needed information. For exa1nple, if a staff member believes that admission of a mistake or a request for help will be viewed as evidence of her incompetence, needed communication may not occur. How much and how accurately staff members communicate with a leader is largely dependent on the leader's past reactions to their communication. If they reported bad news, was it responded to with anger or defensiveness? Was the messenger chastised, or was the messenger thanked for providing the needed information? Did communication about a problem that anotller staff member was having result in extra work for tile messenger? Were confidences kept as requested, or did the manager reveal tile source of information resulting in alienation of tile messenger from peers? Such negative consequences are destructive of trust for the manager and \Vill almost certainly result in future elimination or distortion of communication. The communicator is likely to say, "I learned my lesson-next time 1'11 keep it to myself" This only contributes to an ever-gro"ving cycle of distrust benveen managers and staff members \vitllin the organization.

Promoting Good Communication When formal channels are found to be untrustworthy, informal channels of communication will inevitably develop to fill the void. Managers then usually have little control over what is transferred. It can become a dangerous combination of half-truths, rumors, and even infonnation that is si1nply wrong. Worst of all, the nlan ager may not even know what information is being sent along infor1nal channels. What can a manager do to enhance good formal communication and reduce tile likelihood of dangerous informal communication ? Once again, we come back to tllat critical element for a healtlly organizational vith the use of policies is that they tend to be confused with rules and vice versa. If we all fully understood the differences between rules and policies and always understood the manager's intentions correctly, there would be far fewer problems in human

Influencing Day-to-Day Activities of Others service organizations. Unfortunately, this doesn't always happen. The terms rule and policy often are used as if they were interchangeable, which, of course, they are not. Managers also may fail to make themselves clear as to their meaning and/or intentions-is it a rule or a policy? Sometimes, even if managers clearly communicate \vhich of the two they intend, the receiver of the communication may not choose to hear correctly or may not receive the message accurately for some other reason. If one or both individuals are confused about the difference in meaning, situations can become chaotic. There is no shortage of real-life examples of confusion over policies and rules. Here are a few: • A rule may be in effect that "employees may not accumulate over 30 days' vacation leave:• An employee who perceives this as a policy fails to take vacation ti1ne because she is trying to get caught up on \vork and to see a client through a crisis. The employee becomes outraged when her pay stub reveals that she has lost four days of leave time. • A social worker knows about the rule that requires that "co1nplete medical insurance information must be collected and recorded during the initial patient contact:' But he perceives it to be a policy. He fails to get the details of the client's health coverage as required because he does not want to appear to be more interested in payment for services than in the client's problem. The client never returns for a second interview and leaves the state with no forwarding address. The social worker becomes furious when he receives a written reprimand by his supervisor. • A social worker is aware of a policy that limits the size of treatment groups to eight clients, but she perceives it as a rule. She refuses to admit the son of a prominent local politician into the smoking-cessation group that she leads because the group already has eight members. She later is reprimanded by her supervisor for using poor judgment. • A supervisor is aware of the policy that "social \vorkers should use office computers only for official business:· Treating it as a rule, he demands that a social worker work overtime to reimburse the organization for the ten minutes that she spent sending an e-mail to a friend in another organization, since only a small portion of the message was work-related. The social worker co1nplains to the supervisor's boss and the supervisor is required to back down on his demand.

Pros and Cons of Rules and Policies Of course, both rules and policies have both advantages and disadvantages. Both can be ti1nesavers for staff members and for the 1nanager. With a rule in place, very little if any direct supervision may be needed. For the person bound by a rule, no real thought is required. Just con1ply and you will be OK. Thus rules have a way of freeing up the time and cognitive processes of staff members so that they can better devote them to other decisions where they are needed (e.g., in deciding whether an exception to a policy is indicated). Rules rarely apply to only one individual. They are meant to be impersonal. While nearly everyone finds some rule annoying or insulting, most people recognize the need for rules. They provide even more certainty than policies. One can be faulted for making an exception to a policy \vithout adequate justification or for not nlaking an exception when one was indicated. But abide by a rule and you are safe. It is also possible for managers

133

134

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

to use a rule to justify an unpopular decision; it is more difficult to do the same thing with a policy. For example, it is possible to say, "I wish I could make an exception, but we have a rule that forbids it:' Because of their rigidity and the fact that they are designed to disallow the use of discretion, rules sometimes are resented as an unpleasant reminder of rank and power differentials that exist. Nevertheless, some rules are inevitable in any organization. So1ne behaviors are simply intolerable. Some tasks must be done the only correct way; some decisions cannot be left to individual judgment. A manager should view rules as useful planning methods of choice for some situations. But, because they are often sources of resentment among professionals, they are best reserved for situations where policies would leave just too much room for discretion.

Procedures Procedures are guidelines for actions that are designed to influence the sequence or chronology of events. The use of procedures is most appropriate for situations where the best results are achieved (or results are best achieved) when people follow a certain chronology of events. Procedures are rarely used in shaping the sequence of events in the methods of intervention that social workers use. For example, we don't usually have the kind of knowledge available (best practices) to prescribe the precise order of methods to use in counseling a client who has just sustained a personal loss or in influencing the power structure to support legislation to provide funding for psychiatric aftercare services. Our clients and client systems are not interchangeable parts to be worked on using a "correct" chronology of behaviors in the way that an automobile mechanic might replace an electronic ignition or rebuild an automatic transmission. However, procedures for social work intervention do exist. For example, social workers in public social service agencies may rely on procedures for determining eligibility for services. Like rules and policies, procedures serve to standardize activities within human service organizations. For exan1ple, we might use a procedure for helping low income clients to become eligible for SNAP/EBT benefits (formerly known as "Food Stamps"). Or we might design and i1nplement a procedure for applying for vacation leave that will ensure that all the right people will be notified in plenty of ti1ne that a particular staff member will not be at work January 3 through January 7. Those that need to plan for the employee's absence farthest in advance will be notified first, those who need little warning will learn of it last, and so on. Similarly, a case manager in a hospital may be more likely to comply with managed care requirements and will be less likely to jeopardize reimbursement from Medicare or Medicaid if procedures for discharge planning are developed and enforced. Unlike policies, where exceptions are acceptable, and rules, where they are not, procedures seem to run the gamut from very flexible to very rigid. Some procedures are quite loose and are meant to serve as general guidelines for shaping the sequence of events. Others are meant to allow no flexibility. Because the intent of procedures can vary so much, managers should make their intentions abundantly clear when they are communicated to staff members. If it is intended that exceptions will occur, it might be useful to give examples of when they might be appropriate and what criteria might be used in determining when an exception will be acceptable. If no exceptions will be tolerated, this also should be made explicit. Like rules, procedures sometimes can be viewed as insulting by some professional staff. When considering the use of a procedure it is useful to ask, "Does it really matter in

Influencing Day-to-Day Activities of Others what order the events occur so long as they occur?" If it doesn't matter, procedures may be viewed as an unnecessary harassment and should not be used. If it does matter, we should use them.

Information Sometimes people engage in undesirable behaviors or fail to engage in desirable ones simply because they lack knowledge or are misinformed Education (in the form of information) can be used to stop an undesirable behavior or promote a desirable one while doing it in a respectful way. What kind of undesirable behaviors can information influence? Cultural insensitivity provides some good examples. Staff nlay not show proper respect to a coworker from a different cultural or ethnic background because of a lack of awareness or what a particular behavior means to that individual. Perhaps, staff members may unwittingly regularly insult an older Korean coworker by handing ite1ns to hi1n with their left hands (use of two hands, pahn down, with the right hand supported by the left, would be nlore respectful). Or they nlay, with good intentions, praise the individual achievements of a coworker from another Asian country where only group achievement is highly valued, thereby causing her to become embarrassed and uncomfortable. Staff may also engage in behavior that may border on the unethical or unprofessional, because they never "quite thought of it that way:' Even illegal behavior sometimes occurs because people have not been sensitized to it or are operating on the basis of misinformation. For example, we might assume that, with all of the recent media attention given to the problem of sexual harassment in the workplace, everyone n ow knows what it is and what it is not. However, even many well-educated people still hold erroneous beliefs about it. For example, some people still believe that it is only unwanted physical contact or that it includes all behavior that can be considered sexist. (Both beliefs are wrong!) Even some managers themselves may still believe (erroneously) that they and their organization cannot become part of a sexual harassment lawsuit if they learn about sexual harassment and choose to do nothing about it. (Both definitions of sexual harassment and who can be held accountable for it are stilJ evolving based on recent court decisions.) Certain behaviors such as sexual harassment of coworkers or clients or "conflict of interest" situations clearly cannot be allowed to occur. But merely forbidding unacceptable behaviors by creating a rule without providing needed infor1nation may not be sufficient to preclude their occurrence. Besides, fairness also suggests that staff members are entitled to know exactly which behaviors are acceptable and which ones are not, if they do not already know. Information can provide a positive influence on day-to-day activities in a wide variety of ways. For example, it can be used to keep staff members informed of pending legislative policy changes or other developments. This will help to prepare them for needed changes at the same time that it promotes a sense of"ownership" within the work setting. Information can provide knowledge that may not be found anywhere in writing, but is available from managers or oth er "old hands" who are more experienced in accomplishing some task. It can be a real time (and mistake) saver to be told, "This is how we did it last time, and it seemed to \vork quite weU;' or "we tried it that way once before and this is \vhy it didn't work:' In short, information can influence activities positively by increasing the likelihood that they \vill be successful and productive.

135

136

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

Advice We all are quite generous with our advice. Usually grahtitously, we offer it to others. Between peers or persons of comparable power, advice is available to be heeded, ignored, or even never heard. But when a person with authority over another person gives advice, it should be received as more than just advice or a recon1mendation. It is often an attempt to influence. The advice of a parent may be only advice, or it may be a tactful, non-hwniliating attempt at telling a child what to do. Advice to a three-year-old is usually synonymous with a directive; it is expected to influence behavior ("I think you need to wash your hands before you eat dinner"). Advice to a teenager is likely to carry less expectation of compliance or of heeding the advice ("It might be a good idea for you to spend a little less time on Twitter and Facebook") . Advice may be purely "for your information" in one aspect of a relationship yet may carry the intent to influence in another. A professor who suggests that a graduating student might want to apply for a job opening she heard about expects the student to follow up on the information or not, based purely on the student's interest. A "thank you" is about all that she expects. But when the same professor suggests that it would be a good idea to include some area of content in a term paper he is writing, she has every expectation that the content will be in the student's paper. The student who ignores the advice may discover that it really was much more than just advice. Relationships between managers and their staff members are clearly not equal. Consequently, advice offered to a staff member has much more expectation of and potential for influence than advice passed between and among peers. It is done \vith the intention of shaping and influencing the behavior of the staff member. Because the great majority of advice given by managers is designed to affect the behavior of staff members, staff members sometimes assU111e that all of a manager's advice is a thinly veiled attempt to tell them what to do. This can cause problems. If social workers intend to step out of their manager's roles long enough to simply offer advice, peer-to-peer, without wishing to unduly influence their staff men1bers' decisions or behavior, they had better make their intentions very clear. If not, staff members may respond to what is perceived to be "an order" when none was intended. Because advice (like information) can be communicated in a way that influences while not calling attention to an existing power differential, it is a favorite method for influencing behavior among professionals. Managers enjoy being able to do it in a way that doesn't "put down" the knowledge and professional competence of a colleague who happens to occupy a lower position on the organizational chart. In turn, staff members enjoy the face-saving offered by advice. They appreciate not having to be reminded of the power differential. Unlike, for example, directives (which we will discuss next), staff members can at least partially delude themselves into believing that "it's just advice:' Ho\vever, they should know better than to ignore it.

Directives Sometimes, for one reason or another, information and advice just do not work. Some individuals never quite get the message. In addition, some managers never become co1npetent at the subtleties of their use (cultural differences sometimes are a factor) and feel more

Influencing Day-Lo-Day Activities of Others co1nfortable saying exactly what they mean. Sometimes there is no time for subtlety since the cost of miscommunication would be too great. Other times, a situation may suggest the need for a reminder of the power differential that a staff member may have forgotten. Directives have that effect. (In the military, people understand the implications of a "direct order"!) Directives take the form of orders, overt instructions, or other specific demands. They may be aimed at individuals and/or groups and may be used to exert influence over a variety of behaviors. They are an especially good choice when a conflict situation exists, and it has become apparent that consensus cannot be achieved. If, for example, n.vo factions seem unable to work out a compromise over the sharing of space or technology, the manager may have to resort to directives. This is a responsibility that cannot be shirked. An organization cannot afford the expense of prolonged debate over an issue of relatively low importance to client services, particularly when it becomes apparent that winning the debate is rapidly becoming a higher priority for some individuals than resolution of the conflict. Someone (the manager) must terminate debate and initiate action. Of cotuse, this can only occur in situations where the manager has the authority to issue a directive. Not surprisingly, directives are some of the least popular methods of influence among those used by social workers in the role of managers. Social \vorkers are socialized to be nondirective with their clients; they have little experience in telling others what they must do. Directives also see1n inappropriate for use between or among helping professionals. We want to believe that professionals and other dedicated helpers should be able to co1rununicate in ways that are respectful, not parental. Shouldn't advice and a smile be enough to influence dedicated people of goodwill? Perhaps, but there are many situations when they are not. Directives are required. Staff members, in turn, often find directives humiliating. They are a reminder of the manager's authority that staff members prefer not to think about. To most of us, directives reawaken feelings of pov;erlessness that we thought \Ve left behind when we left our home of origin, turned 18, graduated, or achieved some other rite of maturity. We naively thought that no one would ever again be able to tell us \Vhat to do. Of course, few people ever get to this point in even one sphere of their lives. None of us ever gets to this point in all of life's spheres. If used where necessary and appropriate, directives are very efficient methods of influence. They can save a considerable anlount of time by not requiring staff members to guess just \Vhat it is that managers want. Miscon1munication can be virtually elinlinated. Managers in the manufacturing and business worlds have long been accustomed to using directives to influence. Corporate managers who regularly use them do not seem to exhibit that self-consciousness and apologetic demeanor sometimes seen among social work nlanagers. Perhaps, as social workers, we are overly concerned with questioning our motivation for using directives. We may spend too nluch time asking ourselves if we are using the1n because we get some sense of gratification (a "power trip"?). Just maybe, the good feeling that sometimes accompanies the use of directives occurs because they seem to work so well! Most mature professionals and other human service staff members recognize the need for directives on occasion. They may even appreciate them as a refreshing change fro1n the communication of some social work managers that they regard as too oblique or ambiguous. Staff members expect to be told \vhat to do by their bosses now and then. The judicious use of directives often is perceived as an indication of strength on the part of a manager, of a willingness to assume the responsibilities of the job. Th ere also a.re many staff members who "just want to be told what to do and ho\v to do it:' especially in situations

137

138

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities where there is little time for tact and subtlety. However, this is not meant to imply that there is no room for tact in the use of directives. A skillful manager will state a directive in a way that makes the message dear but that does not come across as parental or demeaning. Alnong other things, directives given in private or on a one-on-one basis are usually less likely to be resented than those given in the presence of others. The addition of the words please and thank you also can be helpful. Obviously, if a social worker in the role of manager relies on directives almost exclusively or in situations where other methods for influencing would work just as well, that can cause problems. Morale can be undermined, along with initiative of staff. But autocratic managers who relish the use of directives are relatively rare in social work. A more common problem is managers who do not make sufficient use of them.

The Manager's Example There is something else that we may not readily think of as a method for influencing day-today activities and behaviors in an organization. Yet it exerts a powerful influence over them. The example set by a manager can affect the behavior of all staff members who seek the manager's good will, who wish to emulate the manager, and/or who simply wish to advance within the organization. We noted earlier how a manager's behaviors can convey a policy, often unintentionally. However, the 1nanager should also serve as a professional role model for others. Offhand comments, actions, attitudes, ethics, and values that the manager displays also serve as norms for the group, the standard to be 1net. If managers act professionally and are well respected, these norms are an especially powerful positive influence on others. For example, highly respected managers who sometimes put aside their own personal best interests for the good of the organization and its clients will influence others to do the same. If managers interact at all with staff, even if they are just seen occasionally by them, they will set an example that will affect their job performance and how they perceive their jobs. The issue is not whether they will influence by example, but how their example will influence others. For example, do a manager's attitudes and actions convey that they always, reflect understanding of clients and their problems, and always do their best to ensure that they are served properly? Or will they convey the message that self-interest is acceptable, clients are sometimes a burden, and that simply meeting minimum job requirements is an acceptable level of performance? Staff members are more likely to participate in a behavior that they know is not acceptable when they can use a manager's example to rationalize it. For example, lower-level staff members are more likely to call in sick to catch up on their holiday shopping when they believe that the manager is doing it. If managers want to support son1e staff behaviors and constrain others, they are most likely to be successful if their own behavior reflects the desired standards. They may possess the authority to live by a different standard, but their poor example will cause resentment and will weaken their overall capacity to influence others. Managers who attempt to communicate the message of "do as I say, not as I do" rarely succeed in providing a positive influence on others. Even the other methods of influence that are used (e.g., formal guides, information, advice, or directives) will be less effective if managers convey a double standard. Staff members may reluctantly allow themselves to be influenced by them. But they will resent it and will likely engage in other undesirable, nonproductive behavior when they have the opportunity.

Influencing Day-to-Day Activities of Others In a sense, the manager is always on stage. In the role of manager, a social worker is watched for clues as to how to act, think, and \vhat attitudes are appropriate. When another individual engages in a particular behavior, there is less danger that many others wil.l try to emulate it. But \vhen a manager (particularly a higher-level one) does something, a large number of staff members are likely to notice and to assume that it represents an example for others to follow. It is important to remember this, not just in the workplace, but also at social functions and other times after work hours when \Ve may interact with staff members. That is \vhy, for example, when managers attend a holiday party, they are careful not to say or do anything that might be construed as unprofessionaL

What Is Needed? Which method for influencing a manager uses and how it is written or otherwise commw1icated are often a function of the requirements of the situation. For example, many policies, rules, and procedures are written so as to comply with federal, state, or local guidelines relating to such areas as timeliness of services offered, confidentiality of records, or require1nents for client participation in certain types of decision making. Or they may be dictated by the requirements for maintaining an organization's non-profit status or for rein1bursement by Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs), other health insurance organizations, or the federal government. When there is more flexibility allowed, other factors enter into a manager's decisions about what methods for influencing staff behaviors will be used. They include their assessment of the staff member or members whose decisions or actions they are attempting to influence as well as their own preferences and styles. For example, some managers, based on their needs and those of subordinates, rely heavily on directives; others can get the job done through their own example or by offering advice or sharing information. That is \vhy one manager can vie\V a need to influence a decision or activity and conclude that only a formal guide for action, put in ivriting, would work, \Vhereas another manager might arrive at a very different conclusion.

The Ideal Mix The methods that managers use to influence day-to-day activities and staff members' behaviors will change naturally with conditions, with the changing needs of the organization, and with changes in personnel. Thus, the best mix or "package" of tools for exerting influence is flexible and dynamic. Identifying it is a rather i1nprecise science. There is no formula available that can tell us, for example, just what percentage of our efforts at any ti1ne should entail the use of formal guides for action, information, advice, or directives. One thing is certain. If we find ourselves relying very heavily on only one or two nlethods, we should become concerned. The widely diverse needs of the human service organization and of those employed within it suggest that a varied package is almost always ideal. We will conclude this discussion by listing several signs or indicators of an effective and efficient influence "package:· They overlap somewhat, and tend to be mutually supportive; that is, the presence of one makes it more likely that the others will also be present. Individually and collectively, they can help to promote a desirable balance in \vhich day-today activities are influenced as much as necessary, while not stifling initiative and creativity among staff members.

139

140

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

It Is Comfortable Perhaps most importantly, the methods a manager uses to influence should "feel right" to him or her. It should not leave the manager and others with the feeling that he or she is playing a role or using methods that are somehow out of character. Whereas managers may need to use every one of the different methods of influencing activities at some point, in most situations more than one could be selected to do the job. Managers should use most frequently those that fit their personality and style of management. For exa1nple, those who are most comfortable giving advice or information to influence and do it effectively should use this method far more often than directives. Of course, when only directives will do the job, they must be able to use them, too. Conversely, a manager with a more authoritarian personality and/or a greater need for control may rarely use advice and information to influence and may rely heavily on directives. As much as possible, the interaction should be natural and comfortable for all parties concerned. For example, neither participant in the interaction between a relatively new supervisor and a senior staff member may feel comfortable with the frequent use of directives. Yet directives may be a much more natural way to influence if the same supervisor is very senior to a staff member.

It Is as Depersonalized as Possible The methods selected should be presented as and, hopefully, perceived as necessary for the good of the organization and/or its clients. It should not appear to others that they are designed to humiliate someone or to reward someone else, but rather to maintain a standard of client services that is in the best interest of all. At the same time, a problem behavior that is unique to one individual should not result in unnecessary constraints on others. For example, if there has been a pattern of past problems with the correspondence of one individual, the manager may issue a directive to that individual that her correspondence must be reviewed by a supervisor before it is allowed to be sent out. It would be an unnecessary imposition on other staff members (and on supervisors) to apply this requirement to everyone when only one staff member requires it.

It Has the Potential to Improve Programs and Services The methods used to influence the day-to-day activities of staff members are designed to make their decisions and behaviors supportive of the attainment of organizational goals and objectives. Unless staff members perceive them as having the potential to improve the organization's programs and services, they may be resented. If, however, they perceive them as likely to result in an improvement in programs and services, they will tolerate them much more easily.

It Is Efficient The methods used should be relatively inexpensive to administer and to maintain. Specifically, they should result in a net surplus (Chapter 1) for the organization. Some methods to influence promise to cost more than they would save in time and resources. For example, weekly required staff meetings to review rules of grammar for written correspondence can increase conformity and reduce certain problem behaviors. But can they be justified in terms of their effects on staff morale or the time taken away from client services or other valuable activities? Probably not.

Influencing Day-to-Day Activities of Others Some overly rigid methods to influence are effective but at too heavy a cost. For example, a manager might maintain tight limits over staff activities by not aUowing compensatory time for evening work or by denying the request of an employee who commutes 60 miles to work to move to an extended four-day work week. But the objective of creating a work environment \vhere organizational loyalty is high (something much more important to organizational success) might be jeopardized in the process.

It Is Enforceable The methods selected should be perceived as having good potential for success. If they contain elements such as rules or directives that clearly are unenforceable, all other efforts of the manager to influence can start to be taken less seriously. As we noted earlier in our discussion of rules, not every behavior that the manager would like to influence or even aU behaviors that are potentially harmful to or desirable for the organization can be influenced. It is better to not even try than to atte1npt to influence them, only to fail. For example, all managers might like to eliminate staff me1nbers' ridicule or nlimicking of their bosses behind their backs. But to circulate a 1nemorandum to staff stating either "staff will not engage in ridicule of their supervisors" or "staff may not discuss their supervisors with co-workers" would be worse than just a waste of time. Rules or directives of this type cannot be enforced and would only leave the manager subject to more ridicule and additional loss of respect.

It Focuses on Critical Issues Some desirable behaviors (e.g., respectful treatment of clients and compliance \vith federal reimbursement for services requirements) are so important that influencing them is not an option. Others (e.g., how staff members address each other or how they choose to decorate their offices) are often less important and are best left "uninfluenced" unless they become problematic in some way. Similarly, some problems can be reduced or even eliminated, but attempting to influence them is not worth the effort-it results in addressing relatively minor behaviors (minutiae) while larger problem behaviors that threaten organizational goal achieven1ent go unchecked. For example, a manager can devote great amounts of time to policing the use of organization telephones by staff members, pouring over printouts of long-distance calls for hours to see who made them and if they seem to constitute official business. Meanwhile, while focusing on a few occasional short personal calls that cost little and represent no real threat to anyone, the manager may fail to observe a much more dangerous staff behavior (e.g., the unethical denial of services or referral of clients to a friend in private practice) that 1nay jeopardize the reputation of the entire organization. What is a critical problem suggesting the need for a nlanager to address it? A lack of attention to clients, their rights, and their need for services is critical. So is behavior that is iUegal, unethical, or grossly unprofessional. These problems and the systems that contribute to them cannot be ignored. Managers clearly do not have the time to influence alJ staff behaviors that are undesirable. They must maintain a set of priorities that suggests which behaviors should be addressed and which are not worth the trouble. Remembering that the client should be the prime beneficiary of a human service organization will go a long way toward helping the manager identify and maintain an appropriate "package" of methods to influence day-to-day activities that focuses on potentially critical problems. Ho\vever, let's remember that a critical problem can vary from organization to organization. For example, a staff member who holds a second job as a bartender may not be

141

142

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities ideal for a human service organization such as a hospice, but it does not threaten the organization or its clients. (Besides, a rule against it may not be enforceable.) However, a staff member who tends bar in the community in which his employer, a substance abuse treatment center, is located presents a problen1 that should be addressed. Finally, some behavior problems, which are referred to as "corruption" in the literature,4 would simply cost more to influence (often in morale) than they are costing the organization by their existence. They are probably best "not seen" by the manager. Once acknowledged, they must be addressed or, if they are not, they may appear to be encouraged by the manager. For example, if a staff member receives daily text messages from her children to let her know that they arrived home safely from school, it might be best if the manager simply overlooks it. Unless a problem is one that threatens organizational goal achievement, why even call attention to it?

THE OPTIMUM AMOUNT OF INFLUENCE Influencing the behaviors of others often is difficult, but it also can sometimes be enjoyable. The impetus for influence should come from organizational needs (and, of course, the needs of clients), not the needs of the manager. It (like all management activities and functions) should be vie\ved as a means to an end, never an end in itself. The potential for a means-end displacement is great. We can easily become immersed in the process of influencing while losing sight of its purposes. It is a good idea to periodically ask what we want to influence, but also why we want to influence it. Is it something that I just find personally offensive, perhaps because of cultural differences or a difference in personal values? Do I want to influence it solely because I can? Do I want to influence it because it threatens my authority? None of these is a good enough reason to do it. The only good reason is for the good of the organization and its clients. If we can say in all honesty that influencing is necessary for the good of the organization and its clients, there is still another question that needs to be asked: "Is the problem a systemic one (suggesting a systemic solution) or is it a problem of just one or a few individuals?" Often, when staff members do not engage in desirable behavior or "act out" in some way, the problem may lie in the organizational climate (the system). The manager might ask, "What is it about the system that somehow seems to be non-supportive of the desirable behavior or has legitimized the undesirable one?" If it can be identified, a slight "tinkering" with the system might be all that is required to change it. Sometimes even a simple change in the physical work environment will suffice. For example, suppose that staff members are spending an inordinate amount of time in the "break room" v.rhere the office copier, a refrigerator, and coffee pot are all located. The problem might be a systemic one, relating to a blurring of functions. If the manager were to move the copier to another location (perhaps a secretary's office), it might represent a "tipping point"5 and eli1ninate the problem. Why? With the copier in the break room, it legitimizes the presence of staff members when they are not on break. It seems to say it is OK to be there, since the room is used for "business:' However, when the copier is removed, the room is clearly not there for business-it is there for breaks (which are supposed to be limited to ten minutes). This sends a very different message to staff. The problem may be reduced or even eliininated. Of course, if one or two staff members continue to spend much of their time in the break room, then the problem will have to be dealt with, but on

Influencing Day-to-Day Activities of Others an individual basis, perhaps through a directive. It is an oversimplification to say that all problems within the work environment are systemic and should be addressed on that level. However, n1any are. Nevertheless, even in a basically healthy organizational climate, there are likely to be a small number of individuals •¥ho exhibit behaviors that must be addressed on an individual basis.

WHAT IS MI CROMANAGING ? The term micromanaging is a negative one. It is most often applied to managers who see1n to want to influence everything that goes on around them. What does the term mean? How can we avoid becoming a micromanager? Micromanaging is not easily defined. Whether a nlanager is micromanaging or not is often a subjective judgment. Even good managers who are not n1icromanagers will undoubtedly be labeled as such on occasion. After all, there is a thin line between doing a conscientious job of managing and micromanaging. Some staff n1embers will inevitably conclude that the manager has crossed that line and has made a decision that they should have made or has attempted to unnecessarily influence so1ne aspect of their work. Nevertheless, micromanaging does occur, and good managers are careful to avoid it. Micromanagement can take many forms. For example, a 1nanager may create numerous rules, policies, and procedures, many more than are necessary. They are designed to ensure that everything is done the way he would like it done, not necessarily the only way it could be done or even the best way. They focus on relatively unimportant issues. Another higher level manager would be micromanaging while filling a staff vacancy when (in a large bureaucracy) she insists on intervie\.ving all job applicants, even those •¥ith whom she will never interact, despite the fact that this is the primary responsibility of the personnel director. Still another manager \.¥ill simply never delegate any authority to others. He might insist on approving or even shopping for holiday decorations himself, rather then delegating the task to staff members who could easily complete it. Or, a manager might always insist on chairing every meeting or task force rather than allowing others to gain experience in leadership roles. What are the common denominators in these examples of micromanaging? They entail (1) an excessive need to influence the activities of others in the work environment; (2) a focus on decision making or tasks that could easily be handled by others, thus allowing the manager to do other things that they cannot do. Why do 1nanagers engage in micromanaging? The obvious answer is that they are "control freaks" and fail to trust staff members because they believe they will make better decisions or complete a task better themselves. A frequent rationale provided is, "It is just easier to do it myself." (Sometimes that is accurate, but it still is not adequate justification.) However, we believe that there is often a second reason, especially among relatively new managers. By doing less important (but familiar) tasks or making decisions that others could easily make for them, they are able to operate in their "comfort zones:' They may not yet be comfortable in the role of manager, but everyone can, for example, shop for paper products for the volunteer appreciation dinner or monitor the flow of office supplies. (This may also explain why some managers continue to carry a client caseload despite the fact that they lack the time for it and it is no longer in their job descriptions-they are more comfortable in the role of therapist than that of manager.)

143

144

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities The motivation for micromanaging is undoubtedly complex. However, we can agree that it is a bad practice, one to be avoided. It can promote a type of passive-aggressive response on the part of staff members, one that is not healthy for the organization. They may begin to avoid decision 1naking, passing such matters on to management with an attitude of "You want to influence everything, then you make the decision:' The expertise of staff 1nembers (to make their own decisions) goes underutilized. When this begins to happen, good managers begin to question whether they have crossed the line and have begun to micromanage. Unfortunately, many managers don't get the message. After all, we are quick to see micromanaging in others, but we rarely see it in ourselves!

SUMMARY We first discussed setting li1nits, a necessary part of influence that often has negative connotations. Influence requires power. Managers have the authority (legitimized power) to influence certain aspects of the work environment because of the position they occupy on a formal organizational chart. However, there are many other sources of power in organizations. They relate primarily to the personal characteristics, knowledge, and skills of individuals and may result in staff members being either more or less powerful than they should be. Thus, individuals may occupy a very different position in the informal organization, a major locus of power in most organizations. Good managers acknowledge the existence of the informal organization, understand it, and use it when it can be of assistance to them. Several methods for influencing the day-to-day activities of staff 1nembers were presented. They included formal guides for action (policies, rules, and procedures), information, advice, directives, and example. The advantages and potential dangers of each were discussed. It was emphasized that, whatever package of influences a manager selects, it must remain dynamic and flexible. The package, no matter what its specific composition, should be co1nfortable for both the 1nanager and staff members involved, should be perceived as largely depersonalized, have the potential to improve conditions, should be efficient and enforceable, and should focus on those areas where influence is critical. The dangers of over-influencing were especially noted. We discussed how too much influence on the part of the manager can stifle staff initiative and can result in a situation where individual expertise will not be fully utilized. The phenomenon of micromanaging was explored-what it is, some forms it can take, and why it may occur. While we chose to discuss it in this chapter, micromanaging often can be seen in the way some managers perform all of the major management activities and tasks that are discussed in other chapters. Often, a problem in staff 1nembers' decision making and behaviors is attributable to the system rather than to individuals, specifically, how the system promotes undesirable behaviors or discourages desirable ones. Then, the best way for managers to address it is through systemic change, that is, by making changes that positively affect the organizational climate. Often there is something in the work environment itself that can be changed, thereby making the other methods of influencing described in this chapter less necessary.

Influencing Day-to-Day Activities of Others

APPLICATION Here are some issues related to organizational requirements. Managers often are responsible for ensuring that these requirements are met by using various methods for influencing staff members' behaviors. Which method or methods (rules, policies, procedures, information, advice, directives, or the manager's example) would you be most likely to use? Why? 1. Paper\vork for a grant funded program must be completed in a timely manner in order to guarantee federal reimbursement for services. 2. The organization's scanner/copier should be used only for work-related tasks. 3. One staff member has not been malting all required home visits. 4. Staff members need to be compensated in some way when they 1nust work evenings to deal with client emergencies. 5. A staff member has been using a coworker for help when she should be getting the assistance from her supervisor. 6. Children of staff members cannot be allowed to disrupt work activities. 7. Staff members need to know the correct way to file a grievance against another staff member. 8. Staff 1nembers need to know that "dress-down Fridays" does not mean that flip-flops and cutoff jeans are appropriate in the workplace. 9. Staff members need to follow the correct sequence of activities to help clients become eligible for Medicaid. 10. Staff members should not engage in any form of sexual harassment. (Hint: Is an exception ever OK?)

145

Chapter 7

Organizing People and Tasks Learning Outcomes At the end of this chapter, you should be able to: • Assess what type or types of departmentation should be used for assigning the staff members of a give.n large human service organization into manageable work groups. • Define what time management entails for a manager, and describe why it is essential. • Explain the differences between staff authority and functional authority. • Explain the differences between a committee and a task force, and how the role of the chairperson differs in each case.

rganizing is a necessary part of any adult human functioning-we could not be successful in completing life's tasks without it. The goals and objectives that social workers strive to achieve would not be achievable unless the settings where we work are organized to make them run efficiently. It is not accidental that these settings are referred to as organiz ations. Organizing is not a choice; it is a necessity for adults in all spheres of life. However, organizing is less important for very young children, since parents and other authority figures organize their relatively simple lives for them. But as we mature, we are expected to assume inore and more responsibility for organizing what goes on in our lives. By the time we reach adulthood, there is so much happening and we have so many different responsibilities that organizing is absolutely essential in both our personal and professional lives. Without it, we would not be able to accomplish all that we need to do for ourselves. We also could not be depended upon by others such as family members and friends to get things done. In the role of manager, we would experience similar problems. We would not be able to successfully complete all the tasks that fall to us or meet our responsibilities to coworkers. Good managers are organized themselves; they are efficient in meeting their own responsibilities. For example, they don't miss appointments and deadlines, they don't misplace things, they follow up on unfinished business, they are always prepared and ontime for meetings, they return phone calls or e-mails promptly, and they finish the tasks that they start. Thus they tend to be productive, waste little time, and are an asset to an organization. Good managers also recognize the importance of organizing the work environment of others. They do this so that (1) the activities of staff members are coordinated and integrated (there is "unity of function"), and (2) their own jobs are made easier.

146

Organizing People and Tasks

CREATING MANAGEABLE WORK UNITS In Chapter 5 we discussed the mission of an organization-how it defines a problem, suggests the best solution to it, and proposes to address it, hopefully, with the blessings of its task environment. The mission then suggests whether the organization should function most like a production line, a linkage organization, or it should offer customized services. This is one of the most basic of organizing decisions, one usually made in the early planning stages before an organization exists. Ho\vever, once an organization has been created, there is still much more organizing that needs to be done. In most human service organizations, one of the most important organizing tasks of managers entails forming manageable-sized work units. Organizational structures (and the organizational charts that are used to describe them) range from "flat" to "tall:' In a very flat organization (perhaps, a small private psychiatric clinic or a grassroots organization formed to address a newly identified problem in a con1munity), there may be relatively few staff members and few (if any) hierarchal levels. There are few formal guides (Chapter 6) such as rules, policies, and procedures, and loose supervision of day-to-day activities. Roles may be blurred; tasks are often undertaken by any individual available to perform them. There is a director, but no mid-level managers. The director may perfor1n multiple functions, including some direct work with clients and client groups. T here is no need to break staff members down into smaller work groups; they can function as a single team. In the n1ore comn1on, taller human service organizations (such as large public welfare agencies or comprehensive medical settings), there are likely to be many staff members and a complex organizational hierarchy, portrayed in an organizational chart with many levels. T he organ izations are likely to function like bureaucracies (Chapter 3) \vith tight control of day-to-day activities of staff members, often through the use of written formal guides. Supervision is tighter, too. Everyone knows (or should know) what their job is and what is not a part of it. There is more specialization. In taller organizations, upper level managers cannot possibly manage the en tire organization themselves. It is in1possible to be aware of, much less influence, the activities of large numbers of individuals performing many different functions. A way must be found to divide the organization into subunits whose members are sufficiently similar to each other in relation to some criterion. Yet the units need to be small enough to be effectively managed by one individual. This is the organizational activity generally referred to as departmentation. It refers to the grouping of people and their activities along some basic pattern or model in order that their activities can be adequately supervised, coordinated, and managed. Koontz, O'Donnell, and Weihrich, 1 in their classic text on business management, suggest many different ways that a manager can choose to handle the task of departmentation. On first blush, their methods of depart1nentation would seem to be very profit oriented and product oriented (rather than service oriented). They appear to be of little relevance for human service organizations. However, with a bit of"Ioose translation;' they provide a social work manager with a variety of viable options for subdivid ing and organizing staff members (see Box 7.1).

147

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

148

Box 7.1 1.

Departmentation Options

Simple numbers- units consist of equal numbers of staff members. all having similar knowledge and skills and all performing the same functions or serving similar clients.

2. Time worked- un its consist of staff members

from different professional disciplines who have in common the time of day (shift) that they work. 3. Discipline- in an organization containing several different professional types, units consist of persons grouped together solely because they are members of the same professional discipline. 4. Enterprise- units consist of all persons engaged in the same primary enterprise activity, regardless of discipline. Service to clients generally is just one of these enterprises. 5. Territory served- units consist of all staff members who serve the same geographical territory.

6. Service offered- un its consist of staff members all of whom offer the same type of specialized service to clients with a variety of presenting problems. 7- Client problem- different units consist of staff members who specialize in offering a variety of services to clients who share a single diagnostic category or who share a common problem. 8. Multidisciplinary teams- in an organization serving clients with different types of problems. units consist of staff members from differen t professional backgrounds who offer a variety of . services.

9. Marketing channel s- Un its consist of staff members who all offer services (often information) within similar types of settings or through similar means.

Simple Numbers One method of departmentation involves simply grouping a certain number of people, all of whom perform the same duties, under a single manager (a supervisor in most human service organizations). Because there are too many of these individuals for one supervisor to manage effectively, two or more parallel, equal-sized units are created. For example, each of four MSW graduates 1night be assigned the task of supervising six volunteers, or four custodial supervisors would each supervise five janitors. The equal-numbers principle might be applied even further by assigning an equal number of work units to each staff member within the unit or units. For example, each member of the custodial staff might be responsible for cleaning and maintaining eight offices. The biggest drawback to the simple-numbers method of departmentation may be its lack of recognition of the individual capacities of staff members and the uniqueness of their job responsibilities. That is why it is infrequently used to create \Vork units of professionals, paraprofessionals, or even volunteers. Individuals within these groups do not share the same knowledge, skills, experience, stresses, responsibilities, and so forth. To treat them as such would be to not acknowledge their uniqueness or the uniqueness of their jobs. Their individual strengths would not be well utilized. The simple-numbers model of departmentation is best suited to forming work groups of employees who are semiskilled or unskilled and whose jobs are relatively simple and standardized. Historically and even today it is the departmentation method employed most by the military. Common characteristics (rather than individual identity) of service personnel are emphasized. Units (companies, battalions, divisions) are viewed as "so 1nany troops"

Organizing People and Tasks rather than a collection of individuals. But the utility of departrnentation by simple numbers for today's human service organizations is limited. Often there is a better way to group staff members, even those whose jobs are very similar, into manageable work units.

Time Wo rked While "shift work" is more commonly seen in manufacturing plants as a means to more efficient use of machinery and to increase productivity, it is not unkno..vn in human service organizations. Medical and psychiatric facilities, crisis centers, and many oth er organizations cannot limit client services to the 9-to-5, Monday-through-Friday model. They function "24-7:' While social workers are more likely to be part of an on-calJ roster than part of a night or weekend shift, other professionals such as nurses and aides have come to expect shift work. Some prefer \VOrking the evening or night shift for a variety of reasons, including extra incentive pay, compatibility with a partner's work schedule, or because the demands of student or parent roles can be more easily met when days are free. Social work managers 1nay find the1nselves with authority over a variety of staff nlembers who might best be grouped according to their work hours. Many private and public inpatient treatment settings tend to have clearly identified day staffs and evening staffs. Clients of an organization that serves people who are ho1neless, are stranded while traveling, or have been displaced by natural disasters are very likely to organize paid staff and/or volunteers into two or more distinct work groups (shifts). This offers the obvious advantage of increased availability of client services-"full coverage:' It also has potential disadvantages. Hiring and keeping competent staff on the "night shift" may be difficult because of the family and interpersonal problems it can cause, the nature of the work itself (e.g., more emergencies, less availability of "backup" assistance), and even hO\V it often is perceived by others. Despite the fact that the important business of client service occurs at any time that staff members and clients interact, people sometimes have the idea that the "real" business of the organization gets transacted during the day when higher-level administrators are more likely to be present. Night-shift work can be viewed as lower-status or less important and, therefore, less attractive. Probably the greatest disadvantage of grouping staff members by time worked relates to its potential to fragn1ent the organization. A lack of cooperation and communication between shifts can be a problem. To help prevent this, the manager will need to regularly convey the message that alJ staff members are part of the same team. If possible, work hours can be scheduled so that there is some overlap between shifts. Anything that the manager can do to promote interaction among staff members who work different shifts also can be helpful. For example, a nlanager might create all-inclusive events such as holiday parties, family picnics, or award ceremonies when the valuable contributions of staff men1bers from all shifts are recogniz.ed. Staff members who get to know, respect, and like those staff members who work the next shift are 1nore likely to try to complete a task rather than "just leave it for them." They are also more likely to try to make their work easier by telling the1n what they need to know about what occurred during the previous shift.

Discipline In some organizations ..vhere several different professional disciplines are em ployed, it makes sense to create units that consist of people from the same discipline. For example, in a large community mental health center, there might be one or more units of just social

149

150

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities workers, one or more units of nurses, and so forth. Departmentation by discipline is a timehonored tradition within many human service organizations. It promotes professional identification and ensures that professionals are supervised by and work most closely with people who should be able to understand their work and who share their knowledge, values, and competencies. Of course, a weakness of this way of organizing staff into units is that it may deprive them of regular interaction with staff members from other disciplines who might have a different perspective on situations and from whom they might learn.

Enterprise Departmentation within for-profit corporations often group employees by enterprise, that is, according to their major activity-for example, production, sales, and finance. To group people by enterprise function is to recognize (especially in larger organizations) that there is value in working with others who share inany of the saine knowledge and skills, and are judged by similar standards, no matter what their academic preparation or professional identification. As we inentioned earlier, as de1nands for financial accountability have increased, the differences between for-profit manufacturers and businesses and human service organizations have tended to blur. Human service organizations (especially those in the nonprofit sector) have had to pay more attention to efficiency issues, while businesses have become more aware of how human factors can affect profit. The increase in proprietary human service organizations (e.g., many independent living, assisted living, and longterm care facilities) and the growth in the private practice of social work also suggest that some variation of departmentation along the line of the usual business enterprises inay be appropriate for organizing within many hu1nan service agencies as well. What are the human service organization counterparts of, for example, production, sales, and finance? Production would logically translate into service delivery or direct practice with clients at different systems levels (individuals, families, groups, communities, etc.). Sales might equate with the public relations enterprise that is so essential to organizational success within task environments that may be inclined to be unfriendly. It might also involve outreach to potential clients and the building of linkages and networks to other organizations and individuals outside the organization who represent potential sources of referral. Finance requires no translation in today's human service organization. Every organization can use people who are specialists in grant proposal writing, fundraising, and financial resource allocation that might include developing and monitoring budgets. Departmentation by enterprise function may have particular utility for the higher-level manager in taller organizations as an overall method of reducing organizational activities into three or more major units. The units can then be managed by a mid-level manager within each enterprise. It may also be useful for mid-level managers themselves, such as supervisors, in situations where the activities of staff tend to be specialized and fall into a small number of distinguishable "enterprises" (e.g., evaluation, treatment, follow-up, or referral). A major advantage to enterprise function departmentation lies in its potential to create esprit de corps among staff members within each enterprise. People who may have widely varying academic backgrounds but who share similar interests-"kindred spirits"-work together toward achievement of similar and/or shared goals. A feeling of camaraderie is likely to result, although the manager should also be alert to the possibility of counterproductive conflict when specialists (who sometimes tend to be "prima donnas") must interact with each other on a daily basis.

Organizing People and Tasks A possible difficulty with enterprise departmentation can also occur if inter-enterprise competition and rivalry are allowed to get out of hand. Human service programs inevitably require the cooperation and mutual support of the various enterprises in order to succeed. If people become too territorial or too obsessed with their O\vn unit's success (sometimes at the expense of the success of other units), organizational goal achievement can be jeopardized. For example, client recruitment can be too successful for the good of the organization; it can generate long waiting lists for services or require that other staff members offering direct services are "spread too thin:' Similarly, staff members \Vorking as a unit in the area of fundraising who are aware that their performance is evaluated by the amount of grant or contract money they bring in can become insensitive to the wishes and needs of other staff members and of clients. They can end up pursuing dollars to offer programs that are outside of staff members' areas of competence or do not result in services that an organization's clients need or want. The pursuit of grant or contract money presents an especially vivid example of ;vhat can happen when departmentation by enterprise fw1ction goes a;vry. It can become a near-obsession for individuals who are either hired solely as grant writers and/or who are rewarded based on the amount of funding that they acquire. A grant or contract received for any purpose also has the potential to make higher-level 1nanagers look good to their board members and, of course, to pay the bills. So, they are unlikely to object too vigorously if the pursuit of funding becomes a little misdirected. But the subtle and long-range costs of overzealous grant or contract writing activity can be great, particularly if staff morale is jeopardized because the organization seems to have its priorities out-of-balance. The tail should never be allowed to wag the dog; that is, services require dollars but dollars should not be the only consideration in deciding what services or programs will be offered. Unfortunately, in recent hard times for human service agencies, the need for outside funding has led some higher-level managers to allow their funding specialists to acquire funding for programs and services that are inappropriate, given their organization's mission. The manager who selects enterprise function as a method of departmentation needs to remain alert to dangers that include means-end displacements and the development of excessively narrow priorities on the part ofstaff members. A sensitive manager will be able to strike a balance in which staff members are conscious of both their specialized function and their place in the overall functioning of the organization. Occasional reminders about staff interdependence and about the superordinate goals of the organization can be useful in this regard.

Territory Served Depart1nentation by territory served sometimes is employed in hun1an service organizations where similar activities take place over a wide geographical area. Territory departn1entation is a way of deciding which clients or client group each staff member will serve and which clients or client group they will not serve. Particularly in taller organizations, it may be logical to subdivide the organization by territory in order to reduce it into manageable subunits and to reduce the likelihood of staff heading off both literally and figuratively in all directions. For example, a large public assistance caseload might be divided up based on the place of residence of clients served. Caseworker X \vould serve all clients in one 10-square-block area, but Case\vorker Y would serve clients \vho live in the adjoining geographical area. Or, to use another common example, in a rural state or province, hospice staff might be grouped into interdisciplinary teams (discussed later in this chapter). Then

151

152

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities each team would be responsible for providing needed services to active hospice patients who reside in a certain county/parish or section of that county/parish. In a similar way, the satellite clinics of a community mental health center might divide up client service by the place of residence of potential clients. If they live in one place, they are served by one clinic; if they live one block over, they may have to be seen at another clinic. (The respective territories are someti1nes referred to as "catchment areas" in the mental health field.) Definite advantages accrue to the manager who chooses to use territory departmentation. Questions relative to the issue of "whose job is it?" are less likely to occur than if other methods of departmentation are used. When staff members focus their activities on services to people residing in a single geographical area, they are also likely to become very familiar with that area. If the territory is a community, there is increased potential to develop cultural competence (Chapter 8); to better understand the community's problems; and to get to know, understand, and build relationships with its leaders and other key people. The problems of the individual client are also put into better perspective when they are viewed in the context of problems of other persons, families, and groups that live within the community, the existence or absence of community resources, or the politics that impact on client social functioning. Overall, concentrated attention to and familiarity with a community or geographical area offers many advantages to both clients and those who serve them. An advantage of territory depart1nentation for the manager can be efficiency in the form of reduced cost of services to clients if they include in-home visits. Travel costs can be kept relatively low and more clients can be seen on a single day. Deciding where to place territorial boundaries can be difficult. Ideally, they should coincide with communities. But we know that communities do not always conform to streets, subdivisions, or other geographical boundaries that appear on maps. What's more, their boundaries are in a constant state of flux. Even if a com1nunity can be fairly easily defined, it may not be practical to form a territory with the same boundaries because the com1nunity inay be too large or too small to be used for departmentation purposes. Another disadvantage of territory departmentation is uneven division of work among staff members. No matter how much planning goes into creating territories, workload is rarely ever in balance for a long period of time. Inevitably, one territory can produce a work overload for one staff member while, simultaneously, another staff member serving a different territory will not have enough to do. Even when the number of clients and the workload across territories are comparable, the working conditions are invariably different. Some territories, based on a variety of factors-for example, their distance from where staff members live, a1nount of criminal activity, their support for the organization's services- will inevitably be perceived by staff members as less desirable than others. Someone must be assigned to work there, ho\vever. This can lead to morale problems and to charges of inequitable treatment and favoritism on the part of the manager who makes work assignments. Skillful managers can sometimes find ways to help staff members understand that all territories have their advantages and disadvantages. Or they may make work assignments based on criteria such as seniority. They may even try to compensate those staff members who must be assigned to what are perceived as less desirable territories is some way, such as making the territories smaller. However, any of these actions can cause resentment by some staff members who believe that they are being treated unfairly. Managers can quickly find themselves feeling as if they cannot win when making work assignments, no matter how they do it.

Organizing People and Tasks Another problem of territory departmentation relates to the enforcement of geographical boundaries. In the purest of applications, no exceptions are made. This can lead to situations that seem absurd, and produce accusations of rigidity. They can also be downright contrary to the best interests of clients and can result in inefficiency. For example, if Ms. Smith lives in the 800 block of a street and her sister, Ms. Jones, lives across the street in the 900 block, they may be served by hvo different hospice social workers and other staff assigned to their respective territories. The two social \.vorkers may both make separate home visits to the two clients, perhaps even on the same day. What if either client decides to move a relatively short distance to another, third territory? Should she be reassigned to yet another social worker? If so, a helping relationship will be lost and continuity of services disrupted. Obviously, a nianager needs to respond to the appeals of clients and staff and to make exceptions when territory departmentation is used. In effect, territory lines should be applied as policies rather than rules (Chapter 6). Territorial boundaries can be relaxed to reduce the number of hardships that they impose on clients and the inefficiency that they sometimes produce. But where does a manager ultimately draw the line and say no? \iVhen it happens (and it must), so1neone will always conclude that he or she "could have been a little more flexible~· Territory departmentation also leaves little room for staff members who deliver services to become specialists in one or more types of intervention or in working with a particular client problem. One's territory is one's specialty. Staff members must be prepared to offer a wide range of services to a widely divergent group of clients \vith varying problems. The need to be all things to all people can be yet anodier disadvantage of diis type of departmentation. Few people are able to perform all of their professional functions equally well or \¥Ork equally well \vith all clients and/or types of problems.

Service Offered Departmentation by service (in die business sector referred to as "product") should be familiar to die social worker in that it is based on a belief in the benefits of specialization by type of intervention. Because of die wide diversity of help offered to various client systems by social workers and other helping professionals, we have relied on certain subcategories to describe the major types of services offered. Early in the history of our profession we observed diat social workers tended to become more competent and thus more effective if they specialized in the type of services diat diey offered. Social work education tended to mirror this observation. It required students to take certain prescribed courses in order to prepare for specialized practice. A popular way of doing diis in die 1960s and early 1970s was to require students to select among three priinary services that diey planned to offer: casework, group work, or community organization, and dien to take diose courses diat provided the best preparation for providing these services. While it has always been acknowledged that social work practice requires knowledge and skills in all areas of social work practice (generic practice). some service concentration (e.g., micro, meso, or macro practice) continues to be encouraged in many social \.vork schools and programs. As with other types of departmentation diat we have discussed and that we will discuss that are a form ofspecialization, die advantages and disadvantages of service departmentation are really two sides of die same coin. If, for example, a manager in a family services agency chooses to divide services into individual treatment, group treatment, family counseling,

153

154

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities and case management, the manager will have the reasonable expectation that staff members within these specializations will become very knowledgeable about and skilled in what they do. For example, people who do nothing but group treatment should get very good at it. Or, staff members who do nothing but link clients up with other services in the community should get to know the helping resources in the community very well and they should have formed valuable networks with their counterparts in other social agencies. It seems logical to conclude that having responsibility for a narrow sphere of activity (a type of service) will result in greater mastery of the knowledge and skills needed to offer that service effectively. The narrowness of a staff member's tasks, of course, is also the greatest disadvantage of service departmentation. (Anyone who has ever tried to get home repairs performed in a unionized state understands the problem: "Sorry lady, we can't nail that molding down-you'll have to call a trim carpenter:') When there is virtually no overlap between one person's job and that of another, a "not my job" mentality can occur. There is also likely to be a reduced knowledge of and interest in the activities of others. Needed infor1nation may not be readily shared. The development of a sense of team, one that includes people in different areas of specialization, may not occur. The manager who is considering organizing using only-or primarily-service departmentation should first determine that a high degree of specialization is both possible and desirable. For example, while it may be possible for a social worker in a counseling agency to offer nothing but group treatment while a colleague offers only one-on-one counseling, this might not be best for the professional development of either staff member, or for their clients or the organization. For staff nlembers, a lack of diversity in their workday can beco1ne tedious and 1nay lead to "burnout" or "compassion fatigue" (discussed in Chapter 13). They also may begin to lose touch with the knowledge and skills of other specialties. This could become an obstacle to current job functioning while also limiting their employability, should they decide to seek work elsewhere. Services to clients may suffer too. Social workers often attempt to help those with multiple proble1ns requiring many different types of assistance. It has been found, for example, that clients in the public sector may need both economic assistance and other forms of help such as parenting skills classes, substance abuse treatment, or help with anger manage1nent. Departmentation that does not recognize this may not provide the coordinated service package that the client requires. Clients in an organization whose staff members are organized by services offered have the benefits of having the services of a "specialist:' But what if they require more than one type of service? They would need to see more than one treatment specialist, requiring them to form more than one therapeutic relationship. The issue of who should have the primary responsibility for their treatment could also be problematic. Departmentation by service offered might also result in an inefficient use of professional staff members within the organization. For example, there might be a waiting list of clients requiring the specialized services of those professionals who offer only group services, while the family treatment specialists might be experiencing a lull in the need for services or vice versa.

Client Problem Another alternative for departmentation of staff members who provide direct services to clients is based on a typology of client problems. How might clients be classified in order to use this organizing approach? Social work and other professional staff in a family

Organizing People and Tasks counseling agency or psychiatric facility might be grouped into units based on the DS1Vl-S diagnosis or presenting problem of the clients \vho they serve. One unit might consist of all professional staff \Vho specialize in treatment of substance abuse; another unit might consist of all staff members who work with clients with a certain group of related DSM-5 diagnoses or who deal with problems encountered by children who are victims of child abuse and neglect, and so forth. It is assumed that, overall, clients in the same diagnostic category or \vi th similar problems will share many of the san1e service needs, at least some of which tend to be different from those in other categories. The advantages of departmentation by client problem can be great. Clients are able to receive help from a group of specialists who are knowledgeable and experienced in \vorking with people like themselves. In addition, common related problems can be anticipated and addressed, when they are identified. We know, for example, that the problem of domestic violence often is accompanied by substance abuse, anger nlanagement issues, unemployment, trouble with the law, and other related problems. Of course, any of these problems could just as well be the primary problem. That is one difficulty encountered in forming work groups based on the primary problem of clients. Because of the complexity of human behavior, we cannot always say which problem is primary or that one is the cause while another is the result of or only a sy1nptom of the problem. We also know that a client's DSM-5 diagnosis at intake can change as we get to know the client better or that a presenting complaint or problem often turns out not to be the primary problem at all. If a client's primary problem is not identified correctly, staff members can find themselves either working with problems in which they lack specialized knowledge and skills or the client has to be transferred to another specialist who works with their newly identified primary problem. Neither scenario is a good one. In the real world, as with some of the other methods of departmentation that have been discussed, departmentation by client problem does not al;vays work \veU. Even if clients can accurately be classified based on their primary problem, professionals who offer them services may find that the ideal of a narrow range ofspecialized services for any problem is unrealistic. They learn that to provide successful intervention they must be kno\vledgeable and skilled in many areas, becoming far more "generic" in their practice than they might have anticipated or chosen.

Multidisciplinary Teams Staff 1nembers sometimes are organized into multidisciplinary teams in human service organizations. Within this method of departmentation, there are two variations. Both are seen 1nost frequently in hospitals and other organizations that offer health and mental health services. In one variation, staff from different disciplines contribute primarily the knowledge and skills unique to their discipline. They maintain their own professional identities, continue to be supervised by a member of their own profession, have different job responsibilities on the team, are paid commensurate with the usual expectations for their own professions, and so forth. However, they work together with other disciplines as a team, sharing clients or patients and their perspectives on their problems. This model of departmentation (sometimes called the "interprofessional model") has been in place in many mental health settings and other organizations for many years and has seemed to work quite well. Another, more controversial type of multidisciplinary team was described earlier \vhen we discussed the growth of case management teams within hospitals. In it, staff

155

Organizing People and Tasks or education designed to present a problem is the service itself, it may be an especially appropriate way to organize into work groups. It offers the advantage of creating staff groupings of people who deal with many of the same issues and use many of the same strategies. They can share their insights and ideas and offer support to each other. The major disadvantage of marketing departmentation for organizing is its limited applicability to human services organizations, though this seems to be changing some\vhat. In manufacturing, it is easy to visualize marketing a product with acceptable success, using many different market channels. The more, the better. For example, a wrench that is manufactured can be sold in hard\vare stores, department stores, home improvement stores, discount stores, and auto parts stores, as well as in many other outlets. But for many human services, there may be a more limited number of outlets deemed to be acceptable. Although we have broadened OUI thinking in recent years (e.g., psychiatric services are now offered in the community, on the job, and in other settings besides inpatient settings, which were the primary outlets before the Community Mental Health Act of 19632 ), many other programs and services offered by social workers and other health professionals are not seen as appropriate candidates for multiple marketing channels. For reasons of efficiency, professional ethics, tradition, and (all too often) inflexibility, we are still reluctant to offer many programs and services anywhere but within the physical confines of an office, usually grouped with similar enterprises. While public assistance or public adoption services may be regularly marketed in shopping 1nalls, through faith-based groups, or in any one of several other innovative \Vays that have been tried successfully on an experin1ental basis, these market channels may just seem "unprofessional;' inappropriate, or even unethical for 1narketing other programs or services by many members of the general public and even by son1e of us. Often, this is when a program or service is controversial. For example, efforts to market many of Planned Parenthood's programs and services would be rejected or blocked if they were attempted \Vithin sch ools or in many religious communities. Or, efforts to reach out to people \vho are homeless using any nontraditional method and/or venue might not be \Veil-received by store owners and other members of a community who might fear that they will just attiact more people \vho are homeless. Turf issues ("it is yoUI job to market yoUI programs and services, not ours") are also likely to continue to constrain the marketing channels available for many of OUI programs and services. Consequently, only some managers in some organizations will find marketing-channel departmentation to be a viable alternative for organizing, at least in the near future.

Co1nbining Two or More Methods It is not at all unusual for a taller, single organization to have two or even several different ways of organizing its staff men1bers into work groups. There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, since all of the nlethods for departmentation that we have discussed seem to work better in some situations than in others, we should expect to see this occUI. For example, a very large extended care organization may have an executive director who chooses to organize all staff by enterprise, perhaps, patient services, public relations, support services, finance, personnel, records, and so forth. In tUin, the n1anager in charge of each enterprise might group staff into several units based on (depending on the enterprise) some other method. Patient services might be subdivided by discipline, service offered, client served, interdisciplinary team, and so forth. Public relations might choose

157

158

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities to use marketing channels for departmentation. The manager of support services might find that simple numbers works best or, perhaps, time worked. If the organization is especially large, additional subunits could be used. They need not all use the same method of departmentation. Of course, there also is a danger in the use of different methods of departmentation within similar work units. Confusion and misunderstandings can occur. For example, when collaboration is required, it 1nay be difficult for a staff member in one unit to work with or even identify his or her counterpart in another unit if the other unit is organized in a different way. When managers group people into smaller units they make them more manageable for those charged with overseeing their work. However, as we noted in our description of several of the available forms of departmentation above, the organization can also become fragmented and undesirable conflict between w1its can occur. To avoid these negative consequences of departmentation it may be necessary for managers to use regular reminders of common goals and objectives and to create activities that cross unit barriers and thus promote teamwork.

TIME MANAGEMENT Successful managers know how to organize their time and help others to do the same. They manage their time well and waste as little of it as possible. Seminars and courses on time management are popular and well attended. They stress many of the same ideas. For example, most all of them emphasize that effective time management requires that managers both know how to manage their own time well and model time management for their subordinates. They: • Know how to rank-order their tasks, so that they can focus most of their energies on the most important ones, the ones that must be con1pleted first, and so forth. • Plan ahead. Allow enough time to perform important tasks. (Unanticipated problems and delays occur frequently) . • Meet deadlines and regularly remind others to stay "on track:' • Keep up with information (phone calls, electronic communication) as it is received. • Delegate tasks that are of lower priority to others, whenever possible. Managers who organize their time well are able to be supportive of their staff members and to be available when needed, but at the same time they are able to isolate themselves when they have work to be done that only they can do. While the "open-door policy" sounds good, no successful manager can always be available to answer a question or just to chat. Most situations can and should wait until a time that is convenient for the manager. There are 1nany time management tools available to the manager. Some are as simple as a printed calendar; others rely on the latest electronic technology. The suggestions and techniques offered by "experts" in time management range from the useful to the impractical. However, they all emphasize the importance of a system that conserves the time of the manager and reduces the amount of time spent in relatively unimportant activities. Time management is especially important for human service managers because they so often must operate under time pressures. Not unlike their business counterparts, they son1etimes find themselves facing nearly impossible deadlines. For example, when federal

Organizing People and Tasks legislation is passed, senior administrators within government bureaucracies may have to implement procedural changes and provide support for them on very short notice. Or, a public relations crisis may require that new rules or procedures designed to prevent an unfortunate incident from reoccurring must be developed and implemented immediately. Or, a manager may learn, only weeks or even days before the submission deadline, about a request for proposals (RFP). The manger might have to "drop everything" to \\Trite and submit a proposal that, if funded, could ensure the financial survival of the organization or at least the continued employment of all current staff. The kind of leadership needed by the \Vork group operating under time pressures may be quite different from that which is othenvise effective; it often needs to be more authoritarian and directive. Of course, acceptance of and even support for this type of leadership is dependent on staff members' acceptance of the appropriateness of tasks assigned to them, their understanding of the i1nportance of successful meeting of deadlines, and the potential of rewards for doing so. A work group that, for example, really does not want the extra work that would result from the awarding of a training contract cannot be expected to respond well to the authoritarian leadership of a manager trying to meet the deadline for the sub1nission of a proposal for it. There must be a coffilnon, mutually desired goal. Authoritarian, directive leadership is also more readily tolerated and even sought when the manager is successful in communicating why discussion, debate, and staff input into decision making are a luxury that cannot be afforded. As in many other situations, trust is critical to successful management under conditions of time pressure. Staff members should believe that the manager is asking for their help to accomplish something that is for the good of the organization and its clients, not to make the manager look good to others. They should also be able to trust that the manager will assign onJy those tasks that they can complete, \vill provide necessary support for completing them, and wiJJ set realistic deadlines for their completion. Confidence in the manager's ability to manage his or her time effectively and to help others to do the same is critical. Reasonable people will work toward a desired goal if they perceive a high likelihood of success. They ,viJj not, however, if they seriously doubt that the manager has the leadership ability required to "pull it off.' Past successes in setting and meeting deadlines and in producing quality results will help to ensure confidence in the manager's leadership.

DELEGATION As we noted earlier, for managers, effective time management includes setting priorities and using their time in the most efficient manner. This requires doing the jobs that only they can do and, when appropriate, delegating other tasks to subordinates. The job of manager can be overwhelming. Managers often cannot perform every task that technicaUy falls within their job descriptions. Nor should they try. Even in smaller, more flat human service organizations, the director cannot perform or even directly oversee all activities, coUect all necessary data for decision making, or make all management decisions. The option, of course, is to delegate, either to individuals or to groups of staff members. Appropriate delegation helps managers to use their time most efficiently. It also can be a good use of staff members' time, can help make their jobs more interesting, and can help them to grow professionally.

159

160

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

Key Terminology Delegation empowers staff members to perform certain tasks, often tasks that are not technically part of their jobs. While everyone would agree that delegation is a necessary and desirable part of the manager's organizing function, there is far less consensus as to what can or should be delegated and how much delegation is desirable. There are a few general principles of 1nanagement that can be used to sort out some of the confusion that surrounds the topic of delegation. What is it that managers can delegate? What can they not delegate? For one thing they can delegate a task, assuming that it is reasonably consistent with a subordinate's job description. Since most job descriptions have a statement like "and other duties as assigned:' that means that a manager can delegate many tasks to subordinates. The task can be one time only, such as calling managers of other agencies to arrange an emergency meeting, or ongoing, such as recording and transcribing the minutes of staff meetings, serving as a mentor to new staff members in their work group, or providing regular supervision to a group of volunteers. Managers also can and must delegate the authority necessary to complete a task that they have delegated. It is unfair to expect someone to perform a task if he or she has not been given the necessary authority to successfully perform it. Authority allows a person, who is delegated a task, to "fill in" for the manager, to have and to exercise some of the authority that rightly belongs to the manager. It lets that person act for the manager by having the same rights and privileges (in a limited sphere) as the manager. Suppose a mid-level manager delegates to a staff member the task of arranging a halfday meeting of supervisors. To get the job done, she will need to let him (the staff member) know and she will need to let others know that a certain ainount of authority has been delegated to him along with the task. Otherwise, it will not get done correctly. For example, he will need to be able to call or e-mail the supervisors to ask them about their schedules, to schedule a meeting room, to order refreshments, and so forth . Under ordinary conditions, he would not have the authority to do any of these. However, with the authority granted by the manager, the staff member can now act for the manager. Because they are aware that he has been granted this authority, no one else should object to his reasonable requests. Of course, the authority delegated would be limited to that required to complete the specific delegated task. He would not, for example, have the authority to seek additional information (besides their schedules) from the other managers or to set the agenda for the meeting. What about responsibility for delegated tasks? Much of the confusion surrounding delegation centers on the issue of whether or not a manager can delegate responsibility. This is the issue of who ultimately can be held accountable for the performance or nonperformance of a delegated task or the quality of its performance. Suppose another manager assigns the task of locating the last ten years of the organization's annual reports and making them available on the organization's website. When he assigns all or part of the task to the staff member that he would otherwise perform himself, and if the satisfactory performance of that task is a reasonable expectation for the staff member (given her job description and skills), the manager should be able to hold her responsible for the timely performance of the task. If the task is not beyond her expected competencies, or too time-consuming (given her other responsibilities), and if she is given the necessary authority to carry it out, he is justified in expecting satisfactory performance of the task. If any of these criteria are not met or he fails to communicate his expectations

Organizing People and Tasks clearly, fairness suggests that it is unreasonable for hin1 to expect the task to be satisfactorily performed. Appropriate delegation of a task results in a legitin1ate expectation on the part of a manager that the staff member will meet a standard; inappropriate delegation would seem to relieve the staff member (at least partially) of full responsibility for satisfactory or unsatisfactory task completion. Under conditions of appropriate delegation of tasks, managers can legitimately hold subordinates responsible to them for their completion, but the question of ultimate responsibility for delegated tasks is another matter. If a task is not completed on time or is completed poorly, the manager may still be held responsible for the problems created. Why? First, the task was one that was originally vvithin the manager's job descriptiondelegation does not relieve the manager of responsibility for its completion as far as the 1nanager's boss is concerned. Second, a manager can be held responsible for all management decisions, including the decision to delegate. If the decision to delegate or the choice of a person to who1n the task was delegated turned out to be a bad one and the task was not satisfactorily completed, the 1nanager can be faulted. In the broadest sense, a manager can delegate a task, but not the ultimate responsibility for its completion. In some ways delegation brings more responsibility to the manager, not less. A manager is still held responsible for the task completion, but also for the decision to delegate it and for the choice of the person to whom it was delegated.

Types of Authority Within human service organizations, three different types of authority can exist. Let's see ho\v they differ, the major advantages and disadvantages of each, and how they relate to the topic of delegation.

Line Management Authority Line management authority (first introduced in Chapter 6) involves no delegation; it exists \.vithout any relinquishment of authority by the manager or any tampering with what is already in place. It is the authority (legitimized by the organization) to make certain decisions and to engage in certain activities that exist because of one's job position and its relation to other job positions. Literally, line management authority exists because of the line (or box) occupied by one's job on an organizational chart relative to the position of the jobs of others on the chart. It comes with the job. Line management authority provides supervisors with all the legitin1acy they need to influence some aspect of the work of supervisees. It is what dictates the relationship of every employee to every other employee. The formal organizational chart displays the authority legitimized by the organization- who has the authority to nlake certain decisions, to tell others \vhat to do and how to do it, and what not to do. Social workers as managers who rely solely on line management authority and never delegate tasks to others are on safe ground in some respects. They know that: (1) they cannot be criticized for mistakes in delegation, and (2) tasks will be completed the way they think they should be completed. But total reliance on line management authority deprives managers of the benefits of delegation. Managers who cannot or will not delegate usually end up trying to do too much themselves and spreading themselves too thin. They also deprive their staff members of the opportunity to grow by assuming more and different responsibilities.

161

162

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities Another major problem with total reliance on line management authority is it does not take full advantage of the special knowledge and skills of those who occupy subordinate positions. People often are capable of doing more than their job description suggests. Sometimes they, not the manager, are better suited to perfor1n certain tasks or make certain decisions than the manager. All individuals have strengths and weaknesses. Unless delegation is used, managers can find themselves constrained by the organizational chart. They may not be able to use the best person to perform a task or to bring the best expertise to bear on a decision. Of course, as we shall discuss, too much delegation of authority can create a different set of problems.

Staff Authority When managers decide to delegate tasks and the authority to co1nplete them they have two options-staff authority and functional authority. Staff authority creates a particular kind of relationship between manager and a staff member or a group of staff members. It can best be described as advisory.3 People who have been assigned some task and been given staff authority are expected to collect information for the purpose of giving advice and recommendations to the manager, usually about some decision that he or she will have to make. A social work manager may, for example, delegate staff authority to a staff member to explore options for the location of a new satellite office and then reco1nmend to the manager where it should be located. Another manager might delegate staff authority to a staff member to contact other similar organizations to see how they are addressing so1ne problem (e.g., an inability to recruit and retain African American professional staff) and to then recommend how the manager should address the problem. With staff authority, advice or recommendations are supposed to be the end product of the subordinate's research and investigation. At the point that advice is given, the delegated task is completed. It is both natural and expected that a person granted staff authority will form opinions and will try to "sell" the manager on the decision or course of action that they recommend. But because staff authority is meant to be only advisory, it does not carry with it any guarantee that the manager will do more than just listen to whatever advice is given. The 1nanager can ignore it or go along with part or all of it. If the manager takes the advice of a staff member and makes the decision that was recommended, there is also no obligation to give the staff men1ber any credit for it if the decision turns out to be a good one (though many managers choose to do it). However, if the decision turns out to be a bad one, the manager cannot pass the blame for it onto the staff member who recommended it. After all, the decision was always the manager's to make. If a bad decision was made, probably the manager either (1) granted staff authority to the wrong person; (2) did not give clear directions or provide enough assistance to the staff me1nber to do the job well; or (3) failed to adequately consider other information that was not available to the staff member when the decision was made. In any case, responsibility for the bad decision still rests with the manager. Staff authority is most frequently seen in large organizations, particularly in bureaucracies. It is used frequently in the military and in government circles. Leaders may surround themselves with individuals granted staff authority who do much of the groundwork that makes it possible for them to make wide-ranging decisions. Such individuals are often called staff- for example, a military general's "staff officers:' They give advice or recommendations and do not expect to get credit or take blame for decisions, or to be involved in implementing them.

Organizing People and Tasks The advantages of the use of staff authority are obvious. A person assigned to research a topic and to give advice can greatly facilitate the decision making of the manager. Suppose a manager needs to make a decision about a purchase of some computer software. She grants staff authority to a staff member (who is more knowledgeable about information technology than she is) to "research" it and recommend \vhat, if any, purchase should be made. The manager does not have to take the time to do the necessary research, thus freeing her up to work on other tasks. In addition, the individual granted staff authority will probably do the research better and more efficiently. Thus, the manager's decision about what to purchase is Likely to be the correct one. The disadvantages of using staff authority relate to what can happen if it is used excessively or unwisely. If used too frequently with the same staff members, line management authority can be weakened; staff members may start to perceive the1nselves as somehow special, perhaps more like peers than like subordinates. They may also start to feel like they are working harder than the manager by doing the manager's job, as well as their own. They may feel inadequately compensated. They may have difficulty accepting the nlanager's decisions when, on occasion, they are not what they had recommended. Or, if the manager follows their advice, and the decision that they recommended turns out to be a good one, they may resent seeing the manager getting the credit for it when it was based primarily on their work. Excessive use of staff authority can also have a demoralizing effect on those granted it because it is so limited. Even if their advice is regularly taken, staff members can become frustrated. It is not terribly gratifying to have one's authority end with giving advice. Many of us need to "see through" a task and to be involved in implementing a decision that we recommended in order to feel like we have really accomplished something. Some people like \vorking on a task \vhen given only staff authority. They enjoy the researching and recommending to someone else, but they do not \¥ant to have final decision-making responsibility. They enjoy making ilieir boss look good and receive all of ilie gratification they need when he or she lets iliem know ho\v much ilieir work is appreciated. These are the individuals \Vho should be granted staff auiliority by managers when delegation is appropriate. Oiliers, especially those who become easily den1oralized or frustrated by its limitations, should not.

Functional Authority The oilier type of authority that can be delegated, functional authority, involves greater delegation of authority than does staff authority. Functional authority is much more than just the auiliority to gather infor1nation or advise the 1nanager; a person given functional authority can also make decisions that he or she would ordinarily not be able to make, and i1nplement them. The term functional authority as we will use it is drawn from ilie literature of the business sector. There it is defined as "the right which is delegated to an individual or a department to control specified processes, practices, policies, or oilier matters relating to activities undertaken by personnel in other departments:' 4 Let's see what that would mean wiiliin human service organizations. Usually functional authority is granted in order to bring ilie best possible expertise to bear on a problem or task. For example, let us suppose that two new caseworkers have been hired as child-protection workers in a county public welfare agency. The director of childprotection services for the organization normally \vould leave ilie task of their orientation

163

164

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities to their line supervisor, the individual whose job responsibility it is. This is totally consistent with line management authority. But, in talking with the supervisor, who was recently hired from outside the state, the director concludes that she is probably not the best person to handle one portion of the orientation, those state laws that impact on the job of child protection. The director could ask the supervisor to consult with the unit's legal counsel to learn about the state's laws and then explain them to the new caseworkers in their orientation. But this would be a cumbersome and inefficient way to get the job done, and there would be a real possibility that misinformation might get transmitted in the process. The director might decide instead that the supervisor should ask the legal counsel to develop and teach the content of the orientation that focuses on relevant state laws and grant her the necessary functional authority to do it. Or, the supervisor might prefer to use another, more experienced supervisor fro1n another unit who is more knowledgeable of and experienced in application of state laws to handle this part of the new caseworkers' orientation. In either case, the supervisor would grant functional authority for part of the orientation to someone else. The supervisor might attend the orientation too, so that she would be better prepared to teach the content to any future new casev.rorkers. The person given functional authority (either the legal counsel or the other supervisor) would take full responsibility for the caseworkers' learning during the legal orientation. For example, the new caseworkers may be required to participate in specific learning exercises, may be told when to take a break, would be tested on their newly acquired knowledge, and so forth. The responsibility for all other portions of their orientation would continue to rest with their line supervisor. This example of the use of functional authority illustrates both the 1najor advantages and the potential disadvantages of the use of functional authority by managers. Functional authority is both logical and efficient. It probably would not make sense for the supervisor to first learn about state laws from the legal counsel in order to then turn around and teach the content to the two new caseworkers. Why not simply let the lawyer or another knowledgeable supervisor both develop and deliver that part of the orientation in the first place? If the line supervisor were to attend too, all three could learn at once. They could ask and receive correct answers to any questions that they may have. As long as the line supervisor would not be too threatened by this arrangement and the granting of functional authority to someone else for part of the orientation were just a one-time thing, the temporary suspension of line management authority should not be a problem. Disadvantages of functional authority relate primarily to using it in the wrong situations or using it too often. If used in situations where line supervisors are insecure and easily threatened or if used too frequently, it can weaken the capacity of the line supervisor to manage. If, in our example, all or most modules of the new workers' orientation were to be delegated out to "experts:' the supervisor might lose credibility with the new caseworkers. Or, if the director regularly removed them from the line authority of their supervisor, they might begin to question whether their supervisor really has the necessary knowledge and expertise to supervise them. Functional authority seems to work well for many social work managers. It allows them to delegate tasks to certain individuals on whom they can depend while giving then1selves more time to focus on other tasks. In many human service agencies, functional authority is unavoidable. It is a recognition that people (especially professionals) tend to have special areas of interest and expertise. Why not take advantage of their knowledge by letting them have time-limited authority over others who lack that knowledge and can

Organizing People and Tasks

165

learn from them? Too heavy a reliance on line management authority and strict adherence to t he formal organizational chart can get in the way of tapping available staff knowledge and competencies. Professional staff members often like being granted functional authority for several reasons. It allows them to see a task through from start to finish (unlike staff authority) and to get some credit for any successes that occur. It allows them to have experience in decision making and other tasks of managers and thus prepares them for assuming increasing management responsibilities. It also tends to put less emphasis on the formal organizational hierarchy that many professionals find a bit unnatural, demeaning, and an obstacle to the formation of collegial relationships. Unlike adherence to formal lines of authority, functional authority says, in effect, "We have to have leaders and followers, but we can all learn from each other now and then;' an attitude that is consistent with social work values. Functional authority also is philosophically compatible with the many variations of participative management (discussed in Chapter 3) that are popular within some human service organizations.

Case Example

K

atherine was the Chief of Social Services in an outpatient psychiatric clinic. As the end of the fiscal year approached. she learned that there were still staff development funds available that could not be carried over into the next year. She shared th is in formation with the social work staff members and enco uraged them to consider attend ing any useful workshops that might be com ing up. She subsequently approved funding for four staff members to attend workshops that were clearly relevant to their job responsi bil iti es. Katherine was pleased that one of her supervisors. Gilbert. had requested fund ing to enroll in a workshop on a new and controversial approach to working with potentially violent clients. When she approved his request. she called him in to talk about the workshop and what he hoped to learn from it. She asked Gilbert to pick up extra copies of any written materials and to take notes. She asked him to provide her with a written summary of what he thought about the new approach and to suggest a plan for how it might be used with in the clin ic. Gii be rt was happy to comply with her requests. He began resea rching information on

the Internet on the new approach even before he attended the workshop. In her next meeting with Gilbert. Katherine again discussed his participation in the upcoming workshop and what she was asking him to do. She was careful to use words like advise, investigate, suggest, and research. In her mind. she believed that she had made it very clear that she was delegating only staff authority to him. Unfortunately, because of his enthusiasm about attending the workshop and just the fact that Katherine had assigned th is task to him. Gilbert did not really listen very carefully to Katherine's instructions. Immediately after attending the workshop. Gilbert req uested a meeting with Katherine to "let you know how we will be using" the new approach. Katherine rearranged her schedule to see Gilbert as soon as possible, fearful that a miscommunication had occurred. Her fears were soon confirmed. Gilbert came to the meeting with his written report in hand. It was immed iately apparent that he assumed that his recommenda tions for use of the new app roach wou ld be im plemented. What's more. he expected to supervise their implementation and to provide consultation

(continued)

166

Part 1\vo: The Major Managemen t Activities

Case Example Continued to other professional staff mem bers about them as needed. Katherine knew that there had been a misunderstanding. She thanked Gilbert for his report and complimented him on its promptness. She explained , however. that she had intended that his special responsibilities would end with the subm ission of his report and recommendations. And she reminded him that she would decide if any or all of his recommendations would be implemented and. if so. by whom. Gilbert was angry. Katherine tried to defuse some of his anger by acknowledging to him that she shared some responsibility for the misunderstanding by not reminding him of the fact that he had been given only staff authority and explaining exactly what it meant. It did little good. He threw the report on her desk and left. As she read more about the new approach. Katherine became convinced that it probably would not be any more effective than the meth ods curren tly used, would req uire additional training for staff members. and might even place the organ ization in some lega l jeopardy. She decided not to implement any of the recommendations in Gilbert's report. Wh ile her decision

was a necessary and correct one. it gave Gilbert add itional cause for resentment and confirmed his impression that she had just been "playing a power game" with him. Her relationsh ip with him remained strained until he finally took a job in another organ ization several months later.

Discussion Questions 1.

Why was it probably a good idea for Katherine to delegate authority for this task, ra ther than to attend the workshop herself?

2.

What else could Katherine have done to ensure that Gilbert understood what she was asking him to do?

3. What kind of authority did Gilbert think he was given? Why might he have come to that conclusion? 4. Why does it appear that Gilbert was not a good choice for delegation of staff authority? 5. Is there anything that Katherine could have done to attempt to improve her relationsh ip with Gilbert after the misunderstanding occurred? 6. What could Katherine do to make sure that future misunderstandings about delegation of authority do not occur among her staff members?

Delegation to Groups The word delegation usually suggests assigning a task to an individual. However, sometimes it is useful to delegate certain tasks to groups of staff members. Two of the most common of these are committees and task forces. A primary advantage of delegating to groups of staff members is a pooling of knowledge and perspectives. Recommendations and/or decisions nlade by groups theoretically should be superior to those that are generated by a single individual. Some delegated tasks can be large and ti1ne-consuming. Delegation to a group allows the work to be shared so that, hopefully, it does not fall too heavily on one individual. Delegating to groups has other, less obvious advantages, too. If members consist of individuals who do not normally work closely together, they gain a better understanding of other group members and how they go about meeting their job expectations. This can result in improved coordination among work units. In addition, because every member should have been given the opportunity for input, any decisions that are nlade by the group are more likely to be acceptable to its members. Of course, there are disadvantages to delegating tasks to \Vork groups. Perhaps the worst one is that they diffuse personal responsibility. 5 If a group of staff members makes a

Organizing People and Tasks decision or approves one, and it turns out badly, \vho can be blamed? Another major disadvantage is inefficient use of staff time. While it can usually be argued that delegation of a task to an individual staff member can result in increased efficiency (the staff member's time is generally "less costly" than the manager's), no similar claim can be made for delegation to groups. The number of people participating on them alone makes them expensive in terms of staff time. In addition, time is often \vasted with \Vaiting for members to show up, "catching up" members who missed the previous meeting, socializing, digressions from business, and so forth. Committees are especially notorious for this. The old saying that "A committee is a group where nlinutes are kept and hours are lost" is probably quite correct. Because of group dynamics, committees also have been known to produce recommendations and decisions that no rational individual would ever produce. We are reminded of another old saying, "A camel is a horse that was designed by a committee." Other problems sometimes seen in the use of other forms of participative management can occur in committees and task forces. Sometimes individuals who might otherwise be critical of a proposed decision (for good reasons) may feel pressured to go along with it. They can rationalize their lack of opposition with the reminder that they will not have to take sole responsibility for it. So, why oppose it and risk the displeasure of some powerful group member or the group's chairperson? Political maneuvering can result in poor decisions. For exrunple, an unspoken understanding that "I'll support your recon1mendation if you support mine" can produce decisions that lack much real support fron1 the majority of members. Or, efforts to seek a compromise can result in decisions that, while politically feasible, really end up pleasing no one.

Committees Normally, when we hear the term committee \Ve think of a standing committee, that is, one that is a relatively permanent structure within an organization. It has been given a certain jurisdiction; that is, it has been determined what issues it should address, what decisions and/or recommendations it is allowed to make, and so forth. They frequently are spelled out in some '"ritten document. While its membership will change over time as individuals assume new duties in the organization or just "rotate off" and are replaced , the \vork and authority of the committee remain mostly unchanged. Standing committees often become an integral part of the functioning of an organization. For example, in many larger organizations, there is a standing employee grievance committee. Some members (usually a limited number) are elected for a term of service. Others may be appointed by a manager, who uses the appointments to ensure diversity and/or balance. The committee is expected to investigate con1plaints of staff, attempt to resolve conflicts, ru1d make recommendations to managers. Committees tend to be relatively formal in their functioning, often relying on Robert's Rules of Order to conduct their business. The chair also is expected to retain tight control in running its meetings. Sometimes, committees have a backlog of work to do; other times, they may have little reason to 1neet. Because they are meant to be permanent, time pressures are usually not a factor; business will get done when it gets done. The selection of the chairperson for a committee is especially critical. Committee chairpersons can exert considerable influence over the committee's actions and decisions. For example, when they create an agenda for a meeting, they can ensure that some items ,rui have plenty of time to be addressed and a vote taken while others (that they deem less important) may have to be delayed until a future time. While group members can elect

167

168

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities their own chairperson, this often does not work well. It can become a popularity contest or, worse yet, the job (which is often the most time-consuming one) can be "dumped on" a member for a variety of reasons. Besides, experience has shown that some people make better chairpersons than others-it often works best if the chairperson is appointed by the manager based on known characteristics. \.vhat are some of them? A good chairperson for a committee is someone who: • Has a clear understanding of the purpose of every meeting and communicates it effectively to the members. • Knows how to set an agenda and keep the meeting on track. • Promotes discussion and cuts it off when it is no longer productive. • Provides clarification as misunderstandings occur. • Encourages input from members who are less verbal or who dislike conflict. • Limits the contributions of members who attempt to dominate discussions or impose their ideas on others. • Encourages discussion on issues, but terminates it when it starts to become personalized. • Moves the meeting along by identifying when consensus has been achieved, when more information is needed, or when a conflict cannot be resolved. • Ends the meeting promptly when the work of the committee is finished or when it appears that it will not be accomplished without scheduling another meeting.

Task Forces Sometimes we also hear the term ad-hoc committee. It means essentially the same as a task force. Task forces are formed to address a specific problem (e.g., a dramatic increase in staff turnover or a funding shortfall requiring the creation of a new client fee schedule) or to complete some specific task (e.g., to conduct a needs assessment for a proposed new program or plan a fundraising event). Task forces are much more narrowly focused than standing committees (which sometimes expand their responsibilities as new needs arise). They are expected to remain "on-task'' and not to become sidetracked until their job is fin ished. When it is, the task force should be disbanded. Task forces generally function less formally than committees and tend to make decisions more by consensus than by making and passing motions. Thus, the chairperson of a task force may function more as a facilitator than as a chairperson per se. This suggests that a manager forming a task force should look for a certain characteristic in selecting a task force leader: the ability to lead and 1naintain the group's focus, but in a fairly un-authoritarian way. Since task forces are meant to be time-limited, a manager must also make and communicate clearly to the chairperson when the work of the task force needs to be completed. Within this constraint, task forces then usually set their own deadlines for the accomplishment of sub-tasks.

Issues in Forming Committees and Task Forces When a manager decides to delegate authority to a standing committee or a task force to complete a certain task, his or her purpose in delegating it and what is being expected should be clearly understood by all concerned. Ideally they should be put in \vriting for members to refer to as needed for clarification when someone questions whether "this is really our job~' The authority delegated to the group must also be made clear. Is it supposed

Organizing People and Tasks to investigate and make recommendations to the manager that can be overruled (staff authority) or can it actuaUy make and implement decisions (functional authority)? Group size is an important consideration. A committee or task force can be either too smaU or too large. The group must be large enough that there are enough members to do its \VOrk. However, if it is too large it can become cumbersome. Scheduling of meetings will be difficult and eventuaUy some members will do most of the work and others \vill be primarily observers or will make only minimal contributions. There is no optimal group size (it varies based on the purpose of the group and its \vorkload) but, personally, we prefer to keep committees and task forces smaU rather than large. Some of the most effective committees and task forces that we have served on or chaired have had just three to five members, aU heavily involved, with workload distributed equitably. Of course, an important issue is al\vays committee or task force con1position. Members can volunteer to serve, but this can be dangerous. It may result in members who are truly interested in serving on the committee or task force, but they also may have volunteered for the wrong reasons. For example, they may have sought to influence group decisions to suit their own agenda, or even to attempt to sabotage its work. The work group can also elect nle1nbers, but that also can result in other problems. Especially if service on the committee or task force is perceived as undesirable extra work, staff members may seek to "punish" certain coworkers by electing the1n. Committees and task forces rarely function effectively when comprised primarily of "reluctant dragons:' Managers often seek to form a group whose members have both an interest in the work and the expertise needed to do it. Sometimes, once appointed, the chairperson is asked to recommend members who are then appointed or asked if they would be willing to serve. If the \vork of the committee or task force is especially arduous or timeconsuming, members may need to be relieved of some other duties as compensation for their service.

Desirable Characteristics for Delegation Delegation of authority to individuals or groups is an inlportant part of organizing. It is essential both to good time management and for promoting the professional growth of staff members. It requires thought, judgment, and the application of knowledge to situations that are likely to be unique. Effective managers are comfortable with delegation and are willing to trust people other than the1nselves to evaluate situations and to make recommendations and/or decisions. There is a 1nanagement principle that relates directly to delegation. It states that, for efficiency, tasks should be performed by those at the lowest level capable of performing them, usually by those staff me1nbers who are also paid the least. This is a principle that is difficult to i1nplement for many social workers as managers. It requires them to delegate some tasks to others that they enjoy performing themselves. They know that they should delegate more to others, but they do not want to do it. For example, many higher level social work managers like to remain close to direct practice. They may insist on attending all case staffing meetings or professional conferences on recent direct practice developments. Yet these tasks could be performed by subordinates, leaving managers more time to focus on their management-specific tasks. To delegate either staff or functional authority to others, managers have to be able to trust them to do a job satisfactorily. They must be open to others' ideas and methods of

169

170

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

performing tasks that may be different from their own. Delegation requires letting go and being content with broadly overseeing activities. When functional authority is used, delegation may require managers to allow others to make mistakes that they might not have made. Managers (and parents!) find it very difficult to see that things are going wrong or to recognize that they will go wrong without jmnping in to "rescue" subordinates. But when we use functional authority we must be able to use restraint, recognizing that most errors are not irreversible. Overriding staff members' functional authority in order to avoid a mistake may avoid trouble in the short run. However, such a practice can be very costly in ter1ns of erosion of staff confidence and morale. It also makes staff members less willing to assume functional authority in the future. Besides, taking back authority that has been delegated does not allow staff members to learn from their mistakes, something that we all need to do on occasion. As we have emphasized throughout this discussion, managers who delegate authority to individuals or groups must be skillful com1nunicators. Careful delineation of the type of authority being delegated and its limits must be communicated. "Superior and subordinate alike must know whether they are working in a staff or line capacity. Lack of clarity on this point often causes friction:' 6 The same principle applies to functional authority. The time for a manager to explain clearly the type of authority delegated and its limits is when the delegation occurs. Special skill and tact are also necessary to avoid offending others in the administrative hierarchy who might be inclined to feel that their authority is somehow being threatened or that the person or group to whom authority is delegated is regarded as more competent than they are by the 1nanager.

HOW MUCH ORGANIZING IS OPTIMAL? Organizing is an important part of managing; a well-integrated system does not occur by chance. It should be remembered, however, that organizing is designed to promote the achievement of goals and objectives; it should not become an obstacle to their achievement. As is true of the other managerial activities that we discuss in this book, it is possible to have too much of a good thing. An "over-organized" organization or work unit can be abnost as dysfunctional as a chaotic one that lacks organization. The ideal organization is only as organized as it needs to be, and no more. It allows staff members to still be creative and autonomous while promoting coordination of individual and group activities. The decision regarding how tightly organized an organization should be often is a difficult one. We must rely heavily on a few general principles, and on common sense and our knowledge of human behavior. In general, large, multipurpose bureaucracies such as state or county departments of social services are highly organized. Departmentation is absolutely essential and is likely to be accomplished in a way identical to the organization's counterpart at the federal level. Smaller private and many relatively flat non-profit organizations usually can tolerate some blurring of roles, functions, and lines of authority. They may require fewer organizing activities on the part of the manager. The capacity of staff members to tolerate and to accept the need for structure also influences the degree of organization that is optin1al. Generally, people who are not professionals expect and appreciate the degree of certainty in their jobs that accompanies a tightly organized work environment. Professional staff me1nbers are more likely to value professional autonomy and may be more resistive to many of the organizing efforts of the

Organizing People and Tasks manager. However, such organizing methods as the delegation of functional authority to individuals and groups can provide an acceptable mix of autonomy and structure for professionals. The personalities of managers themselves help to determine the amount of organizing that is optimal for a work setting. As we suggest in several places in this book, the style of a manager and the manager's approaches to the various tasks of management should be a logical extension of the manager's personality. Managers who are generally easygoing and "laid back" in their personal lives will become uncomfortable and may be unsuccessful if they attempt to create a tightly organized \vork environment. Conversely, managers who are most comfortable when their lives are tightly organized will not function well if they attempt a more "laid-back" approach to organizing. While managers, like all human beings. are capable of growth and change, a total turnaround in style is probably not possible or would at least be very difficult for most of us. That is why we usually gravitate toward organizations whose need for organizing fits our personality and nlanagement style.

SUMMARY In this chapter we examined some of the concepts and issues that relate to the management function of organizing. Larger organizations \vith many levels in their organizational chart (what are referred to as "tall" organizations) generally group their staff into relatively small units to increase management efficiency. We looked at how departmentation by simple numbers, time worked, discipline, enterprise function, territory served, service offered, clients served, interdisciplinary team, and market channels all have been tried in human service organizations with varying degrees of success. Sometimes, managers in larger organization use two or more of these methods to create units of manageable size. Managers need to organize both their time and that of others in order to create an effective and efficient work environment. We described what time management entails and the advantages that it brings. Organizing one's own work and using their time most effectively also generally requires delegation of tasks and the authority to complete them to others. But the responsibility for the task's successful con1pletion remains with the manager who delegated it. Individual staff members can be delegated either staff auiliority or functional authority. We described how they differ. Each has both advantages and disadvantages. They can be potentially useful if they meet the needs of both managers and staff members and if their expectations and liinits are con1municated clearly. Managers can also delegate either staff authority or functional authority to groups. Comn1ittees and task forces are a commonly used method for managers to accomplish certam tasks. Committees tend to be permanent and ongoing; they perform certain work and make decisions (or recommend them to managers) related to issues that are recurring. In contrast, task forces are formed to address a specific problem or to complete a specific task. Once having done their work, iliey should be dissolved. The advantages and disadvantages of committees and task forces were noted and the major issues that must be addressed in forming them were examined. Delegation of any kind is often difficult for the social worker in the role of manager. Yet, it is necessary if one is to be able to meet all of the responsibilities that come \Vith

171

172

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities the job. We identified personality traits that make delegation more or less difficult as well as organizational factors that help to determine how little or how much organization is necessary or desirable.

APP LI CATI 0 N Assume that all of the organizations described below are large; they have way too many staff members for the director to effectively manage without some form of departn1entation to divide them into manageable work units. What form or forms of departmentation might work best? Why? 1. A full service organization for people who are homeless whose staff members engage in

2. 3.

4. 5.

a variety of activities to help clients of all ages and both genders to become independent and able to care for themselves. An agency whose mission is to serve the people defined as "frail elderly" throughout the county by offering a variety of health services in their ho1nes. An organization whose mission is to reduce fatal traffic accidents by educating drivers to the dangers of texting while driving, driving while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs, and other unsafe practices. A rehabilitation center serving people who have suffered a traumatic brain injury as well as their families. An organization whose mission is to help people with developmental disabilities to reach their highest possible level of independent living by offering residential care, running several group ho1nes, providing sheltered workshops, and so forth.

Chapter 8 '

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity Learning Outco mes At the end of this chapter, you should be able to: • Specify what legal and ethical constraints affect hiring decisions in human service organiza tions. • Discuss how volunteers can represent both an asset and a potential problem for a human service organization. • Recognize those signs that may indicate that an organization's climate is not favorable toward diversity among staff members. • Explain why both positive and negative stereotypes that staff members have about managers can be harmful to the work of the organization.

uman diversity is now characteristic of all organizations. When participating in the hiring of new staff members or when atte1npting to 1nake the most productive use of those already employed, managers can benefit from an understanding of the many forms of human diversity that are found in human service organizations, and the effects that their presence can have on the work of the organization.

RECRUITMENT AND HIRING When a social work manager is involved in recruiting and hiring staff members, there is a wide array of legal and ethical issues that must be addressed. We will exan1ine a few of the most important ones.

Recruitment Recruitment ofqualified, compatible staff members has al>vays been an important responsibility of social work managers in human service organizations. Even in very large organizations that have their own personnel or human resource (HR) departn1ents, social work managers often participate informally in the recruitment process. The goal of recntitment has not changed over the years. It is to produce a large diverse pool of applicants from whom the best possible individual or individuals can be selected. However, as will be discussed later in this chapter, selecting the "best" applicant, the one who will offer the most to the organization and its clients, is a complicated process. It is not simply a matter of hiring the individual with the best academic credentials or the most work experience. Many other factors must be considered. 173

174

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

Before a job announcement is written and disseminated, a job analysis should be conducted. It entails asking important questions. If a new position is to be created, what organizational need will it meet? What will its duties be? If an existing position is to be filled, the current job description is carefully analyzed. Is it accurate? Is it outdated? What needs to be added or deleted? Does it reflect any anticipated changes in the job requirements for that position? An analysis of current staff capabilities and of the organizational climate also should be conducted. Then, there is an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses ofexisting staff members. What competencies, knowledge, or perspectives are currently lacking? What demographics are needed to provide better diversity? What demographics would help the organization to enhance its relationship with its clients and with its task environment? What individuals are available and willing to mentor the new hire? Honest answers to questions such as these can help a manager to visualize the hypothetical individual who would be the "perfect fit:' They can also help in determining what to include or omit in a job announcement so that it will be appealing to potential applicants who would have the desired characteristics. The specific content of any job announcement will, of course, vary with the position to be filled. However, all job announcements should contain (1) the title and a brief description of responsibilities and, (2) the minimum qualifications required. Some description of the organization (often listing or paraphrasing its mission and goals) is helpful to potential applicants who may wish to know if their career goals and professional values would be consistent with those of the potential employer. If there is a time frame for receipt of applications and a date when the position will be filled, they should be included. A statement of equal opportunity/affirmative action {discussed later in this chapter) should always be included. Overall, the announcement should be written so as to (1) eliminate applications by unqualified applicants to the degree possible; (2) provide just enough information about the position to entice a large pool of qualified applicants to consider applying; and (3) encourage qualified applicants to inquire further about the position, either from a representative of the organization (the person to whom they are instructed to submit the application) and/or from others in the community. Many issues related to recruitment often are resolved well before a job opening occurs. E1nployment policies can go a long way toward facilitating the recruitment process. For example, policies might be written to address such issues as who has final authority to hire, can relatives of current employees be hired (nepotism), what methods for advertising a position will be used, and how will references be contacted. However, these policies should facilitate the recruitment process, not impede it. Occasional exceptions will be made-if just the "perfect" individual has been found, and there is a danger of losing him or her. Of course, such exceptions can also lead to potential legal problems. They should only be made after all of their consequences have been fully explored and the risks assessed. A written procedure in the form of a step-by-step sequence of tasks that should occur once an application is received can also help to facilitate the recruitment process-here is an example of how one might look:

1. Filing the application. 2. Acknowledging receipt of the application with either a letter, a postcard, or by e-mail. 3. Screening by one individual (or a task force) to determine if the applicant meets the requirements for the job.

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity 4. Sending one of two letters to the applicant thanking him or her for the application and either, (a) informing him or her that he or she will no longer be considered for the position (if qualifications for the position have not been met) or (b) that the application will continue to be revie\.ved and references contacted. 5. References are contacted for all applicants still "in the running" and additional information requested from the applicants as needed. 6. A "short list" of applicants is developed and those not on the list are so notified. 7. Interviews are conducted with those on the "short list~' 8. A rank ordering of those on the list is presented to the individual with the authority to hire. Certain other policies and procedures designed to prohibit discrimination in hiring may exist for both advertisingjob openings or for screening applicants. They may require, for example, that a job opening must be advertised for a certain length of tiine, that an aimouncement nlust appear in one or more widely circulated state or national publications, and/or that all qualified applicants must be granted an interview. Sometimes a job announcement n1ust be posted or advertised in a way that ensures that all potential "internal candidates" as well as nonemployees are aware of it. No matter what policies and procedures are in place, evidence of a "fair and open" search should be maintained. It provides protection against accusations that a job was "wired:' a charge that can be especially damaging to the reputation of an organization that is supposed to be committed to social \Vork values and ethics.

Other Issues in Hiring Many issues related to hiring can be addressed by a standard policy or a procedure. Others cannot, and must be handled on an organization-by-organization or even on a case-by-case basis. We \.viii no\.v look at a fe\.v of the more important ones.

Involvement of Others Even though only one individual (often the director or, in larger organizations, a personnel specialist) may have the authority to hire, input can be drawn from a number of sources. There is usually no shortage of advice offered when it comes to personnel decisions. But how much influence should others' preferences have on the decision to hire or not to hire a potential employee? Whose input should be considered or sought, and how should it be used? It may be in1possible to totally ignore the wishes of, for example, a powerful board nle1nber in a non-profit organization. For example, she may have a friend or acquaintance who is seeking the position. In fact, board members can actually hire or fire only oneperson-the director-who in tum is responsible for personnel decisions. They should not attempt to usurp the director's (or the personnel officer's) responsibility by expressing a preference as to who should be hired. However, in the real world, it does not always work that way. Managers have been fired for refusing to at least consider a board member's preferred candidate! The applicants' potential supervisor will \Vant to meet and interview them, even when someone else does the actual hiring. Applicants also will want to meet the person under whom they \vill directly \.Vork. These are reasonable requests. One question for which there is

175

176

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities no easy answer is, "Should a supervisor have to approve the hiring of a new employee?" A rule that requires approval of the supervisor (or a policy that expresses a strong preference for it) can ensure a good beginning working relationship between a supervisor and a new employee. But such a rule can also cause problems. What if, in the judgment of the manager, a prospective employee is just what the organization needs, but the supervisor (for whatever reason) votes "no"? For example, a very experienced applicant 1night represent a threat to a supervisor who is relatively new to his job. Or, the supervisor might have been "turned off" simply by one thing that the applicant said, or even that she seemed very nervous when they met. A "veto" power by anyone other than the person charged with making the hiring decision can be dangerous. A policy that encourages a potential supervisor's input (sometimes including a recommendation) is fairly common in human service organizations. It recognizes the fact that he or she has an important stake in the hiring decision and has a valuable perspective to offer. But it still allows the person doing the actual hiring to overrule the supervisor, on occasion, in order to 1nake a decision that is in the best interest of the organization. The input of potential coworkers may be valuable but usually is even more limited. If a "search com1nittee" is used, potential coworkers may serve on it and thus may be involved in screening applicants and constructing a "short list" of people to consider by the person who has the authority to hire. But few organizations (even those that employ participative management methods of decision making) allow all future peers to have say-so in the final decision on whether or not to hire a job applicant. Potential coworkers may have a valuable perspective to contribute, but they are likely to lack a good understanding of the overall personnel needs of the organization. There are also just too many subjective and self-serving reasons why they (like an applicant's potential supervisor) might dislike the best applicant or might favor one who would not be as good. For example, future coworkers might vote not to hire a person who they perceive as "just too different" from the rest of their work group or who might tend to "show them up" with some competency that they lack. Or they might vote to hire someone who they perceive as a potentially affable coworker or one who shares many of their same attitudes toward their work, but who does not possess some other attributes that the group really needs. Future worker compatibility should be considered in selection of a job applicant. Usually, a work style that would easily mesh with that of the group would be a "plus:' The new hire would adjust quickly and with little disruption to the group. Of course, if the group is not noted for its productivity and good approach to its work, it may be necessary to "shake up" the group by hiring someone who might have the potential to raise the level of the group's performance. Potential subordinates generally are interested in meeting a job applicant who might become their immediate supervisor when he or she comes for a job interview. That's understandable. However, their interaction with their potential supervisor or applicants for higher-level administrative positions is generally limited to what is really just a brief social courtesy, little more than an introduction. They normally would have minimal, if any, input and definitely not a "vote" as to whether someone applying for these positions should be hired. However the applicant may be able to pick up a few clues about the organizational climate from a brief meeting with staff members. For example, he or she might get some hint about staff morale or the level of interpersonal conflict present. Of course, any conclusions would be very tentative. Staff 1nembers are usually on their best behavior when meeting their potential supervisor or a higher level manager.

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity

Available Compensation An obvious constraint that can limit vvho can be hired is the salary and benefits package offered. For exan1ple, the requirements of the job may suggest that, ideally, a graduate school-educated, experienced professional should be hired. But the amount of salary available in the budget may indicate that it may be more realistic to think of hiring someone \Vith lesser academic credentials and/or less experience. However, if the position does not need to be filled immediately, it may be worthwhile to seek applicants with the desired qualifications. If one cannot be found who will work for the salary that can be offered, the job description can later be re-written and the job re-advertised to attract applicants willing to work for less. While persons employed in human services tend to exhibit an above-average level of dedication, they will not generally work for less than the salary range dictated by the market, unless they have a second source of income. However, some individuals have been known to take a particularly challenging or professionally gratifying position when they could have made much n1ore money elsewhere. A permanent position that offers job security versus one that is "soft;' that is, funded by grant or contract money that 1nay disappear, so1neti1nes can also make a lower-paying job 1nore attractive. Or, benefits such as flexible working hours, considerable autonomy, professional travel, good medical and dental insurance, or a generous 40l(K) plan may be just what the potential employee needs to address their personal needs, perhaps, more than the base salary that can be offered.

Licensure Requirements, Professional Organizations Guidelines, and Accreditation Requirements Still other factors enter into the recruitment and hiring process. State licensure requirements may limit a manager's options as to \Vho can be hired to fill a position. For example, if the title "social worker" is to be part of the job title in the job description, any qualified applicant will have had to have passed one or more social \Vork state licensing exams. NASW personnel standards also cannot be ignored. Although they are recommendations rather than requiren1ents (e.g., they contain only suggested salary ranges based on academic and professional credentials), ethical concerns as well as the need to be competitive in the job market dictate that they need to be seriously considered in, for example, setting salary ranges for a position. And, in organizations where continuous accreditation is essential for their existence (e.g., hospitals), accreditation standards require that individuals hired to work in many jobs have certain professional credentials. Even in those organizations that choose to n1aintain an affiliation with a national organization such as Prevent Child Abuse America, or the Alliance for Children and Families, the national organization sometimes has requirements for or otherwise influences the recruitment and hiring process.

Requirements of Organized Labor and Other Groups In the growing number ofhwnan service organizations where labor unions are established and powerful, additional requirements may further limit who can be hired and under what conditions. Even the salary and benefits package offered may be dictated by the current contract bet\veen the organization and the labor union. Other issues such as seniority may have to be factored into hiring decisions.

177

178

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities In certain organizations, state civil service requirements must be met. Scores on a standardized exam (with extra points sometimes given for certain life experiences such as military service) may dictate that one potential employee should be hired over another. Other groups such as state employee associations, while generally less powerful than labor unions or civil service commissions, seem to be gaining more "clout." They will occasionally serve as advocates for current employees seeking a pro1notion. Especially if an employee has achieved "permanent employee status" or a similar form of job security, this may serve to give that employee an advantage in competing for a position. If not hired for it, at least some explanation to the employee association may be required.

Legal Requirements Federal restrictions play an important role in hiring decisions (as well as in issues relating to retention, promotion, and so forth) . Over the past several decades we have seen an evolution of constraints that have been designed to counteract forces of discrimination in hiring and in other personnel practices. In the United States, the Equal Pay Act of 1963 was designed to prevent discrimination based on gender. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was another step in the direction of nondiscrimination; it required that organizations with fifteen or more employees specify and justify hiring criteria. In 1968, Executive Order 11246 (revised later as Executive Order 11375) was a major milestone in the increasing role of government in personnel matters. It became generally known as affirmative action. The influence of the presence of affirmative action legislation on hiring practices has tended to ebb and flow with the attitudes and priorities of subsequent presidential administrations and various state governments. Several landmark decisions provided support; some challenges to it have also been successful. During the latter part of the twentieth century, affirmative action experienced a period in which enforcement in the courts was infrequent. In the twenty-first century a number of successful challenges and opposition by some state government bodies and by various interest groups (including labor unions) now threaten its continued existence. Nevertheless, managers need to understand the basic thrust of affirmative action and how it relates to their ability to hire potential employees. Both as social workers concerned with social justice and as managers seeking to comply with federal guidelines in order not to put an organization in legal and financial jeopardy, we must understand affirmative action and its requirements. Affirmative action goes beyond the concept of nondiscrimination. It requires that organizations that receive directly, or even indirectly, some federal sources of funding (as is true of most human service organizations) initiate steps to correct employment inequities that exist. Specifically, it requires the development and implementation of a plan to grant preferential treatment in hiring and other personnel actions to women, people of color, and other groups in order to increase their representation in an organization. In the past, this was sometimes accomplished through the use of quotas, a method that opponents found particularly offensive. Other criticisms center around the potential within affirmative action plans to create a situation that some charge is reverse discrimination. In fact, in one sense, that is exactly what it entailsdiscrimination against primarily white males. There is an underlying assumption within affirmative action that the end justifies the means-short-range preferential treatment of certain groups at the "expense of" primarily white males is necessary to correct the

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity under-representation of women and other groups in many areas of the current workplace. Affirmative action was, in large part, a response to the lack of any significant voluntary efforts to create a more diverse workplace during the mid-twentieth century. Central to an understanding of affirmative action legislation is the difference between the concepts of fully qualified and best qualified. Fully qualified means that persons are judged to meet the requirements of a job or not; best qualified involves an additional rank.ordering of all those who are fully qualified. Historically, hiring the person judged to be the top applicant for a job opening (the best-qualified individual) had been an unchallenged practice. But under affirmative action guidelines, this cannot always be done. The only relevant criterion is fully qualified What are the inlplications of this? In applying affirmative action guidelines, the qualifications for a job are first carefully analyzed to be certain that they are really needed to perform the job, and are not sex-linked, culturally Linked, or unnecessarily discriminatory toward a partictLlar group. For example, if nothing about a job requires that an individual have an earned doctorate or higher level management experience, they cannot be included as job requiren1ents because they wowd give an advantage to white male applicants who, statistically, are more likely to have either of these attributes. Next, all applications from fully qualified applicants are revie>ved. The fact that an individual who is not a "n1inority" tLnder the law has additional, desirable, but not required qualifications-for example, he is bilingual or has more ;vork experience than is required-cannot be used to justify hiring him over other fully qualified applicants. In fact, a minority member who lacks these attributes but is judged to be fully qualified showd be hired instead. However, a woman or other person who is considered a minority who is fully qualified with the "bonus" of one or both of these attributes cowd be chosen over other minority applicants ;vho lack them. The shift in emphasis from best qualified to fully qualified is a departure from what, to many people, has been a very logical and time-honored approach to employment decision making. To them, it represents a government's infringement on a manager's assessment of what is in the best interests of an organization. Defenders of affirmative action >vowd respond that a more diverse workforce is in the best interest of the organization, as well as of the society as a whole. Some social >vorkers who advocate for increased professionalization with its emphasis on advanced credentialing find themselves in conflict While they are in favor of affirmative action, it often will not allow "extra credit" for advanced credentials in hiring decisions, since, historically, they have been more held disproportionately by white males. Other, less controversial legislation also influences who managers may or may not hire. For example, Section 402 of the Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 required organizations who receive federal funds to take actions to employ and advance certain qualified disabled veterans and veterans who served during the time of the Vietnam War. And, veterans (but not high ranking officers) who served more than 180 days (not including training) during the time of other wars and received an honorable discharge are given extra credit on civil service exams. If they achieve a score of70 or above (are fully qualified) on the exam, they are given five extra points (ten if they have a service connected disability, are receiving compensation from the Department of Veteran's Affairs, or were awarded a Purple Heart for an injury). Even unmarried spouses of some deceased veterans, spouses of disabled veterans, and mothers of veterans who died in service or are permanently disabled may be eligible for the extra points. The 1990 Americans ivith Disabilities Act (ADA) requires all programs, services, and activities within similar organizations to be accessible to all employees. "Disability" as

179

180

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities defined by the ADA is rather broad and can include persons with cancer in remission, epilepsy, heart disease, diabetes, mental illness, alcoholism, and even disfiguring scars or a noticeable limp. What the ADA means, in effect, is that managers cannot simply refuse to hire people with certain disabilities solely because the job requires that they perform functions that they are unable to perform without special accommodations. If otherwise qualified, they cannot be discriminated against. The accom1nodations si1nply may have to be provided, so long as they are reasonable. There remains considerable disagreen1ent about what is "reasonable" -that is, how much should it cost the organization to change its physical structure, the work environment, and so forth. The ultimate impact of the ADA on hiring practices is yet to be determined. It continues to evolve through a series of legal challenges. For example, in 2001 a professional golfer successfully used it to be allowed to use a motorized cart in order to compete with other golfers on the Professional Golf Association (PGA) tour. Opponents of the Supreme Court decision in his favor, while not denying the golfer's disability, argued that he should not be allowed the accommodation since walking from hole to hole is a requirement of the game as defmed by the PGA. The court ruling effectively changed the rules of professional golf. Still other factors can enter into the decision of who can or cannot be hired. For example, if a former employee was terminated because of a reduction in force (RIF)-they were doing a good job but had to be let go for economic reasons-they may have to receive preferential treatment if they want to come back to work for the organization. We have only scratched the surface of the list of the many constraints that operate and must be considered when staff members are hired. Managers need to learn what they can and cannot do legally if they are in the position to hire staff. However, as we know, some things may be legal, but they are not necessarily ethical. NASW provides only limited guidance on ethical issues related to hiring. The NASW Code of Ethics section 3.09e (Commitments to Employers) states: "Social workers should act to prevent and eliminate discrilnination in the employing organization's work assign1nents and in its employment policies and practices:>!

STAFF MEMBER "TYPES" WITHIN HUMAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS People who work in human service organizations usually fall within several broad categories or "types:' The labels used to describe the1n give us an initial insight into what we can generally expect ill the way of their knowledge, competencies, and other attributes and suggest how they are most often deployed. Each is defined in Box 8.1.

Professionals In social work practice, when we think of an organization's staff 1nembers, we are most likely to thmk of professionals. In most undergraduate and graduate textbooks on social work practice, there is a discussion of social work as a profession. Two of the most widely used quotations in our literature 2 are often used to mitiate a discussion of whether social work meets the criteria of a profession. We will not take time away fro1n our study of management to get involved in the never-ending debate on whether or not social work is a

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity

Box 8.1

181

Personnel "Types" within Human Service Organizations

1.

Professionals-people who, through extensive formal preparation in a program of advanced study, have acquired a specialized mix of knowledge, values, and competencies as well as credentials (such as licensure) that allow them to perform certain highly ski lied work.

2.

Preprofessionals-people who aspire to become professionals and who have met most (but not all) of the prereq u,isites for becoming professionals. Because they lack the required academic degree or some other credential, they are not allowed to do some of the same work that professionals can do. Most preprofessionals eventually complete the requirements to become professionals.

3. Paraprofessionals- people who have undergone specialized education and training that has prepared them to perform a limited number of tasks. They generally do not aspire to become professionals.

4. Indigenous nonprofessionals- people who lack the formal education and credentials of professionals and, usually, of paraprofessionals. However, they have life experiences and/or a cultural identification that makes them especially well suited to relate to certain clients and their problems. 5. Support staff- unskilled or semiskilled employees who perform certain needed tasks within an organization, for exam pie, clerical staff, custodians, maintenance workers, etc. They do not offer direct services to clients, but facilitate the work of others who offer them. 6. Volunteers-people who, for a variety of reasons, offer their time and services without pay. They can be used to perform many different tasks W·ithin an organization, dependent upon their education, experience, and willingness and the needs of the organization.

profession. For our discussion, let's assume that we qualify for the label "professional:' based on the fact that we ineet most, if not all, of the usual criteria that are applied. They include: 1. Mastery of a body of knowledge through successfully completing a course of advanced education. 2. The presence of expertise (competence) derived from that body of knowledge. 3. Adherence to a common code of ethics. 4. A service ideal that emphasizes client well-being over self-interest.

Expectations for Professionals What do these criteria tell the manager about what to expect from human service professionals? What do they say about how managers can best use their attributes to contribute to the achievement of organizational goals and objectives? The manager should be able to expect a high level of commitment to clients and their welfare. This is logical because, as we have already suggested, human service professionals contend that the client should be the prime beneficiary (even though this is often challenged by others). As professionals, they should already have been socialized to certain values and ethical behavior that should be consistent with those fostered by the organization. They should possess certain required competencies as outlined by the Council on Social Work Education (Chapter 1). Professionals should be able to perform their jobs with less supervision than other staff members. They are likely to want to use the knowledge and skills that they have acquired

182

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities in situations that require professional judgment. They are likely to seek opportunities for further professional development and for receiving the kind of intellectual stimulation that can be obtained from regular contact with other like-minded professionals. Particularly among those professionals working in highly bureaucratized settings, there is likely to be conflict between organizational requirements and professional values and priorities. Paperwork, rules, procedures, and attention to lines of communication and authority can be especially maddening to professionals who see these as interfering with, rather than facilitating, delivery of services to clients. Professionals may perceive that their professional autonomy is being restricted and that use of professional judgment is not valued, or is even discouraged. They can be expected to be critical of certain ways in which things are done in the organization, particularly if these practices are perceived to conflict with professional ethics and standards. It is probably a cliche, but educated professionals really are the "backbone" of a human service organization. As long as they view the organization and their jobs positively, professionals can be a valuable asset. But professionals can also quickly represent a threat to an organization and its stability if they become bitter and cynical about the organization and its activities. Managers will experience great difficulty in doing their jobs unless they have the support, trust, and respect of their fellow professionals.

Role Strain among Professionals Professionals also seem to be especially vulnerable to something called role strain. It can come from many sources and directions. One source is the discrepancy between client role expectations and professionals' perception of their roles. A common misconception among clients (and some segments of the general public) is that professional social workers provide tangible assistance in the form of cash or commodities and that their job is to provide specific and effective solutions to client problems. However, we often perceive our job differently. We hope to enable clients to solve their own problems and to function and to become more independent. This can be frustrating for the client who has different expectations. Client frustration and the anger that often accompanies it can be very stressful for professionals who are doing their jobs co1npetently, but are resented for it. Professionals can also experience role strain when having to work alongside others who do not value or look down upon their professional credentials. Social workers employed in medical or psychiatric settings often feel that their work and opinions are not as valued as that of "real professionals" like physicians or nurses. Role strain may also be felt by social work- educated professionals in their relationships with other staff 1nembers who have fewer or different academic credentials. Professionals tend to believe in the value of social work education. They generally have invested a considerable amount of ti1ne and money into acquiring it, and they may be resentful of others (e.g., paraprofessionals, volunteers, or people with degrees in other fields) who are performing some of the tasks that they believe they are better qualified to perform. In 1nedical settings, efforts to reduce the cost of health care have brought a related but different kind of role strain for social work professionals. Frequently, determinations regarding how much and what kind of assistance can be offered are made by people who lack professional credentials in social work or even in any of the other health care disciplines. Professionals resent the fact that persons who lack any of their professional kno\vledge and skills can nevertheless exert great influence over what can and cannot be done for their patients.

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity Relationships with supervisors can also result in role strain for professionals. Unlike the role of supervisors in business or industry, supervisors of professionals have a heavy responsibility for the educational development and emotional support of those they supervise (Chapter 9). This can inappropriately evolve into the role of counselor or therapist, creating additional role strain for the professional who may want to be helped, but not "treated~' But how do you tdl the person who writes your annual performance evaluation to "back off" and stay out of your personal business? If the supervisor happens to be from another discipline where the expectations for the supervisory role are different, even more severe role strain can develop. In treatment teams such as the multidisciplinary ones used within many medical settings, social vvork professionals can find themselves supervised by a registered nurse or physician. They may get the kind of supervision that they neither want nor need and not get what they expect- supervision from an individual with an in-depth knowledge of the unique role of the social \vorker.

PreprofessionaJs Preprofessionals aspire to be professionals and may even be working toward becoming professionals, but fall short on meeting one or more professional requirements (e.g., additional cotusework or completion of independent research). Preprofessionals may have had their formal education interrupted, or they may simply have not yet passed some examination (such as a state licensure examination or other certification) but need to work anY'vay until they pass it. Students, technically, cannot be considered preprofessionals since they are not considered staff members. Yet social work students completing their field work experience or internship are a lot like preprofessionals in many respects. Ho>vever, they are different in that they usually are not paid for their \Vork and they are not expected to carry as heavy a \VOrkload as preprofessionals or other paid staff members. Because of accreditation standards, licensure requirements, and various other client "safeguards" that are in place within many human service organizations, preprofessionals vary in the amount and type of work that they are allowed to perform. Frequently, preprofessionals carry workloads comparable to those of professionals (sometimes even greater)they just cannot do certain things and they get paid less. Preprofessionals (students too) can "shake up" an organization. Because they are still learning they may ask many questions, some of which professional staff may struggle to answer. They can contribute fresh perspectives and ideas; this is especially useful in relatively stable settings where staff turnover is low, behaviors have become routinized, and traditional ways of doing things are likely to go unchallenged. Preprofessionals sometimes question rules, policies, or procedures or why certain decisions are made. They thus can initiate needed changes. Of course, their questions and challenges also can threaten or embarrass managers and other staff members who may have slipped into certain behavior patterns that cannot be easily justified.

Paraprofessio nals Unlike preprofessionals, paraprofessionals generally do not aspire to become professionals (although they sometimes later change their minds). They usually have completed a relatively short, specialized course of study and have a degree or certificate to prove it. It may have been from a public t\vo-year or technical school, from a local for-profit college

183

184

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

or university, sometimes totally online. Some have simply undergone a short course of instruction provided by the organization where they have been hired, where they were selected from among other staff types because of their "potential" and interest in taking on additional responsibilities. Normally we refer to the preparation of paraprofessionals as training; the formal preparation of professionals is called education (see Chapter 10). The training of paraprofessionals prepares them to perform certain limited tasks and duties. They are not assumed to be qualified to do all that a professional can do-just some of the simpler, more routine things. Their decision making usually is limited too. Most all professional disciplines now use paraprofessionals to perfor1n some of the work that professionals once performed. Physicians have their paramedics and medical technicians; dentists have their hygienists and chair assistants; lawyers have paralegals; nurses have nursing technicians; teachers have teacher-aides; and so forth. They free up professionals to do the more challenging jobs that may require the professional's advanced education. In the human service professions we have seen a growth in the use of paraprofessionals (sometimes called technicians or case-aides) in recent years. Emphasis on cost-saving in some organizations has led to declassification or downgrading of many positions that previously required professional credentials. As this has occurred, managers have observed that paraprofessionals indeed can handle many tasks that had been believed to require a professional degree. Undoubtedly, increased use of paraprofessionals in so1ne organizations has also cost the jobs of professionals. But professionals who have not lost their jobs have sometimes welcomed their presence. For example, social work paraprofessionals have been used to take intake histories, bill for services by completing insurance reimbursement forms, transport clients, offer child care, or do some other job that professionals regard as time-consuming and not consistent with their primary roles as professionals.

Indigenous Nonprofessionals A third type of nonprofessional, first widely used in the 1960s and 1970s, is the indigenous nonprofessional. A frequent criticism of human service agencies during that time was that they were staffed by persons (usually Caucasian, upper middle class) who were out of touch with and unable to understand and relate well to nlany of the organization's clients and their cultures. At the same time, the consumer movement also was demanding greater client input into organizational decision making. Indigenous nonprofessionals began to be hired because of certain life experiences and/or demographic characteristics. Hiring them was a way to both head off criticism and bring organizations in closer touch with those being served. In more recent years, indigenous nonprofessionals have been hired primarily because of both their shared cultural experiences with clients and their personal life experiences with problems that clients are experiencing. Because of their similarities to clients, it is believed that they may be better able to communicate with them and will be more readily accepted and trusted by them than, for example, professionals who may have lived very different lives. Indigenous nonprofessionals who have had sinlilar problems (e.g., family violence, anger management issues, mental illness, or substance addiction) can appreciate the difficult process of overcoming them. They can't be accused of not knowing what it is like. If they have overcome the problem they also can serve as a role model while giving valuable help to those still struggling with it. Often, their credibility is much better than those who

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity have never "been there:· However, th ey also sometimes have less patience with clients than a professional might have. T hey beat the problem, and may have difficulty understanding why others cannot! Indigenous nonprofessionals also are likely to understand and have access to the informal and formal power structures that exist within the community that the organization serves. They can be valuable resources for community organization tasks because they knov; just who to contact and how to approach them to get a job done. There are also obvious political reasons \vhy managers sometimes hire and use indigenous nonprofessionals. They have been used to gain acceptance and credibility within a community. While there is nothing inherently wrong with using them for these purposes, their most valuable contribution is as instruments for change. If indigenous nonprofessionals are given little real input into decisions and if their activities are tightly controlled, they can quickly become resentful. They may actually har1n the image of an organization within tlle community, especially if tlley begin to be perceived as little more than "tokens" or "window dressing:• But if used approp riately and given meaningful roles, they help an organ ization to stay "in touch ;' serving as a communication channel between an organization and its clients. They can be instr umental in promoting timely changes that wiU ensure that services offered are those that are needed and wanted and that they are delivered in a way that increases the likelihood that they will be used.

Support Staff Members We usually do not need to be convinced of the importance of good support personnel. Technological and clerical staff can keep work flowing smoothly or they can seriously impair the functioning of others. A receptionist can convey friendliness and concern or annoyance and disinterest to visitors and clients. The \Vork of custodial and maintenance staff members can likewise reflect positively or negatively on an organization. In their role as managers, social \Yorkers kno\v the importance of hiring and keeping good support staff men1bers, but they frequently are frustrated in their efforts to do so. H uman service organizations often are notorious for their low pay at all levels, an obstacle to recruiting good support staff members. When they can be hired, if they are competent they often soon move on to other settings such as physicians' groups or businesses that can offer far better pay and fringe benefits. Yet some very good support staff members remain. The task for the n1anager often is to identify the other ben efits and the intangible rewards that are helping to keep these good, long-term workers an d to try to build in more of them. One advantage that we have is that, in many htunan service organizations, we may be able to offer job security to a member of the support staff that is n ot available in other sectors. In th e latter, if budget cuts are needed, support staff 1ne1n bers are often the first to go. In htunan service organizations every effort is made to save the jobs of loyal employees in these positions. Support staff members may occupy positions of considerable power within the informal organization (Chapter 6). For example, a longtime receptionist represents continuity and a source of knowledge and experience that others turn to as professional and other staff members come and go. That can offer a sense of importance. Such individuals also are often privy to a considerable amount of information and insight into office politics that keeps their job interesting at the same time that it makes them a valuable resource for the manager who may lack access to them.

185

186

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities Much of the work performed by support staff is unstimulating and repetitive. If a manager can find ways to introduce variety into their day or grant them more decision-making powers (job enlargement, described in Chapter 9), that can make their work more interesting. But that may not be possible, given the nature of some jobs. Then support staff sometimes find their own ways to keep the job interesting by engaging in nonproductive activities such as socializing with each other or playing co1nputer games. These activities may help to relieve boredom, thereby keeping a basically good worker around. Unless they result in work not getting done or they project a bad image for the organization to its clients or the general public, it is probably best to ignore them.

Volunteers Some organizations depend heavily on the use of volunteers and have used them for many years. For example, adult Red Cross volunteers, teenage candy stripers, and other volunteers have long been an integral part of patient services within hospitals. The number of individuals active in voluntary activities continues to gro\v. Both young adults and retirees from the "baby boom generation" are reflecting a greater involvement in volunteerism than ever before. Volunteer organizations such as Americorps and the Peace Corps have longer waiting lists now than they have had since the 1960s.

Benefits There are many benefits to the human service organization that has an active volunteer program. The most obvious of these is that volunteers can perform important jobs at minimal costs, thereby freeing up paid staff to do other work. However, they are not "free:' even in a financial sense. They require orientation, training, and supervision. They may be given free meals, uniforms, or reimbursement for various expenses. They generally are rewarded by such ceremonial occasions as holiday parties, volunteer recognition dinners, and other "perks" that can get quite expensive. Some of the benefits of using volunteers have nothing to do with cost. In a way similar to indigenous nonprofessionals, volunteer staff can increase credibility for the organization within the community. They can provide a valuable communication link to our clients. They can help to break down some of the cultural barriers that highly professionalized organizations often encounter. A client entering a human service organization and seeing a volunteer who they know as a part of the com1nunity can provide a kind of legitimization for the organization. Volunteers also can do something that paid staff often cannot: They can offer "unhurried attention, one-to-one caring, and community input in planning." 3 Some contracts and grants from federal, state, and even private sources may require community involvement. Volunteers can help to meet this requirement. Volunteers can also help in another way. Generally, the hours of service contributed by volunteers can be counted as "match" -the contribution that the organization is expected to contribute to a program when it receives most of its funding from some outside source.

Potential Problems On the negative side, many of the same characteristics that make volunteers assets to an organization also can result in problems. Because they are not paid, the behavior of volunteers often is more difficult to influence than that of paid staff members. Managers cannot

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity control when they will go on an extended family vacation or simply not show up or leave early because of a family crisis. They are not financially tied to the organization; other organizations probably \vould welcome their services. Some volunteers may be retired professionals or paraprofessionals. If so, they may find it difficult to adjust to their new role, often trying to get others to do things "the way \Ve always djd it" or attempting to "meddle" in other \vays. At the other extreme, volunteers who lack professional education have not been socialized to the same values and ethics as professional and even preprofessionals or paraprofessionals. While orientation and training can help, some may never "get the message:' Problems generally fall under the category of "boundary issues:' For example, a volunteer may not fully understand the importance of confidentiality. Sensitive and confidential client information may be shared with others outside the organization. Or, a volunteer who interacts with clients nlay inappropriately attempt to provide advice or counseling. A volunteer also 1nay interfere with the work of paid staff members by asking numerous questions or otherwise occupying in ordinate amounts of their ti1ne because of an interest in client problems or organizational politics. Internal problems an1ong paid staff that should not be discussed outside the building can become common knowledge if a volunteer chooses to discuss them in the community. A manager can quickly come to regret the use of a volunteer >vhen he or she causes these types of problerns for the organization.

Volunteer Selection Over the years, managers have learned from experience that careful selection of volunteers is equally important as the selection of paid staff members. Most of the same issues must be addressed. For example, \vhat methods or venues \vill be used for recruitment? Personal referrals from paid staff or current volunteers may work \vell but it may also produce a volunteer group that lacks diversity. Advertising in the newspaper, on bulletin boards, or in other public places may attract large numbers of potential volunteers, including some who clearly would not be appropriate for the work of the organization and/or its clients and thus cannot be used as volunteers. Having to say "Thanks, but no thanks" to potential volunteers is an unpleasant task, and one that can be damaging to the organization's reputation in the community. People seeking to work as volunteers should complete a written application that includes a signed staternent that certifies the accuracy of the information that it contains. They should also sign a release form that makes it possible to make inquiries about their history. Background checks are necessary, since volunteers often will be working with clients and representing the organization. Criminal records, driving records, employment history, and health status are usually relevant and must be investigated. However, investigating them can be time-consuming and becorne expensive and may bring up ethical and legal questions and issues. Applicants may resent them, but a good potential volunteer will understand why they are necessary and will be happy to cooperate. A person who resists them may just have something to hide! People volunteer for many different reasons. They may be "good" reasons, but they can also be the \Vrong ones (e.g., to attempt to impose their social or religious values onto others). The reasons for volunteering often reflect a mixture of personal need meeting and altruism. Sometimes it is hard to identify the primary motivator. Some

187

188

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities volunteers may enjoy the intellectual stimulation that a professional work environment provides. Others may gain considerable gratification from being part of a team. Others seek primarily the social interaction that a work environment can provide. Still others perceive that volunteering is an obligation of their religious faith. Students may volunteer primarily to meet a course requirement or because it \Vill look good on their college applications. Altruistic reasons for volunteering may include just a strong need to help others or a wish to contribute something to the co1nmunity. Volunteers also may hold a conviction that they should help to work toward some social change. Some people volunteer because they have a need to keep busy, or are simply happier when they are productive. Others may wish to share what they have learned over the years. Sometimes volunteers wish to do a kind of "penance" by doing for others what they were never really co1nfortable in doing for those close to them. Even alleviating personal guilt in this way is not necessarily bad for an organization. Volunteers, just like paid staff members, can become so emotionally involved in their work that they find it too stressful. Sometimes this is because of some recent life experience. This is why, for example, hospice programs generally will not use volunteers who have recently experienced the death of a close friend or relative. When potential volunteers are interviewed, it is important to try to determine just what it is that the volunteer is seeking. An assessment can then be made as to whether their presence would benefit the organization in the achievement of its objectives or impede it. ln short, is there a "match"? Managers who fail to recognize the complexity of the motivation of volunteers and who simply assign them to needed tasks as if they were paid staff members may soon find that they have difficulty recruiting or keeping volunteers. Most communities have an effective volunteer communication network-the word gets out fast!

Coordinating the Work of Volunteers The complexity of the motivation of volunteers (about the only thing that we can be sure of is that they are not doing it for the money) can limit what they can and will do. Generally, volunteers want to do what they want to do (jobs consistent with their motivation) and will strongly resist or simply refuse to do anything else. Unlike a paid employee, they don't have to do the less pleasant work that has to be done. If pushed hard enough, they will simply leave. (For the volunteer who hasn't worked out well, a manager or volunteer coordinator sometimes may deliberately provoke such a response.) Some tasks are, by their very nature, appealing to volunteers. Others are not as much fun and have fewer takers. For example, in a hospital setting, there is usually no shortage of volunteers to read to patients, deliver flowers to the1n, or just visit with them. More strenuous or less rewarding jobs such as assisting in rehabilitative therapy are less often sought. Fortunately, the complex needs that drive people to volunteer result in widely varying volunteer preferences. Some jobs that are not outwardly attractive to most volunteers may be a good match with the needs of a few other volunteers. Once they become aware of the intangible rewards that they hold for them, they often resist doing anything else. For example, hospice volunteers or volunteer "brothers" or "sisters" of AIDS patients report a great amount of gratification derived from their work. The roles of volunteers in human service organizations vary widely. They might offer limited and professionally supervised direct services to clients, participate in citizen action

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity

189

groups, serve on advisory boards of non-profit organizations, take part in self-help or mutual aid groups, or do any number of clerical and semiskilled or even unskilled jobs that need to be done. The nature of the task or tasks will determine the amount of training, education, and supervision that will be required. All volunteers require orientation to the organization. They need to be aware of and in compliance with its policies, rules, and procedures. Larger volunteer programs often employ a full-time staff member (a volunteer coordinator) just to oversee the volunteer program. Even volunteer programs with only two or three volunteers still need a person clearly designated to supervise them and to coordinate their work with that of paid staff. The job of volunteer coordinator often falls to a social worker. If an organization has a large number of volunteers, it can be a full -time job, or in smaller programs it can be only one of the social worker's job responsibilities. Being a volunteer coordinator requires the knowledge and skills of a manager and a considerable a1nount of diplomacy. For exa1nple, paid staff members need to be prepared for what to expect from volunteers. They need guidance in how to work with them productively and appropriately. Volunteers, in turn, require an advocate who understands their role and can defend them, if it appears they are being exploited or otherwise mistreated. Volunteers require written contracts and job descriptions. The coordinator should also provide regular evaluation of their work and support for improving their performance. Personnel records must be kept for documentation of their contributions to the organization, but also for possible personnel action, such as dismissing a volunteer if it has been demonstrated that he or she represents a liability rather than an asset to the organization and its clients (see Box 8.2). (Yes, volunteers can, and sometimes have to, be fired.)

Beginning a Volunteer Program Volunteers are now an important part of many human service organizations and programs. However, some managers in organizations have chosen not to use them. In deciding whether or not voltu1teers would represent an asset to an organization we need to be able to look beyond their obvious financial advantages. Paid staff may be resistive to their use. However, the level of resistance tends to vary from organization to organization based

Box 8.2

Some Responsibilities of the Coordinator of a Volunteer Program

• If volunteers have not previously been used, involve paid staff members in planning for their arrival and prepare them for what to expect and how they should relate to volunteers. • Develop and provide volunteer job descriptions and written contracts; use a probationary period for mutual assessment. • Orient and train volunteers.

• Supervise, "nourish," and protect them. • Regularly acknowledge their contributions. • Provide regular performance evaluations. Keep records for: • possible personnel action • documentation of their contributions to the organization.

190

Part 1\vo: The Major Managemen t Activities on the organizational culture (cultural norms).4 Before choosing to use volunteers, many questions might be asked. For example: 1. Are there tasks that lend themselves to the needs and interests of available volun-

teers? Are these tasks easily defined and delineated from those of paid staff so that the "turf" of paid staff members will not be threatened? 2. How likely are volunteers to be accepted by paid staff members as valuable team members? How well will paid staff members tolerate the wide range of both the demographic characteristics of volunteers and their motivations for volunteering? 3. Is there someone who has an interest in and the capacity to be a volunteer coordinator? Is there a commitment among other staff members to volunteer services and a willingness to share some of their knowledge and skills acquired through professional education? 4. Can the organizational climate tolerate the increased uncertainty and different perspectives that volunteers are likely to bring? How well will paid staff receive volunteer efforts to question current practices? The presence of some conditions that would seem to argue against the use of volunteers should not necessarily preclude their use. These conditions may not be permanent. For example, paid staff 1ne1nbers can be helped to change some of the beliefs and attitudes that might otherwise limit the productive use of volunteers. Sometimes only their presence will convince so1ne of those who are most resistive to their presence. However, volunteers should be introduced incrementally. The experimental use of two or three carefully chosen individuals (a minimum of two is needed for mutual support), placed where their potential for success is high, sometimes can be a good first step. Later, when paid staff members recognize their good job performance, n1ore such individuals can be brought in. But this should be done incrementally and only if enough meaningful work is available for them. Yes, an organization can have too many volunteers!

Case Example

J

olene was recently hired as a therapist at a local community mental hea lth center. When she was hired, it was agreed that, like the MSW social worker who previously held her position, she would have a reduced caseload. However, her responsibilities would also include serving as the coordinator of volunteer services. The organ ization generally had between 8 and 12 volunteers, who were recruited from the community that the organ ization served. They were used primarily to provide child care to ch ildren of patients wh ile t hey were receiving counseling. One volunteer, Claire, held an MSW and had recently retired after

30 years employment in an inpatient mental health facility where she was well regarded as a specialist in working with victims of child sexual abuse. As a volunteer, her time was currently split carrying a small caseload as a therapist and offering child care when extra help was needed. Shortly after starting her new job, Jolene learned from one of her coworkers, May Belle, that the social worker who had previously held her job had not resigned voluntarily (as she had been led to believe); he was asked to resign. Jolene asked why. May Belle replied, "He just refused to deal with our complaints about some of the volunteers when we brought them

(continued)

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity

Case Example

191

Continued

to him. Some of what they were doing was really unprofessional." "Like what?" Jolene asked. May Belle replied, "Well, one volunteer, who since has quit, was always telling us about how she was half Cheyenne. She would show up wearing the darnedest costumes. She looked more like she was more ready to do a rain dance than to work in our clinic. Another one, an older Chinese lady, was always scolding patients about how their children would get sick if they didn't dress them warmer. She even tugged on kids' cuffs to make sure their pants were long enough to cover their legs! Thank goodness, she left too. Your predecessor just didn't want to deal with them ." It wasn't long after this that Jolene got her first complaint about some of the volunteers. Two therapists reported to her that, while providing child care, they were asking the children numerous questions about whether their parents touched them in ways that made them feel uncomfortable, about who bathed them, and other questions that clearly were designed to learn if they might have been sexually abused. The patients, who had told their therapists about this, were clearly angry. A few had threatened to terminate their treatment. Jolene asked to speak to Claire privately to try to learn if the complaints had any validity. Claire's response was, "I've never really seen it, but I only do child care when they need extra help and when I'm not seeing patients. I suppose it's possible- I did talk to one child quite a bit and I eventually learned that he was being sexually abused by his mother. However, I did it very much 'by the book,' never pressing him or planting any ideas- just the way we are trained." When Jolene asked if other volunteers might have listened when she talked to the child, Claire responded, "I suppose they might have, but I never suggested that they should do this kind of probing." Jolene moved quickly to address the immediate problem. She conducted what she described as a "refresher orientation" and required all volunteers to attend. She thanked the volunteers for their contributions. She placed heavy emphasis on the importance 1

of what they were doing-child care- and how it made it possible for patients to receive treatment from mental health professionals. She also stressed that the diagnosis and treatment of patients must be left to the professional staff, who best knew how to do it without putting the organization in any legal jeopardy. When asked for an example of what she was referring to, she provided one. She noted that inquiring about how children are treated at home is not appropriate. However, if they have concerns about it based on what they have observed, they should discuss it with the parent's therapist and let him or her address it. There were no more complaints about volunteers for the next six months.

Discussion Questions 1.

Was it a good idea to continue to use Claire as both a therapist and a child-care volunteer? Why or why not?

2.

What common problem with the use of volunteers did the therapists describe when they expressed concern about the kinds of questions that volunteers were asking children?

3. How do you think Jolene dealt with the problem? Would it have been better to establish a rule or a policy and simply put it in writing in a memo to all volunteers? Why or why not? 4. Why would it have been helpful for Jolene to know some of the problems that the previous director of volunteer services had? How could the manager who hired her have communicated needed information to her without directly discussing the work quality of her predecessor or the fact that he was asked to resign? 5. Was the previous coordinator correct in doing nothing about the complaints about volunteers that he received? Why or why not? 6. Based upon May Belle's description of some of the complaints that professional staff made to the previous coordinator, what other problem appears to exist at the organization? Is it Jolene's job to address it? Why or why not?

192

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

What Is the Optimal Mix? There is no formula or recipe for providing the exact proportion of each staff type that is best for any given organization. Even if we could obtain that kind of knowledge, just about the time we were successful in achieving the optimal mix, the needs of the organization would change and we would have to make staffing changes anyway. Nevertheless, as managers we will make better staffing decisions if we recognize a few of the issues that influence what is a good balance of different staff types in an organization. What mix of staff types will best facilitate the efficient and effective delivery of services to the organization's clients? For some organizations, a staff consisting of mostly professionals and the very "professionalized" 1nilieu that generally accompanies it are desirable. For example, in many medical settings, advanced degrees and certificates on office walls, careful use of titles like "doctor:' dress codes and even (sometimes) white coats can help clients to feel confident that they are receiving the very best treatment available. In others, such as a community service organization, a high percentage of preprofessionals, paraprofessionals, indigenous nonprofessionals, and volunteers and only a few professionals may be ideal. This less-professionalized mix would likely create a more casual, laid-back work environment, one that emphasizes human similarities between client and staff members while still projecting enough professionalism and adhering to professional ethical standards. In still other organizations, the best mix would be somewhere in between.

MANAGING DIVERSITY IN THE WORKPLACE A dra1natic change has occurred within organizations in the twenty-first century. The workplace has become much more multicultural than it was only a decade or two ago. There are still paid staff and volunteer staff. Staff members still differ in their educational preparation, general job classifications, or attitudes toward their work. But other differences are often equally, if not more, i1nportant for managers, if they hope to understand the complexity of human behavior within organizations.

Types of Diversity Rosenor 5 has identified two different categories of diversity: primary and secondary. Primary forms of diversity are those that cannot be changed. They do not reflect a "choice" on the part of individuals. Primary types of diversity include age, ethnicity, physical ability or disability, and sexual orientation. Secondary types of diversity reflect (more or less) choices that the individual has made. Examples of secondary types of diversity are marital status, parental status, and religious affiliation. Social workers generally understand diversity and its importance in understanding human behavior. In our professional education we have been taught to appreciate and value diversity and to celebrate the richness that it brings to a society and its institutions. However, like any change that is positive, increased diversity within an organization brings >vith it some potential problems. The manager needs to be able to anticipate these and to be able to influence the work environ1nent so that it will at least minimize them. This is not son1ething that comes naturally to people; we have to sensitize ourselves to cultural and other forms of diversity and to learn how to work with them.

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity

Diversity amo ng Staff Members Longres identified \vhat may be the greatest potential problem of djversity: increased conflict. In discussing an issue \vithin social work education, he observed that "Diversity is not an inherent good ... nor is it an inherent evil. Diversity is simply a fact of social life. It leads to richness, as we so often hear in the social work literature, but it also inevitably leads to conflict:'6 Asamoah made a similar observation regarding the effects of diversity within organizations. She said, "Although the mix of cultures, genders, lifestyles, and values can be stimulating and potentially beneficial to the organization, it can also lead to conflict:'7 We noted in Chapter 3 that management theorists over the years have had different attitudes about confljct. Some classical theorists saw it as unnecessary if an organization is well managed. Later writers believed that it \Vas unavoidable, but that it could be contained within reasonable limits and even used productively. A difficult task for the manager is determining (1) when diversity-related conflict is present, and (2) when it represents healthy stimulation for the organization and \vhen it is unhealthy. How can managers know when diversity has become 1nore of a problem for the organization than an asset? There are a number of warning signs. They indicate that the organizational climate for diversity is not favorable and will continue to foster conflict. For example, the manager might observe that: • There is a disproportionate amount of staff member turnover among certain groups, such as women or people who have a disability. • It is difficult to hire people from certain groups; they even may agree to take a job and then change their minds. • Staff members seem comfortable making jokes or slurs that denigrate th e appearance, customs, or beliefs of certain groups. • Staff members seem to avoid tasks that require them to \VOrk \vith people who are different from themselves and seem to "cluster" with those most like themselves. • Frequent mistakes occur that seem to be a function of staff misunderstandings related to cultural differences. • Staff members complain to supervisors about cultural differences of coworkers (e.g., dress, hairstyles, speech accents, and religious jewelry) that do not affect client services. • Members of certain groups are not invited to informal social gatherings, or, if they are, they interact ;vi th only people who are members of the sa1ne group. • Members of certain groups avoid staff meetings or other 1neetings. When they attend, their comments and contributions are disregarded or "discounted" by other staff members. There are several related terms that are helpful to managers who wish to improve their cross-cultural effectiveness and to create a work environment in which diversity is celebrated and is an asset to the organization. Cultural knowledge is the first step. It entails simply being familiar with the values, beliefs, history, customs, and behavior of other groups. For example, managers need to become aware of certain days that are of great religious significance to staff members \vho are Je\vish, Moslem, Hindu, and so forth. Some other examples of important cultural differences include attitudes and beliefs about punctuality, personal space, individual versus group rights, \Vhat questions are considered too personal, dining manners, and deference to age or authority. Cultural

193

194

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities awareness entails taking cultural knowledge and using it to develop understanding among others. It results in openness and flexibility. For example, a manager could take his or her knowledge of the importance of certain religious observances to other ethnic groups, and use it to remind other staff members of their importance and the need to respect them as we have been taught to do for the more familiar Christian holidays such as Christmas or Easter. The manager would also 1nodel cultural awareness by avoiding the scheduling of important meetings or other events that would interfere with participation in important religious observances. However, the goal is for managers to move beyond cultural knowledge and awareness to yet another level, to demonstrate a certain capacity. It is called cultural competency. A manager who possesses cultural competency employs a congruent set of behaviors, skills, attitudes, and policies that enable the organization, and its diverse staff members, to work together effectively. Cultural competency requires regular assessment of the organizational climate for diversity among both clients and staff members and making changes in policies, structures, and the organization as a system as they are indicated. Our example, religious observances, is only one area of many where important differences exist within a diverse workplace. One's body language, touching, hand gestures, or even the presence or absence of eye contact can have very different meanings among different cultures and different groups. Certain behaviors or a poor choice of words can easily offend or 1niscommunicate to a staff member. Effective managers begin the process of becoming culturally competent by fust learning what is flattering, insulting, humiliating, and so forth to others (cultural knowledge). Then they sensitize other staff to them and convey the message, often through example, that they are expected to be open and flexible in dealing with them (cultural awareness). They also promote the idea that differences simply exist-they are neither better nor worse, often referred to as cultural sensitivity. Unless managers develop cultural competence and promote it in the workplace, staff members are likely to interpret the different behaviors of persons unlike themselves negatively. However, even when coworkers who are different in some way exhibit the same behaviors that they exhibit, staff members may still interpret it negatively. Historically, this has been a problem faced by women in male-dominated organizations. It has undoubtedly contributed to the "glass ceiling" experienced by many women who have sought to move into higher-level management positions only to be turned down for the job. The different (negative) interpretations of wo1nen's behaviors have been used to justify denying them the job while offering it to a male instead. Here are some examples of how this may have occurred, even when a male and a female actually act in the very same way: • • • • • • • • • • •

"He is assertive"; "she is aggressive:' "He is a perfectionist"; "she is being nitpicky:' "He is demanding"; "she's just being bitchy:' "He is overworked"; "she must have PMS:' "He is persistent"; "she doesn't know \vhen to quit:' "He is a man of principle"; "she is really stubborn:' "He is the consummate politician"; "all she knows how to do is schmooze." "He says what he thinks"; "she's too opinionated:' "He knows how to get things done"; "she's very manipulative:' "He's a charmer"; "she is too seductive:' "He is work focused"; "she lacks social skills:'

Foste ring a nd Ma naging Staff Divers ity

Diversity and Eth.n ocentrism As diversity increases \vi thin organizations, managers are likely to face complaints of staff members who label cultural differences (e.g., dress, speech, table managers, or personal hygiene) as "unprofessional:' (This is a more socially acceptable way to criticize others than to say that \Ve simply find something about them personally offensive.) In these situations, the manager can probably safely assume that many of the complaints are likely to be a form of ethnocentrism, that is, a tendency to judge others' behaviors and tastes in the context of one's O\vn culture, life experiences, and values. If this is indeed what they represent, it is incumbent on the manager to help the complainants to understand why they may be offended by cultural differences and to help them to become more culturally sensitive. While pointing out ethnocentris1n to staff is a difficult task that requires considerable tact, it is probably not half as difficult for the manager as having to confront a staff member whose differences may indeed be obstacles to forming useful professional relationships with coworkers or clients. Ideally, we would like to believe that cultural differences should not matter, but in extren1e situations they can and do nlatter. For exa1nple, a professional who regularly uses "four-letter words" or other language that is the vernacular in his subculture but that is offensive to son1e of his clients may never be able to develop a therapeutic relationship with them. Or, another professional may observe standards of personal hygiene that are totally acceptable in her former culture or dress in a way that is consistent with her religious dictates and the "place" of women in her former culture but they can present barriers to working with clients \vithin Western culture. In both of the above examples, the differences probably should not matter. But what if they do? What if clients frequently cannot look beyond the cultural differences to see the knowledgeable individual \vho \vishes to help them? It is not our responsibility as managers to help our clients become more sensitive to cultural differences (although it might be a goal of their treatment). In such instances, the manager may need to discuss \\Tith the staff members the ways in which cultural differences might be impacting on their effectiveness in their work \\Tith clients. Even done tactfully, this can produce anger or even charges of discrimination. However, once again, we must recall that it is our clients who are supposed to be the organization's prime beneficiaries. Unpleasant as it may be, the 1nanager has a responsibility to do what is necessary to ensure that they receive the best possible services in a way that maximizes the likelihood that they can benefit from them.

Diversity among Managers What if we as 1nanagers are different from all or most of our staff 1nembers in one or more ways? Managers' own demographic characteristics as well as their life experiences can affect their capacities to manage effectively. A recognition of who we are and how we are likely to be perceived by others within an organization allows us to understand and to anticipate some of the problems that may arise. It helps explain why people react the way they do to us as managers. It can help us understand how sometimes success comes so easily in our role as manager and why, on other occasions, staff members counter with resistance, suspicion, resentment, and other less-than-desirable responses to perfectly appropriate management requests or behaviors. Understanding of human variables that affect management may also

195

196

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities provide managers with hints as to how they might overcome some of the personal animosity that invariably exists within organizations where people with different demographic characteristics must interact effectively. The demographic characteristics of a manager undoubtedly influence his or her capacity to manage. That is not the way it should be, but it is. In organizations, as in any social system, it makes a difference whether we are, for example, a person who is male or female; homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual; younger or older. It matters that we are a member of a certain ethnic group or that we have a physical disability. A manager's identity as a woman or a man or as white, African American, Latina, Native American, or a member of some other group can affect the way staff 1nembers relate to him or her-a form of discrimination. Initially, it can be either a benefit or a liability, dependent in part on whether he or she is perceived as similar to or different from other staff members. Over time, it is almost al\vays the latter.

DISCRIMINATION, PREJUDICE, AND STEREOTYPES Discrimination is really a neutral word. It is the activity of recognizing differences. As practitioners, as managers, and as staff members relating to higher-level managers, social workers need to recognize differences in people and to relate appropriately to these differences. Recognition of difference is essential for good practice and for good management, a point that was stressed in earlier chapters. As managers, it allows us to appreciate the special attributes of individual staff members and to use them most effectively. It also is essential that staff members discriminate in their relationships with managers; that is, that they be able to recognize the characteristics of managers that make them unique as human beings and learn how best to relate to them. However, as we know, discrimination is more likely to have negative consequences than positive ones. There is a big difference between recognizing differences and appreciating them (positive discrimination) and recognizing differences and, based on them, drawing erroneous conclusions, and treating people in less desirable ways (negative discrimination) based on these conclusions. This latter form of discrimination is the one that social workers see most often and the one that they often endeavor to confront and to eliminate to promote social justice. We know that staff members of all types suffer from many forms of negative discrimination. Are social workers in the role of manager also victimized by negative forms of discrimination directed against them? Definitely. Articles and entire books are devoted to the problems of women and racially and ethnically diverse managers, 8 topics that we will only briefly address in this text. To better understand the negative forms of discrimination that affect managers and their staff, it is useful to examine two related terms, prejudice and stereotype. Prejudice has been defined as "interpersonal hostility that is directed against individuals based on their membership in a minority group."9 It relates to a negative feeling or attitude about people based on their group membership-for example, because they are older, homosexual, African American, female, have a disability, and so on. A stereotype is closely related to a prejudice, but it is different. It results from a cognitive (rather than an emotional) function. A stereotype can be defined as "a standardized, overgeneralized mental picture representing an uncritical judgment based on a person's perceived group membership:' A stereotype denies or fails to recognize individual differences. It assu1nes that "they are all alike:'

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity Traditionally, we have tended to believe that the negative forms of discrimination (treating others in a less-desirable way based on their perceived membership in a particular group) have occurred because people hold prejudices that cause them to engage in stereotyping. In their classic book on the topic, Levin and Levin dispute this notion, suggesting instead that negative discrimination provides its own rewards (economic, social, psychological). and that we use stereotypes and prejudices to justify practices of negative discrimination. 10 Their position has a certain compelling logic \vithin our study of management. Hasn't it been profitable for white males to treat women or certain racially or ethnically diverse people as second-class citizens within organizations? Are such stereotypes as "women don't make good managers" or "an African American person can't supervise a white person" just a rationalization for discriminatory practices that benefit white males? Perhaps. Whether discrimination results from or results in prejudice and discrimination is an interesting philosophical question, but not one that is especially critical to the manager. What is important is the understanding that who one is can affect how well one is able to perform the work of a nlanager at any level of the organization. We need to be able to recognize the prejudices, stereotypes, and, most importantly, the discrimination that can impinge on our ability to nlanage and tlle ability of others to do their jobs and to be able to minimize their effects.

Negative Stereotypes and Discrimination Usually when we think of discrimination we think of a type of behavior that excludes or denies people access to something to which they are entitled. The obvious forms of denial, such as discriminatory pay scales and limited access to promotions, have especially affected \Vo men and others in both human services and in all other sectors of the job market. Social workers' ability to manage undoubtedly is affected by the rewards that they receive (or don't receive) and their perception of their potential for upward mobility. But the denial of access that can most directly affect people's capacity to perform their management functions is the denial of needed information. If, for example, superiors or subordinates do not provide to a \Voman manager the details of a particularly messy situation that exists within an organization, they can hinder her ability to make good management decisions that relate to it. The shutting off or limiting of information may be deliberate and designed to hinder her ability to function as a manager. It may also be paternalistic, seeking to "spare" her based on stereotypes about her "sensitivity" or "tendency toward e1notionality:' Or it may result from her lack of membership in the "old boy network" where valuable information is exchanged over a round of golf or at inforn1al 1nales-only social hours after work on Friday afternoons. The lack of informal social contacts with manager- peers and other staff can be particularly problematic for a woman or a men1ber of minority racial or ethnic groups. Of course, 1nale social workers in an organization where they feel socially cut off by a predominately fe1nale staff can experience the same type of information deficiency. Managers need good information (and a lot of it) to do their job well. Formal communication by way of memos and other such vehicles are not enough to "stay on top of" situations and to be able to engage in sound decision making. Managers need informal communication; social isolation tends to deny them access to it. Social workers as managers face a similar problem as do their staff membersinterpretations and perceptions of their behaviors based on their demographic characteristics. They may be doing or saying exactly \Vhat other managers are doing or saying, but

197

198

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

will it be perceived in the same way? For example, because of a persistent negative stereotype of women managers as overly nurturing, an effort to mentor a new staff member may be perceived as "neediness:' Similarly, older managers who become angry at staff incompetence may have their warranted and appropriate reprimand of a staff me1nber dis1nissed as si1nply another sign that they are getting "old and irritable:' African American managers may have their appropriate enforcement of rules and procedures interpreted as indicating that they are meeting son1e intrapersonal need to exert control over white staff. A white male manager's concerned efforts to be supportive and helpful to a female staff member may be perceived as paternalistic or condescending or, even worse, as an effort to engage in an inappropriate personal relationship with her. Staff members will inevitably engage in some stereotyping based on the characteristics of the manager, whatever those characteristics are. Unfortunately, stereotypes are often accompanied by negative types of discrimination. They may result in managers being taken less seriously than they should be or in certain erroneous assumptions about the1n that can only result in problems in interaction with staff. Whenever superiors, peers, and subordinates relate primarily to a social work manager as a member of a group and fail to recognize the manager's uniqueness, trouble is waiting to happen. Some other examples of dangerous and erroneous stereotypes based on a manager's group membership that staff may have might include: • The manager (younger female) doesn't really need the job and will become pregnant and leave soon. • The manager (physical disability) got the job to meet affirmative action requirements. • The manager (white male) was not really the best person for the job, but got it through the "old boy network:' • The manager (older employee) will not be able to handle the pressure when the workload gets heavy. • The manager (younger employee) is not mature enough to supervise older subordinates. • The manager (Latina) was hired to placate the Hispanic community, and probably knows nothing about management. • The manager (a former beauty pageant >vinner) is not very bright and was hired for her appearance. • The manager (Native American) probably has a problem with alcohol. • The manager (male homosexual) is more concerned about gay issues than about the work of the organization. • The manager (a retired 1nilitary officer) is rigid and insensitive. • The manager (Jewish) will show favoritism to other Jewish staff members. • The manager (Northern male) is rude and insensitive. • The manager (Southern male) is conservative and a racist. No matter what demographic characteristics managers possess, staff will inevitably hold some negative stereotypes about them. Stereotypes can encourage behavior that can harm one's capacity to manage and have the potential to erode the trust that is so important to good management. Managers should be able to fulfill their role expectations as managers without having the motivation for their behavior erroneously interpreted by staff. But once again, what should exist is not necessarily the way things are.

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity

"Positive" Stereotypes and Discrimination All of our examples of stereotyping to this point have been negative. Of course, less frequently, erroneous stereotypes based on the demographic characteristics of the manager can be positive. For example, the older manager initially may be assumed to be very knowledgeable and experienced; the retired military officer may be assumed to be a good leader; the woman or Native American manager may be assumed to be especially competent to have "beaten the odds" against moving up in the organization; the Asian manager may be assumed to be a mathematics wizard; or the white male may be assumed to be welJ qualified to supervise the all-female staff. A younger manager may be assumed to possess a high energy level; supervisors with 15 years' experience must really know their jobs, and so forth. These stereotypes can work to the manager's advantage, at least in the short run. Staff members may respect and show deference to them {positive discrimination) based on what they assume to be true about them. But what if the manager doesn't live up to the stereotype? Individuals may not possess those attributes that they were assumed to have; their strengths as managers may lie elsewhere. Stereotypes (even the positive ones) can result in disappointment, disillusion1nent, and anger when they are found to have little basis in reality. Then, staff members are likely to treat them in less desirable ways (negative discrimination). Managers should help staff members see beyond the demographic characteristics of themselves as managers. This is not to suggest that good management necessarily means we should "bare our soul" to staff members or reveal more personal information than we wish to reveal. It does suggest, however, that managers should be open about themselves as managers, that is, their philosophies of management, their management style, and even, on occasion, \vhat they perceive to be their \veaknesses and strengths as managers. Staff members seek an environment of certainty in which to do their jobs. They want to know \vhat they can expect from the manager in the \vay of behavior; they should not have to rely on assumptions that may be based on erroneous stereotypes about the manager's demographic characteristics. Letting staff members see and recognize the uniqueness of one's self can reduce some of the liabilities faced by managers who tend to be victims of stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. The social work manager of the twenty-first century must assume that, for example, being a manager and a woman or a manager and a member of a racial or ethnic group will continue to create special problems. Fortunately, a large amount of empirical research is being conducted that should provide both insight and assistance in dealing with these problen1s.

ANOTHER FORM OF DIVERSITY IN THE WORKPLACE People are influenced in how they go about their work by factors that transcend their educational achievements or their gender, ethnicity, cultural affiliation, and so forth. Any categorizing of human beings, while it can sometimes help to explain so1ne phenon1enon such as an individual's specific behavior, is a potentially dangerous and misleading activity. It can be a form of stereotyping, too! However, there is still some value in looking at yet another way of categorizing staff members that has been discussed in the business literature for many years. Alvin Gouldner's research many years ago suggested that paid staff members (he did not study volunteers) tend to fall into one of two categories. He calJed one group "locals"

199

200

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities and the other "cosmopolitans:' He proposed three criteria for determining whether a staff member is a local or a cosmopolitan. They are: (1) the object of the individual's loyalty, (2) their primary reference group, and (3) their degree of commitment to skills. 11 A local owes primary loyalty to the organization. His or her primary reference group is the person who appears as his or her immediate supervisor on the organizational chart, whether or not the supervisor was educated in the same discipline. Locals have a relatively low commitment to the skills of their discipline. If, for example, a promotion were offered that would change their job to require primarily supervision of other staff rather than use of their professional skills, locals would eagerly accept it in order to 1nove up within the organization. Cosmopolitans reflect the opposite characteristics. Their primary loyalty is to their profession and to its values. For example, if a conflict were to arise between the demands of the organization and their professional values or ethics, they would take a position consistent with the latter. Their primary reference group is their fellow professionals. A colleague's opinion of his or her work would be more important to a cosmopolitan than that of a supervisor who may have been educated in another discipline. Cosmopolitans are highly committed to professional skills and demonstrate a desire to use them. For example, they might not be interested in a promotion to a management position where they could no longer practice the skills that they learned as part of their professional education. The local/cosmopolitan typology is, of course, an oversimplification of the real >vorld- some would call it a false dichotomy. For example, many people seem to have some characteristics of both locals and cosmopolitans. A few individuals have characteristics of neither. They seem to be self-serving, lacking in loyalty to anything but themselves, not valuing the opinions of anyone else, and have little commitment to either professional skills or to moving up within the organizational hierarchy. Despite the exceptions to the Gouldner typology, we have probably all known people who resemble one description or the other. Cosmopolitans are not necessarily more desirable employees than locals or vice versa. Both have a contribution to make to an organization. Both also represent risks and potential problems for the manager. Locals are likely to do what they are told without much questioning; they want to please their immediate superiors. They are not likely to debate the professional ethics of what needs to be done to meet the requirements of the organization. They usually will not object if asked to perform a task that is outside their job description or what they claim as their professional area of expertise. Locals also tend to make a career within a single organization; they are not likely to leave as long as promotions and other rewards occur on a fairly regular basis. They can be depended on to speak well of the organization within the community and to try to cover for its potentially embarrassing mistakes. They tend to respect such bureaucratic features as "put it in writing,, or the chain of command, and they pay close attention to them. Because of a lack of commitment to professional skills, locals may not have much interest in continued professional growth and are less likely to remain up-to-date on emerging developments in their field than are cosmopolitans (but they know everything in the current rules, policies, and procedures manual!). In short, they are generally "good bureaucrats:' On the negative side, locals sometimes can be too agreeable and compliant. They don't "rock the boat;' even \vhen it needs to be rocked. They don't speak up or offer valuable criticism. Their deference to those in authority can make life easy for the manager in son1e ways, but it also cheats the manager of the negative feedback that is often beneficial.

Fostering and Managing Staff Diversity Managers who are especially insecure or in need of validation for their decisions have a tendency to surround themselves with locals \vho are almost always complimentary of what they do. Thus they get a distorted idea of their competency and, making matters \Vorse, start to discount the opinions and advice of those (cosmopolitans) who are even mildly critical. Before long they listen to nobody but the locals. What do cosmopolitans offer to a manager? They provide a needed critical perspective on the activities of persons and activities \vithin an organization. They insist on adherence to professional standards. In human service organizations, they often provide needed advocacy for clients and the protection of their rights. They offer fresh, new ideas that emanate both from their contacts with professionals outside the organization and from their efforts to continue to practice and upgrade their competency. They are not overly preoccupied with moving up in the organizational hierarchy and never lose sight of the primacy of client needs. They are less likely to slip into means-end displacements than are locals. They keep a better focus on goals and objectives, but they may question them from tilne to time. As with locals, the negative contributions of cosmopolitans to organizations are really just the other side of their positive contributions. Cosmopolitans so1netimes can be annoying. They n1ay seem to challenge and question a little too much, sometimes failing to accept the realities of politics, fiscal limitations, and a need for efficiency as valid reasons why the organization is less than perfect. They may share their criticisms of the organization with community members. They may lack much respect for authority and tend to ignore the administrative hierarchy and the chain of command. In service to clients, they may frequently take an "end justifies the means" attitude that tends to ignore rules and procedures and makes overly liberal use of exceptions to policy. They may advocate for change based on new ideas and approaches to practice, sometimes even if there is nothing essentially wrong \vith the way work is currently being performed. They may have a tendency to always think that conditions are better elsewhere. Because they are not committed to a career \vithin the organization, cosmopolitans tend to be highly mobile. If they become too unhappy, their colleagues within the professional community will help them to find work elsewhere. They may give inadequate notice about leaving, especially if they are very unhappy with the organization. They may exert considerable influence over other cosmopolitans, instigating them to the point of leaving with them or at least making them more dissatisfied with their work than they had previously been. Clearly, some mix of the two (and of less pure types} is desirable. Those organizations that are dependent on strict adherence to rules, policies, and procedures for funding and reimbursement and that must work in a relatively hostile task environment function best with a majority of staff who are locals. A public welfare orga11ization, for example, could not tolerate too 1nany cosmopolitans (and would not attract or retain then1). Neither would a state correctional facility. In contrast, a private adoption agency or private psychiatric clinic 1night attract (and retain) a majority of cosmopolitans. A certain amount of natural selection takes place-people tend to want to work in settings that value their attributes. If they don't perceive that they are appreciated, they leave to find another place to work where what they have to offer is more consistent with the needs of the organization. Managers should not be alarmed to observe that they have a preponderance of locals or cosmopolitans on their staff. It is likely to be the product of the natural selection process. Of course, if they clearly have the wrong n1ajority, they \vill have problems. Rapid changes that occur \vithin human service organizations can create a special problem of the '\vrong mix" for some managers. They may find themselves with a mix of

201

202

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities locals and cosmopolitans that was ideal under previous conditions but is now no longer well suited to the needs of the organization. For example, an organization that was just fine having mostly cosmopolitans when it received most of its funding from charitable contributions may have too many cosmopolitans and not enough locals when contributions dry up during an economic recession, and the organization is forced to seek and rely on government grants and contracts to stay in business. As a conceptual model that is not always consistent with the world as it actually exists, the local/cosmopolitan typology is of limited use. Unfortunately, it does a better job of identifying and explaining real and potential problem areas for the manager than it does of suggesting ways to address those problems. However, it still offers a contribution (along with the staff typologies discussed earlier in this chapter and the diversity issues that were examined) to our understanding of diversity within organizations.

SUMMARY The modern workplace is characterized by an increase in hwnan diversity. It comes in many different forms. Staff members differ widely in their demographic characteristics, their job descriptions, their degree of identification with their jobs, and in other important ways. While diversity adds richness to an organization, it often produces interpersonal conflict. However, if managed effectively, diversity is an important asset. It is a valued component, consistent with and supportive of the mission of most human service organizations as well as social work values. It also can contribute to the quality of services to clients. This chapter focused on several types of diversity, the advantages and proble1ns that each can bring, and on the importance of the manager in maximizing their contributions to the achievement of organizational goals. We first described those issues that must be addressed in recruiting and hiring a diverse staff. Then we examined the different types of staff members frequently seen in human service organizations. We presented their general characteristics as well as the advantages and potential problems that each can bring to an organization. While the primary focus was on diversity issues as they relate to staff members, we also looked at how the diversity of managers themselves may influence their interaction with others. Finally, a categorization of staff me1nbers (local/cosmopolitan) that has been around for a long time was presented to illustrate still another type of diversity that managers encounter within an organization. We have chosen to focus on diversity more in this chapter than in others since it most directly impacts on the recruiting and hiring of staff. However, management of diversity transcends all management functions. Good managers recognize that diversity is most beneficial to a human service organization when the organization is totally committed to diversity of all types-when all staff members acknowledge its importance and embrace it. This commitment is often reflected in the organization's mission, goals, and objectives (Chapter 5) and in its policies, rules, and procedures (Chapter 6). But, as we shall see, it is also apparent in other areas of management, for example, in promoting effective work performance (Chapter 9), in conducting staff performance evaluations (Chapter 10), and in responding to problems in job performance (Chapter 11).

Foste ring a nd Ma naging Staff Divers ity

APPLICATION You plan to start your new job on Monday. The director's administrative assistant calls you on Friday to tell you that the person who you met and who was to be your supervisor has resigned because of a serious health problem. However, the director wanted to assure you that the person \Vho was just hired as her replacement is highly competent and is looking forward to helping you get started. The administrative assistant gives you a brief description of your new supervisor. Read each of the four possible descriptions below. As you read each one, quickly write down five adjectives that come to mind for that individual. His name is Wayne Davis, but everyone calls him "W.G ~' He is a 1985 graduate of the University of Alabama and he earned an MSW in 2000 from the University of Georgia. He is known to be a big football fan, hunter, and fishern1an. He has over 15 years' supervisory experience as a probation officer and in hvo public social welfare agencies. Her name is Yolanda Jones. She holds a BA from Spellman College and is a 2006 MSW graduate of Howard University. She worked in Washington, D.C., as an eligibility worker and supervisor in the Department of Social Services for ten years prior to going back to school to earn her graduate degree. Her name is Hannah Goldstein. She is a native of New York and holds a BA from Hunter College and an MSW from NYU. She has worked in some very prestigious hospitals as a social work supervisor and is a licensed family therapist. She also recently taught an elective on hypnotherapy at NYU. H er name is Han Xi Fu. She holds a BS degree from Peking University and an MSW from Southern Theological Seminary. She just completed her social work Ph.D. degree and plans to start work on a second doctorate in public health in the fall. She has over ten years of supervisory experience in a variety of American social agencies.

1. Were all of the individuals that were described qualified for the job of supervisor? As you read each respective description, what image came to mind? Was it a stereotype? 2. Were the adjectives that you wrote down for each individual positive or negative? 3. Which individual would you most look forward to being your supervisor? How demographically similar or different is this individual from yourself? 4. Which individual would you least look forward to being your supervisor? How demographically similar or different is this individual fro1n yourself? 5. Now compare your answers to the first four questions to the answers of the other people who completed this exercise. In what ways are they similar and in what ways are they different?

203

Chapter 9

Promoting a Productive Work Environment Learning Outcomes At the end of this chapter, you should be able to: • Explain what is meant by the phrase. "A satisfied need is no longer a motivator." • List other factors (besides individual motivation) that influence staff members' job performance. • Explain how membership in a work group can result in either an increase or a decrease in a staff member's productivity. • List the different formats that supervision can employ, and the advantages and disadvantages of each.

at different staff types bring to an organization (demographic characteristics, formal education, credentials, life experiences) is important. However, once they start working, much of what they do and how they do it will be influenced by their work environ1nent. As managers, we have a responsibility to assume an active role in shaping the work environment so that the behaviors of staff members are consistent with the goals of the organization and the needs of its clients. What conditions increase the likelihood that staff members will be productive and that clients \vill receive quality services? What we know about the characteristics of"good workers:' no matter what their job description, provides some hints for us. Some of their characteristics are largely beyond the control of the manager. For example, we know that good workers are likely to be physically and emotionally healthy. They also tend not to be preoccupied with their own problems or those of loved ones. However, there are other characteristics of good workers that managers can promote at least to some degree, primarily through creating a healthy organizational climate. Good workers feel positively about the organization and its goals. They are proud to tell others >vhere they work. They respect and work cooperatively with coworkers. They are knowledgeable about their job and how to meet its demands. They also have job security (their jobs are safe) and they are confident that what they are doing is correct (ethical) and makes an important contribution to achieving the organization's goals.

UNDERSTANDING INDIVIDUAL MOTIVATION An important determinant of staff members' behaviors and attitudes toward their work is their individual motivation-the needs that they attempt to meet through their work. As social workers, we are accustomed to helping clients meet many of their needs. We have no

204

Pro1noting a Productive Work Environment similar obligation to meet the individual needs of staff members-they are not our prime beneficiary (Chapter 2). So, why do managers concern themselves at all with staff members' needs and seeing that they are met to the degree possible? It is because, if staff members' needs can be met, they are more likely to be good workers, people who provide better services to our clients-our prime beneficiary. We have all probably heard someone remark in disgust that "he has no motivation:· The speaker may have been a teacher, a parent, a volunteer coordinator, or a manager. The remark provides a way for the speaker to vent his or her frustration, but it is not an accurate description of reality. It might have been more accurate for that person to have said, "I cannot seem to identify what motivates him;' or "I have not yet been able to use n1y knowledge of his motivation to increase his productivity;' or even, "what motivates me has no effect on him:' However, everyone is motivated by something. People with no motivation at aU would not survive for long. They would not get out of bed, would stop eating, and would soon die. We have emphasized a belief that the knowledge and co1npetencies required to perform the management activities of the social worker often are siinilar to those needed for the performance of management activities. Effective use of the knowledge of motivation is a "people skill" that is certainly an asset to the counselor or therapist or to the macro-level practitioner. But, it is equally valuable for the manager. There is no shortage of research on human motivation. It did not take long for managers and students of organizational behavior to notice that workers do not all seem to be equally driven or motivated by the Sanle needs and forces. This realization Canle in part as a response to the scientific management theories of Frederick Taylor and others (Chapter 3). Taylor's theories, the reader will recall, were dependent on a belief in the existence of"economic man:· that is, the belief that money is the primary motivator of workers. The eventual recognition of the limits of Taylor's theories led other theoreticians to the conclusion that Taylor's belief about motivation was at best an overgeneralization and at worst a gross misunderstanding. Subsequent beliefs about motivation tended to emphasize the diversity of needs and forces that influence an illdividual's behavior. We will look at a few of the better-kno\vn theories of motivation to see what each has to say to the manager.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs One of the more familiar theories is attributed to Abraham Maslo•v (1908-1970). 1 Maslow's hierarchy of needs is generally illustrated by a pyramid containillg five categories or levels of needs. They are, ill ascending order, physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualization. The choice of a pyranlid to illustrate the various need levels is a reflection of Maslow's belief that n1any persons find themselves stalled at the first (physiological) level, fewer are functioning at the second (safety) level, fewer yet at the third level, and so on. In fairness to Maslow, his hierarchy \vas developed at a time (following the Great Depression) when this may have been a more accurate description of the distribution of people and \vhat motivates then1 than is probably true today. We now believe that, at least ill human service organizations, most people have their most basic needs already met and that many more than just a few persons (including many professionals) are n1otivated by a need for self-actualization. Thus, some students of organizations suggest that an upside-down pyranlid might be a more accurate portrayal today. The five levels reflect what Maslo\v believed \Vere the prin1ary motivators seen among individuals. People who have not satisfactorily acquired the basic necessities of Life (food, clothing, shelter) are motivated by offers that promise to help meet their physiological needs.

205

206

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities Having met these most basic of needs, people might "graduate" to the safety-need level. Here, motivators take the form of protection from threat or danger or loss of what has been acquired. For individuals who have met their safety needs and have thus reached the third (social) level needs reflect a preoccupation with the question, "What do others think of me?" Affiliation and acceptance are primary motivators at this level. Belonging is of utJnost importance, and the promise of being able to fit in is a powerful influence on behavior. At the fourth (esteem) level, the important question is more likely to be, "What do I think of myself?" An individual at this level is driven by a need for self-esteem. Recognition, status, and prestige are important, but only because of their potential for enhancing what is most sought, namely high self-esteem and a good feeling about oneself. The fifth level (self-actualization) is the highest need level. It involves the use of one's talents, challenge, creativity, and the opportunity for working to full potential. People operating at this need level would have satisfactorily met all of their lowerlevel needs; thus, appeals to lower-level needs would no longer be motivators for them. The idea that people are motivated by different needs, or even that the needs are hierarchical in nature, was really nothing new. Maslow's major contribution was the conclusion that human beings are only motivated by unmet needs, specifically by the need above the highest one in the hierarchy that has already been adequately met. Of course, implicit in the idea of adequate need fulfillment is the recognition that what is "enough" for one person may not be "enough" for another. People tend to have different thresholds for their need gratification. Some require relatively little in order to move on to the next higher level. Others appear to be fixated at one level and never seem to be able to meet that need. For exainple, for people who have been victims of acts of terrorism, safety needs inay always be their major motivator. Or, people who lost their jobs during the recent economic recession, exhausted their savings, and had to live on nothing but unemployment benefits for many months may require a long time (if ever) to progress beyond the lowest need level. Maslow's needs hierarchy is a useful way of explaining client behavior. For example, it helps to explain why a client who lacks the basic necessities of life (one who is operating at the physiological need level) might derive limited benefits fro1n insight therapy or counseling efforts aimed at enhancing self esteem. How could appeals to higher-level needs be expected to motivate a person who has not yet progressed beyond the first need level? Conversely, the Maslow conceptualization would also explain why an affluent client in a private independent setting might be more enticed by the affiliation with others afforded by a Friday night bingo game (an appeal to the third need level) than by the possibility of winning the $10 grand prize. After all, a satisfied need (according to Maslow) is no longer a motivator. Application of the needs hierarchy concept to the social worker's management activities is readily apparent. One staff member might be operating at one need level; another may be at another level. It is not inconceivable that all five levels might be represented among the members of a single work unit. It is incumbent on managers to know their individual staff members well enough to assess accurately which needs have been adequately n1et and which (the next higher level) have not and, therefore, are a potential source of motivation. For example, managers should be reasonably certain that staff members are operating at the highest (self-actualization) level before offering them new work responsibilities that will require more creativity and innovation. Similarly, managers should be reasonably certain that staff members are not operating at the social need level before moving them to a quiet, isolated work environment with fewer distractions, but fe,v opportunities for social interaction. Some critics of Maslow-for example, Lawler and Suttle2 -concluded that there was little to document even the existence of a needs hierarchy. They saw only two distinct

Promoting a Productive Work Environmen t types of needs, biological and nonbiological, vvith nonbiological needs emerging only after biological needs \vere met. Other researchers 3 noted that, as people move on through the life cycle, higher-level needs naturally predominate. This may occur as a result of career progression or even maturation, rather than as a result of gratification of lo\ver-level needs. Negative changes in our life situation such as losses (e.g., a health crisis, loss of a significant other) can also send us "back do\vn" the needs hierarchy to a level that had previously been gratified. Even if we acknowledge that there are many exceptions to Maslow's theory or believe that it is flawed, it still offers us some basic insights \Vorthy of reflection. Specifically, if we accept the idea that a satisfied need is not a motivator and that only unmet needs immediately above the highest level gratified are potential sources of motivation, we will be more likely to avoid costly mistakes that can damage individual and group morale. Whenever possible, we will offer rewards that appeal to workers' current need levels and not to needs that are already met or that they do not yet experience.

Herzberg's Two -Factor Theory Frederick Herzberg ( 1923-2000) is one well-known theoretician who argued against Maslow's assumption that persons who are 1notivated by a need for self-actualization are rare. In fact, his theories of motivation 4 developed in the 1950s and 1960s are based on the belief that most workers tend to be 1nore productive when efforts are implemented to build the potential for self-actualization into their jobs. Herzberg proposed that for the individual, work contains certain factors called hygiene factors and certain other factors known as motivation factors. Hygiene factors include, for example, high salary, job security, status, good working conditions, or fringe benefits. They are, of course, very nice to have. If not present, they can make an individual feel dissatisfied \vith a job. But, and this is the important point, their presence is no guarantee that a staff member \vill be highly motivated. They are not motivators; they are only potential satisfiers or (if not present) dissatisfiers. The second group, motivation factors, appeals to people's need for self-actualization. They include, for example, challenge, interesting work, freedom, responsibility, and potential for growth. Thus, they are factors that are intrinsic to the nature of the work itself. Herzberg and his colleagues worked with employers and managers to build more motivation factors into their employees' jobs. He called this job enrichment. Sometimes, Herzberg seemed to suggest that motivation factors should be built in even at the expense of hygiene factors. Not surprisingly, labor unions have not always eagerly embraced job enrichment. Generally, their efforts have been directed at gaining more of what Herzberg described as hygiene factors. However, Herzberg never said hygiene factors were unimportant-they were just not effective motivators. In fact, he believed that the ideal situation exists when both motivation and hygiene factors are present. Then, workers are both highly motivated and satisfied with their jobs. Job enrichment is not very applicable to all staff members in hu1nan service organizations; certain jobs are necessarily dull and repetitive. But Herzberg never really suggested that job enrichment is appropriate for everyone or for all work settings. He acknowledged that some jobs, by their very nature, are not candidates for job enrichment. They have little or no opportunity for creativity, self-actualization, and so forth and, in fact, a manager \VOuld want to discourage them. However, Herzberg had other solutions. One of these is job enlargement. It entails a limited expansion of an individual's

207

208

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities job responsibilities. How might job enlargement work in a human service organization? Consider the custodial staff members in a large public agency. Carpets must be vacuumed, wastebaskets must be emptied, recyclables must be collected, and so forth, usually every day. Nothing could make this challenging, stin1ulating work, and we wouldn't >vant to encourage creativity in how it is done. But there is still the potential to make the job a little more attractive. It could be enlarged to include greater input into decisions that must be made. For exa1nple, custodial staff members could help to decide (or even decide among themselves), for example, which brands of cleaning supplies and trash bags should be purchased or when carpets require shampooing. A related approach called job rotation entails building variety into a job to relieve boredom and other associated problems. In our example, this might be done by rotating custodial staff members among floors or departments at regular intervals. In this way, the tasks may not vary, but at least there is a "change of scenery" every so often and the opportunity to interact with different people. If some floors or departments are regarded as harder work or less pleasant than other settings in some other way, job rotation also ensures that no one person will be "stuck" with them more than any other custodial staff members. Would Frederick Taylor have seen the need for job enrichment, or even job enlargement or job rotation? Probably not. They would be seen as unnecessary, since Taylor thought that people were primarily motivated by money. But in the modern workplace we often see people and situations that seem to support the need for them. For example, we inay see coworkers who are not productive despite the presence of a variety of hygiene factors. Job security, relatively high pay, and the best fringe benefits in the world might not be enough to help a social worker "catch fire" in a job that is dull and repetitive and that seems to offer no challenges or no outlet for creativity. We have also seen dedicated, highly productive individuals who work for low salaries, sharing a work cubicle with another employee, and with virtually no hygiene factors present. They love their work and speak highly of it and the organization. We might speculate that their job is probably rich in challenge, freedom, opportunity for professional growth, and/or other motivation factors as described by Herzberg. What is the message here for the social work manager? Many of the professionals and paraprofessionals with whom we work might be expected to seek gratification for their self-actualization needs. After all, few people who pursue financial wealth choose to enter social work or most other helping professions. And most have adequately met their other, lower-level needs. As managers, we may be in a position to engage in a little job enrichment, even if we cannot do much about including more of the hygiene factors that we all would like. However, building in more motivation factors requires time and thought, as >veil as the support of superiors. Job enrichment may appeal to the needs of inany professionals, but the manager cannot assume that even all professionals necessarily have met their other, more basic needs and now seek responsibility, challenge, autonomy, and so on. Some do not. For them, opportunities for self-actualization may be more resented than welcomed, especially if they are perceived as "just piling on more work;' or being offered instead of such benefits as raises or other hygiene factors. Of course, people in the other types of jobs described in the previous chapter (e.g., paraprofessionals or support staff) may respond to efforts at job enrichment in the same way. There also are some people who have a strong need for self-actualization, but they may not seek to gratify it through their work. They may be amateur artists or gourmet cooks

Promoting a Productive Work Environment

209

or they may restore old cars or make their own furniture as an outlet for their creativity. If so, they may seek nothing more than good pay from their job-enough to support the costs of their creative outlets. They would not likely be spurred to new heights of productivity by efforts to enrich their job. The only enrichment they may want is through their paycheck! In addition, the behaviors of staff me1nbers in the workplace can easily be misinterpreted if we assume that they are directly related to their primary needs. For example, not everyone who seeks a promotion or volunteers to work overti1ne does so because they are motivated by a need for self-actualization. They may simply view the promotion or the overtime as a 1neans to an end. Perhaps, the promotion will carry a salary increase that will enable the staff member to buy the new car that she wants. Or the overtime pay will help her to meet the extra expenses that a new baby in the family has brought. Conversely, an individual who turns down a promotion offer or one who refuses to work overtime may also be motivated by something outside the organization. Perhaps, the pron1otion would entail travel and more time away from his family or the overtime would mean that he could not take full advantage of the basketball season's tickets that he just bought. Unless they are careful, managers can easily err in interpreting and responding to what they perceive to be staff members' needs. Or, they may accurately assess the source of their motivation, but wrongly assume that the workplace is \vhere they endeavor to meet their needs. Not all employees perceive their job as central to their identity or ilieir major source of need gratification. It is simply a part of their lives, albeit a necessary one. This is OK. Many staff members who think of ilieir work as "just a job" nevertheless can make valuable contributions to the organization.

Case Example

L

amar was bright, energetic, and upwardly mobile. At age 28, he was the director of a large employee assistance organization (EAP) that employed a professional staff of 24 and had EAP contracts with several large manufacturing firms. He was also well respected in the social work professional community. Lamar's organization was only four years old. In itially, he hired three other social workers to provide services. All were personal friends who he knew well and respected. As the demand for services increased and as new contracts came along, the organ ization had grown quickly. However. Lamar continued to take an active part in all personnel matters and in decisions related to work assignments. Wh ile he no longer knew his staff members as well as he had when the organization

was smaller. Lamar couldn't help but notice one of the newer social workers, Bruce. He observed that Bruce was highly productive and seemed to be well-liked. Two senior staff members also had come to him with praise for Bruce's attitude and the quality of his work. He volunteered to take on new cases despite carrying a full caseload. He came to work early and often worked late. He never seemed too busy to listen to other staff members' problems or to just allow them to vent their frustrations. Lamar found himself wishing he could hire ten other social workers just like Bruce- people with Bruce's competence, enthusiasm . and dedication. Lamar was not surprised when he read Bruce's performance eva luation (completed by his immed iate supervisor). It was the best that he had ever seen.

(continued)

210

Case Example

Part 1\vo: The Major Managemen t Activities

Continued

As a manager, Lamar knew the importance of rewarding his staff members for exceptionally good work. He knew that someone as competent as Bruce would be very marketable elsewhere, and he did not wish to lose him to another organization. Lamar called Bruce in for a conference to discuss his future with the organization. He began by complimenting him on his high performance evaluation and the other favorable comments that had been made by his coworkers. He told Bruce that he really appreciated his work and his positive attitude toward it. and he assured him that it would not go unrewarded. Bruce clearly savored all the praise. Lamar went on to describe the other two EAP contracts that he had bid on and hoped to receive. He volunteered that, while he could make no prom ises, Bruce was being considered for the position of coordinator for the next contract received. This would be a promotion that would entail considerably more money, status. and the opportun ity to supervise four or more new staff members who would be hired. Bruce's response was, "I'm not sure that I'm ready for that!" Lamar dism issed his reaction as humility, or, perhaps, just a way for Bruce to fish for another compliment. Lamar had little doubt that a high achiever like Bruce would jump at the chance for a promotion when the next coordinator position became available. A new major EAP contract was signed in August. It was scheduled for full implementation on January 15. The staff members were informed about it in early September. Three other current staff members immediately applied for the coordinator job, but Bruce did not. Lamar asked for his letter of application and received it a week later. During October and November, plans proceeded for the new EAP. During that time, Lamar began to receive complaints about the quality of Bruce's work. Bruce seemed far less enthusiastic; he took several sick days with no evidence of any med ical problems.

What had once been the organization's most highly motivated and competent employee now looked no better or worse than any other staff member. When by December 1st Lamar had to make a decision on the choice of the new coordinator. he could not in good conscience justify selecting Bruce for the job. He chose another applicant. Not one to avoid the more unpleasant tasks of management, Lamar called each of the applicants who was not selected (including Bruce) into his office individually to announce his decision before it became public knowledge. While he didn't relish this task with any of the other three, he especially dreaded it with Bruce because of their earlier conversation. He need not have been concerned. Bruce seemed genuinely relieved. He confided to Lamar that he really liked his current coworkers and his present job, and had no desire to supervise others. Shortly afterward, Lamar again began to hear positive comments about the quality of Bruce's work.

Discussion Questions 1. Should Lamar have continued to be involved in all personnel matters himself after his organization had grown much larger? Why or why not7 2.

What clues did Lamar miss that might have told him that a promotion for Bruce would not be a good idea?

3. With reference to Maslow's need hierarchy, at what level did Bruce seem to be functioning? How did Lamar misread it? 4. Why did Bruce's work change after his first meeting with Lamar? 5. Why would Herzberg's strategies for job enrichment probably be ineffective in appealing to Bruce's individual motivation? 6. Why do you think Bruce did not say he was just not interested in the coordinator job when Lamar first discussed it with him?

Pro1noti ng a Productive Work Environment

McClelland's Needs Theory David McClelland ( 1917-1998) vie\ved individual n1otivation a little differently from either Maslow or Herzberg. His early research suggested that there are basically three different organizational "types"5 \Vhose behavior suggests the predominant need that each is attempting to meet. McClelland's conceptualization is an appealing one for social workers \'Vho have likely seen clients, CO\Vorkers, professors, and relatives or friends who seem to provide very good examples of each of the three types. According to McClelland, people tend to be motivated by a need for ( 1) po\ver, (2) affiliation, or (3) achievement. Whereas Maslow's theory suggests that people can gratify a predominant need and move on to another, McClelland's theory views people as more fixated. Their predominant need is, in effect, insatiable. People motivated by a need for power are likely to gravitate toward positions and situations that promise control and influence over others. They enjoy exercising power and never seem to get enough of it. As personality types, they are outspoken, forceful, and de1nanding; these characteristics frequently are revealed in their interactions with others. Friendships may be pursued, but primarily as a means to acquire n1ore power rather than as a source of pleasure or gratification in their own right. People with a strong need for affiliation have an approach to human relationships that is almost 180 degrees opposite from that of the power-motivated individual. T heir activities seem to be aimed at being loved and accepted and at avoiding rejection. They enjoy a!J kinds of friendly interaction and are extremely uncomfortable when interpersonal conflict occurs. They do not want power over or to control others, because to do so might damage a friendship or get in the way of forming yet another one. Persons with a need for affiliation are inclined to be nonjudgmental and giving, but, of course, they give primarily in order to receive in return. Their need is readily apparent in the extremes to which they wi!J go in order to be liked and to avoid offending others. Individuals driven by a strong need for achievement crave success, but may never really believe that they have achieved it. They fear failure more tlian anything, and it is this specter tliat drives them on when, by most outside assessments, tliey have already "made it:' They often have some unattainable goal for vvhat is tlieir definition of "real success:' It guarantees tliat they inevitably fall short, but tliey never stop trying to attain it. As we might point out in relation to Maslow's needs hierarchy, tliere are people whose behaviors seem to reflect the presence of two or more of these needs at different times or in different situations, or even simultaneously. But that does not negate tile value of McClelland's observations for our exa1nination of individual motivation. If we assume that, at least for a sizable number of staff members, one of tlie three needs consistently predominates, certain implications emerge. The predominance of any of McClelland's tilree needs can make an individual unpleasant to be around on occasion. But all three types of individuals have the potential to make important contributions to organizational goal achievement and to client services. As we suggested in the discussion of tlie merits of locals and cosmopolitans (Chapter 8), a good mix has the potential to constitute a very effective work group. What are tlie contributions of each to the organization? People witli a strong need for power can be expected to work enthusiastically and effectively in a position such as a supervisory one tilat grants tliem power over tlieir own activities and tile activities of others. Ho\vever, if their motivation is particularly transparent and/ or tiley seem to

211

212

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities enjoy telling others what to do a little too much, subordinates may quickly grow to resent them. A higher level manager will need to monitor their activities closely to be certain that they are not unnecessarily heavy-handed or abrasive in their interaction with their subordinates. People high in need for affiliation have a different contribution to make to an organization. They generally have acquired excellent social skills-they are good "schmoozers:' These skills can be useful in promoting a pleasant work environment within the organization. They also can help to promote good relationships with colleagues in other organizations and other elements of the task environment. Their diplomacy can be a real asset. They will work well when assigned tasks that promote close friendships and pleasant social interaction. But they may also be unable to function well in isolation or when interpersonal conflict occurs. They will often make personal sacrifices in order to please their bosses and to help out when needed. For example, they might not mind work-related telephone calls at home or resent unscheduled 5:00 PM walk-ins from clients. The negative side to this is that their need for affiliation can sometimes cause them to be too congenial than they should be. They might have difficulty in saying "no" when "no" is the correct response in working with colleagues or with clients. Their need to give and to receive also can occupy great amounts of their time and efforts. They might be avoided by some more task oriented coworkers, who become weary of their never-ending efforts to like and be liked. Staff members who possess a strong need for achievement are, like the other two types, a mixed blessing for the manager. They are likely to work hard at those tasks that promise individual recognition or some tangible indicator of their success. They are likely to accomplish much that is good for the organization while attempting to meet their need. However, they also may be hypercritical of and expect an unreasonable amount of achievement from their subordinates and coworkers. This can be demoralizing for subordinates by causing them to feel as though what they are doing is never good enough. It also can antagonize and alienate coworkers, and create an unpleasant organizational climate. McClelland continued to do research and to refine his theories of motivation during the years since he first published his earlier observations. In the 1980s he suggested that there may be a fourth group of motivators-avoidance motives-that may also provide the primary impetus for a person's behavior on the job. He noted that, for example, an obsession with fear of failure, fear of rejection, fear of success, and fear of powerlessness seem to be major influences on the behaviors of people in the workplace. McClelland conceded, however, that evidence for avoidance motives being d istinctly different from "the big three" that he identified earlier had not been found. In fact, critics have suggested that at least some of his avoidance motives may be little more than the "other side of the same coin;' and not an additional predominant need at all. It could be argued, for example, that fear of failure may be the same as need for achievement and fear of rejection may be the same as n eed for affiliation.

Other Theories of Individual Motivation The motivation theories of Maslow, Herzberg, and McClelland all seem to suggest that the level of motivation of individual staff members is determined by how well the nature of their jobs meets their primary need. Other theorists who studied motivation and the role of managers had a slightly different understanding of

Pro1noting a Productive Work Environment motivation. For example, Victor Vroom ( 1932- ) concluded that organizationaJ behavior is a conscious choice that people make in which they attempt to maximize pleasure and minimize pain and discomfort. Vroom suggested that staff members will be motivated to be good workers if they have a strong desire to meet an important need, but only if they believe that good work performance will produce a desirable re\~ard, one that is commensurate \vith the efforts required to produce it. People ask themselves both, "What are the consequences of good (or not-so-good) \vork performance?" and, "Ho'v desirable (or undesirable) are these consequences for me?" Still other theories of motivation emerged from the work of behavioral psychologists such as B. F. Skinner ( 1904-1990). They relate to the concept of reinforcement-a tendency to repeat those behaviors that have resulted in positive consequences in the past (and to avoid those that have had negative consequences). It is not difficult to see how the various theories of motivation overlap, and how they seem to build on each other. In fact, it could be argued, they are all very similar. Nevertheless, each contributes something unique to our understanding of"what motivates" staff members within organizations and suggests ways that managers can shape the work environment to appeal to their sources of n1otivation. They are useful in assessing individual staff members' motivation and in pron1oting appropriate and productive behavior.

OTHER FACTORS THAT AFFECT JOB PERFORMANCE As social workers, we cannot underestimate the importance of individual human needs and the drives for their gratification. But \Ve kno\v that certain other factors (in addition to individuaJ needs) tend to affect the behavior of professionals and other staff members within organizations. Human behavior is complex and often unpredictable, but is more understandable if "ve view it as more than just the product of individual needs. We now examine some other influences on the behavior of staff members \vithin organizations.

Professio nal Values and Ethics One of the objectives of social work education is the socialization of students. It is expected that those who complete professional programs will have developed certain competencies (Chapter 1). However, they also will have inculcated the values and ethics of our profession. 6 Our professional values are what we as professionals believe in, and what we believe to be right or wrong. Our ethics reflect what, often based on these values, we as professionals will and will not do. Generally, our professional values serve as positive motivators; that is, they encourage us to do what we believe to be consistent with them. Professional ethics serve more as a constraint or limitation on our behavior. Ethical professionals simply will not do something that their profession has defined as unethical, such as exploiting relationships with clients for their personal gain or using them as research participants without acquiring their voluntary informed consent. The motivation of staff members to perform or not to perform a requested task or to devote more or less energy to its completion also can be affected by their professional values and ethics. Staff members are likely to be highly motivated to perform it if the

213

214

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities manager's requests and their own professional values and ethics are complementary and mutually reinforcing. For example, a policy that appears to be consistent with clients' rights to self-determination (a professional value) is likely to meet with enthusiastic compliance. However, resistance to so1ne other rule or policy can be anticipated if it appears to impinge on clients' rights to self-determination or conflict >vith some other professional value. In those situations in which a manager must ask a professional staff member to enforce a rule or policy that appears (from the staff member's perspective) to be in conflict \vith professional values or ethics, some explanation by the manager often can help. For example, suppose that a supervisor tells a staff member that she must deny services to an applicant for them because the applicant lacks adequate health insurance, lives just outside a certain geographical area, or because the applicant's underlying problem is one that is not consistent with the mission of the organization. The staff member, a social worker, might view this as insensitive, excessively rigid, and not consistent \vith social work values, since it seems to constitute a failure to help a person who clearly needs assistance. Unless a good explanation is offered, she would be reluctant to deny services to the applicant, and might even refuse to do so. Her professional values are an obstacle to doing what must be done (from the organizational perspective). However, if the manager makes the extra effort to explain the origin of the organization's rule and how it can actually make it possible to provide services to a greater nwnber of other clients (an outcome consistent >vith professional values), the social worker is much more likely to willingly comply >vith the request. Professional values influence staff members' behaviors in another way, a desirable one. Staff members who are aware of funding cutbacks, mandatory layoffs or furloughs, or other events that jeopardize client service delivery may set aside self-interest, at least in the short run. As professionals, they believe that as prime beneficiaries of the organization, clients should not have to pay a price for conditions beyond their control. Thus they would try to do whatever is required in order to avoid shortchanging client services. An appeal to professional values by the manager may result in professional staff "going the extra mile:' For example, they might forego professional travel or delay using vacation time in order that a program can continue to function. However, no professional is likely to continue to respond to this type of appeal if it is made too often or if it begins to be perceived as a device to increase efficiency at staff inembers' expense. The manager should be perceived as advocating for the best interests of clients, but not by exploiting staff members.

Influence of the Work Group When we become a part of a work group, it becomes a powerful influence on our attitudes and behaviors. Thus it can influence the quality of our work performance. In a healthy work group, group norms and standards foster behavior that is desirable for the organization and its clients. In an unhealthy one, desirable behaviors may be discouraged and undesirable ones fostered. Staff members invariably adopt many of the behaviors and attitudes of other group members, but they also exert an influence on them. Work group membership also affects how an individual staff member relates to other groups, to the individuals \vithin them, and to bosses and subordinates. Relationships with other groups and individuals can run the full range from cooperation and mutual respect-to a counterproductive, overt antagonism.

Pro1noting a Productive Work Environment

Competition No matter how well a manager organizes staff members into work groups and no matter how much he or she attempts to foster a spirit of cooperation among these groups, some competition is inevitable. It is not always dysfunctional. Some competition promotes a sense of identity and group loyalty in individuals. But, as we have probably all witnessed, excessive competitiveness can also result in \Vasted energy, and the absence of desirable team"l-vork and cooperation. We are familiar "1-vith both the benefits and the costs of competition. The classic studies 7 of competition performed by Muzafer Sherif (1906- 1988) in a children's summer camp are often cited. On the positive side, Sherif concluded that the presence of competition between groups (as long as it remains close) promotes task-oriented behavior, greater structure, and demands for conformity and loyalty within each group. These can be very beneficial to the organization. The costs of this kind of co1npetition were also identified. An increase in hostility between groups occurs, along with decreased communication and stereotyping of in embers of the other group. Competition among individual staff members and between groups, while inevitable, can and should be kept at a tolerable level where it has the potential to support rather than to threaten work productivity. Competition is most likely to degenerate into nonproductive conflict (discussed next) if individuals and groups perceive a situation in which the gain of one is necessarily accompanied by the loss of the other individual or group. This situation has been described as a zero-sum game.8 A zero-sum game means, literally, that a situation exists in which the total amount of gain for all individuals involved in competition must equal zero- one side can gain only if others lose the same amount. Zero-sum games do exist. Budgeting situations in homes or in organizations are good examples of zero-sum games. If there is only so much money to spend, spending an amount for one activity means that there is that much less available for another activity. In organizations, a commitment to the use of merit raises (e.g., dividing a pool of money for salary increases based on recent performance evaluations) results in a zerosum game. If one staff member receives more than "his share:' another will have to get less than "her share:· Fortunately, not all situations in which there is competition are zero-sum games. In fact, much of the antagonism that exists between groups within organizations may occur because persons erroneously perceive the existence of a zero-swn game, even though one does not exist. When it exists, it is a good idea to acknowledge its presence. For example, professional staff may be in competition for the time and assistance of information technology support staff members. While working exclusively with one individual or group they are not going to be able to work with another. This is a zero-swn game situation, and any nianager who suggests otherwise is likely to insult the intelligence of staff and to risk his or her own credibility. When a zero-swn game does not exist, however, it is often helpful to point out why it does not. For example, it is not unusual for professionals in two different service units of a human service organization to act as though there is a limited amount of praise and recognition available to be dispensed by the manager. Proceeding on this assumption, staff members may spend a considerable amount of time trying to discredit the work of those in the other unit. In such situations, managers need to stress the absence of a zero-sum game. They should help staff members to see that a good job done by one individual or group reflects positively on, and therefore benefits, all members of the organization.

215

216

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

Conflict As was noted in Chapter 8, increased diversity among staff members almost invariably produces an increased amount of conflict. Of course, some conflict may not be bad; there can also be benefits to conflict.9 For example, it can make staff members more involved in activities and less apathetic on the job and can spotlight issues and areas of legitimate professional disagreement. Unfortunately, conflict can also reveal individuals and groups at their worst, more concerned with >vinning an internal struggle than in compromising and/or doing what is in the best interest of the organization. An example of this occurred on the national level in 2013 in the l l 3th U.S. Congress when efforts by members of political parties to defund or preserve intact the Affordable Health Care Act made it impossible to pass a budget and many government functions shut down. Even if we are firm believers in the benefits of conflict, we must concede that too much conflict or conflict over the wrong issues can be dysfunctional within human service organizations (and government). A manager will, at some time or another, conclude that conflict is excessive. It is preoccupying staff members and diverting the valuable energies of those who should be applying them toward organizational goal achievement. When internal squabbles interfere with good decision making and when personal loyalties take priority over the best interests of both the organization and its clients, the manager must intervene to reduce conflict. One possible method of conflict reduction involves the identification of a common goal, one that transcends individual or group interests and the repeated reminder of the existence of that goal. If the manager can find a goal that everyone endorses (not always an easy task if conflict is intense), conflicts will so1netimes be set aside. For example, the manager might remind warring staff members of the need to complete and submit a grant application that, if approved, would result in a new needed program. A strategy to achieve this goal could then be developed, one that requires them to work cooperatively toward its achievement, perhaps resulting in a reduction of conflict. A second tactic for conflict reduction involves the identification of a common enemy. This approach is not new to students of political science or of world history. It was used by Adolph Hitler to help unify German factions after World War I. More recently, it was used by American presidents to justify the invasions of Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and by militant Islamic leaders in the Middle East to organize resistance to it. Frequently, in human service organizations, it is not necessary to fabricate a common enemy or to vilify some outside group. Threatened budget cuts and other threats by a hostile task environment can quickly make internal conflict appear trivial if the manager makes staff members aware of them. A common theme of managers on such occasions is, "This is no time for internal bickering;' as it clearly is not. (When is a good time?) If no such acute threat or common enemy exists, a skillful manager still may be able to help staff members to remember that human services are often offered within a chronically hostile task environ1nent whose me1n bers are often looking for a reason to criticize the organization. Internal conflict provides one. A reminder about the presence of an unsupportive task environment can serve as an impetus to force interaction and to begin negotiation between warring factions. It can help them to see that "the enemy" stands to gain the most from continued conflict.

Group Cohesiveness Cohesiveness refers to how well a group "sticks together:' and has a unity of purpose. Members are bound to both other members and to the group. Understanding of it and how it varies among work groups is necessary to understanding how group membership

Promoting a Productive Work Environment impacts on the behavior of staff members. 10 Work groups can range fron1 un-cohesive, often with ambiguous boundaries, loose structure, and no intragroup loyalty, to highly cohesive with clear boundaries, tight structure, and strong intragroup loyalty. Cohesiveness, as we are using the term here, relates to a number of identifiable factors that may be present within work groups to a greater or lesser degree. It refers to the sense of group solidarity that is present. It also refers to the pride of group membership and the social desirability of belonging to the group. Staff members tend to be satisfied with their ""ork when they are part of a cohesive \.vork group. They are also more likely to reflect a high commitment to achievement of group goals. The cohesive work group that is \vorking toward organizational goal achievement is usually characterized by pleasant, cooperative relationships where members readily assist each other when needed. There is a spirit of"team play:• People volunteer to help because there is a belief that what benefits one benefits the group and, ultimately, benefits all of its members. A member does not want to let the group down or to withhold information that might assist achieve1nent of group goals. Loyalty and commitment exist, both to peers and to group leaders. There is a respect for the knowledge and con1petence of others in the group. Interest in and enjoyment of most (but certainly not all) of the work is readily apparent to the outsider. A relaxed, informal atmosphere prevails in which people speak up and feel comfortable to disagree. But members listen to others' points of view and give them consideration. Disagreements occur, but they focus on issues, not personalities. Disagreements are not personalized; hidden agenda and bitterness over any past personal grievances do not surface. Some groups tend to promote cohesiveness simply by the way that they are organized. For example, smaller groups tend to be more cohesive than Larger ones. Groups in \vhich members are similar in many \.vays tend to be more cohesive than groups in which there are many differences among its members in, for example, values, beliefs, or work style. Also, groups that have existed for long periods of time are generally more cohesive than ones that have been more recently constituted. Let us assume that the manager has determined that there is general agreement between group norms and organization goals. What can be done to promote greater group cohesiveness and, indirectly, to promote desired behavior on the part of group members? For a start, it might help to enhance members' awareness of their similarities and the compatibility between at least some of their group norms and organizational goals. This can be done by enthusiastic support, reward, and commendation for group efforts and by reminding staff men1bers of just how their collective work is contributing to the organization's goal achieven1ent. Managers can also communicate clearly that they value and will reward cooperation and that they take a dim view of interpersonal conflict that jeopardizes individual and group productivity. They can e1nphasize that they expect staff members to evaluate members' positions on issues objectively and not based on their feelings toward the individual who presents them. Managers can also influence activities within work groups in several other ways that will help to promote cohesiveness. They can assign work and structure tasks in such a way that members will have to work together cooperatively to get the job done. For example, the task might depend on expertise and perspectives that are not available within any one member but that exist only if two or more members are involved. Working together and common experiences can help staff members get to know and appreciate each other's contributions, competencies, and knowledge. They can provide

217

218

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities experiences to share and memories about which to reminisce. Of course, cohesiveness will be enhanced only if previous collaboration is viewed in retrospect as positive and productive. If the experience of working together left one or more group members with the impression that other members are inco1npetent, do not carry their fair share of the work, or cannot be depended on, confidence in coworkers will be eroded and the attractiveness of belonging to the work group may actually be diminished. The message to the manager is clear: work to set up tasks that require cooperation and collaboration and that are likely to leave a positive taste for the participants, that is, tasks that have a high probability of successful completion. A manager is likely to have input into decisions or even total authority over how work groups will be stn1ctured and how they may be periodically reorganized (Chapter 7). Cohesiveness is most likely to thrive when groups remain reasonably stable. Time is required for confidence in coworkers and for desirable social bonds to develop. "Revolvingdoor" work groups with unnecessary transfers of staff members in and out of the group can be destructive of cohesiveness. They should be avoided whenever possible. Up to this point, we have discussed the desirability of promoting group cohesiveness. It would seem, on the surface at least, that work group cohesiveness is universally desirable as a way of increasing productivity. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. For example, there are some work groups that are highly cohesive, yet their cohesiveness is based primarily on shared values that pro1note minimal standards of work performance, antagonism toward other groups, and/or a hostile, passive-aggressive approach toward the manager. Or a group may be highly cohesive when, for example, it is resisting needed changes or when it is trying to get an administrator fired or to end an unpopular program. In short, cohesiveness is a desirable attribute of work groups, but only if there is agreement between group values and the goals of the organization. If this is not the case, efforts of the manager may have to be directed toward breaking up work groups or otherwise attempting to weaken group cohesiveness.

Loyalties Loyalties develop over time within organizations. Once in place, they can become powerful influences on individual and group behaviors. Loyalties, in some form or other, are always present within work situations. Appropriately focused, they contribute to organizational goal achievement. They can also present major obstacles to goal achievement if they are misplaced. Organizational loyalties can be very desirable. When employees feel good about where they work and what the organization is attempting to accomplish, organizational loyalties can serve as powerful induce1nents to do what is necessary for the good of the organization and for the organization's clients. For example, an employee or volunteer who has a strong loyalty to the organization may voluntarily postpone using leave time in order to complete a task such as the timely submission of a grant proposal or a move to new offices. Similarly, loyalty to an organization will prevent staff members from engaging in certain undesirable behaviors (e.g., ridiculing the organization in public or discussing its problems to members of the 1nedia). Managers occasionally find it useful to appeal to organizational loyalties. When they do so, they are saying, in effect, "I'1n not asking for me, but for the organization:' However, appeals to organizational loyalties should be used sparingly. If they are used frequently

Promoti ng a Productive Work Environmen t or when no real emergency exists, they can be perceived as simply a means to manipulate or to exploit staff members. Then even appropriate appeals may start to meet with resistance. Of course, personal loyalties often exist, too. Staff members may be loyal toward a peer or toward a manager. Like organizational loyalties, the loyalty to\vard a peer or a manager can promote desirable behaviors, but only if the object of their loyalty is a competent, dedicated individual \vho is committed to the mission, goals, and objectives of the organization and its programs. If he or she is not, their loyalties will be displaced, and they can actually interfere with organizational goal achievement.

SUPERVISION Most staff members want to be competent in their job performance. They want to make a contribution to the achievement of organizational goals. They are motivated by a combination of individual needs and the other influences that we have discussed. But they still need additional help son1etin1es. They can get much of it through supervision. Social work managers function as supervisors the1nselves and/or they assign others to be supervisors. There are many books that are exclusively designed to prepare the reader for the job of social work supervisor. 11 We will cover only a few of the major areas that they discuss here and add a few of our own observations fron1 social work practice. One problem that is frequently encountered in understanding supervision is the different functions that it involves. Social workers who are providers of direct services to clients are most likely to envision supervision as a process designed to provide them with insights and assistance in working with specific cases. This is most often referred to as case supervision, but it is also sometimes referred to as clinical supervision and, perhaps most accurately, as case consultation. Case supervision is based on the recognition that some particularly difficult situations require assistance from a senior professional, often one with more experience and/or a different perspective. For example, the supervisor may be more knowledgeable about what works best with a particular client problem (best practices) or may provide the perspective required to help to sort out ethical issues that might be encountered. While this is a legitimate area of supervision and a necessary one, we really cannot understand supervision within social work unless we broaden our understanding to include other interactions between supervisors and their subordinates that have only an indirect impact on services.

Supervisory Roles and Responsibilities Alfred Kadushin (1916-2014) first helped to identify other social work supervisory roles by dividing the activities of the supervisor of social workers into three slightly overlapping activities: administrative supervision, supportive supervision, and educational supervision. 12 (He addressed case consultation, in a subsequent text. 13) Altogether, these four roles provide a workable overview of supervision as a means of both influencing behavior and enhancing growth among professionals, and to a somewhat lesser degree to preprofessionals, paraprofessionals, and sometimes indigenous nonprofessionals. Kadushin's description of administrative supervision comes closest to what supervision entails in aU organizations, from human service organizations to large nlanufacturing plants, to big box stores, to fast-food restaurants. It involves such important activities as

219

220

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities work assignment and task supervision, overseeing, ensuring compliance with rules, policies, and procedures, serving as a buffer between higher-level administrators and workers, and matching of workers' competencies to tasks. It is, in fact, the primary function of social workers who supervise support staff members or who coordinate the work of volunteers. The second role that Kadushin described, supportive supervision, spotlights a major difference that historically has existed between the role of a social work supervisor and supervisors in many businesses and industries. (This is changing somewhat as managers in these areas have begun to recognize its importance.) The type of job stresses and tensions inherent in the jobs of staff members in 1nany human service organizations {e.g., in performing tasks of child protection, investigation of charges of family violence, or work with people who have a terminal illness) often dictate that much of the supervisor's time is spent in providing emotional support {not treatment or therapy!) to a supervisee. With this support, professionals can continue to function well on the job >vithout being overwhehned by the stresses that are inherent in their work. The third major role described by Kadushin, educational supervision, also represents somewhat of a departure from how people in business or industry might define supervision. The role of educator usually is not emphasized in a business or manufacturing plant. If anything, such a role may be perceived as inappropriate in that it might compromise the objectivity required to perform the major supervisory function, which is administrative supervision. But in a human service organization, the supervisor is expected to provide educational supervision not only by facilitating continuing education for subordinates {discussed in the next chapter) but also by serving as a role model and mentor, sharing with the1n what they need to know and do to grow professionally and succeed in their careers.

Attributes of Good Supervision If supervision is to be effective in promoting desirable behaviors and attitudes, administrative supervision should be fair and impartial and should be consistent with appropriate personnel standards and practices. If a staff member is a social worker, for example, supervisory procedures should be consistent with the current NASW Standards for Social Work Personnel Practices and/or other local, state, or federal standards that apply. If staff members are unionized, the manager must adhere to union supervisory requirements. Not only is this in the best interests of the employee but it also leaves the organization and its staff in a defensible position if employee grievance procedures are later initiated Good supervision constantly stresses the need for high-quality and ethical client services. To this end, staff members are encouraged to acquire the knowledge and skills to become more competent in their work by attending workshops and symposia. Subsequently, they should be assigned tasks that require the use of their newly acquired knowledge and skills. When it is desirable, they should be encouraged to exercise their own professional judgment in decision making and supported in their decisions. Good supervision provides both practical assistance and a role model for staff members. It reminds them of their responsibility to do their jobs in a way consistent with organizational goals and objectives. Good supervision may also serve as a reminder to staff members that they have a responsibility not only for their own growth but for the development of ne\v knowledge for others to use. Supervisors should stress the need for professionals to base their work on available knowledge (evidence-based practice) and to be active in the regular, ongoing evaluation

Pro1noting a Productive Work Environment of their practice effectiveness. If supervision is to be effective in promoting growth, it should create a climate for problem solving in which errors can be candidly discussed in a nonthreatening climate. Both the supervisee and his or her supervisor should feel comfortable in sharing needed information.

Alternative Supervisory Models The \vord supervision in social work usually tends to connote a one-on-one type of relationship with a senior person with the same or additional credentials. However, in making provisions for the supervision necessary for employee growth, there are several viable options to the traditional supervisor-supervisee model. They include: 1.

Use of Preceptors. Although ideally it might be best for a staff me1nber to be

supervised by a person who is from the same discipline and who has recently or is currently engaged in performing so1ne of the same tasks, this is not always possible. As managers, social workers sometimes recognize that opportunities for growth of a staff me1nber can be limited by receiving all supervision from any one person. The supervisor may lack the knowledge and experience to supervise the staff 1nember in activities that are in1portant to that individual's growth. For example, a social worker in an inpatient mental health setting may be interested in learning more about a certain type of group treatment being offered. The only person who facilitates these groups is a psychologist. Jn order not to prevent her from having this experience and growth opportunity, the supervisor may ask the psychologist to assume the role of her preceptor, thus delegating part of the task of educational supervision to the psychologist. The social worker might attend one of the groups and discuss it with the psychologist afterwards. Ho\vever, the responsibility for supervising all of her other professional activities and for providing administrative and supportive supervision would remain with the social work supervisor, who would also continue to conduct h er staff performance evaluations (Chapter 10). 2. Supervision of Subordinates in a Group. Supervisors may choose to carry out their supervisory activities in a group setting, rather than one-on-one, with all or some of their supervisees present. T his for1n of supervision is an appealing alternative for a number of reasons. For one thing, it is efficient. Supervisees may share many of the same needs for administrative and educational supervision. By addressing the1n in a group, supervisors can save much of the time and effort that would be required to do it several tiines during oneon-one supervision. If several supervisees seem to be at about the same level of professional develop1nent and see1n to require essentially the same type of assistance, group supervision can work well. Group supervision can also provide the opportunity for staff members to learn from each other and from the supervisor in a relatively nonthreatening environment. They can share relevant learning experiences, pooling knowledge in a way that provides access to more knowledge than the supervisor alone might be able to provide. On the negative side, certain supervisory requirements cannot easily be addressed using group supervision. For example, it may not meet legal requirements for child protection cases or court-ordered intervention for other types of client problems. Sometimes, it is also not the best choice for providmg supportive supervision. For example, a staff member encountermg the stresses of the job can find support through group supervision if others

221

222

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities will admit to having or having had similar problems. But if others deny having the same difficulties, she can be made to feel even more overwhelmed and embarrassed. 3. Group Supervision. Group supervision, where the line supervisor is present but everyone participates in the supervision of each other, is also sometimes used when staff members are quite experienced and have demonstrated a high level of competence. It is a variation of participative management and thus has some of the same advantages and disadvantages. The primary responsibility for administrative supervision remains with the supervisor. However, the responsibility for the other types of supervision (supportive, educational, and case supervision) is shared >vith other members of the group. While group supervision can work well with the right combination of individuals who understand boundary issues, it also can have its problems. The supervisor's advice, admonition, or even directive can begin to be perceived as having no more force than the opinion of other persons in the group and, sometimes, even less than that of an outspoken coworker. It can beco1ne difficult for group members to discern when the supervisor speaks from a position of expertise or of authority (which the supervisor continues to possess) and when the supervisor is just offering an observation or suggestion as a fellow professional. When group supervision is used, a competition for power and influence may also develop among supervisees. Individuals may seek to "posture" for the position of most knowledgeable or most competent (even to the point of not reporting their own struggles accurately if they might undermine this position). These and other issues reflect the danger of a kind of role-blurring that can occur if group supervision is not used with extreme caution. 4. Multidisciplinary Supervision. Another form of supervision, multidisciplinary supervision, is an option that remains popular because of the use of multidisciplinary teams (Chapter 7) in many medical and psychiatric work settings. Some supervision (most often, case consultation) is provided within a team consisting of persons from various disciplines such as medicine, psychology, nursing, occupational therapy, and social work. On the surface, this would seem like just a variation of group supervision with different characters but, because of the power differential that exists, it is probably closer to what we described as supervision in a group. For example, in a medical setting, the relationship between the physician and other tea1n members is often one of case supervisor and his or her supervisees. When social workers receive case supervision and/or administrative supervision as part of a multidisciplinary team, some supervision (e.g., supportive and educational supervision) should continue to be provided by a social worker, and staff members' job performance should still be evaluated by people who understand both the responsibilities and the values and ethics that govern their conduct as professionals. However, this can result in a problem. Staff members can easily lose respect for the social worker who maintains administrative supervisory authority but who has relinquished most of the activities of day-to-day supervision to so1neone in another discipline. For example, when staff performance evaluations are even mildly critical, there is a tendency for professionals to dismiss any constructive criticism with a response of, "What does she know? Dr. says I do great work." A social worker assigned to work on a multidisciplinary team on a medical specialty floor in a large hospital illustrates both the advantages and dangers of interdisciplinary supervision. The specialty might be neonatal intensive care, oncology, or an eating-disorder

Pro1noting a Productive Work Environment unit. Such an assignment offers the kind of learning experience within a specialized area that is not available within a more generic assignment. Clearly, the physician who is in charge of the unit is more knowledgeable than is the director of social services in the area of specialization. What better choice to assume the lead role of case supervisor? But ho\V much supervisory responsibility should be assumed and at what cost? How does the director of social services avoid a situation where social workers assume the identity of "oncology therapist" or some other attractive role that suggests a primary loyalty to the discipline of the physician in charge? How can one ensure that when value conflicts occur between medical and social \vork values (e.g., in helping a patient to decide whether she wishes to undergo doctor-recomn1ended chemotherapy that has little potential to save her life), the social worker will seek professional consultation and support from the director of social services rather than simply deferring to the physician? Addressing questions such as these is not easy. It requires a considerable amount of thought and a dose of diplomacy. When 1nultidisciplinary supervision is used, there is the potential for professional identity to become confused. Thus managers may need to regularly stress the importance of maintaining one's professional identity while benefiting fron1 the opportunity to learn from those in other disciplines. 5. Remote Supervision. Many social workers find themselves working in small organizations or in rural areas where there is no possibility of having an onsite supervisor who has the necessary professional credentials. Even in large urban areas, some organizations (most notably medical and psychiatric facilities) have sought to become more cost-efficient by creating a flatter organization chart and eliminating the jobs of supervisors and redeploying those who previously held them into direct client services. Staff n1ay have no supervisor per se, at least not for supportive, educational, and, possibly, case supervision. However, this doesn't mean that decisions must be made unilaterally or that help can't be obtained. Supervision of professional staff can and sometimes does come through regular or sporadic e-mail and voice messaging or by using Skype with more experienced peers within or outside the organization. With dependence on technology only likely to increase in the future, this method of acquiring supervision will probably becon1e even more popular. For remote supervision to be effective, however, it must be thoughtfully implemented. Managers need to provide the necessary time and technological support so that it can happen in a structured and organized way, and to stress its importance for both doing a job well and for continued professional growth (the focus of Chapter 10).

SUMMARY In this chapter we relied fairly heavily on the literature of industrial psychology and organizational behavior to explore those individual, group, and other factors that influence what staff members do and why they do it within organizations. We emphasized the importance of an accurate assessment of staff members' individual nlotivation as well as an understanding of other influences on individual behavior. Several of the better-known theories of individual motivation were presented and discussed. Throughout this chapter, we have emphasized that while managers cannot motivate individual staff members directly, they can identify what is a primary motivator for each of them and attempt to provide those factors that appeal to it.

223

224

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities Individual motivation was described as emanating primarily from individual needs and pressures for their gratification, but also as heavily influenced by other individuals and groups within the organization. Professional values and ethics and their potential to influence worker performance were also examined. Competition and conflict were presented as both potentially supportive of desirable behavior and also potentially destructive of it if they become a preoccupation of staff 1nembers. Group influences on behavior within organizations cannot be understood without recognizing how group cohesiveness effects it. Cohesiveness can support organizational goal achievement if group norms are consistent with organizational goals; it can also under1nine goal achievement if they are not. Similarly, while loyalty to the organization is almost always desirable, loyalty to individuals within it can be either a positive or a negative influence on the behaviors of paid staff members and volunteers. We also focused on another potentially powerful influence on organizational behavior-supervision-and the various responsibilities that a social work supervisor is expected to assume. We described the functions of case supervision, administrative supervision, educational supervision, and supportive supervision. Several alternatives to traditional one-on-one supervision were described along with some of the advantages and disadvantages of each.

APP LI CATI 0 N 1. What one or a combination of needs may have influenced you to pursue a career in

social work? What do you think is the origin of this need or these needs? Did an avoidance need (McClelland) contribute to your decision in any way? 2. Think about a boss for whom you have worked. What pri1nary individual need did he or she seem to be trying to meet? How was it revealed? Did it ever get in the way of achieving organizational goals or of you doing your job effectively? If so, how? 3. Some managers, especially those who were the frrst director of a human service organization and/or were highly instrumental in getting it established, have become ahnost "cult heroes" among other senior staff members. They are extremely loyal to the manager and rarely question his or her decisions. \iVhy is this a mixed blessing for the organization? What problems can occur ifthe manager leaves and is replaced? 4. Besides those associated with the areas of practice that we mentioned (child protection work, investigating family violence, or working with people who have a terminal illness) what are some other stressors that you or other social workers who you know have encountered in social work practice? What might a supervisor do to be able to offer supportive supervision that \vould be helpful?

Chapter 10

Promoting Professional Growth Learning Outcomes At the end of this chapter, you should be able to: • Explain why a good staff performance evaluation usually is based on "soft" as well as "hard" criteria. • Describe some of the problems that can occur within an organization if a manager gives anything other than an accurate appraisal of a staff member's recent job performance in a staff performance evaluation. • List the major differences between training and staff development. • List those conditions when a promotion or transfer of a staff member might be advisable.

n the previous chapter, we briefly introduced the topic of professional growth when we noted that one of the expectations of social work supervisors is that they provide educational supervision. In this chapter, we will examine in some detail those other management responsibilities that are designed to help staff members to grow professionally.

STAFF PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS If managers supervise any other individuals within the organization, they are required (often as specified in their written job descriptions) to perfor1n regular staff performance evaluations of their subordinates. This is a task that is frequently not a favorite of social work 1nanagers and those who1n they 1nust evaluate. However, if performed correctly and with sensitivity, performance evaluations can be extremely beneficial to all parties.

Why Do Social Workers Dislike Performance Evaluations? Many social workers dread their own annual performance evaluations. Naturally, if we know we have not been doing a good job or do not trust the person conducting a performance evaluation, we will dislike being evaluated. However, even when neither situation is the case-we anticipate a positive, fair evaluation-we still do not look forward to our evaluation conferences. Why? Part of our dislike of them may have its origins in our past life experiences. They may reawaken all kinds of feelings associated with the powerlessness of childhood or other roles in which we were dependent on the approval of parents, teachers, and others. They may be a reminder that, once again, there exists a power differential between us and someone else, and guess who has the power! Do we ever reach a point in life where we don't require the approval of others? Most likely, no. Will we ever stop being evaluated? No. We all continue to be evaluated by others, though often informally, no matter how old we are or ho\v competent we have become. Our

225

226

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities evaluators are not just our bosses. Sometimes they are our peers, such as when we submit a proposal to present our work at a professional conference or submit a grant proposal to a funding organization. Our family members and friends evaluate us whenever they critique what we do and say (or even how we look). Evaluation is a fact of life; we never "outgrow" it. And we need it. It provides feedback, without which we might cease to gro\v. What happens when social workers conduct performance evaluations of others? Then they must feel more positive about them, right? No, their dislike of conducting performance evaluations can often be seen in both their attitudes toward them and in their actions. Sometimes they communicate to others that they regard them as of little value, something that is a requirement, but that they personally view as unnecessary. We know of one supervisor who never schedules evaluation conferences unless staff members repeatedly request them. Another avoids contact with staff members when they are due to avoid having to schedule them. Still another one dreads "evaluation time" so much that she never sleeps well the night before conducting an evaluation conference. Why do managers react so strongly to what should be a normal, productive interchange between people? After all, they are supposed to promote professional growth, something we all would agree is desirable. We appreciate the importance of evaluation in other areas of our work. We evaluate the effectiveness of programs and of our individual interventions. We evaluate the political climate for social change or a community's strengths and resources. But when it co1nes to evaluating the work of a colleague with whom we work, managers have been known to do most anything to avoid the task. Perhaps it is because we have been socialized to be nonjudginental of others. And a performance evaluation is a judgment of another human being, at least of his or her recent job performance. However, it is a judgment that is (1) meant to be helpful to that individual in promoting growth, and (2) designed to result in better services to our prime beneficiary-our clients. If staff members resent having to be evaluated and those evaluating them dislike performing them, guess what? There is a negative mind-set on the part of both parties. Ultimately the result is likely to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. The evaluation probably will be of little value. The negative experience v.rill then create a negative mind-set for the next evaluation. The vicious circle will continue on indefinitely, if not stopped. However, if both parties approach performance evaluations with a more positive mind-set-as an opportunity for improving communication and as a means to promote professional growthperformance evaluations can be very positive experiences.

The Benefits of Performance Evaluations The primary benefit of a performance evaluation for the person being evaluated is it provides information for professional growth. While no evaluation is ever perfect or a 100 percent accurate description of the past work performance of an individual, all staff performance evaluations provide at least some answers to such questions as, "How well am I doing?" and "What are my greatest strengths and what weaknesses?" But even more can be learned from a staff performance evaluation. It also tells a lot about the person doing the evaluation, the staff member's supervisor. For example, it might reveal that the evaluator values performance in some areas more than in others, places a high value on cooperation with other staff members, notices appearance or dress, or values conformity more than initiative. In this way, the evaluation can expose the evaluator's values, priorities, and biases. These are important to know about, even if they represent the shortcomings of the evaluator as a manager.

Promo ting Professio nal Growth Based on the knowledge of them, staff members can choose to either make changes in how they go about doing their jobs (to the degree possible), or, at the very least, they know what to expect in the way of future evaluations if they choose not to make changes. A staff performance evaluation also can provide other benefits for the individual being evaluated. An "outstanding" or "exceeds expectations" evaluation (even one that is "inflated" because the evaluator is well known for avoiding conflict at all costs) can be an "insurance policy." It can make it difficult to be demoted, be fired, or to experience some other negative personnel action. Even if the overall evaluation is less positive, for example, "meets expectations;' the evaluation may still provide some degree of job security. If the evaluation is negative overall and identifies various deficiencies, it should also contain specific information about what improvements must be made and what will constitute satisfactory work performance. If the staff member wants to keep his or her job, he or she has learned what must be done. Performance evaluations also can perform several valuable functions for the evaluator. They provide a periodic vehicle to remind a staff me1nber of the organization's goals and objectives. Especially in large hun1an service bureaucracies, there is a natural tendency toward means-end displacements (Chapter 3). Staff 1nembers can become im1nersed in compliance with the many rules, policies, and procedures that exist while losing sight of what they are supposed to be doing-helping clients. A performance evaluation provides both the manager and the subordinate with the opportunity to stop, step back, and assess just how well the staff men1ber's daily activities contribute to effective client services and to meeting the organization's goals and objectives. If a means-end displacen1ent seems to be developing, it can be identified early and steps to elinlinate it can be initiated. Of course, if the individual doing the evaluating has "lost sight of the forest for the trees" and has become preoccupied with a supervisee's performance of tasks that \Vere intended to be a means to an end, an evaluation conference \vill benefit neither party nor the organization. Evaluation in this type of unfortunate situation only tends to reinforce a means-end displacement. The manager bears a heavy responsibility not to lose sight of goals and objectives, even if staff members may have lost sight of them. Performance evaluations can help to refocus activities and priorities of both the evaluator and of the individual being evaluated. In conducting a staff performance evaluation, the evaluator is required to apply certain predetermined criteria in evaluating a staff member's work. The application of these criteria may sometimes cause the manager to change the impression of a staff member that he or she currently has. For example, in the daily interaction that occurs among employees of an organization, personality traits can sometimes distort the manager's impressions of the abilities and achievements of staff me1nbers. A personable, confident, outgoing, and articulate staff nlember may tend to leave a general impression of being knowledgeable and competent. Conversely, the quiet, withdrawn loner is more likely to elicit doubts about competence. In fact, the contributions of the loner to organizational goal achievement may be co1nparable to or even greater than those of the more socially adept individual. The more outgoing individual may be using an attractive style as a smoke screen for deficiencies in job performance. Application of the evaluation criteria can reveal this, along with the true value of the more socially withdrawn individual. How? A performance evaluation forces the manager to apply criteria that neither add nor subtracts "points" for personality factors that may not be relevant to job performance. If a staff member's style or some personality characteristic is a verifiable asset or liability to the delivery of services or to promoting a productive \VOrk climate, it has relevance. Other\vise it does not, and it has no place in the evaluation process.

227

228

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities Both the business and the social work professional literature contain examples of staff performance evaluation forms that can be used, though they will generally have to be adapted by the manager to reflect the uniqueness of the organization and the roles of its staff members. 1 Many others are available on the Internet. Specific recommendations for productive use of evaluation conferences are also available.2 In many organizations (especially larger bureaucracies) the manager is required to use certain evaluation instruments and procedures. In this way, everyone is evaluated using the same criteria which, on the surface, would seem to promote fairness. However, this practice can seriously detract from the value of a performance evaluation because standardized "one size fits all" forms and procedures of this type are usually not totally appropriate for the unique requirements of any one individual's job. Even when a standardized evaluation form is used, there is usually a space for additional narrative co1runents. They can be used to help 1nake the evaluation process fairer by addressing those factors and issues that relate to the uniqueness of the staff member's job. In larger human service organizations where work roles tend not to overlap-for example, where supervisors do nothing but supervise, only direct service staff members see clients, etc.-a performance evaluation affords the manager (the supervisor) the opportunity to get to know staff members better and to better understand their jobs. For example, the supervisor can learn what sources of gratification the job provides, or what stressors are frequently a part of it. During a staff performance evaluation, valuable information is exchanged. It may be the only ti1ne that staff members receive the undivided attention of their supervisor to discuss their job satisfaction and their career goals. Are they satisfied with their current jobs? Do they hope to move into a job with more management responsibilities, either soon or sometime in the future? Would they rather be doing something else, or doing the same job but somewhere else in the organization? How committed are they to staying in the organization, or would they really prefer to be working in some other field of practice? Staff men1bers thus have an opportunity to share some of their aspirations with someone who can offer a different perspective on them and who may be helpful in achieving their goals. In turn, the supervisor acquires information that can be useful, for example, for considering who would be a good candidate for promotion, for deciding who might benefit from a transfer to another work unit, or for contingency planning (Chapter 5) for possible future job vacancies. A very positive performance evaluation based on predetermined criteria provides powerful reinforcement for good work performance-more than the general sense of approval that often gets conveyed on a daily basis. While staff members 1nay sense or even know that they are doing their jobs well, there is something about written and verbal kudos within the context of a performance evaluation that makes them especially gratifying for the recipient. On the less pleasant side, staff performance evaluations can lay the legal and ethical groundwork for reassignment, denial of merit-pay increases or promotions, demotions, or even termination ofstaff 1nembers who are not performing up to standards or who represent a liability to the organization, its clients, and/or its image within the co1nmunity. Optimistically, we hope that an evaluation of an individual who is not performing well will provide an impetus for change and improvement. Managers should assume that staff want and are capable of improvement. By providing a staff performance evaluation, they suggest specific areas where improvement is required. They may then provide assistance for improvement in the form of increased supervision or mentoring and/or continuing

Promoting Professional Growth education. But nevertheless there may come a time when it is clear that a staff member lacks either the ability or the desire to improve to the degree necessary and must be demoted, reassigned, or terminated. At that point, written evaluations provide documentation of the individual's inadequate job performance and that the required \varnings and all due process have been in place. A "paper trail" consisting of performance evaluations can be used to provide evidence that the decision is neither arbitrary, capricious, unfair, impulsive, nor in any way unanticipated by all parties involved. Thus, they protect the organization from an employee grievance or even a potential law suit. As \Ve have repeatedly emphasized, any task performed by the manager should have the potential to benefit our prime beneficiary, our clients, either directly or indirectly. Staff performance evaluations are no exception. When managers provide positive reinforcement for good work they increase the likelihood that services to clients will continue to be good or \Viii get even better. Staff members then know where they stand with their supervisor and the organization-they feel secure. They can devote more of their energies to client services and less to trying to correct deficiencies or worrying about their own job security. Even when managers' evaluations of staff members are less positive, they usually suggest how job performance can be i1nproved and may result in additional assistance for doing better work. Unless they are simply ignored, client services are likely to improve. Of course, if staff members show no improvement and continue to receive poor performance evaluations, clients may also ultimately benefit. A basis for replacing them with other, more competent individuals will have been established. In this way, performance evaluations help to protect clients from those who have demonstrated that they are either unable or un\villing to provide the help that they need.

Characteristics of a Good Evaluation What constitutes a good performance evaluation? Like any other management task, a performance evaluation should be performed ethically. The NASW Code of Ethics informs us that "Social workers who have responsibility for evaluating the performance of others should fulfill such responsibility in a fair and considerate manner on the basis of clearly stated criteria:'3 This one-sentence staten1ent tells us a great deal, both in what it says and also in what it does not say. For example, it does not say that it is unethical or unprofessional to judge a subordinate's work performance or that a performance evaluation should never be critical of an individual's work.

Fairness Why is fairness so important in a performance evaluation? Not only is an unfair evalu ation of a staff n1ember unethical, it is also poor managen1ent practice. A single unfair performance evaluation can destroy the trust and respect that a manager needs to be effective. How? A staff member who believes that he or she was given an unfairly low evaluation will feel anger a11d resentment. He or she is likely to share with other staff members those parts of the evaluation that he or she thought were unfair. Then they may become fearful that the same tiling might happen to them. Or, if a staff member is well known not to be doing a good job is given an unfairly high evaluation and other staff members learn about it, they may become angry and resentful. In either case, the organizational climate can quickly change from one of mutual respect to one of anger and distrust.

229

230

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities A manager needs to build a reputation for fairness in conducting performance evaluations. But what are the characteristics of a fair performance evaluation? Here are the most important ones:

1. Use of Previously Understood Criteria. It is fair to evaluate employee staff member based on criteria that were clearly stated and understood by both parties and that were in place prior to the evaluation period. It is quickly perceived as unfair by staff members if new criteria for evaluation are introduced later or, worse yet, at the time of the performance evaluation. Evaluation instruments and criteria should be presented and explained to workers as part of orientation v.rhen they are first employed. Frequently, they also are contained in a rules, policies, and procedures manual though, as we noted earlier, there are often disclaimers in the manual stating that it should not be construed as a contract with staff members. This is useful for both parties. Staff members know the criteria on which their evaluation should be based and can use it for ongoing self-assessment of their work performance. Managers, with the criteria in place, are less likely to make some of the common errors that can occur in staff evaluations, such as evaluating staff members compared with their own quality and pace of >vork, making a general assessment of the worker first and then subconsciously evaluating all aspects of the worker's performance in a way consistent with that rating, or never giving an "outstanding" rating to a new employee in order to "leave room for improvement." 2. Avoidance of Comparisons. It is unfair to evaluate staff members using other employees as reference points or even to make reference to another staff member in an individual's evaluation. While some comparison of staff members by a manager is inevitable and even desirable in performing some functions (e.g., selecting an employee for promotion or for some honor or reward), comparison has no place in a job performance evaluation of an individual. It amounts to "curving" evaluations, a practice that is statistically indefensible since (1) job performance tends not to be normally distributed within work groups, and (2) the "sample" of staff members that any manager supervises and evaluates is neither a random one or sufficiently large. If evaluations are "curved:' staff 1nembers and their evaluations are vulnerable to the strength or weakness of the group in which they find themselves. A very good worker in a group of exceptionally good coworkers would receive a low performance evaluation. Conversely, a weak staff member might be the best in a group of very weak coworkers and would thus receive a high performance evaluation. Of course, either performance evaluation would not be a fair one. Co1nparative staff evaluations also can promote an undesirable form of competition among staff members. It can inhibit cooperation and teamwork and promote an organizational climate of self-interest. While this competition may result in increased staff productivity in the short run, over time staff members will begin to see it as both manipulative and insulting. Adult professionals should not have to compete with their colleagues and coworkers in a kind of sibling rivalry for high performance evaluations and the rewards that accompany them. Their work should be judged on its own merits. Still another reason why a manager should avoid comparisons with other staff members when conducting performance evaluations relates to issues of confidentiality. It is impossible for a manager to convince employees that they are being fairly compared with others without revealing too much about other staff members' evaluations. And to do so would be unethical. It can also discourage the productive and candid discussion of a staff

Pro1noting Professional Crow1h member's own performance that should be a part of any good performance evaluation. A staff member may fear that what is discussed \vill be shared with peers. Useful performance valuations depend on honest communication, and their value is diminished when discussion becomes guarded. 3. Staff Differentiation. As managers, social workers sometimes have difficulty rating some staff members lo\ver than others. It just seems so judgmental, something they are socialized not to do with clients. So, they simply give everyone the same high performance evaluation, despite the fact that staff members ahnost always reflect varying levels of competence and productivity. To do so is to renege on a management responsibilityperformance evaluations have not really been performed at all. The practice of simply giving everyone a high performance evaluation is unfair to all concerned, especially to those who earned the best evaluations. Students can easily relate to this inequity. A student who earns an A tends to resent another student who also gets an A but who did C work; that same student also resents the professor who awarded the undeserved A. Good workers react similarly when they learn through the grapevine that their "outstanding" evaluations by a supervisor reflect very little if any difference from those received by a peer universally known to be only 1narginally competent. Their own ratings communicated very little. They also underwent depreciation in their eyes and those of others if everyone was rated the same. Staff members know that there are differences in the motivation, knowledge, competencies, and sometimes even the professional values of members of their work group. They have a right to expect that a manager's staff evaluations will reflect these differences. No one benefits \Vhen all staff members are rated "outstanding" or are otherwise rated the same. Those who should have been rated lower may be initially pleased \vith the practice. However, they are deprived of the feedback they deserve-information that can help them to grow as professionals. The solution is simple: Evaluate all staff employing the predetermined criteria that are applicable to their jobs and provide a narrative description to address anything of importance that is not adequately addressed in them. The differences in staff performance will reveal themselves. 4. Application of Realistic Expectations. The goal of perfor1nance evaluations is that they are neither too negative nor too positive (i.e., they should be a fair, accurate description of a staff member's job performance). This can be accomplished only if managers sometin1es introduce other considerations (not to be confused with criteria) into the evaluation process. The evaluation should be based on an assessment of what is a realistic expectation for each individual \Vorker. Such factors as the worker's stage of career development, professional background, stated career objectives, and previous work experience are variables that often are considered. No one can fairly expect the same level of performance (in terms of quality or quantity) fro1n, for example, a new graduate as that expected from a senior, experienced professional. A certain kind and number of mistakes are expected from the ne\v graduate; the same mistakes might be indicative of apathy or motivational problems for the more seasoned professional. Another factor to consider is the nature of the job itself. The amount of cause-andeffect knowledge (best practices) available to help in performing tasks should be considered in evaluating staff members' performance. For example, we have very good knowledge about the right and wrong ways to conduct an interview with a child who is alleged to have been

231

232

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities sexually abused or the correct way to help a client to apply for Medicaid or Social Security Disability benefits. We would expect a staff member to be able to perform these tasks successfully. However we might expect another staff member to have more limited success in counseling with people who are adjudicated sex-offenders or in their intervention with adolescents being pressured to join youth gangs. In assessing what performance standards are reasonable, still another factor should be considered. In evaluating the work of human service professionals, we frequently encounter situations where there is ainbiguity as to what even constitutes successful practice intervention. For exainple, how should an evaluator construe the fact that few of a social worker's clients return for a second treatment interview? Is it indicative of an inability to form treatment relationships or of the successful application of crisis intervention methods? Or is the dissolution of the marriages in three of a social worker's cases an indication that the staff member's role as marriage counselor was performed poorly? Perhaps, but a divorce may have been the best course of action for these fainilies. Fairness in evaluating a staff member's job performance requires listening to and considering any explanations that are offered. It is also helpful if the evaluator knows (either through having offered case consultation to the staff member and/or through his or her own practice knowledge and experience) what issues and obstacles to success are commonly encountered. 5. Recognition of Problems in the Work Environment. Often there were conditions or situations in the work setting that were beyond the control of the individual being evaluated, but yet they impacted on his or her ability to do a job effectively. For example, orientation and training may not have been adequate. Knowledgeable clerical support may not have been available. The supervisor may have been out on extended leave and thus was unavailable during much of the evaluation period. Coworkers may not have been cooperative and helpful. There may have been technological breakdowns or inadequacies. A noisy workplace or a lack of privacy may have made the job more difficult. If these or other similar situations existed within the work environment during the period of evaluation, fairness would suggest that the manager still provide an accurate assessment of the level of job performance, but also include something in a narrative description of the performance evaluation that is a recognition that they might have at least contributed to any shortcomings of the individual being evaluated. For exainple, it might state that, "Roselyne is behind in her case recording, a problem that may be at least partially attributable to the fact that she received eight additional cases when another employee resigned suddenly. Roselyne is aware that this is a problem that must be corrected if she is to continue to receive a 'satisfactory' (or higher) rating at her next scheduled performance evaluation:' Another common situation that should be factored in relates to "inherited problems" -problems that may have been either caused by or left over from the previous occupant of the job. Suppose that an individual is hired as a supervisor to replace another supervisor who was fired. The previous supervisor 1night have left behind, for example, a backlog of paperwork that should have been completed or a subordinate who acts out inappropriately on the job but has never been confronted about his behavior. Or she might have antagonized key staff members in another organization that previously had been an important source for client referrals. When problems like these have been inherited, it would be unfair to evaluate the current occupant of the job as ifhe or she was responsible for them. However, when taking a job, a new staff member does assume some responsibility for addressing old problems that are encountered. So what would be a fair way to evaluate a staff member who

Pro1noting Professional Crow1h inherited a problem? Fairness suggests offering a "grace period"-a reasonable period of time that common sense would suggest as realistic for solving the problem. During that grace period, it is fair to evaluate the individual on his or her plans for solving the problem, efforts made toward solving it, and progress that has been made. Following the grace period, if the problem still exists the staff member must assume ownership of the problem and is now responsible for it. If it is still a problem, it \vould be fair to mention this as a deficiency in the staff member's performance evaluation. Sometimes a manager knows of extenuating circumstances within the work environment. But, not always. Many managers no\v ask their staff members to engage in some form of self-evaluation prior to their performance evaluation. They may be asked to prepare a draft of their O\vn written evaluation. It generally contains (at a minimum) a description of their work during the period of evaluation and what they regard as their primary achievements and what they hope to accomplish in the future. If they are offering direct client services, it usually includes a listing of services offered and/or cases carried. However, staff members may also be asked to provide a written assess1nent of their work perforn1ance along with a description of other factors related to the work setting that they believe the 1nanager should take into consideration. The self-evaluation is given to the manager one or more days before an evaluation conference as additional data for use in conducting the performance evaluation. Of course, it should be understood in advance that the manager is obligated only to consider the inforn1ation provided. Thus the description of extenuating circumstances in the work environment may be discounted or even totally disregarded as irrelevant to the worker's performance. 6. Use of "Hard" and "Soft" Criteria. With an increase in lawsuits and employee grievances, many human service organizations no\v rely heavily on standardized evaluation instruments. But even these instruments (and they vary so \videly that we \Vere unable to include one in this book that could be described as "typical") tend to include criteria that sometimes are very difficult to measure. Invariably, the instruments reflect a mixture of "job performance, personal abilities, and personality:>4 Such standard factors as arriving for work on time, adherence to rules, policies, and procedures, job knowledge and quality, communication skills, and timeliness of work often are balanced with more subjective judgments of qualities such as attitude, initiative, cooperativeness and team play, professionalism, adaptability, use of supervision, cultural sensitivity, commitment to client service, and ability to work with peers. In this age of litigation, there might be a tendency to want to evaluate staff performance using only those "hard': verifiable criteria that do not leave the manager and the organization vulnerable to charges of subjectivity or bias. But an obsession with self-protection does not produce an evaluation that is accurate, useful, or fair. An evaluation that is limited to easily measured criteria tends to be sterile and of little value. For exan1ple, it may indicate that a staff member is al\vays on ti1ne for work, keeps up-to-date on paperwork, and complies with organizational rules, policies, and procedures. But it fails to identify the fact that the staff me1nber is not growing as a professional, is not very comnlitted to client service, or is not a good team player, which are very critical problem areas that should be addressed. Unless an evaluation includes this type of feedback, steps to remedy the problems will not be initiated. And should the manager ultimately conclude that the worker is more a liability than an asset to the organization, the legal and ethical groundwork for termination \vill not be in place.

233

234

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities A good evaluation employs some criteria that are easily measured. But, of necessity, it also includes criteria that are "softer" and thus more vulnerable to charges of subjectivity. While these attributes of staff members are more difficult to measure and document, fairness suggests that at least so1ne of them are appropriate criteria for use in a performance evaluation. Some undesirable behaviors or attitudes, such as an obvious distaste for working with clients who have certain problems or an inability to work well with coworkers, need to be mentioned, even if they cannot easily be documented. Other, highly desirable ones (e.g., a friendly, cooperative approach to coworkers or a good attitude when assigned additional work) should also be acknowledged and, whenever possible, rewarded. However, in some organizations where staff members have little interaction with others, factors such as good peer working relationships may be irrelevant or at least much less relevant than they once were, and should not be part of a staff performance evaluation. For exa1nple, if staff members are allowed to do most of their work from home or in another non-office setting, what really matters (and should be rewarded) is simply how well they did their job and how productive they were, no matter when, where, or how they did it. This is the essence of the trend called performance based evaluation, which is in part a response to how technology (Chapter 12) often has changed or even replaced the traditional workplace. There are other "soft" criteria (and they vary from organization to organization) that managers nlay want to build into a staff performance evaluation. One common one is "value to the organization:' It is very difficult to document, but important nevertheless. It is something that a manager feels and senses over time, rather than an assessment based on a simple observation of behavior. It is why the manager would say, "If I could keep only one staff member, she is the one I would want to keep:' It is not the application of "soft" criteria for measuring performance of staff members that gets a manager and/or the organization into trouble. It is when they are applied without adequate warning or they are applied to some staff members but not to others who share the same job description. Researchers now recognize that both quantitative and qualitative research methods are needed to truly understand some problem or life experience. The more objective methods are comple1nented by the more subjective ones. Similarly, most staff members now recognize that fairness is best achieved when performance evaluations are based on a combination of judgments and documentable facts. They recognize that no evaluation criterion can be 100 percent objective anyway. Thus they do not object to a package of criteria that contains a mixture of"hard" criteria and some that are inclined to be "softer", so long as they know in advance just what is meant by these criteria and are confident that they are applied equally to others as well. Of course, the use of these criteria is always less threatening to staff members if the manager has built a reputation for fairness and for good assessment skills. If fairness requires a balance of "hard" and "soft" criteria, just what is the right balance? As always, it will depend on various factors. Some organizations, most often those operating in a relatively unfriendly or even hostile task environment (Chapter 2), may not be able to risk the use of many of the "soft" criteria. They may have to rely mostly on criteria that can be easily measured and documented, those that are less likely to result in embarrassing legal action or charges of discrimination by disgruntled e1nployees or former employees. In contrast, an organization with a friendlier, more supportive task environment can safely use a higher percentage of the "soft" criteria. If individual evaluators in either organization need to be on safer ground (perhaps because of past difficulties related to their personnel

Pro1noting Professional Crow1h actions) they may decide that it is best to use few if any of the "softer" criteria. However, in doing so, they may sacrifice a certain amount of fairness.

Consideration The NASW Code of Ethics also stipulates that a performance evaluation should be considerate. What makes an evaluation considerate? A considerate evaluation provides plenty of opportunity for input and explanation by the individual being evaluated. It acknowledges achievements and identifies strengths as \Veil as weaknesses. It offers support for improvement and professional growth. The performance evaluation also recognizes and respects the dignity of the staff member. It is predicated on the assumption that the staff member can and wants to be as competent and productive as possible. Thus, it is designed to be constructive and not destructive. It identifies deficiencies, describing them clearly but in a tactful manner. For example, the evaluator should never be sarcastic or attempt to be "humorous" in a derogatory way, either in comments made verbally during an evaluation conference or in the written part of a performance evaluation that goes in the personnel file. And an evaluator should not make any reference to the staff men1ber's race, gender, age, sexual orientation, and so forth, even in a supportive way. In discussing fairness, we described how problems in the work environment that are beyond an individual's control should be addressed-mention them as possible extenuating factors but still rate the individual at a level consistent with actual job performance. But what if the problems are more of a personal nature, for example, clinical depression relating to the loss of a partner or an illness or a legal problem in the family that may have negatively affected work performance during the evaluation period? Wouldn't it be unfair and inconsiderate, if not do\vnright cruel, to give someone experiencing such a personal problem a lo\v performance rating, even if it accurately describes the quality or quantity of work performed recently? No. There is a place for consideration when the evaluator is a\vare of such a problem. However, knowledge of it cannot be allowed to affect the level of the evaluation itself An accurate assessment of recent job performance is still required, both by the evaluator and the staff member being evaluated. It is also in the best interests of the organization. To provide an inflated, inaccurate evaluation, even out of sympathy or kindness, would be a mistake. The staff member being evaluated needs to know t11ose areas where work performance has not been up to the standard if he or she is to attempt to make improvements. It could also prove to be a problem for the evaluator and the organization if it later becomes apparent that, even without personal stressors, work performance does not unprove. The presence of the inflated evaluation in the personnel file could make subsequent personnel action (demotion, transfer, or even tern1ination) more difficult. During an evaluation conference, the evaluator should not bring up a personal problen1 of the staff men1ber, even if it is widely known. To do so, even in a supportive way, could suggest that it somehow interfered with the evaluator's ability to provide an accurate evaluation. If the staff member brings it up, perhaps as an explanation for recent poor work performance, the evaluator should listen, say little and keep the discussion short. The purpose of the conference is business- to share an evaluation of the staff member's recent job performance. It is not a time for supportive supervision. So, \vhere does consideration enter in? Consideration requires that the evaluator treat the staff member politely and as we all \Vould wish to be treated. It offers assurances of support in bringing \vork performance up to an acceptable level. Perhaps a slightly longer than usual (but

235

236

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities time-limited) grace period may be offered to enable the staff member to reach that level before any corrective action is initiated. If the staff member has not been functioning at the acceptable level, more often than not, he or she is aware of it. The evaluation should come as no surprise. However, the evaluator still needs to provide an accurate assessment of his or her recent work performance. This should be done both verbally and in writing ("for the record") in a way that the evaluation process does not exacerbate either the problem itself or any concerns the staff member already has about its effect on job performance. Even if the evaluator has concluded that the recent level of perfor1nance is clearly unacceptable and that it cannot be allowed to continue much longer, this can still be com1nunicated in a clear but respectful way. Finally, if the staff member is not receiving help for the problem and it appears that it might be beneficial, he or she should be given support for seeking it. If the organization has one, an employee assistance program is often very helpful in this regard, since the staff member's work schedule is usually taken into consideration in scheduling appointments for counseling or other assistance. However, if getting help requires time off fro1n work, the manager can consider adjusting the staff member's work hours to facilitate it while still meeting his or her job requirements.

Conducting Performance Evaluations Most organizations have written rules, policies, and/or procedures in place for conducting performance evaluations. They specify, for exainple, how often employees must be evaluated and the steps that must be followed. They must be adhered to. Despite recent efforts by organizations to ensure that they do not constitute a contract, failure to comply with the1n continues to cause problems if, for example, a union grievance is filed or legal action is brought against the organization for "wrongful discharge:' Rules, policies, procedures, and required paperwork tend to vary from organization to organization, but they also have much in common. For example, there are usually two major components of a performance evaluation: a written evaluation and an evaluation conference.

The Written Evaluation A typical written evaluation may consist of a description of the work undertaken during the evaluation period, a form such as a scale containing the evaluation criteria used along with the rating for each of them, and a narrative summary of job performai1ce during the rating period. Even in those organizations where staff members prepare a draft of all or part of their evaluation and submit it to the evaluator prior to the evaluation conference, the ultimate responsibility for the written evaluation in its final form remains with the evaluator. And that is the way it should be. Evaluating one's self objectively is difficult. It may produce a hypercritical evaluation or certain deficiencies or important issues may be avoided. Even if the draft was written conscientiously and honestly, there will invariably be areas where the evaluator has a different perception of performance than the staff member. To simply "sign off" on what was written by the staff member would be avoiding responsibility and would deprive the staff member of the feedback needed for professional development.

The Evaluation Conference The performai1ce evaluation process is not complete without a person-to-person evaluation conference. Social \Vork managers are most likely to dread conducting evaluation

Promo ting Professio nal Growth conferences if they knO\V that the evaluation is not going to be a very favorable one. Ho\vever, if they have been doing the job of manager all along, there is little to fear. The conference should merely be a confirmation of the messages they have been sending through regu.lar written, verbal, and nonverbal communication. Since the evaluation criteria should have been clarified and understood before the evaluation period began, anything said or anything offered in writing at the evaluation conference should come as no surprise to the staff member. While there is no "one best way" to conduct an evaluation conference, there are some methods to increase the likelihood that they will be both fair and considerate. For example, they should be scheduled well in advance and every effort should be made to not reschedule them. While rescheduling may not seem like much of a problem to the evaluator, an annual or semi-annual performance evaluation is very important to and can be very stressful for the staff member. It would be inconsiderate to postpone it unnecessarily. The evaluator should plan the agenda for the conference and, perhaps, even rehearse what will be said. This reduces the likelihood that anything will be said or done impulsively that will later be regretted or, worse yet, 1nay be the basis for a grievance of some kind. UsuaUy, the conference begins pleasantly, perhaps with some statement by the evaluator expressing appreciation for the contributions of the staff 1nember (and everyone has made some). A review of the work undertaken may follow. At some point, a draft of the evaluator's written evaluation is provided and the staff nlember is given time to read it. Then it is discussed. The evaluator should listen to any explanations given about any deficiencies noted in it, but should avoid getting into an argument over them. The conference may end with a "look ahead:' in which the staff member can talk about what he or she hopes to achieve during the next evaluation period and the evaluator can offer ways that can be provided to make it easier to achieve them. The staff member is encouraged to discuss any longer term career goals he or she may have, either within the organization or else\vhere. Overall, most evaluation conferences are pleasant, productive meetings in which valuable information is exchanged. Of course, if the evaluation is not a very favorable one, the interchange may be less pleasant, but stiU useful. Follo\ving the evaluation conference, the evaluator revises the written evaluation where necessary and a second, brief meeting is scheduled for both parties to sign it. Signing one's evaluation does not mean that a staff member necessarily agrees with everything con tained in it, only that it has been read and understood. If there is still serious disagreement, usually the staff member is allowed to write an addendum to it stating where the areas of disagreement are and why he or she disagrees with the1n. After both parties have signed it, the written evaluation (including any addenda) is filed in the staff member's personnel file along with a notation of when the evaluation conference took place.

Problems That Sometimes Occur In human service organizations, nJanagers are expected to provide timely written performance evaluations and to conduct evaluation conferences. If they do not provide them, both they and the organization can be in serious trouble. This is especially true in organizations where staff members are unionized. If, for example, a decision is made to terminate a permanent employee and the required annual or semiannual evaluations were not performed in a timely manner, there may be grounds for a grievance. Even if an employee has fe\v protections-as is sometimes the case with temporary employees, people hired on

237

238

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities "soft" money, or people in most "right to work" states-regular evaluations are a fair and considerate (i.e., ethical) expectation of a manager. While it might be legally possible, for example, to summarily frre an employee in a grant-funded position with no explanation and without ever having conducted a staff performance evaluation during the years of his or her employment, an ethical social work manager would never do it. The promise (or, perhaps, threat) of future performance reviews can exert a considerable amount of influence over staff members' behaviors. Knowing that there will be a regular, periodic day of accounting, they are less likely to engage in behaviors that they will not be able to justify or that will leave them vulnerable to poor evaluations. All of us (including those of us who are classroom teachers) tend (to a greater or lesser degree) to carry our evaluation instruments in the back of our minds. The inevitability of their application is likely to curb those behaviors that we know are likely to result in critical reviews and to encourage other behaviors that will be reviewed favorably. Of course, an obsession with getting good performance evaluations also can be counterproductive. If preoccupied with getting them, staff members may tend to "play to" the evaluation instrument too much. This can, for example, result in behaviors such as shirking tasks that are not in their job description (since they may not get "credit" for them), or choosing not to use certain intervention methods with clients (e.g., confrontation) that might be very appropriate but might also result in client complaints. Sensitive managers are aware of the dangers that exist when the promise of staff evaluations becomes a specter to be feared or the major driving force behind staff members' decision making. They are aware that impending performance evaluations inevitably influence staff behaviors to some extent, but they will not, for example, make their influence even greater by providing frequent reminders about them.

Trends in Performance Evaluations In the previous chapter we described some options to the traditional model for supervision. Some of the same developments that have produced them (use of participatory management, greater reliance on information technology, and "flatter" organizations) have also resulted in so1ne recent trends in staff performance evaluations. One of these is peer evaluations, in which one's peers (rather than a supervisor) conduct the evaluation. Total peer evaluations (in which only peers evaluate the staff member) make sense only when peer supervision is used. However, if other supervisory models are used, peers may still be asked for input by the supervisor. It is generally limited to those areas in which peers would be most knowledgeable, for example, cooperation, sharing of responsibilities, attitudes toward clients, or other attributes that indicate the individual's ability to be a good team player and to act appropriately. When this type of limited input from peers is requested, it should constitute only one co1nponent of the evaluation process-insight or a perspective that the supervisor might otherwise lack. It is the supervisor's job to put it in context and to acquire any needed additional infor1nation about those areas of the staff 1nember's job performance. Evaluation by peers can work well when used for constructive feedback, but we believe strongly that it should not be given anonyinously. Anonyinity may provide protection, but it also promotes irresponsibility; it encourages people to exaggerate or otherwise distort the truth. Besides, if a negative comment or rating from a peer is to have value, the person being evaluated should be able to go to the individual who offered it, ask for specifics, perhaps provide an explanation and, if they feel that the criticism was justified, do what is necessary to correct the problem. Similarly, positive comments or ratings are most meaningful when one knows their source.

Promoting Professional Growth

239

Case Example

S

cott was a case supervisor in a large family service organization offering a variety of counseling services. He was previously employed as a psych iatric social worker at a mental health clinic for six years. He came highly recommended as a replacement for the previous case supervisor who had recently retired. Overall, the social workers that Scott "inhe rited" were a dedicated and competent group. There was, however, one notable exception. Mildred was 57 years old when Scott took the job. In her first supervisory conference with him, M.ildred pointedly but pleasantly reminded him that (1) she had grown children older than he and (2) she planned to work eight more years. doing essentially what she had been doing. and then retire. Scott soon learned that Mildred had. in fact, been doing very little. She had been hired 27 years earlier right out of her MSW program along with Scott's predecessor-her former supervisor- and continued to have regular contact with her. However. as he learned more about Mildred and got to know her better. Scott's initial irrita tion at her approach to their first conference subsided. He found himself genuinely liking her. While he had hoped that she would become more productive. he soon concluded that she was probably incapable of doing more. When he assigned several new cases to her. she missed appointments and seemed to become overwhelmed. On other occasions when he needed to use her for work more appropriate to her job description. she generally proved herself to be totally incompetent. The other staff members became concerned. They tactfully suggested that Scott just leave her alone and not ask her to do more than she had previously been doing. Her duties had consisted of carrying a few cases that she had for many years. doing occasional intake histories. watering the plants in all offices, and keeping the waiting room tidy and uncluttered. She also kept the coffee pot filled and the refrigerator clean. According to organizational policy. Scott was to conduct annual performance evaluations of all

of his supervisees. After the first year. he seriously considered rating Mildred as unsatisfactory and confronting her with her shortcomings. He tore up the first draft of the written evaluation that he had prepared. He decided that Mildred would be devastated if he rated her objectively, especially since she had always been ra ted "excellent" by her friend and previous supervisor. He envisioned a hurt. tearful evaluation conference. painful to both parties, and resentmen t from the rest of the staff for his insensitivity toward her. He cou ldn't imagine how she could possibly make productive use of a critical evaluation for im provement anyway, given her lim ited skills and her pattern of performance developed over many years. He chose the road of least resistance with a slight effort at compromise-he rated Mildred "excellent" in eight performance categories and "needs improvement" in two. In their conference he quickly explained to her that everyone (even himself) "needs improvement" in the two areas. punctuality and attention to detai l. They laughed together about this and. overall. the conference was a pleasant interchange. Scott felt relieved. Mildred's reaction was far better than anticipated; it made him even fonder of her and seemed to confirm that he had chosen the right course of action. Scott decided not to assign her to any new duties. It would make Mildred happy and would allow him to continue to give her high evaluations on what she did, without grossly distorting reality. After all. she did make great coffee! For the next two years. Mildred continued to do very little. Her coworkers continued to cover for her and Scott continued to give her favorable evaluations. Then a new executive director was hired. Funding had declined drastically following the loss of a major EAP contract. The board of directors gave the new executive director an assignment. She was to design and implement a reorgan ization of the organization. "flattening" the organ izational structure by cutting out some midlevel management positions. The board also denied her

(continued)

240

Case Example

Part 1\vo: The Major Managemen t Activities

Continued

permission to replace two social workers who had recently resigned. The di rector wasted little time. As part of her response to the board's instructions, she called her first-line supervisors together and explained the situation. She instructed each of them to develop a plan that would represent no reduction in client services while making full use of remaining staff members. Scott considered all possible alternatives. None were ideal and all involved some change that would increase Mildred's job responsibilities and would force her to have more client contact. He finally concluded that the best solution was to assign her full-time to do intake histories, freeing up the other remaining social workers and himself to do more treatment. Predictably, Mildred reacted with incredulity, hurt, and even a little anger. She suggested that she might retire early, a thought that gave Scott no small amount of false hope. But before she could follow through on her threat (which most people doubted would occur anyway), another situation arose. The reorganization resulted in reassignment and/ or a heavier workload for eight other staff members in addition to Mildred. Six of them were those most recently hired who were given a full caseload immed iately. This was a departure from the usual organization practice of giving new social workers a 3/ 4 workload for their first six months on the job. All six were women. One of the six convinced the others and, eventually, even Mildred, to lend their names to a gender discrimination suit against the organization. The fact that the executive director, Scott, and most other supervisors were male lent even more credence to the complaint. When she made some inq uiries and learned just how incompetent Mildred had been for years, the director grew optimistic. Scott told her that neither he nor his predecessor felt that they could trust her to handle higher-level professional duties and had thus

used her for only rou tine tasks. The director asked for documentation. Scott had to admit that he had none, but that these were only his impressions. The di rector asked to see Mildred's annual employee evaluations; they were, of course, quite favorable. The director was furious, refusing to accept the only explanations that Scott could offer. The board, not wanting to risk the public reaction to a lawsuit charging gender discrimination in a human service organ ization, agreed to a substantial financial settlement for participants in the lawsuit. The subsequent resignation of Mildred and all but one of the other staff members involved in t he suit left several new vacancies, most of which could not be filled because of new budget deficits. Another painful reorganization had to be implemented.

Discussion Questions 1.

How did Scott attempt to justify his decision to give Mildred high evaluations and to assign her little professional level work to do?

2.

How did the fact that Scott had continued to rate her highly help to put the organization in legal jeopardy when the gender discrim ination lawsuit was filed?

3. Who else may have been harmed by Scott's actions? How? 4. How could Scott have conducted Mildred's performance evaluations in a way that was both fair and considerate but still reflective of her true level of functioning? 5. What, if anything, might Scott have done to make Mildred a more productive member of the organization? What might have worked or not worked? Why? 6. Why was Scott likely to receive a poor performance evaluation from his own supervisor even though Mildred was an "inherited problem"?

Pro1noting Professional Crow1h As we noted in Chapter 4, performance evaluations are not as "top down" as they once were in other ways, too. Subordinates may be asked to evaluate their supervisor's or manager's job performance. When this occurs, it can provide useful feedback; for example, a supervisor who perceives herself as readily available and approachable may learn that several staff members perceive her as aloof and rarely accessible. Or a supervisor may learn that she is perceived as showing favoritism in making work assignments or is not responsive to suggestions. However, evaluations by subordinates should constitute just one component of the supervisor's or manager's own performance evaluation by his or her boss. They should not be allowed to take on too much importance, since there are many reasons why subordinates may rate their supervisor the way they do, some valid and some not so valid. Still another newer option reflects an "anyone can evaluate anyone" attitude. It is the 360/multirater review (sometin1es just called a 360-degree evaluation). It entails allowing many different people (e.g., peers, subordinates, nlanagers, or people outside the organization with whom a staff member interacts on a regular basis) to evaluate an individual. The nlajor benefit to this type of evaluation is that it provides 1nany different perspectives on a staff member's performance and, thus additional insights into it. However, who is allowed to have input into the evaluation process can greatly affect the results. For example, a few powerful members of a board of directors can select only people who they know to be critical of a director's performance (not those who know her to be doing a good job) and then use the evaluation as justification to fire her.

CONTINUING EDUCATION The background of formal education and experience that staff members bring to a human service organization is generally not enough for them to become "good workers" in their new \vork environn1ent immediately. They need to learn, for exanlple, what rules, policies, and procedures limit, what they can and cannot do, and the "right" way to perform certain required tasks \vithin the organization. Later, once they master basic job requirements, they will require assistance to continue to grow professionally and to learn how to adapt to the inevitable changes that will occur. Orientation sessions and supervision can help them with these tasks, but they also require other learning opportunities. It is the manager's job to nlake sure that they are provided as needed. The NASW Code of Ethics states: 3.08 Continuing Education and Staff Development Social work administrators and supervisors should take reasonable steps to provide or arrange for continuing education and staff development for all staff for whom they are responsible. Continuing education and staff development should address current knowledge and emerging developments related to social work practice and ethics.5 Learning within organizations is inevitable. People learn every day. They learn from CO\vorkers, supervisors, subordinates, clients, clerical staff, and anyone else with whom they have contact. The issue for the manager is this: What do they learn, and is \.vhat they learn desirable for promoting effective client services and for their O\.vn professional

241

242

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities growth? Sometimes it is, and sometimes it most definitely is not. Informal learning from a coworker, for example, may suggest a shortcut in record keeping that will result in more time for client service. The "savings" may have no negative effects or it may result in a disastrous loss of federal reimbursement, if detected. Other inforn1al "orientation" of a new employee by a senior worker may result in a lack of respect for a manager who might othervvise have been respected without the biasing input from the "old hand:' If a manager fails to provide for formal learning, other learning will fill the void. But it could be the wrong kind of learning. Even providing good learning opportunities will not guarantee that they will "take;' at least not in the way intended. For example, a training session designed to ensure that employees follow appropriate procedures for reimbursement of professional travel expenses can inadvertently suggest ways to use professional travel to conduct personal business. Just what is communicated in programs of formalized learning should be verified and reinforced by the manager, to be certain that it does not produce unintended results.

Types of Continuing Education Staff members have a wide variety of learning needs. They range from technical skills to theoretical knowledge to reinforcement of appropriate professional values. Certain forms of continuing education are appropriate for some learning needs, but less appropriate for others. Three terms- training, education, and staff development- are often used rather freely and even interchangeably to describe the varieties of continuing education methods that exist. Understanding how they differ in purpose, content, and process is very helpful to the manager in identifying what response might be needed by staff members for their continued professional growth. 1. Training. Unlike the other two types of continuing education, training is designed

to provoke a standardized, "correct" behavior from staff. Like a rule (discussed in Chapter 6), it is designed to prohibit the exercise of professional discretion. While in some situations it is desirable for a manager to promote initiative and creative solutions among staff members, other situations suggest the need for standardization. For example, there are certain right and wrong ways (legally and professionally) for a child-protection worker to handle a report of suspected child abuse or to complete a form for third-party reilnbursement for services. Creativity and initiative are not desirable. Any deviation fro1n "the right way" cannot be tolerated. People can be trained to respond in a prescribed way to a predictable and recurring situation. It is possible and desirable to train in those situations where we know in advance that a situation will occur, that there is one acceptable way to respond to it, and that we can be reasonably certain that the way will be effective. Training usually involves hands-on practice in performing a task in the approved way. We can and should, for example, train staff to answer the phone appropriately or how to respond to electronic com1nunication in a professional manner, to safeguard client data from cybertheft, to use nonsexist language, to fill out a form correctly, to enter information into an organization's computer database, or to comply with requirements for reimbursement from a health insurance organization. Training is a form of socialization. It helps employees to achieve a basic role competency and to do their work in the acceptable way. It imparts knowledge and provides

Pro1noting Professional Crow1h experience in use of skills that are of immediate value on the job. Thus, it helps employees meet role expectations, that is, to "grow into" and learn to function competently in their current job. Training can be a very cost-efficient and valuable form of continuing education. Large numbers of staff members can be trained simultaneously. With adequate training, new staff members can become productive quickly and they will make fewer mistakes. This, in turn, produces less embarrassment for them and for the organization and makes staff members feel better about their job performance. They are then less likely to engage in absenteeism, they complain less, and they are less likely to look for other \vork. As job requirements change, even more senior workers benefit from re-training. It helps them to adjust to changes more confidently and comfortably. Professional staff 1nembers sometimes complain about having to attend training. But if performed effectively, they almost always appreciate it later when what they got out of it is put into practice. Once correct methods of responding to situations that can be specified in advance have been learned, they can function with more autonomy and feel certain that their handling of a situation is correct. Training can help staff 1nembers to feel less controlled. For example, if, through training, staff members have internalized the correct protocol for scheduling a home visit, it will just seem natural, correct, and an extension of their own work habits and style. Training is usually time-limited and relatively formal while supervision is ongoing and less formal. Yet they are mutually supportive. Training supports (especially) administrative supervision and vice versa. Well-trained staff members need less supervision. T heir supervisor, in turn, may be able to devote more time to supervising other workers who may need more intensive supervision or to performing other tasks. If staff members are well trained, they are likely to provide better services. As behaviors for which they have been trained become "second nature:· it allows them to devote more time and energy to addressing those one-time-only situations and decisions for which training could not prepare them. Confident, well-trained, and well-supervised employees have a tendency to feel better about their jobs. They can do better \vork and, sometimes, more work. What's more, training is efficient. The cost of not training is often much greater for both staff members and the organization (in errors and e1nbarrassment) than is the cost of training. Unfortunately, in a time of fiscal cutbacks, training sometimes may be viewed as a luxury. It is often one of the first activities to be reduced or cut out. This is an example of false economy. At a ti1ne when there are reorganizations because of funding cuts or non-replacement or "rifting" of staff members, it is 1nore imperative than ever that all re1naining staff members are well trained. 2. Education. In many ways, education is designed for learning needs that are almost directly opposite to those addressed through training. Education is the communication of a body of general knowledge. It is designed to equip the learner to be able to act competently in some future situation, the specifics of which cannot be dearly envisioned. Education is the only preparation possible for the one-time-only, not totally predictable situations that professionals often encounter. If we knew exactly what the situation would be and what it would require, we could do more than educate-we could train for it. There is often confusion regarding the respective purpose and meaning of the terms training and education. Social work students and educators are familiar with the confusion generated by their respective meanings and the frustration and other problems that

243

244

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities arise. Faculty members perceive themselves as educators, preparing their students by providing them with generalized knowledge designed to assist them in functioning in some future, unspecified practice situation. However, many social work students enter a program of professional education expecting an amount of training that, most faculty would argue, cannot be offered. They may expect explicit "cookbook" ans\vers, ho\v-to-do-it knowledge for use in practice situations. While social work education may have some training components (most commonly within field agencies and, sometimes, in practice courses where more skill-building takes place), the preponderance of curricula is designed to educate, not to train. There is a compelling logic for this emphasis. We cannot anticipate the precise needs of a client or client group in some future situation or what would be the correct decision or response of a social worker. Furthermore, no two practice situations and no two social work practitioners are identical. A social worker needs to be able to assess the situation, to draw on experience and generalized knowledge acquired through education, and to apply professional discretion in a unique, one-time-only manner. If social workers were only trained and not educated, they would struggle in adapting to the needs of an unknown future. For example, those who received their professional preparation prior to 1990 would not have been well prepared to work with people with HIV and their families when it became more of a chronic rather than a fatal illness, or to provide appropriate services for newly identified categories of people who are homeless. Or, social \Vorkers who attended social work programs prior to the twenty-first century would not have been well prepared to offer assistance to people who are victims of new forms of domestic acts of terrorism such as the Boston Marathon bombings in 2013 or unprecedented disasters such as the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010. They would not be prepared to offer help to victims of cyber-bullying or "sexploitation." Many current graduates of social work programs will still be working in social work practice in 2040 and beyond. They will need generalized knowledge that can be applied to addressing problen1s that we cannot yet envision. While so1ne training (e.g., training in the application of professional ethical standards in common practice situations or interviewing training) will always be a part of a social worker's professional preparation, it cannot replace education as preparation for an unknown future. Staff members often rely on education to promote their professional growth. They may enroll in individual academic courses, a package of courses leading to an advanced certificate in some specialized area such as gerontology or substance abuse, or in advanced degree programs. If resources are available, released time and even tuition subsidies from their employer are much appreciated. As staff members acquire more education and particularly if they are awarded advanced certificates and degrees, they are likely to expect increased work responsibilities, higher salaries, and continued career advance1nent. For the staff member, it would be demoralizing to invest the time, effort, and expense to go back to school and then return to one's old job with the same responsibilities, perhaps even with a loss of seniority for time spent in getting an advanced degree or certificate. Unless employees are rewarded for their educational achievements, they are likely to quit their jobs to go elsewhere where they will be "more appreciated:' 3. Staff Development. The third form of continuing education, staff development, can be especially useful to the manager in addressing problem situations or in providing staff with the new or updated learning required to function effectively in a changing work

Pro1noting Professional Crow1h environment. Staff development is a kind of hybrid-it contains some elements of both training and education. What distinguishes staff development is its specific problem focus. Changing knowledge, changing technology. changing service needs, and changing standards for their delivery are likely to create practice kno\vledge gaps and stress among staff members. In past years, certain problems have created timely and appropriate topics for staff development. In the early 1980s, it was often burnout or detection of child abuse. In the 1990s it was various topics related to managed care and, in the public sector, block grants and welfare reform. More recently it has been a variety of problems related to the widespread growth in the use of illegal substances such as methamphetarnines or "ecstasy;' the requirements of the Affordable Health Care Act, or the adjustment problems faced by veterans of recent wars and their families. Generally. staff development tends to address the needs of practitioners for current knowledge relating to a recently identified (or at least recently spotlighted) problem or development. It usually employs a short-term intensive for1nat with a fairly narrow focus. State-of-the-art knowledge is presented and discussed along with practical suggestions for addressing issues that may be encountered. Sometimes, experiential learning (practice in resolving them) is included. Staff development provides the manager with a useful and well-received vehicle for influencing employee growth. Staff members generally like spending time acquiring new and emerging knowledge and in addressing topics that are widely discussed in both professional and lay circles.

Providers of Continuing Education Many different individuals and groups can provide continuing education. Ideally, education is the domain of college or university educators. Training is usually conducted by staff members within the organization, at least within those large organizations where staff members have been hired specifically to be trainers. And staff development is a contested area that is claimed by those possessing various professional affiliations. However, these generalizations are becoming less and less accurate. Schools of social work and other academic units have hired more and more part-time educators from the practice community to teach courses as "adjunct faculty:• They may continue to provide training in the organization where they are fully e1nployed. Concurrently, fiscal necessity and opportunity increasingly have resulted in even full-time academicians performing training and staff develop1nent for human service organizations. Professional organizations and private, forprofit contractors also have seized upon opportunities to offer training and staff developn1ent. 'fhe current environment can be a confusing one for social work managers who are unclear as to just what they want in the \Vay of continuing education for their staff members and what 1nonetary and non-monetary costs they are willing to incur in order to acquire it. We will explore some of the costs and benefits of available options.

Employed Staff Members Certain obvious advantages exist for managers who select in-house providers of continuing education. They are already on the payroll and have made a commitn1ent to the organization and its goals and objectives; a certain level of organizational loyalty can usually be assumed. They also understand the organization and its unique needs, political constraints, and clientele.

245

246

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities Using in-house staff members requires only simple arrangements and agreements (such as release time from some of their usual job requirements), and a minimum of paperwork and red tape. Contracts involving complicated budgeting and time-consuming approvals at several levels are largely w1necessary. However, the extensive use of one's own employees and the short-circuiting of multilevel review and approval procedures can be costly. With no written agreements and contracts, monitoring and quality control are difficult. Too heavy a reliance on one's own employees can also result in a shortage of new ideas or creative approaches to situations. An employee may lack familiarity with and access to the theoretical knowledge that is readily available to others outside the organization such as academicians. Ironically, the greatest strength of employees as providers of continuing education is also their greatest liability. They are clearly identified with the organization and all the advantages that this entails. But this identification also threatens their credibility and, therefore, the effectiveness of their teaching. Will employees accept their expertise as they would that of an outside "expert" who may hold higher academic credentials or be an employee of some prestigious organization? They may, in fact, be very knowledgeable and competent in offering continuing education, especially training, but will their employee status make them suspect as providers? Will trainees seek hidden meaning in what they say or do because they are viewed as agents of the organization? They may bear the dual liability of being perceived as both "prophet without honor" and "spy:' Even normally accepted and well-liked individuals providing continuing education may notice that participants become very guarded and unwilling to be candid in relating to them in their new role. The usefulness of employees as providers of continuing education may be limited to continuing education activities where suspicion and doubts about competence and loyalties are least likely to exist. Generally, when we think of organization staff members as potential providers of continuing education, we tend to think of persons already employed as trainers or of experienced senior-level staff members. But social work managers may have another valuable resource at their disposal. As providers of one type of continuing education-orientation training-an employee's peers may be the option of choice. Peer training is "the use of a more experienced fellow employee to teach specific knowledge and skills to a new employee of the saine level and job description'.'6 It can occur in a classroon1 setting or, more frequently, in a one-on-one situation. Peer trainers are often assigned on a time-limited basis under the direction of an organization's permanent training staff member or some other manager. Several potential advantages exist These include:

• Accessibility. Local peer trainers usually are more accessible to assist the newly hired worker than are permanent continuing education personnel or more senior level staff members, whose time is consumed by program management and the many needs of other employees. • Individualized attention. Peer trainers who may have recently experienced the same learning needs as the new employee may be able to identify with and relate to their learning difficulties. • Choice of trainer. From among a variety of persons, trainees and their supervisor can help to select the individual who is the best match of personality and teaching/ learning styles. • Trust. New employees may find it easier to trust and to be candid with a peer. They will be less inhibited about asking what they fear may be "dumb" questions of a peer trainer than they might be in questioning a more senior-level staff person or a full-time trainer.

Promo ting Professio nal Grow th

Disadvantages of using peer trainers lie primarily in the way in which they can threaten the role and authority of the supervisor. They should only be employed in a way that it is clear to aU concerned that ultimate responsibility for the socialization, job preparation, and performance evaluation of a staff member remains with the supervisor. It should be emphasized that they have been granted limited functional authority (Chapter 7), and the authority is also time-limited.

Private Contractors and Established Continuing Education Programs Some large organizations (whether private, for-profit or relatively freestanding programs within universities) are deep into the business of continuing education. The manager who seeks continuing education from private contractors or continuing education programs within universities is buying both competence and experience. These organizations both want and need the work; continued employinent of their personnel depends on it. Providers generally have many years of experience in offering continuing education and understand what organizations want and what works. They often have developed attractive, copyrighted packages and know how to develop new or modified ones. These packages include such learning supports as workbooks, PowerPoint presentations, CDs, and other aids that are both well liked by participants and have a record of effectiveness. Established continuing education programs generally will allow the consumer to specify what is needed, but will take the responsibility for the more specific develop1nent and packaging phases. Since continuing education is a business to them and subject to the rules of the marketplace, they must deliver on time and satisfactorily. Dependence on future contracts-and the threat of possible legal action-guarantees it. Agreements with established social \vork continuing education programs tend to be relatively expensive. There are overhead and administrative costs to absorb, materials must be developed and purchased, people who deliver the training or staff development must be paid, their per diem and travel expenses reimbursed, and so forth. These programs also have their priorities. Since continuing education is a business and they intend to make a profit, they are most interested in those agreements involving the greatest compensation. They actively seek big dollar, long-term contracts that offer the greatest job security for their staff members. Managers looking for a single half-day workshop or other low-cost continuing education program may receive a response of"we're not interested;' or they may have to wait until the organization can find a time to offer them in-between other, more lucrative commitments.

Individual Social Work Educators The faculty n1embers of some social work academic programs in colleges and universities that lack freestanding continuing education units often are a good source of so1ne types of continuing education, usually at low or even no cost. College and university faculty members usually are expected to provide so1ne service to the community (along with teaching and research), preferably pro bono. They also need to re1nain current with social work practice. The opportunity to offer one-day workshops or staff development sessions meets both of these requirements. Thus, a request to offer them is often welcomed, especially by those who aspire to enrich their vitae for promotion and/or tenure consideration. Continuing education agreements with individual faculty members have a benefit in the form of the aura of the educator who, at least among some people, may have "instant credibility~' Academicians are presumed to have kno,vledge and expertise in their field. Of course, this

247

248

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities is not always true. Educators' credibility can be rapidly destroyed by a few comments that indicate that they are out of touch with the real world of professional practice when, for example, they confuse TANF with the old AFDC program or reflect a misunderstanding about what sexual harassment is and what it is not. And, someti1nes, educators are simply assumed to reside in their "ivory towers" and are out of touch anyway, whether this is the case or not. There are other potential problems in using people whose pri1nary responsibility is not continuing education. Certain errors in delivery of the product may be made that people within established continuing education programs would not make. Unless they are quite experienced at it (and more senior faculty members often are less interested in conducting continuing education than their more junior colleagues) there is less probability of a smooth, well-implemented product when using individual social work educators. Educators also may be tempted to use shortcuts to the development of continuing education curricula by trying to adapt content from their existing course materials. This can result in overly theoretical, esoteric presentations that may have little pertinence to the dayto-day needs of staff members. Educators also are accustomed to vigorously guarding principles of academic freedom. They may resent and resist a manager's efforts to influence the content and/or format of delivery. The manager may have little control over what is actually presented when purchasing continuing education from academicians who are accustomed to exercising a good deal of autonomy in what and how they teach.

Other College/University Units So1ne of the specialized knowledge and expertise needed within human service organizations is only minimally taught in social work programs. It may be desirable to seek continuing education that is delivered by people who are acknowledged to be "experts" in other related fields such as public health, nursing, 1nedicine, or law. Staff members may find it refreshing to be taught by those from another discipline. They may have previously experienced frustration with continuing education offered by in-house staff or social work educators. Of course, being from another discipline can also work against providers if they are perceived as unaware of the unique characteristics of human service delivery systems. A lack of identification with social work values and ethics also can be a major problem when using providers from other academic disciplines. Before choosing them, a manager should ascertain whether individuals who will deliver continuing education are likely to perceive clients and services in a way consistent with social work values. The best continuing education methods can be of little value when delivered by a provider who, for example, clearly believes all single-parent families are dysfunctional, that corporal punishment is the right and responsibility of parents, or that health care is a privilege and not a right, and cannot relate to anyone who believes differently.

Agreements for Providing Continuing Education Three basic types of agreements are used for the delivery of continuing education services by persons outside the organization. They are consultation agreements, grants, and contracts. Confusion regarding the meaning and implications of each of the1n can result in proble1ns and a great deal of resentment on the part of those involved. Whether in negotiating with providers of continuing education or in monitoring agreements made, a manager should be careful to avoid using the three terms as if they are somehow interchangeable. They are not.

Promo ting Professio nal Growth

Consultation Agreements A consultation agreement is designed to bring a person or persons into the organization because of some specific expertise that is needed. Consultants also are hired because they can be objective. They are believed to have no allegiance to any staff members (at any level) and no preconceived biases as to the rightness or wrongness of anyone's position. In human service organizations, it is sometimes stated that we hire "consultants" to provide regular ongoing services (e.g., case supervision) if no one on staff possesses the necessary credentials or expertise. But this is really a misuse of the term. These persons are really just part-time employees. True consultants are involved with an organization on a very time-limited, often problem or need-focused basis. They might, for example, be brought in to help to redesign an organization's personnel benefits, to computerize its client record system, to design a needs assessment for a proposed program, to teach board members how to conduct strategic planning, or to help the organization retain its accreditation. Less frequently, they are used for professional development, but it does occur. For example, a consultant 1night be hired to help professional staff members to learn how and when to use a new form of intervention with clients experiencing son1e problem. The consultant 1night be a nlanager in some other organization that has successfully implemented the intervention with similar clients. Actual written agree1nents for consultation can be quite formal (e.g., the Veteran's Administration requires extensive paperwork and higher-level security clearances), but they frequently involve little 1nore than a letter of agreement outlining the general purpose, duties, and compensation involved. Usually, a certain number of hours or days of the consultant's time are purchased. Some of the time may be used in preparing for a consultation visit if that is part of the agreement. The consultant may request documents from the organization to help prepare for the visit or even request that staff members perform certain tasks like compiling records or keeping journals prior to actually meeting with any members of the organization. Because the consultant is assumed to be the expert, the specific nature of \¥hat will be required of staff members during the visit may be specified in advance. This is often left to the judgment of the consultant, who should be in the best position to kno\¥ how to do the job. It is in the best interest of consultants to keep agreements as vague as possible. That gives them the maximum amount of autonomy. However, a manager who hires a consultant may wish to make the agreement as specific as the consultant will allow in order to ensure that the organization gets exactly what it needs.

Grants Grants are most accurately understood as a swn of money given to individuals or organizations to perform work in their areas of expertise. The most common of these is research grants, which are awarded because applicants are believed to possess the necessary knowledge and skiJJs to successfully undertake research in some area. Frequently, research grants are awarded to researchers and academicians to enable them to continue their research agenda or to allow them to pursue some existing area of inquiry on a larger scale. Common sources of grants are federal agencies (e.g., the National Institute of Mental Health, the U.S. Department of Education, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). University faculty members like and actively seek research grants. They can provide a significant salary supplement in the form of summer pay and/or result in a reduced teaching load. There are other attractive benefits too, such as budgets for employing research assistants, professional travel, or purchase of computer hard\vare and software. As long as

249

250

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities faculty demonstrate a reasonable degree of accountability in the expenditure of funds, the grantor will allow them to use discretion in specifically how, for example, they will design their research or how they will analyze their research data. Social workers are also familiar with program grants, sums of money awarded competitively to agencies to initiate, expand, or help to support a human service program. Common sources of program grants are federal agencies but also private philanthropic foundations such as the Duke Foundation or donor funded organizations such as United Way. Organization administrators seek and often depend on program grants for their survival, especially in the non-profit sector. In fact, grants for conducting continuing education are relatively rare. So why even mention them in this discussion? Unfortunately, federal agencies sometimes use the term training grant to describe an agreement to develop and to deliver what we would define as training, but also education and staff development. However, when this term is used, it is really a misnomer. Whereas the word grant connotes a fair degree of trust in the provider to develop and deliver a quality product, the requirements of a federal training grant are often very specific and rigid. Little autonomy is given. Social workers who, in the role as manager, are involved in seeking outside continuing education services should be wary of using the word grant to describe such an agreement. Despite the fact that grants frequently involve long written agreements and notarized signatures, use of the tern1 grant suggests that the organization awarding it will defer to the superior knowledge and skills of the grantee. And, in seeking outside assistance with continuing education, this can be dangerous. In most instances, a contract better serves the needs of the organization and its staff members.

Contracts Because of the freedom implicit in the use of consultation agreements and grants, persons in organizations who are seeking outside continuing education services prefer to use contracts. Contracts simply are more enforceable, holding the provider of continuing education directly responsible for delivering what has been promised in a manner acceptable to the organization. Contracts are legally binding; if continuing education is not delivered as specified in the contract, the recipient may not be paid or part of the agreed-upon fee may be withheld. In contrast, dissatisfaction with services based on a consultation agreement or grant probably will result in a tarnished professional reputation and the provider not receiving future opportunities. However, there is rarely any other penalty. Like a grant, a contract generally is awarded on a competitive basis-that is, several organizations or individuals usually "bid" for it by submitting a proposal in response to the organization's request for proposals (RFP). A "sole source" (no competitive bidding) situation is permitted only if it can be de1nonstrated that only one organization or individual is qualified to deliver the desired continuing education service. A contract for continuing education services is best understood as being virtually comparable to, for example, a contract a homeowner might sign to have new carpeting installed in the home. Material quality, time of delivery, and quality of work must be that which was agreed upon and must be approved by the homeowner or the homeowner is legally not bound to pay; full or partial payment nlay be withheld. If, however, all conditions are met, the homeowner is required to pay in full. The contract is designed to protect both parties. They are protected if events unfold in a way that one or the other did not envision or if it is later learned that their perceptions of what the job entailed were not in agreement.

Pro1noting Professional Crow1h Contracts tend to be negotiated and written out in legal jargon and in great detail. They cannot be signed by just anyone; often only the director and/or the board chairperson of the organization is authorized to sign them. Unlike consultation agreements or grants, little is left to the discretion of the provider or the purchaser, at least it should not be. Unfortunately, even the use of contracts sometimes does not preclude problems if the provider of continuing education does not understand the difference behveen a contract and a grant or consultation agreement. Professional providers of continuing education in private, for-profit organizations a.re well a\.vare of the differences. Ho\.vever, individual educators are especially notorious for confusing the three types of agreements. The mind-set of many educators is toward grants or consultation agreements, since those are the agreements that they see most frequently. They may mistakenly believe that any agreement for continuing education services provides for similar autonomy and exercise of their professional discretion. When they later learn that they are wrong, a strained relationship can occur. Another frequent source of trouble is the belated realization on the part of educators that a contract usually grants ownership of materials and teaching aids used in the continuing education to the purchaser (organization). Professors using treasured course materials developed over the years or new ones developed specifically under their continuing education contract may be shocked to learn that they no longer own "their" material. We know of one educator who some years back agreed to develop and deliver a workshop on burnout for a small number of the organization's child protection workers. He was offered just a small fee to deliver the training, but spent several days in developing his materials, rationalizing that it was a good investment. He would need the preparation time only once, since in subsequent workshops he would already have the materials developed, and need only deliver the content for the same amount of money. The evaluations of his workshop were highly favorable, and he expected to be invited back to deliver it soon to the next cadre of employees. It never happened. He learned later that a member of the training division of the organization had attended his \.Vorkshop, taken copious notes, and \.vas no\v using them to offer the same workshop to several groups of staff members, using the educator's PowerPoint slides and handouts. While contracts with universities for any type of continuing education are generally an organization-to-organization agreement, it would be naive not to understand that the success of contracts can easily be affected by who actually delivers the training, education, or staff development. Individual attitudes toward doing the work are likely to be affected by whether it is voluntary or been assigned, ego needs, financial considerations, career status, and other factors that can either enhance the quality of learning offered or detract from it. For this reason the manager should, whenever possible, try to learn who might be the best person or persons to deliver the content and specify in the contract who will be required to deliver it. Overall, when a manager knows what staff 1nembers need for their professional developn1ent, contracts provide the best assurance that they will receive it. However, until there is greater understanding of the differences among the three types of continuing education that have been described, some misunderstandings and related problems probably are inevitable even when contracts are used. Because of t11is, managers have a heavy communication responsibility on the front end of any contractual agreement. When agreements for continuing education services are not fully understood and/or providers think that they have been misled, it is the potential beneficiaries (staff members) \.Vho are most likely to suffer. They may not receive the enthusiastic, quality learning that they require to enhance their professional growth.

251

252

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

PROMOTIONS Staff performance evaluations form the basis for the manager's assessment of staff members' competence. Along with day-to-day observations. they help to form impressions of, among other things. who is capable of using continuing education effectively for professional growth. and who may be interested in and capable of assuming different or greater responsibilities. These impressions. in turn, help a manager to make recommendations or unilateral decisions as to who should be recommended for promotion as vacancies occur. When a staff men1ber is offered a promotion, it generally conveys a message of "job well done!" and the manager's belief that he or she has demonstrated professional growth and can continue to perform well in a job with different (usually greater) responsibilities. But selecting one individual when one or more others may have wanted the job can also cause resentment among those not promoted. Recommending one employee over others (who may also be competent) for a promotion can leave a manager in what feels like a "no-win" situation. Unless it is handled skillfully and diplomatically, a manager's carefully cultivated reputation for fairness can be jeopardized.

Common Issues In determining who might be the best person to fill a job vacancy, 1nanagers need to consider a number of key issues. Some of them are the same issues that we discussed in relation to hiring new employees in Chapter 8.

Constraints In unionized organizations, managers may not have the freedom simply to pick the person they deem to be best for the job. In order to maintain good labor relations, they may need to adhere to union guidelines. Affirmative action requirements and the organization's rules and policies may also affect who may be chosen. It is not unusual to be caught between labor unions with seniority-based requirements on the one hand and federal nondiscrimination and affirmative action requirements on the other. Women and minorities or people with disabilities may possess the least seniority, having been recently hired within many organizations. By union standards, they are not likely to be in line for what would be considered an "early" promotion. Yet efforts to eli1ninate discrimination (as well as our professional values as social workers) would suggest that, in the interest of achieving better diversity, we should recommend that they receive the promotion. Sometimes there is no perfect candidate for a promotion or a perfect solution that will please the opposing forces that can influence tl1e choice of a candidate for promotion.

Past Performance The past is a good indicator of the future, but it is far from perfect. We cannot be certain how an employee will perform if promoted, but past and present behaviors and attitudes give us some good hints. An individual selected for promotion (in the manager's perception) at the very least ought to have been doing a good job in his or her present position. While it is conceivable that a staff member who is just functioning marginally would rise to new heights if promoted, it is highly unlikely. The concept of "promotion to motivate" has little validity.

Pro1noting Professional Crow1h In addition to the fact that it is unlikely to be successful, it sends the wrong message to other staff members, namely do an outstanding job and we will overlook you; do a marginal job, and we may promote you. This same message is conveyed when an outstanding staff member is passed over in favor of one less competent because the outstanding one is vie\.ved as too valuable to the organization in his or her current job. Some managers h ave received a less-than-grateful response when they have paid staff members this kind of "compliment" after denying them a promotion. Consider the issue of promotion among social work professionals. Traditionally, the best direct practitioners have been picked to be supervisors. The assumption is that a good practitioner "vill make a good supervisor. However, this is not always the case. Successful one-on-one intervention, the ability to lead treatment or support groups skillfully, and other co1npetencies that are important in direct practice roles can serve a social worker well in the role of supervisor. Similarly, demonstrated community organizational skills or the ability to relate effectively to com1nunity leaders may suggest that another individual would be a good supervisor in a more macro-practice setting. They also may not. Promotion to a supervisory role entails taking on additional managen1ent responsibihties, for which an individual may be unprepared. It requires different competencies (such as the ability to work well with fellow professionals at different levels in the organization), and perspectives (such as an understanding of the importance of adherence to rules, policies, and procedures in order to not give a hostile task environment more reasons to criticize the organization). In the past, in many bureaucracies the most successful supervisors or mid-level managers have been promoted still higher in the organizational hierarchy, and the best of these have eventually been chosen to be the top-level administrator. While this can work well, it also can result in problems. By the time an individual is employed long enough to become the director, he or she may have forgotten \.vhat hfe is like in lo\.ver level positions or it may have changed over the years. Also, an unfortunate phenomenon can occur whereby staff members leave positions where they function \veil and continue to be promoted until they reach a level \.vhere they can no longer function effectively, something referred to as "the Peter principle:'7 Then they remain there, often at great cost to the organization.

Personal Attr ibutes and Demographic Characteristics What about personal attributes? How important are they in selecting an individual for promotion? They are less important than we might initially think. Certain attributes such as initiative, intelligence, conceptual abilities, problem-solving skills, interpersonal skills, integrity, communication skills, and commitment to organizational goals tend to be frequently 1nentioned as indications that an individual is capable of "1noving up." These are all good attributes to possess, but they and most of the others suggested in the literature are desirable among professionals and other staff members at any level in the organization. Besides, how much of them is desirable? For example, how much intelligence is necessary to be a good supervisor? We know that it is helpful to be as intelligent or maybe a little more intelligent than those you supervise, but at what point does a disparity in intelligence between a supervisor and staff members become a problem? We can also identify persons who are excellent managers but who, nevertheless, seem to lack one or more of those attributes often suggested as prerequisites for successfully assuming higher-level positions. Should demographic characteristics be considered? In selecting a staff member for a promotion, managers have been kno\vn to automatically favor a staff member who has the demographic characteristics of its previous occupant or even someone "vho is most like

253

254

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities themselves. This can lead to problems. Suppose the previous occupant was a white male and very successful in the job. That does not mean that the next occupant should be a white male. The job could be done differently and, perhaps, even better by a woman, a minority, or a person with a disability. Of course, denying a promotion to a qualified individual based on any demographic characteristic that the manager deems inappropriate for the position is dangerous in another way. It 1night be the basis for charges of discrimination. And, we should remember, selecting someone for promotion primarily because he or she has certain demographic characteristics can lead to the same charges. One attribute that is essential for someone being considered for promotion is the desire to perform more of the activities of a manager (See Chapter 14). A useful question to ask is, "Does this person really want the job or just the perks that go with it?" If, in fact, we are not convinced that an individual wants to spend more time 1nanaging and would work hard to be good at it, he or she might not be a good candidate for promotion.

Needs of the Organization The formal job description of a position may give only a limited hint as to the best person to assume the job. If, for example, it is a supervisor's job that involves overseeing a productive, cooperative, self-motivated group of professionals, one type of supervisor may be appropriate. Another position, though it has the same job description, may require a supervisor who can exert the control necessary to bring to productivity an apathetic or burned out group of individuals who appear to have retired on the job. Especially in the task of selecting a supervisor, the matching of potential supervisory style and organizational needs becomes extremely important. Should a manager consider only those individuals currently within the work unit (or, perhaps, only those currently employed within the organization) when a higher-level vacancy occurs or are persons from outside an alternative? Sometimes policies and, occasionally, even rules (such as the requirement that a position be advertised in the media for a certain nu1nber of days) 1nake this decision an easy one for the manager. But if a policy invites consideration of both alternatives or if no organizational guidance is available, it can be helpful to assess both the costs and benefits of the available options for the organization and its work environment. Consider the selection of a replacement for a case supervisor who has resigned. On first blush, a promotion fro1n within the work unit appears to be the logical option to choose. A pattern of continued looking beyond current staff members when opportunities for advancement arise can have a demoralizing effect on staff members. But if the usual practice is to promote from within, employees not only feel that they have a chance to get ahead but they also feel that their employee status gives them a better opportunity for advancement. What's more, managers considering their own employees for promotion are much more likely to make a knowledgeable decision (they are more likely to know candidates' strengths and weaknesses) than if they were to consider persons outside the unit or outside the organization about whom less is known. Why not tap the management potential of one's own organization? While a practice of promotion from within has a compelling logic to it and several distinct advantages, a number of cautions regarding its use are in order. Generally, staff members tend to favor the idea of promotion from within and its implicit potential for upward mobility. But jealousies and rivalries can develop within organizations that have a policy of promotion from within. Competition for a position that may become available some time

Pro1noting Professional Crow1h in the future can be a stimulus for productivity. But it can also promote an attitude that, for example, discourages sharing of essential information with colleagues (potential rivals for a promotion) or other forms of noncooperation. Staff members may tend to engage in largely self-serving behaviors. It should also be remembered that a promotion of a competent and proven staff member may weaken the ranks from which that person was drawn. Can an adequate replacement be found \vithin the organization (a double disruption) or hired from outside? Sometimes not. Arguments for filling nigher-level vacancies from outside the unit or the organization relate primarily to how this practice can help to avoid the problems related to promoting from within that we just mentioned. While hiring from outside does not directly deplete the work unit, if it happens too frequently staff may begin to feel career-blocked and decide to leave for another organization where the potential for upward mobility is greater. On the positive side, it may be less personally embarrassing for a staff member to have someone outside get the job that he or she had sought than it is to have a coworker be given the pro1notion. While staff members may disagree with the principle of filling higher-level vacancies from a1nong those outside the organization, it usually does not produce the same level of disappointment among staff members who might have wanted the job than when someone else is chosen from within the organization. Open competition for a position among both current employees and outside applicants would seem like a good compromise. It allo\vs a manager to select from among a larger pool of applicants. However, it puts a heavy burden on managers to demonstrate that the competition is indeed open in order to maintain a reputation for fairness. Despite the existence of such a policy, employees who sought and did not get the job often seem to \Vant to rationalize that a job \Vas "\vired" from the start. So, even open competition can leave some staff angry and resentful. When it comes to promotions, managers sometimes feel like they just cannot win!

Other Issues that May Be Relevant There is an almost limitless number of other factors that can influence the decision as to who is the best choice for promotion. They include, for example, whether the organization is in a period of relative stability or change, the political visibility of the specific position, the conditions under which the previous occupant left the position, the type of mentoring available to assist the newly promoted employee, and the likely reaction of subordinates and coworkers. It is virtually impossible to think of everything that should be considered. So1netimes a consultation with a peer can be helpful. It may suggest a factor or issue he or she previously encountered that may otherwise be overlooked.

TRANSFERS A job transfer, moving a staff member to another position at the same or comparable level elsewhere in the organization, can sometimes work to the advantage of both the individual and the organization. Sometimes, as a result of a series of performance evaluations and extended observation, a manager concludes that a staff member's abilities and/or interests lie elsewhere in the organization and that he or she might perform better and/or be happier there.

255

256

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities If the organization can accommodate it, which individuals are good candidates for transfer? They usually have one or more of the following interrelated characteristics: • They have a commitment to the mission and goals of the organization and want to make a different contribution to it. • Their career goals are not consistent with their current job. • They are performing their duties adequately, but don't really seem to enjoy their work. • They are "burned out" from the stresses inherent in their current job. • They have greater or different abilities than the current job requires. • They describe their current job as not very challenging. • They have stopped growing professionally in their current job. • Any problems in their current job performance are situational and not their own fault (e.g., a personality conflict or job demands inconsistent with their qualifications). • They represent a potential asset to the organization that has not been tapped as much as it could have been. • They are enthusiastic about the possibility of starting over in the new job. None of the descriptions that we have just offered suggests that a staff member who is perforn1ing poorly in his or her current job is a good candidate for a transfer. As with promotions, transferring a low-performing staff member to another position within the organization is generally not a good idea for several reasons. First, an individual with a bad attitude, limited skills and knowledge, and/or a history of poor work performance is not likely to be any more successful in the new position than in the old one. All we will have done is get rid of our problem and give it to another manager-not exactly something that promotes good feeling between us and our colleague, especially if we were less than honest about the staff member's previous work performance at the time of the transfer. The transfer also is unlikely to be received well by the staff member's coworkers, past and present. Even to previous coworkers who may be pleased that the staff member is gone, it sends the message that the only consequence for poor work is to be allowed to just start over again somewhere else, perhaps even in a more desirable job. Unless the staff member is somehow successful in the new position, his or her new coworkers will become angry that a "weak link" has been added to their team. In short, among the possible consequences of transferring a poorly performed staff 1nember, most are negative. There are better ways to deal with a staff member who cannot or will not meet current job expectations. They will be discussed in the next chapter.

SUMMARY In this chapter we examined some important tasks of managers that are designed to pro1note growth among staff members. We discussed why staff performance evaluations often are unpleasant for both the manager and the subordinate and why they need not be so. They provide numerous benefits to all concerned. We also emphasized the importance of fairness and consideration in conducting them. We warned that performance evaluations that rely too heavily on only easily measured evaluation criteria tend to be of limited value. Some of the most important attributes of valuable workers are difficult to measure. However, some use of these "softer" criteria is both inevitable and desirable in pro1noting fairness.

Promo ting Professio nal Growth In examining the role of continuing education in staff members' professional growth, several important distinctions were made. First, we emphasized the important differences in purpose, content, and process of training, education, and staff development. The task of selecting a provider for delivery of continuing education was given thorough consideration. The advantages and disadvantages of the various options \Vere noted. We also examined the formal agreement options for acquiring continuing education. Consultation agreements, grants, and contracts were defined and compared, \vith special emphasis on common misunderstandings about them and the problems that they can cause. Both staff performance evaluations and continuing education can lead to recommendations for promotion and, less frequently, to transfers. While both can benefit the individual staff member and the organization, not every staff member is a good candidate for either or both of them. We described factors that should be considered, including the problems that either personnel action may produce.

APPLICATION You have been assigned to supervise a newly hired but very experienced social worker. He has always received very high performance evaluations and was highly recommended by his supervisor at his previous place of employment. However, the place where he previous worked is a prestigious in-patient setting that specializes in the long-term treatment of people with severe psychiatric illnesses. Your organization's mission is to offer only crisis intervention with people who are diagnosed with similar proble1ns, and then to help them maintain themselves through a combination of medication and out-patient counseling. 1. What are some areas of new knowledge that you think your ne\v supervisee may require

to meet the expectations of his new job? What form should each take (training, education, or staff development)? Why? 2. What criteria might you wish to emphasize in explaining to him ho'v you ,vilJ be evaluating his work in his staff performance evaluations? 3. In conducting his first staff performance evaluation what might fairness and consideration entail, despite the fact that he is a very experienced social work practitioner? 4. When a higher level staff vacancy occurs, what would you want to know about him before you would even consider recommending him for promotion?

257

Chapter 11

Managing Staff Problems Learning Outcomes At the end of this chapter, you should be able to: • Describe when it might be appropriate to address a staff member's undesirable behavior by natural consequences. • Explain why group reprimands are ineffective and can be destructive to group morale for addressing problem behaviors. • List the usual steps followed in progressive discipline when a staff member's job performance is not meeting the required standard. • Describe how termination for inadequate job performance and for gross misconduct are handled differently by a manager.

espite the problems it can create, selecting a current employee for promotion is a relatively pleasant management task. It allows the manager to reward past performance and to suggest that a staff member is believed to be capable of even greater growth and of assuming more responsibility. Coordinating a transfer can also be gratifying if the new "match" turns out to be a good one and the staff member is both successful and happier in the new job. Unfortunately, regular observations and performance evaluations of staff members also can reveal that some individuals are falling well short of meeting the expectations of their current positions. If the individuals who are not performing their jobs well are social workers, the responsibility to take action is an ethical one, as outlined in the NASW Code

of Ethics: Standard 2.10 Incompetence of Colleagues Social workers who have direct knowledge of a social work colleague's incompetence should consult with that colleague when feasible and assist the colleague in taking remedial action. 1

ADDRESSING SPECIFIC PROBLEM BEHAVIORS Some staff members do their jobs quite well, but one or more times they engage in a behavior that, while not a major threat to the organization or its clients, cannot be allowed to continuefor example, a staff member spending too much time chatting with volunteers, is often late for staff meetings, or sometimes uses offensive language within hearing distance of clients. Let's look at two ways in which a manager might respond to behavioral problems like these. 258

Managing Staff Proble1ns

Natural Consequences With some problem behaviors, a manager may choose to do nothing, at least initially. A conscious decision not to act at the present time can be appropriate when, based on the manager's experience and judgment, a problem (1) is not a severe one, (2) can be allowed to continue for a \vhile, and (3) is likely to go a\vay naturally. Why would the behavior go away naturally? Sometimes it is something that, based on the manager's experience, often exists for a while and then disappears on its own. Or pressure fron1 peers ranging from the subtle (gradual observation that other staff members are not doing it and eventual adherence to group norms) to the direct (confrontation by one or more coworkers) will eventually cause it to go away without the manager having to deal with it. Teachers sometimes rely on natural consequences. For exa1nple, a teacher may elect not to confront a student about disruptive classroom behavior (at least for a while) because she has observed that if students do not get the desired attention, they stop being disruptive or, if they don't, other students generally will step in to exercise social pressures for conformity. Similarly, a manager in a hwnan service organization may conclude that it is usually not necessary to deal with the angry and frustrated outbursts of a new child-protection worker because, based on his past experiences, her outbursts are likely to stop as she gets more co1nfortable on the job and learns how to cope better with the stresses that go with it. Or, another manager may choose not to confront a staff member about drinking coffee in the staff lounge and offering it to guests while never contributing to the coffee fund because she believes that his coworkers will observe the behavior for only so long before confronting hin1 about it. Let's be clear here. The decision to deal with a behavior by natural consequences should only result from a careful weighing of alternatives and the manager's belief that doing nothing (at least for the time being) is the best course of action. It should not be confused witll the Wlfortunate tendency of some managers to try to ignore a sticky problem because they are just not comfortable dealing with it, or the tendency of others to fail to take action on a problem that they knO\V they should address while rationalizing that the problem might eventually go away on its own. Neither of these is dealing with a problem by natu.ral consequences; it is not meeting a management responsibility. Of course, the decision to control by natural consequences is appropriate in only a limited number of problem situations. Even some problems that 1night eventually go away on their own cannot be allowed to exist long enough for that to happen. Waiting for natural consequences to run its course is not an option. For example, an allegation of repeated intimidation of a coworker by a staff member cannot be ignored, even though a 1nanager might have reason to believe that the behavior will be extinguished by peer pressure (or by the victim's angry partner) over time. Or if a staff me1nber is treating clients in a disrespectful way, it needs to be addressed immediately, despite a 1nanager's belief tllat the staff men1ber \Vil! eventually notice that his coworkers don't treat clients that way, and he will stop doing it. In either case, the good of the organization, demand that it be dealt with by another means of ending it- perhaps, a directive (Chapter 6), a sanction (discussed next). or even something more severe.

Penalties and Sanctions Managers sometimes need to employ sanctions and to punish certain behaviors that, while not grounds for firing an other\vise good employee, are unacceptable and should not be

259

260

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities allowed to happen again. Of course, there are certain other behaviors of staff members that are so unethical or reprehensible that they pose an immediate threat to the organization and/or its clients. They require decisive action in the form of immediate suspension or termination. We'll discuss them and how to deal with them later in this chapter. Penalties and sanctions are not used too frequently within human service organizations, at least among professionals. There's a good reason for this-they are rarely needed. The behavior of professionals usually is adequately influenced by other methods, for example, by staff performance evaluations and by their professional values and ethics. Or, agency policy requires that they are addressed using other means such as either oral or written reprimands (discussed later), depending on their severity. Negative sanctions, while used infrequently, are a legitimate response that should be in the repertoire of the manager. While they have limited use, they can be very effective. When sanctions are in place and/or penalties occur, staff members learn quickly or are reminded both what they are forbidden to do and the negative consequences of doing it. The consequences can be quite severe. For example, suppose a staff member was reimbursed for travel expenses for nvo home visits that, it was discovered later, he failed to make. The penalty might be deduction of the reimbursement from his next paycheck. (The manager might also inform him that she will be carefully monitoring any of his future requests for travel reimbursement.) There generally would be no effort to hide from other staff members the reason why the penalty was applied. If they somehow learn about it, the manager's action would be an example to them, reminding them that sanctions and penalties are in place for misuse of the organization's funds. And they are not simply idle threats-they will be imposed. Sanctions and penalties can be effective. People will avoid undesirable behaviors when they understand that, if they engage in them, there will be a cost, especially if they see others punished for them. But sanctions are of less use in promoting positive behaviors or desirable activities. They can also have a very damaging effect on morale and on relationships between staff members and managers if they are perceived as excessively severe or designed to humiliate. Consequently, sanctions should be used very sparingly and only to address behaviors that fall short of being grossly unethical, but they still cannot be ignored or allowed to re-occur.

INADEQUATE JOB PERFORMANCE Often, the problems of staff members relate more to an overall inadequate level of job performance than to any specific behaviors or actions. In most organizations there is a procedure for addressing problems of inadequate staff performance of duties. It entails a sequence of actions of increasing severity that is referred to as progressive discipline. They are among the most difficult and unpleasant tasks that social workers in the role of manager are required to perform. If staff 1nembers continue to make the same important mistakes or otherwise are not performing satisfactorily, managers need to do whatever possible to remind them of their deficiencies and provide support for change, perhaps through continuing education, mentoring by another staff member, or by more intensive supervision. However, if improvement does not occur, they should be warned that they are in danger of losing their job. If they still don't improve sufficiently, they may need to be fired. If periodic employee performance evaluations have been performed conscientiously and honestly, they can form the basis for all of these activities. But even negative performance evaluations can be dismissed

Managing Staff Proble1ns by a staff member who may rationalize that they are the result of the manager's unreasonable expectations or biases or because she and the manager simply have a difference in style or a personality conflict. Similarly, the staff member may ignore the "friendly reminders" or nonverbal communication of a manager (such as facial expressions or body language) that express dissatisfaction \¥ith her job performance. When this happens, other forms of communication are required, ones that cannot be so easily ignored.

Verbal Reprimands The fust step in progressive discipline is usually a verbal reprimand. In some organizations, it is referred to as simply "counseling:' Whichever term is used, it refers to a oneon-one meeting (one that is in addition to staff performance evaluations) to discuss some specific deficiency in behavior and/or work performance. It entails a direct, private, and confidential communication of the staff 1nember's shortcomings. Depending on organization policy, a verbal reprimand may be required to be documented with a dated notation in the employee's record stating that a verbal reprim and was given along with the reason for it. The repritnanded staff member 1nay also be asked to sign it, confirming in writing that the verbal reprimand was received. Social workers as managers dislike the use of verbal reprimands. They require direct confrontation. There is nothing nonjudgmental about them either; they communicate the manager's judgment that the staff member has been found to be deficient in some respect and needs to change. Because of their distaste for one-on-one reprimands, social work managers sometimes have relied on a substitute that is both inadequate and creates new problems of its own-the group reprimand. The group reprimand is essentially a contradiction in terms. Unlike an individual reprimand, it is public, not private and confidential. Thus it has the potential to embarrass rather than to protect the offending individual fron1 the gossip and ridicule of peers. It is also an undue hardship on the rest of the members of the work group. Why is a group reprimand bad management practice? Here is an example. Suppose that a supervisor (Sandra) is having a persistent problem with a staff member (Jerry) who is falling way behind on keeping up-to-date records of his client contacts. Sandra dreads confronting Jerry directly about the problem, so she attempts to address it by means of a group reprimand delivered during a weekly staff1neeting. lt consists of a stern voice, a scowl, and a statement such as, "Some of you are not keeping up-to-date on your records of client contacts. This is against organizational policy and cannot be allowed to continue! I tllink you know who you are!" Sandra feels relieved to have addressed the problen1 while having avoided what would likely have been an unpleasant meeting with Jerry. She might even believe that the problem had been effectively solved. But what is the likely result of the group repritnand? Those staff nlembers who are not behind on their record keepmg will speculate on who Sandra was referrmg to in the m eeting. If they suspect it was Jerry, they will be angry at him for having to listen to Sandra's insulting accusations when they are not guilty of the problem that she described. They will resent the time wasted during the meetmg and will lose some respect for Sandra, \Vho seemed to lack the courage to directly confront Jerry. Some other competent and conscientious staff members who occasionally fall behmd on their record keeping for brief periods may believe that Sandra was referring to them. They will feel chastised, a little surprised, and shocked at the severity of her reaction. They •vill probably never dare fall behind again, even for emergencies.

261

262

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities Meanwhile, Jerry, the real object of the group reprimand, may simply assume that Sandra was not talking about him. Even if he recognizes that he was the target of the reprimand, he will be somewhat reassured to think that he is apparently not the only one falling behind on record keeping, and thus will be unlikely to feel much need to do anything about it. There will also be no written record of the group reprimand other than perhaps a vague reference to it in minutes of the meeting. There will be no proof that Jerry had been reprimanded for his inadequate job performance, should more severe personnel action later have to be initiated. Group reprimands can be destructive to both morale and the kind of productive organizational climate that the manager is expected to create. They are not a discharging of managerial responsibility; they are a shirking of it. However, appropriately used, direct, one-on-one verbal reprimands are an unpleasant but absolutely essential part of a social worker's job as manager. Conducted respectfully, they should not be perceived as a reminder of a power differential or hwniliating. They represent what is needed by the staff members who receive them; that is, specific, honest communication about where they have fallen short of expectations and where and how they need to improve in order to avoid future, more unpleasant consequences. If improvement over time is insufficient and a staff member ultimately must be terminated, verbal reprimands and the written record that they occurred can help to expedite the performance of this task.

Written Reprimands Usually after one or more verbal reprimands (and insufficient improvement), the next reprimand for the same problem is written. Copies of a written reprimand are kept, usually in the employee's personnel record, although a manager may elect to use an "tu1der the table" written reprimand, which, by agreement with the staff member, is removed from the record if the deficiency is corrected. A written reprimand is very specific. It spells out in detail what is inadequate about the staff member's work performance. It may contain a description of new requirements being imposed in order to address the problem and/or a reference to sources of help. The staff member is asked to sign it as proof that it was received and read. Like the written record that a verbal reprimand took place, it is an important part of the "paper trail" that must be kept if future personnel action becomes necessary. Box 11 .1 is an example of a written reprimand. Occasionally, a single action caused some relatively severe problem but was insufficient to justify firing an otherwise good staff member. A written reprimand could still be placed in the individual's personnel file even though there is no pattern of similar behaviors and there were no previous verbal reprimands. It may be used to send the message that a staff member used very poor judgment and made a bad mistake, and if it ever happens again, it could be grounds for termination. For example, \Ve know of one social worker who, out of compassion, allowed a woman who was homeless to sleep overnight on a couch in the organization's waiting room on a very cold night. The woman stole a checkbook from a desk and cashed several agency checks that she had written to herself, costing the organization hundreds of dollars before her theft was detected. The director was forced to close the agency's checking account and open a new one-a major inconvenience. The social worker received a written reprimand from her supervisor that was placed in her personnel file.

Managing Staff Proble1ns

263

Box 11.1 Example of a Written Reprimand Name of Employee: Mary Doe Date: 9/5/14 Dear Ms. Doe: This notice constitutes a written reprimand being issued to you for excessive tardiness and your continuing failure to notify me as required when you are unable to work as scheduled. You were verbally reprimanded for these problems on 6/3/14 and again on 7/1/14. However. reviewing your attendance record si nce then, I note that you have been absent on six occasions and failed to notify me on four of them (7/8, 7/11, 7/24, and 8/8). You were also absent on 8/19 and 8/ 26, and l did not receive information concerning your absence until the afternoon, when a coworker of yours sent me an e-mail stating that you were at home. The messages gave no reason for your absence, and did not indicate if you planned to file for sick leave or file a request for annual leave. Furthermore, since 7/1/14 you have been late for work on nine add itional days. Beginning immediately, in the event you are unable to report for work because of illness. you must call and speak to either me or my administrative assistant by 10:00 NA. You must also provide a physician's statement with a brief description of your illness when you report back to work. Emergency situations will be handled on a case-by-case basis. Annual leave must be requested and approved at least five working days in advance. Failure to adhere to these requirements will constitute insubordination and a refusal to accept a reasonable and proper request from an authorized supervisor. In an effort to assist you, l am suggesting that you contact our Employee Assistance Program (EAP) at Family Service. 201 Elm Street. They may be able to provide counseling to help you meet job requirements. You may call to make an appointment at 555-1234. All visits should be scheduled on your personal time during weekends or evenings. We must work as a productive. cooperative team and adhere to acceptable standards and practices if we are to serve our clients effectively. Your past absences and tardiness have made the work of your coworkers more difficult. Any further deviation from your normal work schedule may result in further disciplinary action, including dismissal. Please let me know if you have any questions about the contents of this notice. Received by:

:Mary r.Doe Employee Signature

Sa[fySmith Supervisor Signature

915114 Date:

915114 Date:

(Signature denotes only that this document has been received and read.)

264

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

Warnings and Contracts If insufficient improvement occurs following one or more written reprimands, a staff member is usually given one last chance. It entails another written document that is even more specific and is usually called either a warning or contract, or sometimes even a final written reprimand. It describes all of the other progressive discipline actions that have previously occurred and all of the continued problems since the last one. It outlines what must be done to avoid termination, and where appropriate (as in cases where the problem is required work that was not completed) deadlines are set. The manager makes it clear in this document that the staff member is being given a final opportunity to avoid either suspension without pay or outright termination, whichever is specified. The staff member, if he or she wishes to have this final chance, must sign the document agreeing to do what is required exactly as written. The signature is an indication that he or she understands that not doing it will be grounds for the consequences described.

Termination Termination of a worker who does not want to leave can be difficult for any manager. It can be especially hard for us as social workers, because we seek to help people, not be instrumental in making their lives more difficult. We are also taught to seek consensus, and some staff members never can be convinced that they are not doing adequate work and deserve to be fired. We might even blame ourselves in part for the staff 1nember's failure-perhaps we believe we could have done more (and when is that not the case?) to help a staff men1ber to become more competent. Nevertheless, firing a staff member who is a liability to the organization and its clients is sometimes a task that cannot be avoided.

What Constitutes a "Good" Termination? Even such an unpleasant part of the manager's job as firing a staff member can be made easier if we understand some of the issues involved and know how to do the job properly. There are several goals that managers hope to achieve when terminating an employee who, perhaps, did his or her best, but still fell short of expectations. Here are some of the more important ones:

1. Be fair and considerate. The same criteria that apply to performance evaluations apply in firing a staff member. Fairness involves making the decision after providing as much help as is possible and after carefully weighing the alternatives. It entails adhering to ethical standards and to rules, policy, and procedures as specified in manuals or other documents. 2. Preserve the individual's dignity. Every effort should be 1nade to not humiliate the staff member. The process should be kept as private as possible, so as not to unnecessarily embarrass him or her. Be direct, but tactful-there is no need to make it more "personal" than necessary. It is an individual's job performance, not the individual himself or herself, that makes the termination necessary. 3. Reduce legal risk to the organization. Try to avoid charges of discrimination or "wrongful discharge:'

4. Preserve the organization's reputation. Even if there are no legal grounds to file a lawsuit or grievance or otherwise protest the action, the reputation of the

Managing Staff Proble1ns organization can be damaged by an angry fired staff nlember or coworkers and friends who criticize the decision in the community. A manager should do whatever possible to help to avoid this. 5. Minimize disruption of the work environment. The organizational climate can be seriously damaged by the knowledge that a coworker has been fired and/or by his or her continued presence following notice of termination. A manager may have to make special efforts to address any disruption before it gets too severe and begins to interfere with the work of the organization. Termination because of unsatisfactory work performance is a "last resore' It follovvs a period of efforts to correct the worker's deficiencies. During this time the individual should have been told repeatedly what was required to bring work performance up to standard and that termination would occur if that standard was not met. A paper trail should have been accumulated; it would include a series of consistently low staff performance evaluations, oral and written reprimands, and one or more warnings.

Avoiding an Unsuccessful Termination Suppose that all of the required measures to ensure due process have been used properly and "just cause" has been established. There still remains the possibility that the decision to terminate a staff member for unsatisfactory performance could be viewed as unfair or discriminatory by others either within or outside the organization-something that should be avoided if at all possible. Before termination proceedings begin, several final questions may be asked: • Will most other staff members who work closely with the individual be surprised by the decision to fire him or her? (The manager should not be the only one who noticed that work \Vas substandard) • What similar situations have existed within the organization in the past, and were other staff members treated any differently? Has anyone else not been fired for job performance that was consistently as bad or even worse? If the manager has been documenting examples of poor job performance, \Vas sirnilar documentation kept on other workers whose work \Vas not up to standard? Will the worker appear to have been "singled out" or "set up" in any way? • Is there anything in the staff member's record to contradict the conclusion that the worker cannot do the job adequately? Do any recent performance evaluations state that the staff member "meets expectations"? Are there any letters of co1nn1endation, "employee of the month" awards, or even a recent small salary increase that was described as a "merit raise"? Any of these would make it difficult, if not i1npossible, to fire the worker at the present time.

In short, a manager should avoid a battle that cannot be won. To try to fire a staff member and then learn that it cannot be done or to fire a staff member only to have him or her win an appeal and be reinstated can be embarrassing for the manager and very disruptive for other staff members. lf it appears that a staff member might be successful in fighting termination now, it might be better to wait, carefully documenting work performance while avoiding any action that might preclude or delay future termination. A word of caution is in order, however. Managers cannot always wait until they are on totally firm ground If, in their professional judgment, the continued employment of a staff member may be so detrimental to the functioning of the organization and its clients it may be necessary to go ahead and terminate the worker even

265

266

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

though a battle is likely to ensue. With the current proclivity of people to file grievances and to seek restitution or reinstatement (even in so-called "right-to-work" states that offer little or no protection), they cannot be totally avoided. One who proudly states that "no one has ever sued me or even filed a grievance against me" probably has never taken a necessary risk. Lawsuits and grievances and threats about them are a fact of life for today's 1nanagers. They cannot afford to be intimidated and immobilized every time a staff 1ne1nber (or client) threatens to sue or claims that he or she is being discriminated against. Sometimes, we have to "take our chances" and fire a staff member when the good of the organization or our clients' welfare is at stake. That is why individual professionals and human service organizations carry malpractice insurance and many organizations employ legal consultants.

Conducting Termination Interviews Once the decision is made to fire a staff member because of continued unsatisfactory work performance, a private meeting should be scheduled. A witness (usually a personnel officer or higher-level administrator) should also be present. If there is no sense of urgency, termination interviews usually are scheduled at the end of the day or even late Friday afternoon. Then the employee will not have to face coworkers afterward and can go home to the support of family and/or friends. There are right ways and wrong ways to conduct termination interviews.2 The manager should make it clear from the outset that termination is the interview's focus and that the decision is not reversible. A letter of dismissal should have been previously prepared. It is given to the staff member at the start of the interview. The letter should be short and factual, generally a single line stating the fact that the staff member has been terminated and the effective date. Anything else can be dangerous. For example, there is no need to justify the termination-it serves no useful purpose at this point and can become part of a grievance petition or lawsuit claiming wrongful discharge. The manager should be direct and clear. This is not a time for pleasantries or social courtesies. For example, the first verbal communication might be "Shelby, you will not be employed here after the seventh of August" or "Suzette, I've decided to fire you:' A more vague statement like, "Suzette, I think you might be happier working somewhere else" is not appropriate. It is not direct enough and seems to imply that the manager's decision may not be final. The staff member will undoubtedly know the reason for the termination (adequate warning has been given) but he or she may still dispute the manager's decision or demand to know why it was made at the present time. If so, it is best to listen politely, but to avoid an argument by reiterating that the decision is final and by not becoming defensive. If the staff member attempts to bring another staff member into the conversation (e.g., they may ask >vhy a coworker is not being fired too or instead of them), they should be told directly and succinctly that discussion of otl1er staff me1nbers is inappropriate and cannot occur. Future employment advice would probably go unappreciated in the emotion of the moment and might only make the terminated staff member angry. Supportive comments that are intended to be kind also may be resented. Skip them. Some comments might even provide the ammunition for a grievance or lawsuit. For example, statements to staff members terminated for unsatisfactory work performance such as, "I recognize that it must have been difficult to try to learn so much new at your age" or "I'm sure that being the only African American didn't make your job any easier" should never be made. They are almost certain to land the manager and the organization in a discrimination suit. Make no reference whatsoever to any demographic characteristics of the staff member. Even if the

Managing Staff Probleins staff member brings up his or her demographic characteristics as an explanation for past job performance, do not respond. Be careful not to even hint that the termination decision was influenced by anything but the individual's inability to do the job adequately. Any benefits available to the staff member (termination pay, payment for unused vacation days, continued medical coverage, etc.) should be outlined, even ifhe or she appears to be too preoccupied with the impact of the termination decision to be listening. If nothing else, the manager's description of remaining benefits may help to underline the reality of the decision, helping it to "sink in:' The information can be repeated later by the manager or, if there is one, by a specialist in the personnel office who can assist \vith any required paperwork. After necessary information has been communicated, the interview should end. A termination interview should not be allowed to go on once the necessary business has been transacted and (hopefully) the staff member is sufficiently emotionally settled to leave the manager's office. After the terminated staff member has left, a confidential memo should be written and hand-delivered the same day (if possible) to confirm that the termination interview took place. A copy should be placed in the individual's personnel file. If there is ever a tin1e for the nlanager to be businesslike, it is in a termination interview. Any soul-searching and e1notional struggle should have occurred earlier, before the decision to terminate the staff 1nember was made. The interview should be conducted with sensitivity, but also with the legal interests of the organization in mind. If the manager has followed all appropriate courses of action and has made a decision that is in the best interest of the organization and the clients it serves, he or she can take comfort in the fact that, while firing the staff member may have been difficult, the decision to terminate was the correct one.

D ealing with Terminated Staff Members Having completed the termination interview, the manager may experience a great sense of relief. An unpleasant task has been con1pleted. But the most unpleasant part of the experience may still lie ahead. A staff member who has been employed for some length of time and is fired for unsatisfactory \Vork performance is likely to remain on the job for a while. Generally, under organizational policy, employees terminated for reasons of unsatisfactory work performance are given at least two weeks' notice at the time of the termination interview, sometimes as much as 30 days. Sometimes they have vacation time saved up and choose to use it rather ilian return to work. However, organizational policy may allow them to opt to con1e to work and to be paid for any accrued vacation time when they leave. The manager may wish to avoid the terminated staff member. The feeling may be mutual. But for a manager, this would be irresponsible. First, a follow-up interview 1nay be required. If the staff men1ber was highly emotional and upset during the termination interview, he or she may have failed to ask questions about the termination or may have failed to hear or comprehend all of what was said. A follow-up interview should be offered while making it clear that the decision to terminate remains irreversible. A terminated staff member often will decline the offer, wanting nothing more to do with the manager. Even if there is no need for or interest in a follow-up intervie\v, contact with terminated staff members should not be avoided. A bitter, openly hostile terminated staff member may need to be confronted and dealt with for the good of the organization. Even a staff member who was calm and seemed resigned to the termination decision at ilie time of the termination interview may harbor a great amount of repressed anger. The manager should monitor terminated staff members' emotions and behavior to ensure that responses to termination decisions are \vithin normal

267

268

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

limits. If responses seem extreme and show no sign of dissipating, it might be useful to try to refer the terminated staff member for counseling, but not to attempt to provide it! A social worker's knowledge of human behavior can be invaluable in making these kinds of assessments. The continued presence of a terminated staff member can be uncomfortable for everyone else in the \Vork unit. The manager who has made the decision to fire the staff member is likely to bear the brunt of anger from the ter1ninated staff inember and from any other staff members who might believe that an injustice has been done. Even coworkers who know that a staff member has been fired and agree with the decision are likely to have problems in knowing how to continue to relate to the terminated staff member. Some terminated staff members just do little or nothing and keep a low profile. Others continue to work hard (perhaps harder than in the past) up until their last day on the job. Perhaps they want to prove that the decision to fire them was incorrect, or perhaps they continue to hold out the false hope that their boss will have a change of heart. Still others seem more intent on stirring up as inuch trouble as they can. These individuals present special problems for the manager. Often, the attitude of terminated staff members reflects an attitude of "If I don't do what you ask, what are you going to do about it-fire me?!" (In fact, this may constitute gross misconduct [discussed next] and grounds for immediate dismissal). Terminated staff members also have been known to become openly hostile with other staff members and with clients or even to deliberately do something that will make the work of the organization more difficult, such as destroying client records or office equipment. It might be better for the organization if a very bitter, fired worker stayed home. But this may not be possible if the organization has a rule that terminated employees must remain on the job in order to be paid.

Case Example ' \ T eronica was the Chief of Social Work Services V in an extended care facility. She became aware of problems with one of her staff members, Clyde, shortly after taking the job. He did what was required. However. he made no secret of the fact that he disliked his job. He was not well liked by the residents who seemed to try to avoid contact with him. When, on two separate occasions. other staff members reported that he had made derogatory remarks about one elderly man. Veronica confronted him. He said he had "just been kidding." However, both her own observations and complaints by other staff members continued to confirm Veronica's impression that Clyde's attitude toward the older residents was. if anything, getting worse. He clearly did not like

working with them and openly expressed annoyance and often responded rudely when they asked for any assistance from him. Over a six-month period, Veronica developed a "paper trail" of her efforts to help Clyde improve his attitude and behavior toward the residents. She also adhered carefully to the facility's progressive discipline policies. Following the required reprimands, she gave and discussed with him a warning letter that outlined what deficiencies would have to be corrected if he were to still be employed after 60 days. He stormed out of her office stating, "I'll think about it." Clyde did not improve. Veron ica discussed with the director why she thought he should be

(continued)

Man aging Staff Proble1ns

269

Case Example Continued term inated. The director agreed with her and complimented her on the way that she had ca refully documented his deficiencies. Veron ica carefully rehearsed the termination interview. When she met with him and the personnel director. she handed him a one-line notice of termination with two weeks notice. She did not allow him to provoke her into discussion of the decision and never lost her composure, even when he stood up, pointed his finger in her face, and told her that she had been "out to get me" all along. He also cat.led her a "man-hater." She did not refute his accusations and reiterated that her decision was final. Clyde continued to report for work. but simply refused to do anything he didn't want to do. He ignored all of Veronica's attempts to meet with him. He told other staff me.mbers that he had been mistreated and that he planned to sue Veronica and the organization. He openly ridiculed her to other staff members for everything from her manner of dress to the fact that she was a single parent. He told a secretary that Veronica's son had an eating disorder "because he had been screwed up by his sicko mother." Veron ica went to see the personnel director, but she was on vacation. Her adm inistrative assistant said he was not sure if a terminated employee had to continue to report for work to get paid, but everyone always had, so it must be a rule. Veronica was frustrated. Clyde had four more days to work. and she didn't know if she could handle his behavior. She decided to take four days of her annual leave. rationalizing that Clyde might be less of a problem if she were not around. With Veronica on leave, Clyde focused his anger on the organization and its residents. He told anyone who would listen why he couldn't wait to leave. On his second last day, a nurse discovered two residents in tears and asked them what was wrong. She learned that Clyde had been telling the residents that the facility had been so badly mismanaged that it would be closed down soon.

The nurse went directly to the director to tell him what she had learned. He immediately called for two securi ty guards and went with them to find Clyde. He told Clyde that he was "gone" and that he would request a restraining order prohibiting him from setting foot on the grounds without being arrested. The director and the guards escorted Clyde to his car and waited until he drove off. The director then told his secretary that he wanted to see Veronica in his office immediately. When the secretary reported that Veronica was on leave. he called her at home and demanded that she come in to meet with him. When Veronica arrived 30 minutes later. the director was still furious. When she attempted to justify her actions, he barely listened. He told her that she had totally mishandled the situation since Clyde's termination interview, and that he held her personally responsible for the disruption that Clyde had caused and the anguish that it had caused the residents. He told her that a written reprimand would be placed in her personnel file and that her handling of the situation would be reflected in her next performance evaluation.

Discussion Questions 1.

Do you think that Veron ica was correct in firing Clyde? Could she have first tried other ways to change his attitude and behavior? If so, what?

2.

Do you think that Veron ica handled Clyde's termination interview well? Why or why not?

3. How was Clyde's continued presence following his termination interview a threat to the organizational climate? 4. How was it a problem for the organization's prime beneficiary? 5. What did Veronica do wrong in checking out Clyde's situation with the personnel office? 6. Why was Veronica's taking leave until Clyde was no longer employed not a good idea? What should Veronica have done differently to handle the situation?

270

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

JOB ABANDONMENT Some staff members do their jobs marginally well, meeting minimum requirements, but they are absent much of the time. Even if there may be at least a partial explanation for their absence (such as a chronic illness or a medical problem in the family), they can become a liability to the organization. They are not present often enough to, for example, handle client emergencies or to do their fair share of additional work that needs to be done. They are resented by other staff members and group morale is negatively affected. In many organizations there is a way to dismiss staff members who are chronically absent from work: job abandonment. If they simply fail to report to work for a certain number of consecutive days without either calling in sick or requesting administrative leave using the correct procedures, they can be sent a registered letter informing them of their termination. (We know of one employee who was terminated this way and who was later found to have been splitting his days between two full-time jobs!) Job abandonment can be a quick and relatively "painless" way to remove an individual from employment. No prior warning is needed. It requires only a written notice of the action (abandonment of position), a listing of the dates during which the employee was absent, and a reminder that he or she has been charged the appropriate number of days of unauthorized leave. The organization's rule or policy is cited. The staff member is given a date (a reasonable time period such as one week) to provide an acceptable >vritten explanation of his or her absence. Unless one is received, the termination is effective on that date.

GROSS MISCONDUCT Besides a continued pattern of inadequate job performance or of frequent inexcused absences, there is yet another reason for the involuntary termination of a staff member: gross misconduct. It is handled quite differently from the termination of a staff member for unsatisfactory work performance. Termination for gross misconduct occurs because an individual is believed to have done something so intolerable that he or she needs to be fired "on the spot:' Termination is the result of some behavior that has occurred on or off the job that is clearly forbidden in writing or is an obvious violation of professional ethics. While some types of this misconduct may be unique to the organization and the services it provides, there are many that are nearly universal. Some of them are listed in Box 11 .2.

Box 11.2 Commo n Examples of "Gross Misconduct" • Drinking or substance abuse on the job

• Sexual harassment

• Stealing • Violence or threats of violence

• Ethical violations

• Conviction of a felony • Behavior injurious to the good of the organization or its cl·ients

• Refusal to follow reasonable orders

Managing Staff Proble1ns Termination for gross misconduct does not require a course of progressive discipline. Like job abandonment, there is no prior warning required. Depending on agency policy, they may be entitled to fe\V or none of the other benefits that other terminated employees receive. For example, a staff member fired for gross misconduct may not be entitled to receive payment for any unused leave or vacation time. Prior to the actual termination, personnel standards may require a period of suspension, either with or without pay. If so, further investigation and opportunities to contest charges or appeal the decision take place during this period. Termination for gross misconduct is not a matter of discretion or judgn1ent for the manager; if termination did not occur, the manager would be faulted for not doing what he or she should have done. The continued presence of a staff men1ber who is believed to have engaged in gross 1nisconduct puts the organization and its reputation in serious jeopardy. By not taking immediate action, a 1nanager would seem to be saying that the behavior is acceptable-a message that no human service organization wants sent. It is also not what a nianager wants to communicate to other staff members. In fact, the quick, definitive action taken is meant to both rid the organization of the problem and to remind other staff n1e1nbers that the behavior will not be tolerated. Staff members fired or suspended for gross misconduct generally are gone from the workplace in a matter of minutes; the manager thus does not have to deal with their disruptive influence on the work environment. Of course, if the decision to fire is appealed or legal action is brought, an adversarial relationship may go on for months or even years outside the work environment. And, there is always the possibility that the fired worker will be vindicated and return to work, perhaps even with back pay and extra compensation for their "ordeal:' However, fortunately, this occurs quite rarely. The evidence against the staff member {witnesses, written documents, and so forth) is usually very strong, or he or she \vould not have been suspended or summarily fired in the first place.

EXIT INTERVIEWS An exit interview (usually conducted on a staff member's last day on the job) customarily is offered to all employees who are leaving the organization (except for those fired for gross misconduct). For those who are leaving voluntarily (e.g., those who are retiring, leaving to take a better job, moving out of the area, because of a mutual agreement that their abilities simply do not match the requiren1ents of the job, or even those who are victitns of a reduction in force), it affords a pleasant opportunity to reflect back on the time of their employment and to review their contributions to organizational goal achievement. The interview generally entails a pleasant exchange of compliments between the manager and the departing staff member and perhaps some constructive suggestions for changes by the individual who is leaving that he or she might previously have been reluctant to make. For the staff member who has been involuntarily terminated for unsatisfactory work performance or for job abandonment, the offer of an exit interview may be refused. The manager should offer one, but should not "force it:' But if the staff member consents to one, it may be beneficial to all parties. The combination of anger and embarrassment felt by a fired worker doesn't ahvays go away on its own when the staff niember leaves the organization. It can be carried over to a subsequent job or into the community and have a negative

271

272

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities effect on the public image of an organization. Bitterness about having been fired from a job sometimes can be partially "defused" when fired workers are allowed the opportunity to ventilate a little during an exit interview. If the offer of an exit interview to a tern1inated staff member is accepted, the interview can be a valuable contribution to future organizational functioning. The comments made by a departing staff member can be helpful to the manager in selecting replacement employees and in planning for the support that they will need. It also can provide insight into organizational morale and turnover problems.3 Even if a departing e1nployee chooses to make it an unpleasant occasion, the manager should regard it as an opportunity to acquire potentially useful information. Some of what the fired staff member may say is likely to be a rationalization or an effort to blame others for poor performance. When this occurs, the manager should listen, but not comment or otherwise justify (e.g., by nodding in agreement) to what is said. However, some explanations may contain elements of truth and can be useful information for the manager. They can provide the manager with insights that might lead to changes that will prevent similar proble1ns for some future staff me1nber.

SUMMARY In this chapter we discussed attitude and behavioral problems that staff members sometimes exhibit, and how managers should address them. Some staff members who are doing their jobs fairly well still engage in a behavior that is not acceptable. We discussed two ways that managers sometimes handle it-natural consequences and sanctions or penalties. Natural consequences work best with those relatively innocuous behaviors that often occur among newer staff members. They will, in the manager's experience, go away on their own over time or because of influence exerted by their peers. Sanctions and penalties are used with behaviors that are detrimental to the organization and/or its clients, often among staff members who "should have known better:' They are used less frequently in human service organizations than in most other types of organizations. For various reasons, not all staff members are dedicated, conscientious, or they may not be sufficiently competent despite doing the best that they can. Staff members who are not performing up to the requirements of their jobs require a series of actions designed to give them every opportunity to correct deficiencies. The usual sequence of events known as progressive discipline was described. It includes verbal reprimands, written reprimands, and warnings. If staff members do not respond to earlier efforts at progressive discipline, it may be necessary to fire the1n. We stressed that the termination interview is a time for special caution, as the terminated employee may be seeking ways to either get the manager to reverse the decision or to gather ammunition for a grievance or lawsuit. Another option, job abandonment, can sometimes be used to terminate a staff member who is simply not available enough to carry his or her share of what needs to be done by the work group. It can remove a staff member from the organization without having to take the time-consuming route of progressive discipline. Occasionally, staff members must be suspended or terminated immediately for certain types of behaviors that are absolutely intolerable. They threaten the organization and/ or its

Managing Staff Proble1ns clients. Firing employees for gross misconduct can be very unpleasant and it can be especially disruptive to an organization, but it must be done. Finally, we looked at ho\v a discussion with employees about to leave an organization, the exit intervie\v, can be valuable. It can be beneficial to the staff member, the manager, and the organization.

APPLICATION Listed below are seven events that might occur (and most have) in hun1an service organizations. What do you think would be the best method or methods for a manager to address them?

1. You are the executive director of the organization. You read the online version of the morning paper and see a member of your staff quoted in an article on "glass ceilings" for women. She is quoted as saying, "Where I work, sexis1n is ran1pant. Women are overworked and exploited. No woman can ever expect to advance beyond the level of supervisor:' (You believe that there is no truth to any of these accusations. The staff member is a con1petent and valued employee.) 2. Your office manager tells you that a staff member has asked her to order five green notebooks of a specific brand "to help me keep my correspondence better organized:' The office manager wants to know ifshe should purchase then1 for her at a cost of $15 apiece. She tells you that her daughter attends the same school as the staff member's son. The notebooks she is requesting are exactly the ones described in a notice sent to all parents announcing that they are required for purchase by all students. 3. You are the director of an after-school youth activity center for adolescent boys. You observe that a newly hired female social worker, a recent MSW, has been showing up to work in lo\v-cut tank tops and very short skirts and has been very "flirtatious" with several of the boys. None of the other staff members dress or act this way. 4. A client called to complain about a phone call that she received. It was from her social worker's husband. He was offering to give her a free estimate on vinyl siding for her home. After making some inquiries, you learn that the social worker (who you supervise) has provided her husband with a list of the names and phone numbers of several of her clients whose homes she has visited. 5. Two different staff members have reported to you that one of your low-paid and dedicated paraprofessionals has been going through boxes of charitable donations to your agency and removed some of the better children's clothes to take home for her granddaughter. 6. In reviewing recent financial records, you notice that one of your social workers has been billing the county Department of Social Services for two hours of treatment when she sees a couple together for one hour of counseling and three or more hours when she sees a family for an hour for conjoint family therapy. 7. A supervisee of yours requested permission to attend a professional conference in Miami on services to HIV-positive clients. All of her expenses were reimbursed out of the agency's professional travel budget. However, you learn from a peer who also attended the conference that she failed to attend any sessions for \vhich she was registered, and has been boasting openly to her co\vorkers that she just had the best three days of shopping she has ever had in her life.

273

Chapter 12

Financial and Technology Management Leaming Outcomes At the end of this chapter, you should be able to: • Describe the difference between a line item budget and a program budget. • Discuss how advances in technology have affected both the informal organization and the ways that communication occurs in the modern workplace. • List some of the new issues that managers currently face because of advances in technology. • List the criteria that managers should use in deciding whether a request for the purchase of new technology represen ts a need or a wish.

e now turn to two manage1nent activities that received little attention in earlier editions of this book However, in recent years, they have occupied an ever-increasing share of the time and efforts of human service managers at all levels.

MANAGING AND ACQUIRING RESOURCES The NASW Code of Ethics speaks to our ethical obligations to those individuals and organizations that provide the resources we require to serve our clients. It states, "Social workers should be diligent stewards of the resources of their employing organizations, wisely conserving funds where appropriate and never misappropriating funds or using them for unintended purposes~' 1

Managing Resources Well Historically, fmancial management has focused on developing budgets and monitoring expenditures to ensure that the organization stayed within them. It also entailed shifting of funds from one budget item to another whenever possible, if it became apparent that nlore money is needed in one area and less in another. We briefly introduced budgeting in Chapter 5 as a way of planning, for the efficient use of the resources available to an organization and its programs. We mentioned them again in Chapter 6 as one way in which managers can exert influence on the behavior of staff members-they can provide financial support for some activities while not supporting others. Budgets vary in type, in specificity, and in the ainount of flexibility that they allow. The line-item budget is probably the best known type. It contains many different lines, each reflecting some category of expenditure (e.g., salaries, office supplies, professional travel, utilities, rent) for the organization. It is inclusive; that is, every dollar that is

274

Financial and 1echnology Managen1ent projected to be spent is contained in one of the categories. A grand total appears at the bottom right, reflecting the total (usually annual) budget. Sometimes one or more additional columns may be added at the right to reflect projected expenses (line by line) for one or more future years. These numbers are usually based on projected income and the likely effects of inflation on costs. A line-item budget simply states how much money the organization will have to operate during the next year and ho\v it will be allocated to cover each of the various expenses that are anticipated. For sn1all organizations, the line-item budget usually works quite well. Such organizations cannot afford an on-staff accountant; the manager (usually the director) creates and monitors the budget. While line item budgets seem simple enough, they can be tricky in a changing economy. The cost of some items is more predicable than the cost of others. For example, a five-year lease for office space may make that item (rent) predictable, yet the cost of another item such as professional travel may change rapidly with the fluctuating cost of gasoline. Thus, managers need to be knowledgeable about, for example, what money can be shifted fro1n one item to another within a line item budget and what cannot, or whether unspent money can be carried over into the next budget year. Often restrictions may apply, sometimes even for items within a single "line ite1n:' So1ne federal grants, for example, allow an organization to shift up to 15 percent of the money within a line item from one expense to another without going through the difficult process of asking for a budget revision. However, larger shifts from one item to another are not allowed unless preapproved in writing. Within many human service organizations (especially larger ones), there are likely to be several semi-autonomous programs. When different programs exist, line items are generally broken do,vn by programs (program budgeting). Each program \VOuld then have its own column in the budget \vith a dollar amount on each line that is allocated to it. Thus, if there are five programs and line one in the budget is salaries, there would be a dollar figure in each of five other columns reflecting the amount of money budgeted for salaries for each program. If different programs share an expense such as rent or utilities, the dollar amounts in the "rent" and "utilities" lines would be prorated to reflect the percentage of the building actually occupied by each respective program. Program budgeting provides easier monitoring of individual progran1s and thus for more accountability than simple line-item budgeting. However, program budgeting can also create unhealthy rivalries between and among programs. Some individual program managers inevitably feel "short changed" when program budgets are constructed. For exainple, a manager may start to believe that some other prograin is the "golden child" with what she p erceives as an overly generous budget, while she is forced to operate within what she sees as a "bare bones" budget. Or, another nlanager whose staff me1nbers are working in cubicles may see it as unfair that her program shares the san1e percentage of rent and utilities expenses as another program that occupies the saine an1ount of office space but with newly decorated private offices with windows. Program budgeting also is sometimes vulnerable to "office politics:· Recently, in a large organization, a manager was delighted to learn that she had been assigned the seven new employees long requested in her proposed program budget. However, she quickly found out that she was expected to "unofficially" loan four of those employees back to her boss, even though the cost of the employees salaries would show up in her program budget. The emphasis on accountability that occurred during the latter half of the twentieth century (especially \vithin the federal government) gave rise to other types of budgeting. One that emphasized efficiency, especially the cost of each "success:· is performance-based

275

276

Part 1\vo: The Major Managemen t Activities budgeting. It was a response to the question, "What are you (usually meaning the taxpayer) actually getting for your money?" However, the lack of valid performance measures in many human service organizations, especially in the public sector, has made the use of performance-based budgeting extremely difficult. It or variations of it are currently being used in the non-profit sector. Organizations like United Way are using it. When an organization requests continued funding for the next year, it is asked to provide evidence of its successes during the past year. Based on it, the request is then granted, reduced, or even denied altogether. Accountability is also a focus in another approach to budgeting that was first advocated late in the past century. It is known as zero-based budgeting. It requires that an organization or its programs start "from scratch" each year and justify why it needs each dollar that it requests for the upcoming year. Unless a request can be justified, it is assumed that it is unnecessary, whether or not it was budgeted in the past. The goal is to eliminate those budget allocations that in the past went unchallenged because of the rationale that "we had money for it last year" or because "everyone has a line item for it." Zero-based budgeting is similar in philosophy to the so-called sunset provisions that now govern the continuation of so1ne human service programs. They require that a program can be funded for only a specified amount of time, after which it is to be discontinued unless it can demonstrate anew that it is needed. As is the case with zero-based budgeting, past funding is no guarantee of the future. Good managers are aware of the dangers of constructing budgets that are too rigid. Rigid budgets that disallow transfer of funds from one line item to another that do not allow managers to turn back unneeded funds, or do not permit carryover of funds into the next calendar or fiscal year can sometimes run at cross-purposes to goal achievement and effective client services. They promote a "spend it or lose it" mentality that results in some individuals spending money unnecessarily while others lack sufficient financial resources to be as effective as they might be. This undesirable phenomenon is even more likely to occur when next year's budget allocation relies heavily on evidence of full expenditure of monies earmarked for the previous year. Managers within non-profit organizations are especially aware that good financial management also requires keeping extensive financial records of the organization's sources and amounts of inco1ne and how it was spent in order to continue to maintain its SOl(c) (3) status. These records must be available for inspection upon request. Each organization receiving federal funds must also submit to an annual audit by a certified public accountant (CPA).

Fund Acquisition Skillful, ethical monitoring and expenditure of available funds is still an important element of good management. However, because of increased competition for funding managers now often spend even more time attempting to raise money. Historically, the funding for human services has come from some combination of (1) government appropriations, (2) allocations from the private sector (federated agencies like United Way and private foundations) , (3) fees (collected directly from clients or through third-party payments), (4) grants and contracts, and (5) contributions from individuals or the corporate sector. In recent years, writing grant proposals, negotiating contracts, and finding creative ways to obtain money from individuals or corporations to implement new, needed programs or to continue to operate existing ones have taken on ever-increasing importance for managers.

Financial and Techno logy Managen1ent In seeking fund ing through grants or contracts, it is no longer unusual for staff members at many levels to contribute to a proposal. Some of the specialized expertise required to produce a credible document with high potential to be funded can lie with staff members an ywhe re in the organization. Sometimes those with the needed expertise are even volunteers or students. We know of one manager \vho, noting the recent influx of Mexican workers into the community, concluded that the local county welfare agency might be willing to contract for translation services in order to help its caseworkers to better serve Mexican families. She sought and received funding for such a program, but with sign ificant input from several Spanish-speaking social work students who were former Peace Corps volunteers. They made suggestions that were useful in designing a program that was both culturally sensitive and appealing to those who awarded the contract. Successful grant writers are highly marketable and said to be "worth their weight in gold;' as agencies depend more and more on grant funding. Here (in no particular order) are some practical insights and suggestions that can increase the likelihood of successful grant acquisition: • Do your homework to see if you have a reasonable chance of being selected for funding. Foundations will have a list of organizations on their websites that they have funded in the past. Does your organization fit their profile? If not, you may be wasting your time if you apply for a grant. • The likelihood of being funded also is influenced by how proposals are submitted. Many grant proposals to government agencies or large foundations are now submitted totally online. This means a foundation that once received 100 proposals for $10,000 in funding now may receive 2,000 proposals. This can result in your proposal being a very "long shot:' Perhaps your time might be better spent seeking funding else\vhere. • Think of a grant proposal as a puzzle with many pieces. Allow sufficient time to put the puzzle together. Even for a team of six with a breakthrough idea, 30 days is not a sufficient time to complete a large federal grant proposal. Take the amount of time you think will be needed to complete the proposal and add a minimum of 30 days. With online proposal submission, you no longer have the excuse of, "It was mailed on time:' (Remember too, some on line submissions "time out" a session after 60 minutes and you will lose any work you have not saved to your computer.) • Some documents are almost universally required as attachments to grant applications. These include the overall organization budget, a list of the board of directors, resumes of the director and key personnel, the state's 501 (c) (3) letter of approval (when appropriate), and, in so1ne cases, a copy of the organization's last annual audit. Save precious time and energy by saving a copy of each of these to your computer and keeping a paper copy on file. We know of one manager who n1issed an important application deadline siinply because she did not have a copy of the organization's current budget, and both the director and accountant were on vacation. • Write clearly and simply and organize the content of your proposal. To receive a high score, proposals must have sufficient, specific information in each of the required sections. A reviewer of proposals may read 30 or more of them and information about the different proposed programs can begin to blur. Do not be afraid of insulting

277

278

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

proposal reviewers by "taking them by the hand" and leading them to required pieces of information. Use specific headings and mark targeted phrases in boldface type. If you are going to ask for $ 1 million dollars, have a million dollar idea. Many proposal reviewers will refuse to fund an excellent idea because a proposed program could be funded for $100,000 but the organization is asking for much more. Skilled proposal reviewers know when a budget is "padded:' Conversely, be careful not to underfund a proposed program. You may be applauded for securing funds and later criticized for not acquiring enough money to implement the ideas promised in the proposal. If possible, talk with people who would actually be administering the program to gain ideas about personnel needs, and the time, travel, or equipment needed to make an idea become a reality. Think ahead. For example, one savvy grant writer always asked for new computers in each proposal she wrote. If she didn't need them at the moment, she knew she would within a year. In writing the proposal, add phrases or sentences that indicate you have an understanding of the mission of the foundation or organization to which you are applying. However, don't force it. If your idea or proposal dearly doesn't match what the funding organization is seeking as reflected in its requests for grant proposals (RFPs), don't bother to submit a proposal. Skilled proposal reviewers can spot a bad match and will quickly reject it. If possible, try to place a phone call or send an e-mail to the listed contact person at the funding organization while you are writing the proposal. Introduce yourself and ask a quick opinion or technical question. Be professional and upbeat, and leave a positive impression with the contact. A part of successful grant writing, as in any fundraising, is about establishing relationships. Most calls for grant proposals will assign specific "point" values to each required section of the proposal. For example, the budget may be worth 20 points out of a 100-point total score, staffing worth 10 points, and the program justification worth 40 points. Allocate your time according to the point value. For example, don't spend four days writing an introduction section that is worth five points! Some requirements for a grant proposal may be listed last, but they should be addressed first, for example, letters of support which are letters from directors of other organizations, community leaders, and political leaders who know the work your organization does. They may take time to acquire (including several requests), so start early. The letters should be on organizational letterhead (even if submitted electronically) and should make a specific reference to the goal and objectives of your proposed program. Smart grant writers have informal agreements with their counterparts in other organizations, in which they will provide letters of support for each other if they know each other's work well and can ethically make a positive recom1nendation. You will need to allow extra time for letters fro1n community and political leaders, as they receive many such requests. If you are applying for state or federal grants, make the appropriate state- or federal-level elected representatives from your area aware that you are submitting a proposal as early as possible. Allow time for other readers to review your work, not just for grammar and spelling, but to see that every required component of the proposal is present and covered fully. While serving as proposal reviewers, we have seen some innovative ideas not funded because their proposals were not well written and/or were missing required infor1nation, while other much less innovative, but technically correct, proposals won out in the point system.

Financial and Ted1nology Managen1ent

279

If a m anager knows t hat grant w riting is to be a m ajor part of h is or her 1nanagement responsibilities, a grant writing worksho p is a "must." Excellent workshops are offered at m inimal cost by organizations such as United Way and NASW in some geographical areas. Som e private fo un datio ns offer gran t writing workshops for free, simply because t heir reviewers get tired of reading so m any badly writte n proposals!

Case Exam ple

C

larissa was thrilled with her new job at Services to Schools. The non-profit organization provided resources and other support to teachers in schools in the inner city where she had attended school herself. She knew all too well the difficulties teachers faced, often while lacking even the most basic of supplies such as books, instructional videos, or Internet access. During her job interview, Clarissa had made a good impression on the organization's di rector, Tabitha. She had strong references, supervisory experience, and excellent "people skills." She was told that the job required supervision of the five social workers who traveled from school to school in the inner city, working with teachers and students in need. Tabitha made only one comment that worried Clarissa. "You know our organization is grant-driven," she said. "If you are hired, you will be responsible for writing grant proposals to acquire funding. Your first one will be the Un ited Way proposal that is due soon." Clarissa had no experience writing grants, but thought that it couldn't be that difficult. An Internet search should give her the knowledge she needed, she assumed. Clarissa quickly settled into the job. She visited the schools. She met each of the principals, all of whom seemed appreciative of the program. She enjoyed getting to know the men and women who she supervised. She paid little attention to the item on her calendar that said, "United Way proposal due in 60 days." Two months was surely more than enough time to write a book. much less a simple proposal, she reasoned. Besides, their United Way requests had always been funded in the past. Four weeks before the deadline Clarissa looked at the instructions for the proposal and became

concerned. One section stated, "Give specifi c data on the reliability and validity of each of the indicators you will be using to evaluate the achievement of your outcome objectives." Another section called for her to include the logic model for her program and provide a discussion of each of its components. "What language are they speaking?" she wondered. An Internet search provided some clari fica tion, but it still left Clarissa feeling overwhelmed. Everything seemed so technical, and so timeconsuming! She called her most experienced social worker, Helen, and asked her to come to her office to provide some assistance. She was embarrassed to have to ask Helen for help, but she was desperate. "Our former supervisor has always written that proposal, but I'll help, if I can," Helen replied, sounding somewhat annoyed. Clarissa asked Helen to solicit letters of support from community leaders and school principals, since there was not enough time for her to do it herself and still complete the other grant proposal requirements. "I'm not sure they will do it for me," Helen replied. "That really should come from you, but I guess I can do it." The grant proposal was due at 5 PM. on a Friday afternoon. That morni ng, Clarissa asked the organization's bookkeeper for a copy of the budget, only to be told it was being revised. She searched for and eventually found a list of members of the board of directors and the organization's by-laws. At 4:45 PM. Clarissa's car pulled into the parking lot of the United Way. She ran upstairs. than kful that she still had 12 minutes to spare. The administrative assistant at the desk stared at her and asked, "Did you know you could have submitted this proposal online?" United Way did not reject the proposal outright. However, Services to Schools received only about (continued)

280

Case Example

Part 1\vo: The Major Managemen t Activities

Continued

30 percent of the fun ding that Clarissa had requested. When she asked for an explanation, a representative told her, "You know, your proposal received one of the lowest scores from our reviewers. It did not follow instructions in several areas, and was incomplete in others. There was only one letter of support. I had to go to bat for you in order for you to get as much as you did. We know your organization does good work and I really respect your director but, frankly, unless we see a better proposal next time, you will have little chance of getting any funding. We have to be fair." Clarissa returned to her office, depressed and exhausted. She passed Tabitha in the hall. Tabitha asked, "Did you receive my e-mail about the Clarke Foundation grant that's coming up? We don't really fi t their usual grantee description, but I think we have to give it a try, especially since we lost that United Way money. There's a short turnaround time, though, only two weeks." Clarissa wondered if she was in the right job.

Discussion Qu estions 1.

When acquiring grant funding or fundraising is listed as part of a job description, what questions do you think a potential employee should ask during a job interview?

What mistakes did Clarissa make as she worked on the United Way proposal? 3. Do you think it was appropriate for Clarissa to ask Helen to help? Why or why not? 4. Do you think that delegating the task of requesting support letters to Helen was a good idea7 Why or why not? 2.

5. Do you think that the United Way staff members were fair in the award they gave to Services to Schools? Why or why not? How might "politics" have influenced their decision? 6. Why would pursuing the grant from the Clarke Foundation probably be unsuccessful? What might Clarissa do that might convince Tabitha that it would not be a good use of her time?

Nontraditional Funding Sources The need to find new sources of funding in a highly co1npetitive environment has also brought other changes for managers. They have had to learn to think creatively. That has meant using some unconventional approaches to potential funding sources that a decade or so ago might have been considered inappropriate or even unprofessional. For example, one non-profit organization's director mailed out thousands of letters to people about to receive a one-time federal tax refund. She reminded them of their unexpected good fortune and suggested that a good use of 10 percent of the money (a reminder of "tithing" for those belonging to certain religious denominations) would be a contribution to her organization. The request was highly successful, especially among local politicians. Apparently they recognized that a small tax-deductible contribution was a bargain. They knew that a large number of the organization's staff members and supporters in the community would see the list of contributors when it was published in the organization's newsletter and might be impressed by their generosity-enough to vote for them in the next election! At the time that the contributions were rolling in, the same manager asked a mid-level manager who was a self-avowed "NASCAR fanatic" to use her personal contacts to see if a certain racing team would be interested in beco1ning the organization's sponsor. The racing team >vas in need of positive publicity after a cheating accusation and the organization could certainly use the increased donations they would be likely to get from its wider visibility.

Financial and 1echnology Managen1ent The Internet has drastically changed fundraising in the last decade. Websites are easy and inexpensive to create; nearly all social service agencies and "good causes" have them. Many even have pages on Facebook, and sometimes on MySpace. These developments provide the manager raising funds with both a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge is that thousands of other "good causes" are competing for funds online, along with some posing as genuine charitable endeavors that are really little more than unethical scams to take people's money. The opportunity for online fundraising grows as a gro\ving number of people now contribute to charity online (often through PayPal or by credit card). This method is especially favored among those in the 21-40 age group-those who will produce the next generation of charitable givers. The Salvation Army, long a familiar sight at Christmas with its red kettles, is one exainple of an organization keeping pace with fundraising changes. It still 1naintains an enormous nlailing list, regularly appealing by "snail 1nail" to loyal givers and replying with hand-written thank-you notes for donations. However, the orgai1ization also has begun an "online kettle" campaign for donors who never need to leave the comfort of their computer screens, and has begun to allow donors to swipe credit and debit cards at many of its kettles. In the twenty-first century, the most successful financial managers will continue to be those people who are creative, recognizing and seizing new funding opportunities as they present then1selves. However, good financial managers also recognize that not all opportunities to raise money for the organization are desirable ones. Sometimes, the correct response is, "No, thank you:' Why? If it brings in money for an organization that is in danger of not meeting its payroll, why \vould a manager ever turn down any opportunity? While there may be others, there are two obvious reasons why good managers might tum do\vn a funding opportunity: ( I) It is not an efficient use of staff men1bers' time and/or (2) it represents a threat to the image of the organization. For example, a manager cannot afford to assign three busy staff members to work a \¥eek doing nothing but helping to plan a fundraiser that promises to bring in $ 1,000. The cost (their salaries, the usual work they won't be able to do, and so forth) would mean that participation in the event would produce a net loss. Sometimes an offer to become a sponsor or to "partner" an event and receive a percentage of revenue from ticket sales or other revenues should be declined, even if it requires no staff input. The manager might conclude that the image of the organization would be damaged just by lending its name to it. Perhaps the event is not popular in the con1munity (local merchants have complained that parking congestion would hurt their business) or it is not consistent with the goals of the organization (e.g., alcohol will be sold). One manager we know turned down a "Battle of the Bands" benefit night, even though her organization stood to profit $5,000, since the sponsoring organization had a local reputation (and a police record) for street fighting and illegal drug usage. No matter how creative a manager is in seeking funding, tmforeseen problems and just the cyclical nature of our economy will periodically produce funding shortfalls. When this inevitably occurs, the margin for error is reduced. Efficiency becomes critical; waste of limited resources cannot be permitted. How does economic austerity affect the financial management activities of the manager? It may entail the development of new, restrictive policies regarding professional travel or the construction of several "contingency budgets" reflecting economic improvement, level funding, or further loss of funding. Managers in many state agencies \¥ere asked in the economic recession of2009 to develop "contingency budgets" \vith cuts of5 percent, 10 percent, and 15 p ercent. T his produced a kind of"bunker mentality:' Staff members needed

281

282

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities to be given input into management decisions and to at least feel that their opinions about where cutbacks would be most or least destructive were considered. Unfortunately, this did not always occur.

TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT There was a time in the twentieth century when we took for granted the statement that the invention of the automobile did more to change life than any other invention in history. (Prior to that, it was gunpowder.) Now there is almost universal agreement that the computer has that distinction. The successful use of information technology (IT) in hwnan service organizations depends heavily on the knowledge and sensitivity of managers. Depending on how they choose to use it or prevent its use, it can be either a bonanza or an impediment to achievement of organizational goals. Generally, it is somewhere in between. Information technology has made dramatic changes in the workplace. We regularly use e-mail and text messaging to communicate with colleagues at distant geographical locations or just down the hall. We read professional journals online. We download a vast amount of information to assist us in performing daily tasks. As noted earlier, we often receive RFPs and sub1nit our funding proposals online. Many tasks that previously were accomplished through face-to-face contact, or at least a phone call, now are accomplished by computer. Even "virtual meetings" are becoming common. For example, managers serve on advisory boards for other organizations in which all meetings are conducted using Skype with members never leaving their offices. This can be a real time-saver for a manager. Of course, the downside to it may be a loss of valuable networking as well as other proble1ns that can result when one lacks access to important nonverbal communication.

Changes That Have Occurred We have already seen dramatic changes in the workplace created by the introduction of information technology. We will mention just a few of them in the hope that they will in son1e way prepare us for the unknown changes yet to come.

The Informal Organization An increase in dependence on technology can cause rapid, upsetting changes to the informal organization in many work settings. Some individuals are quickly catapulted to positions of high value and status. They generally are those who are "technology geeks" and >vho relish the opportw1ity to co1nbine their avocation with their job. They not only know about and already use the latest technology but also know how to speak the language. Their comfort with the jargon makes them the envy of those who are struggling just to learn basic skills. They are clearly "one up" on their less computer knowledgeable coworkers and, often, their bosses. They can choose to become invaluable team members, giving unselfishly of their ti1ne and expertise. Or, if so inclined, they may prefer to build a power base by helping those who pay deference to them and denying assistance to those who do not. Those who quickly rise to the top of the informal organization are likely to be individuals who are relatively new to a human service organization. They are likely to be

Financial and 1echnology Managen1ent younger and/or recent graduates who have grown up with technology. In the past, they normally \VOuld have had to wait a long while before obtaining status and/or power in the informal organization through interpersonal and political skill or by demonstrating over time that they are very competent employees. But now they simply have mastered a technical skill that some others find baffling. Mean\vhile, the "old hand" worker who earned a position of status over a period of years on the job may suddenly be devalued in the eyes of the \Vork group. Knowledge and skills that previously were admired suddenly may be perceived as obsolete to others. For example, client intake diagnostic skills and insights that have been developed over many years suddenly may be less important than the technical skill needed to use a software package that can generate a psychiatric diagnosis from data entered by clients themselves. In an organization where technology is highly valued, competence can easily become synonymous with using the latest and tiniest handheld device or in instantly accessing needed information from the Internet.

Communication Logically, inforn1ation technology should produce better communication, and better co1nmunication should result in better decision making. At least that is the way it is supposed to \VOrk. But, better access to vehicles for information transfer may or may not produce better communication. At least initially, many organizations experienced increased human isolation among staff members, a condition that is hardly conducive to better communication. In most human service organizations, information technology was first introduced \Yhen clerical staff began to use computers for word processing. Soon most professional staff learned to perform basic tasks like \vord processing, data entry and analysis, and intra-organization communication for themselves. Clerical staff members had little to do and \Vere reassigned to other tasks. Professional staff members had much less need to interact with them or with each other. While, previously, even those \Vho did not like each other much had to interact and cooperate to get their \VOrk done, face-to-face interaction now \Vas rarely required. Office doors often ren1ained closed and direct contact was greatly reduced. The changes in communication that often accompanied the introduction of information technology into human service organizations in the late twentieth century provided a hint of changes that occurred later. Communication continued to become faster and easier. Access to vast a1nounts of data available through the Internet (some more reliable than others) made part of the job of a manager easier. For exainple, when confronted wiili a proble1n or a difficult decision, a 1nanager quickly "googled" to access research and theory on the topic or to learn how peers approach it. Have there been otl1er costs to the ever-increasing reliance on technology for communication? Yes, there have. E-mail provides a good example. Managers now must spend a considerable amount of time screening hundreds of e-mails to decide what requires an instant response, what can wait, and what can be trashed. E-mail also affected the quality of communication. There is no longer a need for pleasantries or social amenities. Why bother to ask about the fanilly or inquire about a colleague's health?-just get to the point. Some people choose not to use full sentences or worry about grammar or syntax; they use abbreviations for common phrases. This may be efficient communication, but is it good communication, the kind that builds valuable

283

284

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities relationships among colleagues and others? Does it promote valuable networking? Does it convey the message that we value others as human beings and that we really want to establish a good working relationship with them? What about our clients? Has our communication with them been affected by technology? Can today's social workers who never have to use their voices or observe and interpret body language in communicating \vith peers be able to do it when they need to do so with their clients? Will they be able to effectively conduct an interview or build a therapeutic relationship with them? Can they bear to be "disconnected" long enough to listen attentively to their problems? Will a verbal interchange devoid of the assistance of technology seem incredibly boring to them? None of these potential problems (most of which we are only beginning to explore) is insurmountable. With good management practices, technology can be much more of an asset to our work performance than a liability. However, that won't just happen unless managers work to make it happen.

The Techno logy Deluge In previous years, a discussion of technology in the workplace might have been a brief, straightforward discussion of the proper use of the Internet. With the advent of wireless communication, Facebook, Twitter, Tweeter, and other forms of distraction, technology issues at work are now far inore extensive and complex for a manager. One way to evaluate new forms at technology is to ask, "Do they increase productivity?" If so, they may become a useful tool in the workplace. The same devices that can be used to increase productivity can, however, become a distraction. The manager must walk a fine line in making decisions about what is allowed or whether the organization as a whole should put restrictions on their use. As early as 1998, one author observed that some managers had become preoccupied with what had been termed the information technology paradox. 2 The progress of technology in our lives was unprecedented and almost unimaginable. But, Krugman asked, has it raised staff productivity and cost efficiency? He suggested that "That $2,000 computer on your employee's desk may well impose $8,000 a year in hidden costs:' including technical support, new software, and repeated training of employees. While Krug1nan's numbers now seem out of date with computers becoming less expensive and as more organizations are encouraging staff members to use their personal computers at work rather than providing them, his concern is still valid. Managers still need to be aware of the tradeoffs between hidden costs and increased productivity. A blanket faith in the benefits of information technology can backfire and end up costing the organization more than it saves.

The Internet Once a luxury in the workplace, the Internet is now an integral part of it. With a few clicks of a mouse, the worker can now Google directions to a client's house, find background information on a potential donor to a foundation, or read the latest research on a client's mental health diagnosis. Productivity should be greatly increased. However, from e-mailing or texting friends and family to bidding on E-Bay or shopping on Amazon

Financial and 1echnology Managen1ent to watching last night's reality series on You Tube, workers can easily spend their entire office day on nonproductive Internet activities. In 1993, Galletta and Polak completed a study of 571 workers in agencies with Internet access. 3 Even back then, they found that workers spent an average of 10.4 hours, or 25 percent of their work week on personal Internet use. Low job satisfaction also was tied to heavier Internet use. The researchers found that males, computer novices, and employees in small firms were more likely to abuse the Internet at work. Females, more experienced employees, and those working in large agencies were less inclined to abuse it. After personal e-mail, reading news and entertainment websites, pursuing hobbies, and shopping \Vere the most frequent examples of electronic time-wasting. Many agencies and organizations have attempted to place lockouts on what sites are available, much like the parental blocks used by parents on ho1ne computers. With lockouts, agencies can block out virtually any site, such as You Tube, to employees. The choices of what to block and how to block it are sometimes complex. Precipitous decisions can be costly. For example, child protective services workers seeking to learn about best practices for working with victims of sexual abuse may be frustrated to find that any sites containing the word "sex" have been blocked by an overzealous manager attempting to prohibit staff members from viewing pornography online. Other agencies and managers practice control of the Internet passively, by examining the browser history on the organization's computers. Until fairly recently, a manager could use software such as Index-Datto review the personal browsing history of a staff member on a computer, even when the worker had cleared personal files. However, the Index-Dat method only worked on earlier computers and did not work on Firefox and Safari because they use different caching methods, both of which can be easily, and reliably, cleared by the user. So, if the employee is even moderately careful, managers are going to have a hard time monitoring browser use after the fact on the their staff members' workstations. And, if they are using their personal computers for performing \vork related tasks, monitoring of sites previously visited is not possible unless they agree to hand over administrative control of their computers to the organization. Other strategies for reducing Internet abuse (besides the blocking methods described earlier) include placing staff members in highly visible \vork settings and e1nploying strict productivity quotas and measures. However, they may have a cost in morale. They do not convey a message of mutual respect and the belief that employees will want to be productive and do a good job. They seem quite "Theory X "(Chapter 4), and may only encourage staff 1nembers to find new ways to engage in Internet abuse. Managers have an obligation to let their employees know that any information obtained on the Internet on an organization-owned computer is available to the organization. This has not always been done, or the 1nessage just didn't register. One example of this occttrred when a recent MSW graduate was hired to provide Spanish interpretation and translation for a state public health agency. Often there were times when he was sitting idly at his desk. As months went by, though, he spent more and more time at his organization-issued computer. He often would become annoyed when asked to interpret for Spanish-speaking clients. On a hunch, his supervisor checked the history of websites he frequently visited. He was fued when it was determined that he had been participating in frequent day trading on the Ne\v York Stock Exchange during work hours. If the organization has its own network run by a net,vork administrator, there are many \Vays that a manager can control Internet access and computer use. As long as

285

286

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities staff me1nbers do not have administrator-level access on the computers they use, most of these methods will be effective, but each involves a tradeoff between security and productivity. • Port-blocking software on individual computers. This software blocks network traffic on the ports used by chat and instant 1nessaging services (Skype, AOL, Yahoo!, Microsoft, etc.). Limited port blocking is also included with later Windows versions. • Pro: It keeps people from abusing these applications. • Con: It keeps people from using these applications at all. • IPSec policies. The network administrator can set up these policies to control the flow of traffic over the network, including access to the network server, peer-to-peer access to individual computers on the network, and access to remote servers off the local network (like a corporate server). These policies do not monitor or control Internet access per se, but they are essential when working on large networks with different levels of access for different types of user accounts (managers, paid employees, volunteers, and so forth). • Pro: They control access to different levels of the network and maintain network security. • Con: They require advance decisions about user access and a staff member needs to be assigned the role of network administrator to maintain them. • Firewalls. A firewall is a barrier between the user and the rest of the network, including the Internet; it monitors traffic like a security guard monitors access to and from a building. Essentially, a firewall does all at once what port-blocking software does for individual ports: it controls incoming and outgoing traffic on all ports simultaneously. Most firewalls can be configured to block or open specific ports either by port number (531) or application name (AOL Instant Messenger), and once configured, these settings can be locked out to non-administrator users. In effect, lower-level users will not be able to access the Internet, or other computers, using the blocked software. For networks using a wireless router and employees' personal computers, the network administrator can block ports at the router firewall but not at the individual computers. With routers, this blocking is less efficient because some messaging software (Yahoo!, for instance) defaults to port 80 if its preferred ports are blocked. Blocking port 80, though, means blocking all Internet access. • Pro: Firewalls are absolutely critical for security on any network, especially networks with Internet access. They keep hackers out, they limit application access both on and off the network, and in some cases they can prevent malware and Trojans on an infected computer from sending sensitive information from the infected computer to off-network computers. A network computer without a frrewall is like a house or a car without locked doors. • Con: They need to be configured for each organization's needs, and beyond the very basic settings, this configuration requires a professional network administrator. • Windows user accounts. Windows user accounts are the easiest way for a network administrator to limit network access and software configurations on organization O\vned computers. For each user account, the administrator can decide whether or

Financial and Techno logy Managen1ent not software or hardware can be installed, whether or not certain applications already installed can be used, and whether or not other computers or hardware on the network can be accessed. While user accounts don't govern specific Internet behavior, they can prevent users from installing Internet-related sofhvare (Yahoo! or Instant Messenger, for example), and they can also limit damage from malware and malicious \Vebsites that users might stumble across during legitimate (or illegitimate) activities. User accounts are the first line of defense for protecting computers. In fact, most security professionals recommend using a limited-access account during day to day use, even for advanced users. • Pro: User accounts limit user access to critical computer and network functions. This limited access makes security breaches and system failure less likely. • Con: Some accounts limit user access to critical computer functions even when access to those functions is necessary. Like IPSec, using them requires advanced decisions about who gets access, and maintaining them requires a network administrator. • Parental controls in the web browser. Although employees will likely resent the implication, parental controls can block sites by content type, do1nain, or specific >veb address. These require administrator level access to configure, but they can be changed by anyone else with that access. Parental controls are the first line of defense for network administrators who want to restrict access to sites like Facebook, MySpace, and other social networking sites. Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 and later versions come with good parental controls, and retail soft•vare is widely available both online and in stores. As \vith browser controls, using this software requires Windows user accounts \vith limited access for employees. • Pro: Parental controls restrict access to websites managers want to keep off limits. • Con: They may be perceived as demeaning by employees. They can also limit, sometimes severely, access to legitimate sites when not configured properly. Managers \vho implement some or all of these controls still need to be aware of steps employees can take to conceal inappropriate computer, net\vork, or Internet use. Managers who rely on none of the above should take special note. They may include: 1. Clearing the browser history and cache.

2. Installing their own software but hiding the icons from the Desktop or the Start Menu. 3. Adding personal files (picttues, videos, songs etc.) to an organization computer and storing the1n in out-of-the-way places or hidden directories. Advanced users can, and will, find more sophisticated ways to hide illicit activities, and managers should always be cautious about being over-confident in their own ability to detect them (for every better mousetrap there's a smarter mouse). When security or liability is particularly important, a good manager may have to rely on IT professionals to set up and maintain the organization's network. Overall, managers should approach information technology as a balancing act: they need to determine their organization's needs and weigh those needs against the costs of setting up, securing, and maintaining a computer network. For a small, local non-profit organization, most of the options described here would be overkill. For a large organization that handles sensitive or confidential information on a computer network-especially

287

288

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities

a network with Internet access-all, and even more, of these steps are a 1nust. Managers need to decide for themselves where the balance lies, but they should always remain aware that IT is a trade-off between the costs of implementing it and the benefits and risks of using it.

E-Mail E-mail can be the best friend and the worst enemy of a manager. During the first part of this century, e-mail became the communication of choice among social workers. It is not hard to see why. E-mail is quick, it can be short and to the point, and it enables the sender to communicate with dozens, or even hundreds, of people at once. Other potential benefits of e-mail include improved client co1nmunication and support and easy access from a variety of sources, including laptops, PDAs, and cell phones. Remember, however, there is no way to "unsend" an e-mail that has already been sent. Before sending an e-mail, anyone should always think, "What would happen if this e-mail were to be shared with someone else or even become public knowledge?" In fact, each time an e-mail is sent within an organization, it can provide evidence for or against charges such as sexual harassn1ent, discrimination, and/or wrongful termination of employment. Even when e-mail isn't used as evidence, it is more likely to be viewed by non-recipients or non-senders than other written correspondence {for instance, computer technicians, system administrators, and other computer users). In general e-mail should be regarded as less private than traditional inter-office communications. When sending an e-mail, a staff member should consider the following: • Who is the intended recipient, and how will that person interpret the wording and content? (E-mails, due to their brevity of wording and lack of visual or auditory content, can easily be misinterpreted or perceived as culturally insensitive.) • Is the content appropriate for anyone to see? What would happen if the e-mail is forwarded to someone else inside or outside the organization? (This applies to attach1nents as well as text.) • Does the e-mail comply with the organization's rules, policies, and procedures? What can happen if these issues are not adequately addressed? In 2008 the United States House of Representatives Judiciary Committee began an effort to encourage "whistleblowers" to come forward to reveal corruption and risks to security. A form was set up on a website. No anonymous tips were accepted, but those who entered information were promised their tips would be held "in strictest confidence:' To thank those who participated, the Judiciary Com1nittee sent a follow-up e-mail. However, they put the e-mail addresses in the "To:" field rather than the "BCC:" field. Needless to say, the number of tips to the House Judiciary Committee plummeted in the following years. It seems obvious, but managers should be sure everyone understands the difference between CC (carbon copy, the person on the line is listed on the e-mail and receives a copy) and BCC (the person on the line receives a copy, but is not listed on the original e-mail). Employees also have been known to land in serious trouble when they accidentally clicked "Reply to All" rather than "Reply To:' thus sending their reply to everyone who received the original e-mail rather than only to the original sender for whom it was intended.

Financial and Techno logy Managen1ent Many government offices and private agencies now have strict policies about what is inappropriate content in e-mails. These may include: • • • • •

pornographic inlages; profanity, or discriminatory or racially prejudiced language; i!Jegally copied or shared music; pirated software or games; and chain letters or hoaxes.

Auto-replies to e-mails, the types \vhich conveniently say "I will be out of the office on vacation from ... :· present another potential problem. Auto-replies may validate e-mail addresses to spammers. They also may let cyber-thieves know a person wilJ be leaving an empty office available. Auto-replies also unnecessarily clutter inboxes. One way to minimize such problems is to set up criteria determining \vho will receive an auto-reply. Spam, or junk e-mail, accounts for a high percentage of all e-mail traffic. Billions are spent each year to co1nbat it. Managers can often spot the promises of spam-Get rich, buy cheap drugs, lose 20 pounds effortlessly, or earn a doctoral degree in six months. While most spam is harmless, so1ne can be devastating to individuals, clients, and organizations, if a virus or a Trojan is introduced. The more dangerous side of e-mail is that it has introduced a whole new class of threats. E-mail scams usually have one element in com1non: they ask the user to click a hyperlink to an unknown website, sometimes masquerading as a known site (like Google or Microsoft). Managers should ivarn staff members to "never click a link in an e-mail fron1 someone you don't kno\v!!" This basic user error is by far the most common cause of security breach on computers. The link inevitably leads to websites that illicitly collect information, install malicious code, download and install malware, or infect the user \Vith viruses, keystroke sniffers, and Trojans-virtually aH the security threats found on the Internet inhabit these sites. Other problems that directly or indirectly afflict e-mail users come from using outdated software which is more vulnerable to viruses, sending unencrypted e-mail on unsecured wireless networks (hackers can scan the network and read unencrypted transmissions), and from putting too much personal information on social networking and other public sites. Social networking sites, such as Face book, have provided a new wealth of information for hackers. They go to the networking sites where they find information the person freely provides, such as the name of his or her high school, or the mother's maiden name. T he hacker then goes to a bank or credit card account and clicks on "Forget Your Password?" The hacker is then able to answer security questions and gain access to confidential information. In 2008, Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin's personal e-mail account was hacked by a person who read her pets' names on a social networking website and was thus able to answer her security question correctly. Managers might pass on a number of simple and practical suggestions to protect e-mail inforn1ation from hackers and viruses: • Do not request to be removed from spam lists. This action requires a person to give his or her e-mail address and lets the spammer know the address is active. • Persons should open only attachments they know to be valid. If sending an attachment in an e-mail, the sender should mention in the body of the e-mail that a valid document is attached.

289

290

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities • Many computers will offer to store passwords. This practice should be discouraged because any user of that computer with the same level of access will have access to their accounts with the saved passwords. • Passwords should be a 1ninimum of eight characters and, when allowed, should contain a combination of upper and lower case letters, numbers, and symbols. They should also not contain phrases or words related to the user's personal infor1nation (birthdays, pet names, home town, favorite food-any information that another user can use to guess the password). • Passwords should be changed every 90 days to six months, depending upon the sensitivity of the information stored.

Other Confidentiality Threats to Organizations Identity theft occurs when a person's birth date, address, driver's license number, Social Security number, credit or debit card numbers, or other information are "stolen" and used by the thief to obtain money, goods, jobs, and so on. When a person's identity is stolen, thousands of dollars are often charged to a victim's credit cards or withdrawn from accounts, with the victim usually losing $200-$1,000 out of pocket. This cost does not include the enormous amount of time and stress required to restore credit, a driver's license, credit scores, and bank accounts. Identity theft may happen to an individual or to thousands of people at once. In what is called the "T.J. Maxx case" hackers with strong antennae outside the retail stores were able to steal data from handheld pay1nent scanners. The account information of 94 million customers was exposed. In 2012, the files of the South Carolina Department of Revenue were not adequately encrypted and hackers were able to access the state tax returns of anyone who had filed them online. Millions of taxpayers had their income data, Social Security numbers, bank account numbers, and other personal information stolen. From an organizational perspective, managers must consider possible identity theft of employees, clients, financial donors, board members, and anyone about who1n confidential information is stored. They should be aware of the organization's policies concerning: • • • •

distribution of mail, what information is to be stored and where, who has access to what information, and >vhat information is to be shredded and how.

Dumpster diving is the practice of going through an organization's trash to obtain sensitive information. One social service organization providing protective services for children found that shredding wasn't enough. Staff members dutifully shredded page after page, case after case of dated unfounded cases. They placed the shredded paper in plastic garbage bags and placed them in the building's dumpster. During the following night, hurricane-force winds blew through the town, ripping the garbage bags fro1n the dumpster and shredding the plastic. The next morning residents of the town found pieces of reports of unfounded cases of child abuse or neglect in the streets, trees, and bushes. Some of the names that were still visible were the subject of gossip in the small town for years. Managers learned an important lesson-crosscut shredders are more effective than strip-cut shredders at destroying confidential information.

Financial and 1echnology Managen1ent

Looking Ahead The best prediction for the use of information technology in the next decade is: there's absolutely no way to predict it. For example. just over ten years before this book was written, few managers would have predicted they would have had to set rules about the use of employees' personal Facebook accounts. The social networking phenomenon was not in existence then. but by March 2014 it had l.28 billion subscribers worldwide. The '1-VOrd "unfriended," the act of dropping a person from your Facebook account. was judged to be the top "ne\v \vord" in many a Thesaurus in 2009. Persons with Facebook accounts and other social nehvorking sites often post information about themselves. including personal updates. photos, and videos as often as they wish. The information may reveal details about a person's life that blur the boundaries between personal and professional. Many organizations now make it a practice to search a job applicant's sites, and people have been summarily rejected because a site revealed that, for example, they used a racial slur, posted a provocative picture of themselves. or used illegal drugs. An ethical dilemma for organizations has occurred when staff nle1nbers have chosen to add clients, field instruction students, organization donors. and niembers of the boards of directors in non-profit organizations to their list of Facebook friends. Does a 1nanager have a right to develop rules to control this? Apparently, yes. Son1e organizations have tried to set guidelines about who staff members may not "friend" on Facebook. However, issues abound around who should be included on the list. For example, should it include: • Clients, but not previous clients? No person who has ever been a client? At what point does the rule become overly restrictive? • Fellow employees of the organization? All staff members or just some, for example, subordinates? All non-professional employees? Students or interns? • Board members or donors to the organization? What if the staff member already has a social relationship with one or more of them? Should an exception be made? The ever-increasing importance of technology brings many a headache for managers. Managers may develop policies or rules against use of personal data assistants (PD As) of all types. but their inappropriate use is becoming easier and easier to conceal. It can include personal cell phone calls. listening to music. watching Internet videos or television, and text 1nessaging, all within the semi-privacy of an employee's work area. For example, skilled "texters" can send a message to a friend from a cell phone while the phone is out of view, hidden w1der a desk or in a pocket or purse. Texting becomes even nlore problematic for the manager when it n1ay constitute "sexting;• that is. the sending of what some people nlight perceive as sexually explicit 1nessages or provocative pictures of one's self via the Internet. How does a manager draw the line between hun1orous but job-related texting and conlmunication that borders on sexting bet>veen staff mernbers? This raises not only legal and ethical issues but practical ones as well. The challenge for managers grows as PDAs become smaller, more functional, less expensive, and easier to hide. Staff members who are parents may wish to "tune in" to the video camera located in their child's daycare facility to check on their child. Is that OK? How about a little occasional shopping one-Bay or An1azon.com? Is it worth the efforts of a manager to try to stop it altogether? How much is too much? Black Friday (the Monday after Thanksgiving in the United States) has become one of the least productive times in many organizations, as staff members return to work yet spend much of their time seeking

291

292

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities post-holiday deals online. Issues are becoming more complicated and often lack an easy answer. For example, should a manager allow personal use of a computer by a secretary whose work is caught up for reading a digital book or playing solitaire or another video game such as Candy Crush? Certainly, not all predictions about the progress of technology have come true- yet. Offices have not gone co1npletely paperless in their operation. Most refrigerators still do not automatically order our groceries when an item is depleted. Network television has not disappeared as a news source (though hard copy newspapers appear to be on the way out). Personal mobility devices have not proven as popular as once predicted. The Segway was supposed to change the future of human transportation; it never caught on. Someday, cars will drive themselves, but it will be later than was predicted in 2010. 3D printing is in our future, but it currently remains too expensive for most organizations to use it. One event that has influenced the relationship of managers and information technology is the worldwide recession that occurred during the first decade of this century. More and more staff members were encouraged to work from home while using their personal computers. There were some definite cost-saving advantages to this. For example, less office space was required and office computer purchases could be reduced. Employee satisfaction was higher among those who were offered this option. The challenges of "work from home" or the related practice of employee flex time (where employees set their own hours based on what is most convenient for them) are also plentiful. Accounting for employees' time becomes nearly impossible. How do you count work time for an employee who is working at his or her computer at home with dinner on the stove and the air-conditioning repair person in the yard? How do you know if they are putting in a full week's work or not? This problem (accounting for staff members' time) is not a new one, but it becomes more complex with the use of personal con1puters and PDAs while working at home. One solution may be productivity-based evaluation (which we introduced as an option in Chapter 10). After all, if staff members are assigned a reasonable workload, they con1plete it, and their work is of good quality, does it really matter how long it took them to accomplish it or when or under what conditions it was accomplished? Does a manager really need to know? In the recent past, a major part of technology management has been deciding what technology to purchase and use. One thing we have learned is that there is always something new out there that is better than what we already have. (And next month there will be something even better.) Managers have come to expect staff members (especially those who are most into technology) to regularly request that they purchase the newest and latest software or electronic gizmo. The reasons given can be compelling, especially when a staff member is more knowledgeable about technology than the manager and could easily overwhelm him or her with jargon about its many benefits. But inanagers should resist the hype of every bit of new technology and the pressure from staff members to embrace it. Instead they should always keep in mind the balance between the costs-including the "hidden costs" mentioned above-and the benefits that it might bring. Obviously, budgets rarely don't permit the purchase of all technology that staff members claim they need to do their jobs better. So, how does a manager know when to say yes and when to say no to a request for a new technology purchase? In some cases, the decision is quite simple and entails little more than what parents have to do frequently- recognizing the difference between a need and a want. Very young children lack sophistication. They state simply what they want and demand to have it ("But I want dessert!"). When they get

Financial and 1echnology Managen1ent a little older, they recognize that presenting a request to a parent as a want doesn't work too well. So, they begin to describe it as a need. ("I need a new jacket:' "I need those $200 jeans:' "I need a car:'). To them it may actually seem like a need {perhaps because of peer pressure), though it is still just a want. Adult staff members sometimes confuse \Vants and needs, too. To a person \Vho al\vays must have the latest technology in his or her personal life, every advance in technology is an absolute necessity for doing his or her job. However, managers may (and often should) perceive it differently. What is being requested is often a want, not a need. There are a number of questions that managers have learned to ask in determining whether a purchase should be made, even when the budget would permit it. They include the following: • Are there other, more pressing needs for technological upgrades within the organization? • Will purchasing it really improve client services, either directly or indirectly? • Will it benefit other staff men1bers too, or is it primarily for the use of the individual requesting it? • How would its purchase and use affect person-to-person communication? • Would its purchase increase demands for still other purchases by other staff members? If so, can they be met? • Is it a requirement for the organization or its programs to remain competitive with or to effectively collaborate with other organizations? • How quickly is it Likely to become obsolete, thus requiring the purchase of an upgrade for staff members who have become dependent on it? • What other organizations or units have purchased it, and has their experience with it been more positive than negative? • What other options (including approving the use of personally owned devices) exist? What about the future? Will purchase of technology be an issue frequently confronting managers? Maybe, but maybe not! Now that an increasing number of human service organizations allow employees to use personal computers and cell phones for work it is certainly less of an issue than when all technology was supplied by the organization. However, the potential for ethical dilemmas looms when staff members use their personal electronic devices in their jobs, primarily those relating to confidentiality. For exa1nple, what if: • A staff member completes a home study and writes a report on a couple accused of neglecting their children. The staff member's teenage son uses the computer to write his English essay and "accidentally" reads the study that includes the name of a girl in his class. • A staff member is writing a summary for a court hearing the next day and takes the unfmished report home to complete it. Exhausted, she asks her partner to complete the summary from the notes that she has taken. The summary is well-written and effective, but the partner mentions the case at the office holiday party. • A staff member accidentally leaves her iPhone at a restaurant. In trying to locate the owner, the restaurant owner first calls a dozen clients whose names are in the contact List. Several of them want to kno\v ho\v the owner got their names and phone numbers.

293

294

Part 1\vo: The Major Management Activities With increased use of personal computers {and we see this as highly likely with tight organizational budgets), the look of the future office is likely to change. For a 10-20 person organization on a tight budget, setting up Internet access for all employees can be as inexpensive as a broadband connection and a $65 wireless router from Best Buy; setting up the network so their personal computers can interact is only slightly more expensive, though this presents some of the security challenges we have discussed. Another change that was recession-driven was the increased use of "open source" software. Tradition among human service organizations has held that "if it's free it must not be good:' Thus managers often paid large sums of money for licenses for software such as Microsoft Office for productivity or Blackbaud for accounting. Since the recent recession, more and more agencies are investigating the possibility of using Linux-based computers, which are usually less expensive than Windows-based computers, along with Open Office (which is free) for increased productivity. Other open-source software is widely available online and can often be used as a viable substitute for commercial software. Whatever additional changes and issues technology will bring, there is one thing that is certain-they will arise more rapidly and occur more frequently than any time in the past as the pace of technological development increases. Beyond this knowledge, we have little to prepare us for them as managers. However, with flexibility, good working relationships with staff members, and a dose of com1non sense, good managers can use future technology for the benefit of the organization and the clients it serves.

SUMMARY In this chapter we examined two management activities that have rapidly grown in importance-financial management and technology management. They have more in common than their increased emphasis, however. In difficult economic times that occur periodically and in the hostile task environments that many human service organizations always experience, they are both critical to successful management. We described the traditional tasks of financial management such as creating budgets and 1nonitoring expenditures. The different types of budget were presented. But finan cial manage1nent now includes fund acquisition. We also discussed in some detail the ever-increasing demand for grants and contracts within human service organizations. Suggestions were offered for both understanding the grant proposal review process and for writing successful grant proposals. We looked back at the recent history of technology in the workplace, noting how rapidly changes have taken place. Issues that were important just a few years ago are no longer paramount; others have replaced them (e.g., those related to personal electronic devices to do the organization's work). We know that more changes are coming, but it is virtually impossible to predict what most of them will be. All of this points to one essential characteristic for managers-be flexible and keep an open mind about technological advances. They could represent a threat or an asset to a healthy work climate and to organizational goal achievement, or some of both.

Financial and 1echnology Managen1ent

APPLICATION Think back to (or review) Douglas McGregor's Theory X/Theory Y from Chapter 4. 1. How might a "Theory X manager" vie\v the use of staff members' personal electronic devices in the workplace? How might this manager respond to their inevitable presence? 2. How might a "Theory Y manager" vie\v the use of staff members' personal electronic devices in the workplace differently? Ho\v might this manager respond to their inevitable presence? 3. Where would your attitude fall (along the Theory X/Theory Y continuum)? Why? 4. When 1night encouraging staff members to use their personal computers to do the work of the organization be considered good financial management? What rules or policies would you (as a manager) implement to ensure that it would not cost the organization more than it saves or place it in legal jeopardy?

295

COMPLETING THE MANAGEMENT PICTURE he management activities that were described in the previous chapters represent most of what the work of social work management entails. However, there are a few more responsibilities that are so important that they deserve special attention. These are described in Chapter 13. Chapter 14 then discusses the intrapersonal and interpersonal stresses that often accompany the role of manager. It draws on material in earlier chapters and is designed to help the reader decide whether he or she might want increased management responsibilities \Vhen the opportunity for them arises. Some final suggestions for developing and recognizing one's management style are offered, along with some methods for fostering a personal identification as a manager.

Chapter 13 '

Other Important Management Responsibilities Leaming Outcomes At the end of this chapter, you should be able to: • List the reasons why staff members may be resistive to change. even if it is desirable. • Describe some methods that managers can use to reduce the amount of costly staff turnover. • Describe the difference between a program output and a program outcome. • Describe how a manager's role is differen t when monitoring a program than when evaluating the program?

istorically, some management tasks have been the exclusive responsibility of only those at the highest management levels of the organization such as the executive director or someone else bearing a similar title. However, over time we have come to realize that many of them are better performed with involvement from staff members at many different levels. At the very least, we all need to be aware of what they entail and how we can provide necessary support for those responsible for their completion.

CHANGE MANAGEMENT Many different areas of change tend to affect the work environment in human service organizations. Changes in what we regard as best practices (e.g., methods of family treatment, approaches to rehabilitation of those in correctional facilities, community- versus institution-based work with certain client populations) can require rapid and comprehensive change within organizations. The identification of new client groups (e.g., victims of cyber-bullying or sextortion, people who have fallen prey to the latest Internet scams, or people displaced by natural disasters more severe than previously encountered) can result in the need for new programs and services. Loss of sources of funding can result in program cutbacks or elimination. Changes can occur in many areas, for example, in services, organizational structure, staff roles, use of information technology, and personnel. Some changes-for example, implementation of new rules designed to avoid costly errors-occur largely as a response to problems identified by managers. Others have different origins; for exainple, they may come from administrative fiat, board pressures, fiscal expediency, or changes in federal regulations.

299

300

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture

During the time that changes are occurring, they can occupy a large percentage of a manager's time. Much of the content of earlier chapters of this text (e.g.• the concept of the informal organization or the discussion of organizational loyalties) should be of help to managers who need to manage organizational change. However, there are certain other suggestions, drawn from research studies of the impact of change within organizations that can be especially useful for managers seeking to implement organizational change successfully. We have incorporated them into the discussion that follows. During times of change, it is important to maintain organizational continuity and to preserve the integrity of the organization as a system. The basic character of the organization, and its public identity, cannot be altered to the point where critical relationships and linkages to other organizations and systems are jeopardized. While change is occurring. the work of the organization must go on as well. This is especially critical in human service organizations. A manufacturing plant can close down briefly to retool for the next year's model or to delete a product line or add a new one; a human service delivery system cannot stop its services to clients to prepare for or implement change. Remaining programs must continue and services must continue to be delivered. Staff members and clients should be helped to recognize that the mission, goals, objectives, and essential characteristics of the organization, in most instances, will remain largely unchanged. Whenever possible, change should also be incremental and implemented in tolerable amounts. Times of change, especially if the change is unwanted, often shake staff members' commit1nent to the organization and their relationships with managers. The relationship between managers and their staff members may undergo unusual stress during times of change, and change agents (managers) are natural targets for resentment and frustration. Managers should anticipate this reaction, try to understand it, put it into perspective, and not take it too personally. A manager's approaches to change will be most successful if the co1nplete cycle of change is accomplished; that is, what has been described by Kurt Lewin (1890-1947) as the three-step process of unfreezing. change, and refreezing. 1 (This model for change is equally relevant in direct practice when, for example, a social worker might seek to assist a client in leaving an abusive relationship.) During the unfreezing stage, the individual who is being asked to change (a staff member for our purposes) must become sufficiently uncomfortable with the old way of doing things to want to change. Unfreezing by the manager can be brought about through any combination of presentation of data, appeals to professional values and ethics, logic, bargaining, or even threats, whatever is necessary to get staff members out of their "comfort zone:' The most effective strategy or combination of strategies will vary, based on the manager and the staff member or members. It also is a fw1ction of the time available for change, the scope and nature of the change desired, and the amount of flexibility inherent in the requirement for change. The second step, the change itself, can occur only after unfreezing has taken place. It is when the change is implemented, when the new way is first "tried out:' There should be adequate reinforcement of learning. They can take the form of a variety of rewards, compliments, and encouragement. Mistakes also are likely to be made; they frequently happen when we are learning to do something new or differently. Good managers understand this, and will not overreact when staff members don't always "get it right" immediately. Once the first two stages have been accomplished, refreezing should occur. It is necessary if the change is to "take" and staff members \rul not slip back into their old way of doing things. While it may never occur completely, how can we tell that at least some

Other hnportant Management Responsibilities

refreezing has occurred? When refreezing has been somewhat successful, the ne\v way of doing things ,viJl become the norm. It will just be "what we do" or "how \Ve do it:' It will have become so comfortable that it may no longer even be identifiable as someone else's idea, suggestion, or directive. It will appear to be only logical and natural and some individual ownership of it \viU occur. Managers sometimes use participative management approaches to change implementation. Staff input into, for example, how change might be implemented in a way that is least disruptive of client services can result in a more cooperative approach to change. However, managers sometimes make the mistake of attempting to use participative management methods when the nature of the change or the time constraints required for its implementation do not allow for flexibility. For example, changes that evolve from state or federal mandate or fron1 fiscal en1ergency may leave little or no room for negotiation or creative input at the local level. It would be a \vaste of staff members' time and efforts to pretend otherwise by seeking their input. Support from managers is both needed and welcomed by staff members during times of change. However, different individuals may require different forms and different an1ounts of support. For exa1nple, close 1nonitoring may be welcomed by one individual who is relatively new or unfamiliar with what is being required, but resented as micron1anaging by another who is perfectly capable of making adjustments 'vith little or no support from the manager. Similarly, some individuals may require frequent reassurance that they are meeting expectations whereas others may prefer to receive initial orientation and then be left alone while only occasionally "touching base" ffith the manager.

Resistance to Change Almost any change will be resisted to some degree by at least some staff members. There are many reasons people might resist change. They overlap slightly, but \Vhether experienced individually or as a group, they represent formidable obstacles for the manager seeking to implement change. They include: 1. Changes can appear to violate professional values. Professionals can be expected to (and should) resist a change if they perceive it as a violation of client rights or professional ethics. (Managers should question their own stance regarding the change if workers' concerns are found to have validity.)

2. Inertia. The laws of physics suggests that "a body at rest will tend to stay at rest, while a body in motion will stay in motion:' Loosely interpreted, unless challenged, we tend not to change; we keep on doing what we have been doing. To do anything differently requires a conscious effort. For example, people, when not assigned seats, will tend to sit in the same place in classrooms or meetings. We drive the same route to work, even though other, perhaps better routes are available. Routines are comfortable and conserve energy; we don't have to think as much. We resist change that might require us to do something different, or to do the same thing differently. 3. Change produces uncertainty. People may know from experience that they can be successful in the old way of doing things; but there is no such assurance after change. They might struggle or even fail.

301

302

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture

4. Misunderstanding of the change. Rumors can spread quickly and exaggerations often occur before changes are fully understood. Sometimes one or two possible but very unlikely negative effects of a proposed change are widely discussed as if they were a virtual certainty, creating resistance among even the most levelheaded of staff members. A "worst-case scenario" is a frequent occurrence in staff members' discussions about a proposed change. 5. Fear ofloss. Changes may result in obsolescence of many types. Feared loss of job is the most dramatic source of resistance, particularly a1nong staff members with little seniority or those who have received poor performance evaluations. But loss of status (or fear of losing it) can cause staff members, especially those currently valued for their knowledge and competence, to resist changes just as vigorously. 6. Distrust of the individual proposing the change. Even changes that would benefit staff members are sometimes resisted because of a distrust of the manager based on previous interaction. The manager who proposes a change can pre-doo1n it to resistance, especially if staff members do not trust him or her and what his or her motives for the change might be. 7. Lack of confidence in the manager. A staff member may like the proposed change and trust the manager attempting to implement it, but still resist it because of a lack of confidence in the manager's ability to "pull it off:' The manager may have a history of being indecisive or of being unable to function effectively in some other way when problems arise during the change process. 8. Lack ofparticipation. When input of staff members is possible, they may believe that they should have been involved in planning for change because of their expertise or position in the organization. Resentment at noninvolvement can result in resistance to change that might otherwise have been supported. 9. Failure to see the need. A staff member may be genuinely unconvinced that the change is needed. Old methods or procedures may have created no problems, so why change? "If it isn't broken, why fix it?" 10. Timing. Some changes, normally acceptable, may be resisted at times when there is already a backlog of work to be done, staff member vacancies, or when they just seem to come too soon after other recent changes. The tolerance for change of individuals (as well as organizations) has its limits. 11. Threat to social relationships. A staff member may resist change if it threatens existing social structures. For example, if a proposed change would 1nake it impossible for a staff member to continue to work on projects with a close friend and coworker or even to walk to the parking lot with the usual group of coworkers, resistance to a perfectly rational change suggestion may occur. 12. Change can upset power balances. Factions and cliques inevitably exist within organizations. Does the change appear to benefit one group more than another? Managers have sometimes observed that nearly everyone may resist a change proposal if individuals on both sides believe that the other side may stand to benefit more than members of their own group. 13. Pressure from coworkers. In order to maintain friendships or good working relationships with peers, staff members may resist a change that they might otherwise

Other hnportant Management Responsibilities support. Disapproval of the manager may be perceived as preferable to antagonizing someone with whom they may work more closely on a day-to-day basis, and whose relationship they value more. 14. Change is perceived as criticism. If not tactfully presented, change may be perceived as a message that staff members have not been doing something correctly or well enough. While this is sometimes the case, it isn't always.

15. Resistance just comes naturally. Some staff members are just negative and pessimistic by nature. They have taken on the role of"resident foot-dragger" and will resist any change because they believe it is expected of them. 16. Resistance to change has its own rewards. Less competent staff members have found that by organizing resistance to change they can (a) n1ake new friends a1nong coworkers of varying competencies who may have legitimate reasons to resist it and (b) divert attention away fro1n their own past work performance.

Many of the sources of resistance to change have one thing in common: They result from an individual's recognition or belief that change may depreciate one's value, particularly the value of experience. Ironically, those individuals upon whom a manager could depend in most other situations may become leaders in resistance unless they can be convinced that their skills and knowledge will continue to be valued in the future. Those who have been marginal in their work performance may be less likely to resist change; what do they have to lose? It is true that change is somewhat of an equalizer among staff members, especially if the change is a dramatic or significant one. Everyone must start new and attempt to prove their competence all over again. It may be some consolation to remember that a unanimous resistan ce to change rarely occurs. Because of factions and personal differences that exist within work groups, staff members are rarely in total agreement in their reaction to anything; change is no exception. There are almost always some individuals who 'vill support a change, as \Veil as some who invariably will oppose it.

Implementing Change Kurt Lewin's classic studies of organizational change can be useful for understanding how managers can effect change. According to Lewin's theory of force field analysis, there are both driving forces (for change) and resisting forces (against change).2 Equilibrium is achieved when driving and restraining forces are in balance; the status quo is thus n1aintained. Change will occur only if the equilibriu1n is disrupted. This is accomplished either by increasing driving forces for change so that they overwhelm restraining forces, or by reducing restraining forces so that the change forces prevail. The first method, increasing driving forces, is the far less desirable method. Why? Because increasing driving forces often only tends to increase resistance-people "dig in their heels" and resist the change more strongly. Then the driving forces for change must be increased again, the resistance will increase further, and so forth. A vicious circle and, frequently, a power struggle will result. The preferable approach to implementing change is to identify the resisting forces that exist. Then the manager can select some of the more promising ones (those that can be most easily addressed) as targets and attempt to reduce or eliminate them.

303

304

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture Problems relating to change, including resistance, can be avoided or at least lessened through a proactive approach. Managers need to repeatedly stress that change is both natural and desirable within human service organizations. It cannot be avoided, given the nature of hun1an service programs and services and the changing levels and sources of support of members of our task environments. Presented this way, change is less likely to be perceived as criticis1n when it occurs. This message that change is "a way of life" in the human services should first be communicated at the time that staff nlembers are interviewed for jobs and hired. Then, the message should be reinforced regularly thereafter even when (and, perhaps, especially when) changes are not imminent.

Strategies for Presentation of Change The literatl1re is helpful in suggesting a variety of strategies for successful presentation of change. It stresses the importance of maintaining a managerial climate that is supportive of change. Both the preparation for and the implementation of change should be ongoing tasks of the manager. In discussing the role of the supervisor, Kadushin 3 suggests those conditions under which successful change is most likely to occur. For example, change is best accomplished if staff members participate (to the extent feasible) from the start in planning for the change, if they are informed early of its nature, if the change is introduced slowly (preferably with some initial trial efforts), and if expectations are made clear and understandable. They will be less resistant to change ifthe change is consistent with perceived organization norms and objectives, if there is some assurance that it will have the predicted effects, if managers themselves communicate strong conviction in the desirability of the change (more about that later), if there is some appreciation of and empathy with the difficulties that it will create for staff members, and if provisions are made to minimize them. Tact is imperative in all areas of interpersonal management behavior, but especially in presentation of change. Managers need to explain the need for change and its most likely ramifications in an honest, straightforward manner. If possible, the limits of threat to job security and possible loss of status should be discussed. Assurances of additional training and other support should be given, but only if they can be offered. Because they often necessitate a redefming of roles, times of change 1nay provide an opportunity to reward son1e staff members or to punish others; manager should avoid engaging in either behavior. To do so, would only undermine the trust that is so important to successful management. When new role expectations occur, specific criteria for job performance must be developed in such a way that accusations of arbitrariness and favoritism can be avoided.4 When changes must be made in programs or services and methods of their delivery, it is also desirable to review with staff members what we know about clients and their likely reactions to change. (This >vill help to reinforce the message that the needs of clients remain the highest priority.) Staff members should be reminded that many clients, particularly those in the public sector, may be operating at the security-need level. They often are aware of the political posturing of legislators who threaten to cut out or curtail unpopular "entitlement" programs. Clients may perceive any change as a 1nove in this direction. Their fears may surface in the form of distrust or anger with the slightest provocation if the change appears to represent a threat to their security.5 Managers may need to help staff members to anticipate, to understand, and to handle these reactions so that they will not become just an additional source of stress and frustration for them during the times of change.

Other hnportant Management Responsibilities What if managers themselves are doubtful regarding the merits of the change? After all, it can represent a threat to us too (even to our jobs) or we may genuinely believe that it is not in our clients' best interests. And, we may have had no input into an impending change. Defending any decision made by others to staff members can be difficult; if the manager does not agree with it, the job can be made even worse. So, how should the manager then present the change to staff members? When a manager has doubts about the advisability of a change that nevertheless must be implemented, a certain amount of healthy skepticism in presenting it is usually not harmful; it is just being honest. Skepticism cornn1unicates doubt about the value of a change but \vithholds judgment pending time and an honest effort. It says, "As you might imagine, I have some questions about the change myself, but I wiJJ give it a 100 percent effort and we will evaluate its success at some later date. I expect you to do the same:' A certain amount of skepticism about a change is healthy and natural among thinking, concerned professionals. The san1e cannot be said for cynicism. It is never appropriate. What would it look like? Cynicism might entail a manager ridiculing a change and/or those who are requiring it, exaggerating its potential for causing problems, and downplaying its possible merits. It sends a message to staff members that the 1nanager thinks the change is ridiculous, and wilJ not be successful, and perhaps even that he or she hopes it doesn't. This can result in a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the manager or staff members give only a half-hearted effort to working toward the success of the change, it is almost certain to fail. Cynicism is never helpful during times of change. It just reinforces negativism and resistance among staff members at a time when they need support and encouragement.

Support for Staff Members during Change In providing support for staff members during times of change, many questions must be addressed. For example, \vhat types of support are needed and by whom? Will there be enough time for needed training and "re-tooling"? If so, who can be enlisted to provide them? How can the inevitable mistakes be addressed in a tactful, respectful manner that promotes learning, but not embarrassment or resentment? How can staff performance evaluations be conducted fairly so as to reflect an understanding of the difficulty of assunling new responsibilities or having to learn a new way of performing a task? This last question is especially important. Immediately following a time of change, it may be fairer to evaluate staff members based on the effort that they made to implement a change rather than on the success of the change itself. The latter may be something that was beyond their control. As changes are being implemented, managers need to maintain an optunistic stance toward change and should com1nunicate a belief that most changes ultimately have positive results. Frequent fearful, anxious discussions with staff members regarding problems related to change can be harmful to morale. During times of change, a manager can and should be a role model for others, maintaining an attitude that change is usually essential and often beneficial. Maintaining a sense of humor during times of change also helps to project a good role model. Changes within human service organizations sometimes occur so rapidly or with so little time to prepare for them that \Ve can either (1) become furious, overwhelmed, and even immobilized, or (2) laugh about the absurdity of it all and just handle them as best \Ve can. The second response is better for the organization and for everyone's mental health.

305

306

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture

PREVENTING STAFF TURNOVER Staff member turnover is characteristic of almost all organizations. However, in the human services it can be especially problematic for managers. In some of the n1ore stressful and lowest-paid public sector areas such as child protection or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), there appears to be a virtual "revolving door~' The problem of staff turnover in the non-profit sector is great as well. Managers must sometimes be especially creative in order to retain good staff members. Smaller nonprofits usually cannot offer a pension plan, but they usually can offer contributions to a personal 40l(k), IRA matching, and so on. Some may not be able to afford health insurance for their employees, though some organizations may have to find a way to provide it anyway for full-time employees under the Affordable Health Care Act once it is fully implemented. Many small non-profit organizations cannot afford to offer sick and vacation leave days to employees. Instead, they provide personal days for use for any reason (15 a year is common). At the end of a fiscal year, half of the remaining days may be placed "in the bank" or even may be transferable to other staff members, for example, to a coworker who has a severe medical condition that requires extended time off from work. Creative solutions designed to accommodate and thus retain good staff members are especially in1portant in non-profit organizations. Few non-profits are able to provide funding for staff members to pursue an advanced degree or certificate that might help them to qualify for higher level, better paying jobs within their organizations. However, some non-profit organizations are able to set aside some money each year to be used as a salary bonus fund. Bonuses often are awarded by giving the lowest-paid individuals a bonus first based on their past year's job performance evaluation, then scaling it up the chain until the bonus fund is exhausted. However, while this method might help to reduce staff turnover, it would not be appropriate in some non-profits where the organization barely has enough cash flow to meet monthly payroll. It also might not be a good idea where the organization's emphasis is on group (rather than individual) achievements. Staff turnover causes many problems for organizations and for the clients whom they serve. Even in the public sector, it can take six weeks or more to advertise for a position, interview, hire, and train new staff members to the point that they begin to reach full productivity. This causes a drain on an organization's resources and can negatively impact services to clients. Bringing new staff members on board makes demands on other staff members too. They may have to "pitch in" by taking on extra cases or mentoring a new staff men1ber. Staff turnover also can be a fmancial loss to those organizations that depend on client fees for part of their revenues. During the time that a position is vacant or a new employee is being trained, fewer services can be offered, and thus fewer dollars are taken in. Even when new staff members first begin to assume a full workload, mistakes and judgment errors are likely to occur. These can be costly in many ways to the organization (e.g., in staff morale, increased need for supervisory time, or even damage to the image of the organization within its community). What else can social workers as managers do to help to retain good, productive staff members? Why would they want to seek a job elsewhere? While the promise of higher pay may be a factor, it is often not the main reason why staff members in human service organizations choose to leave their jobs. Three of the most common ones are: (1) burnout, (2) lack of professional stimulation, and (3) lack of opportunity for advancement. There is a

Other Irnport.ant Manage1nent Responsibilities common fourth reason, a lack of a "match" between the interests and talents of staff members and the requirements of the job; for example, they may decide that they do not enjoy working with and/or do not work well with adolescents, the only clients the organization serves. However, if this is the case, there is not much that can (or should) be done to try to retain these individuals. They would be happier elsewhere and the organization and its clients might be better off \vith someone else who is a "better fit:'

Burnout Burnout has been defined as "a state of physical, emotional, and mental exhaustion resulting from involvement with people in emotionally demanding situations."6 The problem of burnout received much attention in the 1980s and 1990s. It was the focus of many staff development workshops. Burnout is an occupational hazard that produces changes in both attitudes and behavior. For example, staff members who are identified as "burned out" while working in a field like child protection may exhibit cynicism and start to show less hun1anitarian concern for victims of child abuse. They 1nay "go through the motions" of doing their jobs, continue to meet job requirements, but nlay easily lose patience with colleagues, supervisors, and "the system;· and/or they become frustrated with their inability to make 1nuch of an impact on the problem. A staff member working in hospice services may exhibit so1ne of the same behaviors, but may be more likely to report feeling emotionally drained and having "no more to give~· The concept of burnout was probably overused for a while. Many employees who were just unwilling or unable to do their jobs tried to use burnout as an excuse for their less than stellar job performance. But how could they have been "burned out" when they had never really caught fire in the fust place? Despite the inappropriate use of the concept in some instances, burnout (or the potential for it) continues to be a very real problem in some human service work. A closely related phenomenon, compassion fatigue, has more recently been identified and discussed. It relates to the emotional and physical toll experienced by social workers \vho work regularly with clients who are undergoing severe emotional distress. What can a manager do to prevent burnout or compassion fatigue, and thus to reduce the risk that a good employee might feel the need to get away and take a job elsewhere? Depending on the situational variables that may produce them, a wide variety of strategies have been proposed. Providing additional supervision (especially supportive supervision; see Chapter 9) would seem a good place to start. Support groups and counseling from employee assistance programs (if available) might also help. If possible, the manager may consider restructuring jobs, perhaps by rewriting job descriptions, to increase the amount of interaction with peers, since many workers experiencing then1 complain of loneliness and isolation. Even job rotation (Chapter 9) might be considered. A proactive approach to problems such as burnout is essential. After they have been identified, it may be too late for the manager to do anything that might keep a staff member from leaving.

Lack of Stimulation While burnout represents a kind of emotional overload, a lack of stimu.lation can also cause a good staff member to look elsewhere for •vork. This can occur when the organization is relatively static and staff members are asked to do their jobs in much the same way,

307

308

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture year after year. For example, the primary job responsibility of a paraprofessional in some mental health facilities (performing family histories) can easily become repetitive and uninteresting after a while. Even the job responsibilities of professional staff members can no longer be interesting or stin1ulating once they have mastered them and can novv do what is required without much thought. What can the manager do with capable people who are not "stressed out" or under emotional duress but just have become bored with doing the same thing over and over in a relatively static organization? To help to recapture their earlier enthusiasm for their work, some form of continuing education may be helpful. Staff men1bers should be encouraged to grow and to seek new and different responsibilities. Whenever possible, a reward system that values movement in new directions should be put in place. The rewards may cost nothing. For example, staff members can be given recognition in staff meetings for writing for publication in professional journals or for presenting their ideas or research findings at professional symposia. This will communicate to other staff members that professional growth and lifelong learning are important for both the individual and the organization, and might encourage them to also find something that might keep their jobs interesting. Occasionally, among professional staff members, reassignment to a different job within the organization should be considered and discussed. For example, experienced professionals might be reassigned to other duties that require them to offer new types of services or to offer services to clients with different problems than those >vhom they normally serve Qob rotation; see Chapter 9). On the surface, it would not seem to make sense to move competent staff members to other jobs where, initially at least, they will be less competent and where mistakes are likely to be made. But sometimes staff members with less experience in a given practice method or with a particular client group can be "revitalized" by new experiences. Clients also may benefit from their newly found enthusiasm. An organization may appear to be static on the outside-solid, well established, accepted by the community, and doing what it does best. But it can still be dynamic within. The manager who makes a practice of rewarding innovation and growth and who is constantly seeking to find new challenges for staff members within the organization can help to linlit lack of professional stimulation and thus can reduce the likelihood of the organization losing some of its best staff members.

Lack of Opportunity for Advancement Even in very dynamic human service organizations, another problem can be harmful to staff morale: professional staff may find that they have no potential for upward mobility. In many professions, people can look forward to an ever better future as their career progresses, for example, increased earnings, responsibility, status, and other benefits. An attorney, for example, might start out as a law clerk after graduation, then perhaps a junior partner. But over the next 30, 40, or even 50 years, the attorney's job is likely to get better and better. Eventually, as a senior law partner, she may reach a peak in earnings and status when in her 60s and 70s and she may also have the luxury of setting her own hours and selecting the most interesting cases. Physicians generally have similar career patterns. These two professions are referred to as "late-ceiling" occupations. They possess a kind of built-in source of motivation: the belief that even better times are coming.

Other Itnportant Management Responsibilities

309

Case Example

N

athan was the director of a well-established private outpatient psychiatric clinic. His most senior clin ician was Elvira. She was well respected in the professional commun ity as a very competent family therapist. When Nathan conducted period ic client satisfaction surveys, Elvira's former clients were almost always highly complimentary of her and of the help that she had given their families. When the time for conducting Elvira's annual performance evaluation came around, writing it was a "no brainer." As he had for the previous five years. Nathan evaluated her work as "outstanding" in every respect. He noted in his narrative comments that she was a role model and mentor for the more junior family therapists on the staff. He invited her to meet with him to discuss her evaluation. He was not prepared for her response. After the first few minutes, it was obvious that the meeting was not the usual exchange of pleasantries that it had been in the past. When Nathan complimented her on her continued good work, Elvira did not seem particularly pleased by the compliments. Even the news that she would be getting a substantial pay raise did not seem to create any enthusiasm. Nathan wondered if she might be having some personal problems. He asked her if everything was all right. She looked at him for a moment and then replied, "I think I'm just burned out! I've gotten to the point where I just dread seeing another family come in with the same old problems. I think I just need to do something totally different." Nathan was reassuring. He told her that everyone feels that way from time to time. even he does. and that she'd probably feel better about it in the morning. She replied that she did not think so. that she had felt this way for some time. In fact she had an idea and she wanted to know if he would support her in a plan that she had made. She wanted to attend a staff development workshop on reminiscence therapy for older people. She would take personal leave time and would pay for it at her own expense. After that. she wanted to start two groups for older clients to practice what she had learned. If the groups went

well. she might want to spend about half of her time leading other groups for older people. but still continue to do family therapy half time. Nathan was amused at first as Elvira described her plans. then he got a little annoyed. He told Elvira that she was a very valuable member of the staff- the best family therapist that he knew. And she had been rewarded well for her work. While he appreciated the fact that she thought she might want to try something new. he needed her to keep on doing what she did so well, family therapy. That was where she was most valuable to the organization. He prom ised to give her idea more consideration (since it had caught him by surprise) and they would discuss it again during next year's staff performance evaluation if she still felt the same way. "But," he concluded, "by then I feel sure you will think it was not a good idea. You are a great family therapist. You would never be happy doing anything else." He said that he wished he could meet with her longer but he had another appointment scheduled. Elvira left, looking angry, but said nothing else. He later overheard her complaining to a coworker that she was "sick of this whole place," but he assumed she was just having a bad day. One year later. Nathan again met with Elvira to discuss her job performance during the previous year. As in the past, he was highly complimentary. He never brought up her idea of developing greater proficiency in working with older clients and was relieved that she did not bring it up again. Despite the fact that she had mentioned it to him on four separate occasions since her last evaluation. he assumed that she had now decided it was not such a good idea. After a lull in their discussion she asked, "Are we finished ?" "Sure," he answered, "what else is there to add? You're still the best family therapist we have and I hope you know how much I appreciate your good workl" She did not reply. Two weeks later, Elvira asked to see Nathan. She asked him if he would be willing to write a letter of reference for her. She had applied for a position as a group therapist at a nearby intermediate care facility. Nathan agreed, but blurted out. "Why would you

(continued)

310

Case Example

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture

Continued

want to do that?" Then he spent the next hour listening to Elvira for the first time. He finally understood that she had lost interest in her work as a family therapist. and that it did not provide enough opportunity for her growth. She had entered social work because of the wide variety of work experiences that it offered, yet she had done nothing but fami·ly therapy for 15 years. She was ready for a change. Nathan remembered what she had said a year earlier. He apologized for not listening better and asked her to reconsider leaving the organization. She replied that she had already decided to take the new job if it was offered to her. Elvira did not get the job. When she told Nathan. he immediately asked her to come into his office to discuss some ideas he had. He spent the next hour with her and one hour a week for the next month discussing ways to make her job more interesting. He offered that, if she would agree to continue as a family therapist, he would send her to the next available staff development workshop on remin iscence therapy. After that, she could cut back on her family therapy work and run reminiscence therapy groups with older clients as soon as she could get them organized. She told him that she also wanted to learn more about play therapy with young children from another staff member who was considered an expert in the area. He arranged for Elvira to sit in on play therapy sessions that the other staff member was conducting. He promised her that she could stop doing family therapy altogether after six months if another experienced AAMFT-certified staff member could be hired by then.

Elvira never became very skilled at reminiscence therapy but her group members commented on her enthusiasm and interest. She qu.ickly saw enough of play therapy to understand that it was beneficial for children, but doing it was not something that she would enjoy. After a while she began taking on more family therapy cases again, but also began seeing several adolescents individually who were addicted to alcohol. She continued to lead her two reminiscence therapy groups for older adults until she left a few years later to take a job in another state where her daughter and grandchildren lived.

Discussion Questions 1.

What mistakes did Nathan make when he conducted his first performance evaluation conference with Elvira?

2.

Why did Nathan resist allowing Elvira to make changes in her work? Was he justified in doing so?

3. Was Elvira really "burned out" as she stated, or was she just experiencing a lack of stimulation in her work? What indicators can you identify? 4. What were the costs and benefits to the organization of supporting Elvira's plans? 5. In the future, should Nathan insist that all staff members be required to learn new methods of intervention or otherwise seek to "grow" professionally? Why or why not? 6. Do you think that job enrichment, job enlargement, or job rotation (Chapter 9) is best suited for helping to retain professionals like Elvira who no longer find their jobs interesting?

Not surprisingly, there are also "early-ceiling" occupations. Some examples are professional athletics, fashion modeling, or other types of work where youth, appearance, or physical strength are important to success. Unfortunately (and for other reasons), social work and some of the other helping professions also qualify as early ceiling. People in early-ceiling occupations tend to get to the top relatively early in their careers. Some, like professional athletes or fashion models, subsequently experience a rapid decline in their status and incomes. While social workers and other professionals usually do not experience a decline after an early peak, they may find that they have little or no opportunity to go much higher or assume greater management responsibilities in the organizations

Other hnportant Management Responsibilities where they are currently employed. It is not unusual for social workers to reach a relatively high level in an organization (supervisor, midlevel manager) fairly soon after they complete their professional education. Especially in small, flatter organizations, they may then perceive that they have little potential for up\vard mobility unless their boss leaves (and that may be unlikely) or they leave the organization for a job in a larger one. In some settings, it is difficult for a manager to be able to offer much hope for up\vard mobility for relatively young professional staff members who believe that they have already "peaked out:'

Retaining Early-Ceiling Professionals Particularly in small organizations or in larger ones that hire only a few people within a given professional discipline, efforts must be made to retain early-ceiling professionals. Unless this is accomplished successfully, nlanagers may find themselves frequently hiring and developing new staff members, only to have them leave as soon as they become really con1petent at performing their jobs and thus becon1e marketable elsewhere. One method that is sometitnes successful entails fu1ding ways to allow staff members to spend more of their days doing challenging, stimulating work, sometimes referred to as redesigning. It is similar in many ways to Herzberg's job enrichment (Chapter 9). For example, managers might try to hire paraprofessionals or even use volunteers to take over some of the more routine, repetitive tasks that normally fall to professionals. Professional staff members could be relieved altogether of tasks such as collecting medical insurance information or intake history taking. Instead, they could be asked to participate in the development of ne\V programs that are in the planning stages or to participate in research such as program evaluation (discussed later in this chapter). Job redesigning that can free staff members from tedious tasks and allow them to devote more time to onetime-only, higher-level tasks may appeal to needs for self-actualization. Thus, while they may not be able to move up higher in the organization, they may feel less of a need to do so. Nonmonetary factors have often been used by managers to increase the likelihood of retention of people within early-ceiling professions. Sue Henry concluded that efforts to further professional enrichment, contribution to the profession, and the exercise of professional autonomy are appreciated by social workers and may be related to the decision to stay in jobs where upward mobility is limited. She argued for the value of a participative manage1nent structure to "spread retention incentive measures through a systein."7 So1netimes it really is about money. Staff members may know that they will have to leave their current job to improve themselves fmancially, yet there is no opportunity for promotion to the next level within the organization. Thus, they can feel compelled to look for employn1ent elsewhere for a job that will pay 1nore. For example, a fan1ily health crisis or a growing nwnber of dependents can cause a staff member to seek a higher-paying job elsewhere, even if they really enjoy their current work. If the staff member is one that the organization cannot afford to lose, this is to be avoided. But how? A partial solution may exist in what has been called a dual career ladder. 8 It may seem a little nnconventional. It has the potential for resentment by some employees because it runs connter to traditional personnel practices. Thus, to be successful a dual career ladder requires support at all levels of an organization. In a traditional (single career) ladder, the opportunity to earn more money is available only to those who are able and \villing to move to the next higher level in the organizational hierarchy-for example, from caseworker to supervisor or from supervisor to director. Each subsequent level has a salary range that begins higher than the top of the previous one; there is no overlap. The only way to make more money is to "move up:' Thus, for example,

311

312

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture dedicated, highly skilled caseworkers remain in their jobs at a price, both financially and personally. They will make less money than they would if they had moved up to a supervisory position and they may have to deal with innuendoes and questions from coworkers who cannot understand why they have never advanced within the organization. In contrast, in a dual-career ladder, there is considerable salary overlap among the salary ranges for various levels of the organization. For example, the salary range for a caseworker might be $35,000-$ 55,000 per annum and the range for case supervisors might be $40,000- $60,000. Thus a supervisor might be paid less than a caseworker whom she supervises, depending on such factors as their relative work experience, advanced degrees or certificates, or other attributes. While this might "not seem right" and it can sometimes cause problems between and among individuals, it actually makes sense from an organizational perspective. The dual career ladder suggests, in a way consistent with current thought, that the relatively new supervisor is not necessarily \VOrth more or even as much to an organization than the highly competent senior person over whom she has been granted administrative authority. Being able to earn more without having to take a job that an individual doesn't want and/or may not be successful in probably will not motivate an employee to be more productive or to do better work. But it may provide enough financial compensation for a good staff member to avoid having to seek a better-paying job in another organization.

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT Most social work practitioners have a thorough tu1derstanding of what a program is within a human service organization. A program is a co1nplex, integrated system that has been created to address some problem (e.g., homelessness, teen pregnancy, or elder abuse). It is most often a component of an organization, a more or less self-contained package, usually with its own goals and objectives, and sometimes even its own rules, policies, and procedures. It has its own budget. Individual staff members may be assigned to a specific program or, less frequently, they nlay work in two or more different prograins. Most programs have their o>vn manager whose job is to advocate for the program; publicize it; monitor it; and, when an outside evaluator is not used, help to judge its overall value, worth, or merit. Most human service organizations have multiple programs. They are supposed to all be consistent with the organization's mission and to interact supportively or at least cooperatively with each other. Sometimes higher-level managers find themselves immersed in the difficult and thankless task of trying to coordinate the various programs that exist within an organization. Competition (especially for resources) among the programs can be fierce. Then the inanager has to assume the role of arbitrator. For example, a manager may need to find ways to reduce the resentment that occurs when it becomes necessary to shift funding from one program to another or to implement an unfunded (but badly needed) new program when staff members are aware that it will almost certainly cause a drain on the financial and staff resources of existing programs. Some conflict between programs is almost inevitable, even if there is no competition for resources. Frequently, there is overlap in some aspect of two or more programs. For example, one program treating substance abuse and another offering treatment for family violence may both need to offer similar services to clients. This can produce turf protection issues that the manager must try to resolve.

Other Itnportant Management Responsibilities

313

For a social worker in the role of manager, it is helpful to think of a program as a social system. For example, the manager, tuned in to the syste1ns concept of"interface;' can anticipate the effect of a new program on all other components of the suprasystem, and can thus head off many potential problems before they occur. Or, he or she can easily understand how the lack of staff turnover can produce a lack of creativity and innovation (a dosed system) that must be addressed. In the business literature, programs are often described as time-liinited. This is logical, because they are regarded rather naturally as packages put together to address a need or eliminate a problem. In social work, many programs (especially grant-funded ones) are also tiine-liinited; they may not continue after a certain tiine period unless alternative funding can be found. However, other prograins are relatively permanent. Some are even mandated by law. They address problems (e.g., the need for foster care) that can be alleviated somewhat but that will never go away completely. Still other prograins began as time-liinited and perhaps should have been eliininated, but, because of the nature of bureaucracies (Chapter 3) and/or people's vested interests, they still continue to exist.

Programs and Logic Models Today's programs usually are portrayed in se1nigraphical for1n using what is called a logic model. A logic model is a concise articulation of the logical connections among: • the problem that the progran1 is designed to address, • the activities aiined at addressing it, and • the outputs, outcomes, and iinpacts that the progra1n is supposed to produce. The ter1n logic model is a generic one; there is no single logic model. A quick Internet search reveals numerous, varying examples (and templates that can be used to create one). However, they are more similar than different. They all reflect the key components of programs and how they are designed to fit together. They are usually no more than a page or two in length. While some logic models can get quite elaborate with arrows, loops, and other devices to reflect the flow from one component to another, others are relatively simple. Some components are pretty standard in all variations. They are defined in Box 13.l. Note that services would fall under "activities;' but that a program's activities consist of much more than just services. Figure 13.l is an exa1nple of how a logic model for a job training program might look.

Box 13. l

The Usual Compo nents of a Logic Mod el

• Inputs= the resources available to the program (human, financial, organizational. community).

• Outputs =the amount of product or services produced by program activities. They .may include types. levels. quantities. and targets of activities.

knowledge, skills, behaviors. functioning level, or status. Often, "immed iate" and "mid-term" (e.g., one year after program completion). • Impacts= the long-term, broader effects of the program on its clients and other individuals and social systems. They should be positive and anticipated, but they may be negative. and unanticipated.

• Outcomes= the anticipated benefits and achievements of the program; changes in participants'

• Indicators= the ways in which outcomes are measured and documented.

• Activities= what is done by staff members (including services) with the inputs.

-*'" ..,.,

Figure 13.1 A Logic Model for XYZ Training Program*

The Problem: Current job training prograrns target the chronically uneniployed. A prograin is needed to help older unernployed workers lVho have held responsible positions to find lvork in the current econoniic situation. Goals: To help participants to set realistic employment goals and to find and keep jobs adequate to 1neet basic needs.

OUTPUTS

INPUTS

ACTIVITIF.S

• Staff of two part-time trainers, two social workers and 3 RSVP volunteers.

• Pub Iicizing the program and seeking referrals.

• 48 participants will enroll in the program.

• Vocational interest testing.

• At least 90"m will complete it.

• Training materials. • Use of one class room three nights per \\Wk for six weeks at the local community college. • Purchase of vocational intere.s t testing materials. • Agency office space and computer assistance.

• Support groups.

• All participants who complete the program • Individual and fan1ily will have had at least counseling for problems two job interviews related to loss of jobs. for entry level positions by its end . • Trairting in resume writing.

SHORT TERl\f

l\1EDlUM TERl\f

LONGER TERM

OUTCOMES

OUTCOMES

OUTCOl\vhat they decide, the decision will displease someone. And, dealing with staff members' displeasure can be stressful.

Power Issues Much of what managers find distasteful about their decision-making responsibilities relates to issues around power. Some managers wish they didn't have some of the power that they have. Others believe that they do not have enough power to do their jobs effectively. Many people in the helping professions have no interest in having and exercising power over others. This may be especially true among many social workers. As part of our professional education we have been taught to empower others rather than to use the power we have over clients unethically to, for example, impose our own values or wishes on them or to use a treatment relationship for personal gain. While this {empowering others) is also good management practice, there are ti1nes when managers have to exercise the power that goes with their jobs. This requires them to make unpopular decisions, something none of us enjoys. Often, it means saying "no" when we would rather say "yes." Some time back, one researcher 1 concluded that one reason (besides the well-publicized "glass ceiling" phenomenon) why so few female social workers historically acquired or even sought higher-level management positions is that they may have been socialized by males to believe that power is undesirable for a woman. While this has undoubtedly changed, it is probably still safe to say that many social work managers (both male and female) remain uncomfortable with the power that goes with the job of a manager; it is not what they sought when they entered the profession. However, they feel compelled to use it anyway in the interest of good management practice. Other social workers often experience stress related to power in a very different way. Despite the legitimized power (authority) that goes with their jobs, they often feel that most of what goes on within organizations is really beyond their control. For example, they are constrained by the limited resources available to assist both staff members and clients-they wish that they could be more helpful, but they cannot. They also get blamed for higher-level decisions that they are powerless to do anything about. A common complaint is that managers have much less power than others perceive them to have. Despite their efforts to influence the behavior of their staff members, people will often do as they please. For example, a manager may try to enforce a rule against the use of personal phone calls and text messaging during work hours but, in fact, he is often powerless to stop it or even to detect it without "hovering" over staff members or invading their work space. Especially in those organizations where staff members acquire permanent employee status or tenure following a brief period of evaluation, managers observe that some staff n1embers may listen politely, but that is

Beco1ning and Remaining a Successful Man ager no guarantee that they will do what is requested. One nlanager we know described his job as "like being the caretaker in a cemetery. You have a lot of people under you but nobody listens!"

Interpersonal Relationships with Subordinates Another problem often experienced by social \vorkers in the role of a manager relates to the nature of the relationship with subordinates that should be maintained. Managers need to be perceived as fair, objective, and trustworthy; they cannot allow some staff members to be perceived as or to perceive themselves as favorites. Thus, a manager generally cannot maintain close personal friendships with subordinates (or with their own boss). That can leave a manager feeling pretty much isolated, especially if he or she is basically a pretty "social" individual. Ainong coworkers at the same level within an organization, nlaintaining one or 1nore personal friendships on the job and sometimes after work hours is natural and generally innocuous. When one has administrative authority over others, however, it often can cause problems. We know that managers cannot relate to subordinates as they 1night to a coworker such as another supervisor at the same level, both on and off the job. But how different does the relationship have to be? Intimate personal relationships between managers and those that, for example, they supervise and evaluate are universally condemned as unethical. But are all friendship relationships with them to be discouraged? After all, isn't it part of a manager's job to create a cordial, mutually supportive work climate? Can't a manager maintain some degree of friendship with subordinates and still be an effective manager? T here are no simple answers to these questions. As \ve have emphasized throughout this book, most all of a manager's tasks are facilitated if he or she is perceived as worthy of trust. Friendships \vith subordinates that go beyond job requirements have the potential to lead to other staff members questioning \vhether a manager can be trusted to be objective and not play favorites when, for example, work is assigned or staff performance evaluations are conducted. On the other hand, deliberate efforts to be "all business" and to keep a social distance fro1n all subordinates can also erode feelings of trust. People who do not know us very well are likely to perceive us as untrustworthy and unpredictable. Besides, this aloofness can easily be perceived as a po1npous reminder of the status differential that exists between managers and their staff members. Ideally, there is a perfect level of friendship between any one inanager and his or her subordinates. The 1nanager identifies it and maintains the same level with all of them. But, in the real world it doesn't work that way. Some staff nlen1bers will want son1e level of a friendship relationship with a manager; some may simply dislike him or her and want no such thing! The manager (let's be honest) \vill naturally like some subordinates more than others. While (hopefully) treating them all fairly, he or she will not want anything like a friendship relationship with some. So, there is no universal solution. But what is the appropriate mix of friendship and distance between a manager and one or more subordinates? The answer is, as in most management issues, it depends. Some managers in some organizations (often smaller ones \vith a flat organizational chart) maintain on-the-job and even after-hours social friendships with one or more staff members and it actually seems

323

324

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture to nurture a relationship of trust. For other managers in other work settings, any such relationships would threaten or damage trust. The manager seeking to establish the ideal balance-one that promotes the maximum amount of trust-should give serious thought to three questions and their most likely answers: • To what degree can I maintain a personal friendship relationship with one or more subordinates without it compromising my ability to be objective? Am I capable of maintaining professional boundaries? • To what degree can they (each person must be considered individually) maintain such a friendship relationship with me while still relating appropriately to me in my role as manager? Are they capable of maintaining professional boundaries? • To what degree will others' perception of my objectivity and trustworthiness be affected because of my friendship relationship, regardless of how well we ourselves are able to handle it? The first question can be addressed primarily through self-analysis. We can assess our "limits:' the degree to which we can make necessary role shifts (from friend to boss and back to friend again) when required. To use an extreme example, we might ask, "Could I have dinner at the home of a staff member on Sunday evening and objectively conduct his staff perfor1nance evaluation conference on Monday?" Few of us could do this without compromising our ability to be objective and thus to manage effectively. But most of us could attend the organization's holiday party on the weekend, do so1ne socializing with subordinates, and still objectively conduct their staff performance evaluations on Monday. Others could not even do this. Because they have enough insight to recognize this, they choose to have no outside-the-office contact with their staff members. They know that it would be likely to limit their ability to manage. So they deliberately avoid socializing and any semblance of friendships with subordinates, even in the workplace. Even if a manager is perfectly capable of making necessary role switches, the other individual or individuals may not be, or may attempt to use a personal friend ship to manipulate the manager's behavior. They may attempt to use a friendship or a shared social occasion to their advantage, either by applying pressure to the manager ("I thought we were friends!") or by implying to other staff members that a "special" relationship exists. Any implication of a personal friendship by the manager thus would be a mistake. Letting down of barriers would only provide an opportunity for exploitation and for manipulation. Some subordinates will easily recognize the importance of maintaining the different roles that must be played and will make the shift accordingly. Others may intentionally {or even inadvertently) let the roles blur a little. Finally, a manager may be able to "switch hats" with ease, comfortably being both a friend and a boss to an individual. The latter also may recognize the need for strict role differentiation and may be able to accomplish it. In fact, a social relationship with one or more staff members may be totally independent from and in no way impinge on their professional relationships. But other staff members still may not perceive this to be the case. How can this happen and why does it cause problems? There is a natural tendency of staff members to assume that managers have favorites and give preferential treahnent.

Beco1ning and Remaining a Successful Manager Speculation on who is the favorite (office gossip) is interesting grist for dull days. Those who are not receiving good evaluations or are being passed over for promotion may have a special need to rationalize to themselves and to others why this is happening, and a friendship bet\veen a manager and one or more other staff members can meet their need. ("Maybe I should start hanging out \vith the boss more. I might get better evaluations!"} Even the staff member/friend can suffer \vhen these perceptions exist among other staff members. If he or she earns an award or a promotion, other staff members may devalue it, just assuming that it was because of the friendship relationship with the boss. ("I guess we know why that happened, don't \ve!") The relationship may also affect how other staff members relate to him or her. Some may become inordinately friendly, hoping to benefit by association. Others may resent and shun the individual, especially if they are n ot too fond of the manager. Good honest communication and collegial working relationships can thus be damaged or can be prevented from developing in the first place. When it comes to even casual socializing, managers must be sensitive to the needs of the work environment but also to the rights of individuals. For example, managers sometimes believe that staff nlembers would work more effectively if they got together socially now and then. T hey may encourage a Friday afternoon social hour or similar occasions. However, it should be made clear to staff members that sociaHzing after work hours with coworkers (and sometimes the manager) is voluntary and not a requirement of the job. A "command" social performance can produce more bad feelings than good ones about an individual's job and about the manager. It can be vie\ved as an unwarranted intrusion on a staff member's own time. Many people just want to do their jobs and be left out of any socializing that goes on outside the \Vork setting. After work hours, they may prefer to enjoy themselves alone or with family, friends, or neighbors and leave their jobs {including the other people who \vork there} at the office. Good managers respect that choice and protect them from pressure to socialize with their CO\vorkers. As long as they are doing their jobs, it is their right to accept or to reject social overtures off the job and to not be resented, penalized, criticized, or ridiculed for their decision. They are paid to do a job for a certain number of hours per week. Emergencies may occur that occasionally will justify the manager requesting a little more time from them. But the manager, the organization, or coworkers have no legitimate claim on employees' relaxation or recreation time that is not directly related to their job responsibilities. It is hard to know just how much socializing {both on and off the job) is desirable for the health of an organization. Some people contend that they work better with people if they get to know the1n well. But it is knowledge of others' work persona, not of their private lives, that facilitates productive interaction. Staff members need to know and understand the management style of their managers and managers need to know the work style of their subordinates. We should rarely be surprised by others' behaviors or attitudes on the job. But a more personal knowledge of each other is not necessary. Besides, sometimes seeing the "other side" of a coworker can harm our ability to work with that individual. It can result in a loss of respect. For example, it would be better not to know that he can become verbally abusive toward his partner or that she drinks a little too much at social occassions.

325

326

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture

IS A MANAGEMENT CAREER RIGHT FOR YOU? Sooner or later, virtually every social worker will have the opportunity to move into a position that requires that a sizable portion of the day will be spent in management activities. Frequently, the issue of whether or not to "move into management" occurs when one is offered a position of supervisor. The occasion can be the beginning of a rewarding career with ever-increasing management responsibilities. Or it can be the beginning of a period of frustration and unhappiness. A cautious, informed approach to the offer of a move into a management position (including consultation with those already in similar positions) is needed.2 Unfortunately, often that is not what happens. Not every social worker needs to become a full-time manager. The human services require good managers but they also need competent practitioners who want to spend only the minimum amount of time performing necessary management tasks. Only a relatively small percentage of social work jobs require that the social worker be a full-time manager or even spend most of the day performing management tasks. Some people simply do not have good potential to become full -time managers. They may lack one or more of the traits that we usually associate with good leaders (Chapter 4). They may possess certain other personality traits or characteristics (e.g., they may have a need to be liked by everyone, be chronically disorganized or have a "hair-trigger temper") that would be problematic if they were to assume more management responsibilities. They may know it. If not, others probably do, and an offer of a management job may never occur. Among those who have been identified as having the desirable characteristics for more management responsibilities, they may be aware of what management entails, and they prefer to let someone else do it. The decision not to take the offer of a management position is easy for them. But for many other potential 1nanagers, the question, "Should I or shouldn't I?" is a difficult one.

Errors in Decision Making Some social workers have impulsively said, "No, thank you!" to the opportunity to take on more management responsibilities because they could think only of the negative aspects of management. For example, they don't ever want to be in a position to have to fire someone who needs the job, or they know that they would miss the gratification they receive from working directly with clients. Or they previously worked for a bitter or "burned-out" boss and, perhaps without knowing it, had adopted the boss's attitudes about management. Or they may have held the erroneous belief that manage1nent is not really social work practice. For whatever reasons, they hastily turned down the opportunity for more management responsibilities and then later regretted their decision, wishing that they had more carefully explored what the job entailed. A more frequent error involves the tendency to impulsively accept the offer of a management position when it is offered. Many new managers approach their new jobs with totally unrealistic expectations. They soon become unhappy and disillusioned. Some eventually learn to look more realistically at the pros and cons of the job, they

Beco1ning and Remaining a Successful Manager adapt. and become competent nlanagers. Others simply resign from the job and leave the organization, determined to never repeat their mistake. A few may be able to move into another position in the organization with fewer management responsibilities, and some may even be able to get their old jobs back. They are the fortunate ones. Others, \.vho were promoted from \vithin, bearing the real or imagined stigma of failure, have felt the need to leave the organization where they once had been happy and productive staff members.

The Lure of a Management Position When we learn that we are being considered for a promotion or are encouraged to apply for a higher-level position within our current organization, it can be very flattering. It is, after all, an indication that we have been successful, that we have done our current job well. It represents both an appreciation of past achievements and of others' belief in our ability to assume even greater responsibilities. Who wouldn't like to receive that kind of message? In a competitive, success-oriented society, saying yes to an opportunity to 1nove into a position with more 1nanagement responsibilities can be ever so attractive. It is viewed by many people as "making it:• Beco1ning a manager is so1nething that the majority of workers in our society aspire to achieve. Unfortunately. the reasons why they covet the job often have little to do with the job itself There are many reasons why one might impulsively say yes to the offer of a job with more management responsibilities. A higher salary is the most obvious. Scurfield surveyed social work administrators. He observed that "a substantial number of current administrators would choose to be clinicians if promotional and fmancial opportunities in clinical practice were equivalent to those in administration~ 3 They often are not. Despite the increased use of dual career ladders (Chapter 13) in human service organizations, in most organizations tangible and intangible re\vards still go most often to those higher up in the organizational hierarchy. A move into a management position may be the best \vay, if not the only way, to n1ake more money. Awareness of this fact can be a compelling reason to accept a move into management, even among those who seriously doubt whether it is what they really want. There are other enticing rewards associated with moving into a job with more management responsibilities. They may include such "perks" as a reserved parking space, more opportunities for professional travel. the newest computer, an administrative assistant, or a larger and more attractive office. A manager generally is granted more autonomy in such areas as work and vacation scheduling, purchasing supplies and equipn1ent, or choosing whether to perform a task or to delegate it to someone else. The prospect of increased autonomy can be appealing, especially for those individuals who have felt oppressed and inhibited by rules and policies or constrained by a supervisor who has a tendency to micro1nanage. There also is the attraction of being out fro1n under many of the restrictions that may apply only to "lower-ranking" staff members. For example, managers are less likely to have to sign in and out of the office, or to get someone else's approval to use . comp time. There are other "perks" to being a manager. There is the more prestigious n1anager's title that appears in a signature block on correspondence. Staff members tend to treat their boss \vith a little more respect and deference than they do coworkers. They are more

((

))

327

328

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture likely to listen attentively to a manager's ideas and suggestions and to give him or her their undivided attention. They act as if the manager's jokes are really funny. Who wouldn't like more of this? There are other seductive interp ersonal attractions associated with a 1nove into a position with more management responsibilities. In imagining what it would be like to become a manager, one is likely to envision how it would feel to tell fa1nily, friends, and other well-wishers about it or, perhaps, to see the look on the face of a rival for the job when the news is announced. The opportunity to have what others may want can be an important impetus for saying yes. Saying no is especially difficult if the list of applicants is long or if some very competent individuals also want the job. The logic goes like this: "They all want it, so it must be something good. I can have it, so I had better take it:' The desire to prevent some other individual from getting the position also can cloud our judgment. It can leave little room for honest assessments of whether the position is what we really want. Some people have been known to accept a job with n1ore management responsibilities (often at the urging of other staff members) just to keep a disliked coworker from getting it and becoming their boss. The fear of the long-term career consequences of not saying yes also has been known to produce a hasty affirmative response. We have all heard stories of workers (usually in the business world) who declined an offer to move into a higher-level management position. Later, when they were ready to move into management, another offer never ca1ne. However, in human service organizations, this fear is largely unfounded. Refusal of such an opportunity is unlikely to be interpreted as suggesting that an individual lacks ambition or will never have an interest in any kind of management position. Opportunities to move into positions with greater management responsibility usually occur many times over the course of a social worker's career, especially if he or she is free to leave the organization where currently employed. Nevertheless, the specter of missing an only chance (even though it may have little basis in reality) can contribute to making a decision to take a job that later is regretted. A more realistic fear of saying no relates to what others might think. There is likely to be concern as to how coworkers, professional colleagues outside the organization, or family, friends, and neighbors will interpret a lack of "upward m obility." Will they speculate that the individual is really only marginally competent and incapable of going much farther? When the offer of a management job is turned d own, it often is impossible to let others know that the offer was made and declined. Telling others about it may be a disservice to the person who ulti1nately takes the job. And, new managers have enough problems without others knowing that they were not the first choice for the job. Convincing oneself that "No, thank you" is the correct response is especially difficult. If we decline an offer of a position with increased management responsibilities, it is impossible to know for certain whether or not we really could have done the job well. After all, people sometimes "grow into" a job. If we don't try, how will we ever really know? There are likely to be other self-doubts too. For example, we may wonder if it really is just easier to criticize others for their management practices than to be a good manager ourselves. Avoidance of self-doubt can be a powerful impetus to impulsively

Beco1ning and Remaining a Successful Manager say yes when the offer of a management position comes along. Of course, the presence of self-doubt is also the reason why some potentially good managers say no to the offer of a job with more management responsibilities.

The Rude Awakening If we accept the offer of a job with greater management responsibilities based solely on one or more of the reasons that were just discussed, we will quickly learn something. The decision is almost certain to result in disillusionment and regret. The benefits and "perks" that initially were so appealing lose their value rather quickly. They just do not seem very important after a little while. For example, telling others about one's new job can be very enjoyable, but soon everyone who cares already knows. That attractive private office with the better grade of carpet soon becomes simply "the office." It will have good or bad associations depending on our feelings about the job itself. The reserved parking space is soon just taken for granted, at least until someone else parks in it. Then it beco1nes just one more problem that needs to be addressed. Paid professional travel to conferences and meetings in pleasant locations looks like wonderful fringe benefits to those who do not get the opportunity to go places at the organization's expense. But they quickly can lose th eir appeal when managers have to make many trips, some of which they would rather not make. Professional travel can be fatiguing. It is time away from family and friends. It takes managers away from the job more than they would like, leaving them behind in their work. Many senior managers find themselves seeking ways to avoid professional travel by sending others to represent them whenever possible. The increased autonomy that goes with higher-level management positions is not a luxury; it is a necessity. It simply allows managers to be able to perform the many varied tasks that are required in the way and in the sequence that works best for them. The title that goes with being a manager is useful only on those rare occasions when it is desirable to "pull rank" or to remind others of one's greater authority. But it also can be a barrier between a manager and staff members. It can interfere with needed communication. A manager may nliss the honest critique that used to be offered gratuitously by former peers, who now seem more concerned with practicing ingratiation than with saying what they really think. The pleasure of having kept a disliked coworker or other fellow professional from getting the job does not last long either. Soon the other individual's career aspirations really do not 1natter anymore. Even a raise in pay may not result in any net gain. Increased income taxes and additional expenses generally accompany a move into a management position. A lower-level staff me1nber can make a $2 contribution for flowers for a hospitalized coworker. The manager is expected to make a larger contribution. When others' donations do not cover the cost of the flowers, guess who makes up the difference? There also may be an expectation that managers give holiday gifts to staff members or host social events. Either can be expensive, even if they may be tax deductible. A new "manager's wardrobe" (at least "business casual") may have to be purchased when an individual becomes a manager. Even that ten -year-old car that was just fine before might no\v be deemed unsuitable.

329

330

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture Soon, most of those reasons for taking a position with greater management responsibilities that seemed so attractive have been depreciated. They are no longer important. What matters most is the new job itself and its expectations.

Changes to Expect As has been noted throughout this book, many of the responsibilities of the manager are pleasurable and very consistent with the knowledge, values, and co1npetencies of most social workers. For example, increased influence over an organization's policies and services can be gratifying, especially for a social worker who may have felt powerless to initiate needed changes. "Troubleshooting" in order to address unique problems can be a more challenging and intellectually stimulating way to spend the day than performing repetitive tasks. But other management activities such as conducting staff performance evaluations, overseeing the daily work of others, making budget cuts, or reprimanding or firing staff members are not enjoyable for most of us. The need to give specific direction to subordinates can be especially difficult for social workers who are far more comfortable using nondirective approaches in working with others. 4 When an individual takes on more management responsibilities, other changes occur. Managers are expected to be responsible for their own job performance, but also for monitoring how well staff members are performing. As suggested in the discussion of delegation in Chapter 7, more management responsibility also leaves managers accountable for not only their own actions but also for those of others. Managers experience what it is like to take the blame for 1nistakes that are made by others, or even for situations beyond anyone's control. Politicking and diplomacy are important skills for the manager. Especially in the public sector (where the task environment may be especially hostile), a human service organization should be recognized for what it is-a political arena.5 The internal environment of an organization also requires managerial diplomacy. For example, there are always some unanticipated tasks that don't fall cleanly in anyone's job description, but they still must be completed. Unless managers have the time to co1nplete them the1nselves (and that usually isn't the case), they must ask and persuade others to do the job, on top of their usual responsibilities. The "and other duties as assigned" in most job descriptions may 1nake the request a legitimate one {a manager has the authority to ask). However, unless the request is made tactfully and with some expression of appreciation, it can damage a good working relationship between managers and their subordinates. Higher-level managers (such as executive directors) have little or no job security. They generally "serve at the pleasure of the board:' often at the will of one or two powerful board members. They are highly visible. Their behavior on business and even social occasions is often noticed and discussed by others. Among staff members, some amount of criticism or even ridicule is likely to occur. Virtually everyone 1nakes fun of the boss now and then. Managers learn to expect it and try not to take it personally. Staff members at the lowest organizational levels are evaluated by their superiors. But higher-level managers are critiqued by both their superiors (such as the members of the board) and their subordinates. People who are especially sensitive to criticis1n {and "beat themselves up" over it) often are unhappy in management jobs. Jobs that entail greater management responsibilities are not for everyone. Refusing the offer of a management position may be the correct decision, if it is based on the recognition that the tasks of managing hold

Beco1ning and Remaining a Successful Manager

331

Case Example

S

ocial work was a second career for Ben. During the years that he had worked as a middle school language arts teacher, he had also been a volunteer guardian ad /item. This experience convinced him that he really was more suited to social work than classroom teaching. It also convinced him that the public child welfare system was seriously flawed. When he enrolled at the local school of social work, he chose a concentration in macro-level practice, believing that he had the best chance of making needed changes in the system if he went into management. When Ben received his degree, the job market was tight. The only available job in the city where his partner was employed that did not require prior social work practice experience was as a child welfare caseworker in the local county welfare office. He had student loans to repay and a car payment, so he had no choice-he took the job, but told his partner and all of his friends that he would "grab" the first job with more management responsibilities and higher pay that came up. For four years, no supervisory or other management job became available. Meanwhile, Ben became a very good child protection caseworker, and actually learned to like his job and found it professionally gratifying. He received excellent staff performance evaluations. Then his supervisor went on medical leave while she recovered from surgery and received chemotherapy. Ben was made acting supervisor. He was told to make as few changes and make as few decisions as possible, since his supervisor was expected to return to work in a few months. However, after four months she suffered a medical setback and decided to take a disability retirement instead. When the job was posted, Ben and Kathy, a caseworker from another unit with whom he had never gotten along, both applied for the job, along with several people from outside the agency. The agency had a policy of hiring from with in. Since Kathy had several more years of practice experience than Ben, he both expected and feared that she would be offered the job.

When he interviewed for the job with the agency's personnel director, Ben became a little more hopeful. The director seemed impressed with his years of volunteer experience as a guardian ad /item, and even indicated that his classroom teaching experience might be useful for meeting the educational supervision expectations of a supervisor's job. When, two weeks later, he was called back and offered the job, he did not hesitate. He took it. He would be starting on Monday with an immediate $s.ooo annual salary increase. He eagerly filled out the form to have his new calling cards made with the title of "Case Supervisor" listed after his name. The weekend before he officially became a supervisor was a happy one for Ben. First, he called his mother to tell her the news. She was very pleased. She had never wanted him to quit his teaching job and never understood why he took a job for less money in social work. But now she appeared to be convinced that the move might have been a good one, since he seemed to have the potential for more upward mobility in social work than he had in public school education. She remarked that she only wished his brother was as ambitious as Ben. Ben had never moved into his supervisor's office. He had spent as little time there as possible since it contained many of her personal belongings and he did not want to appear too impressed with his temporary title. But now he began to think about that private office with a window, large desk, drapes, and the latest technology. He couldn't wait to claim it as his own and to personalize it with his pictures and academic degrees. He knew that there would be other "perks" too, like some paid professional travel to the annual supervisor's meeting at the beach and the freedom to keep more flexible work hours. The raise in salary might finally make buying a condo possible and there would have to be fewer bag lunches or dinners at fast food restaurants. Ben enjoyed his new job for about the first month. Then something happened. It didn't seem as great as he had anticipated. His former caseworkers acted differen tly toward him. They no longer joked around with

(continued)

332

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture

Case Example Continued him as they once had. A few times, they got suddenly quiet when he came out of his office; he wondered sometimes if they had been laughing about him. He was not asked to join the NFL football pool in which he had always participated. He understood that he could no longer have the kind of friendships with them that he had once had. but he felt isolated and cut off. When he tried to become friendlier with the other supervisors. they were polite, but they seemed to show little interest in starting up a friendship. About the only interaction he had with them was during the special called meetings at 4:00 PM when some problem had arisen. He began to resent these meetings, since they often lasted an hour or longer and put him right in the middle of rush hour traffic. His partner started to resent them too. and told Ben so. Since he had not really been a supervisor before. everything seemed to take longer than what Ben thought it should take. He quickly got behind on paperwork, most of which he thought was unnecessary, and found himself coming in to the agency on Saturdays to try to catch up. Then, he was told in a confidential supervisors' meeting that the agency was preparing for some severe budget cuts. They would most likely include cuts in the personnel budget. which would necessitate laying off one or more caseworkers. He dreaded the possibility of having to fire any of his former coworkers; he had wanted the job partly to be able to make life better for them. not worse. What surprised Ben the most was that he really missed direct contact with his clients. He considered trying to carry a few cases himself. but recogn ized that he just didn't have the time. Besides, his boss would never approve if he asked about doing it. He wanted to get back in his old job. but he knew that wasn't possible either with the impending layoffs. Even if it were possible. Kathy might be offered the supervisor's job and become his boss. and it would look to his coworkers. friends and relatives like he had failed. That would be embarrassing. Ben had never been one to call in sick unless he was very ill. but that began to change. He did not look forward to Mondays and stayed home on two successive ones. He got even further behind on

paperwork and he knew his upcoming staff performance evaluation would reflect it. He became depressed and had trouble sleeping. Fortunately for Ben. he found a way out of his situation. His partner. a lawyer. was offered and took a junior partner position in a law firm after being highly recommended for it by one of his former professors. It was in a larger city, one with plenty of jobs for direct practice social workers in child protection and related fields. Ben resigned immediately and was offered a job as a family counselor in the other city without much of a drop in pay, in part. because his former supervisor wrote such a glowing reference for him. Over the next ten years. Ben received several more opportunities to move into a job with more management responsibilities. He seriously considered taking one of them. but decided against it. Finally, when a part-time supervisor's job opening was announced. he applied for and got the job, but only after asking numerous questions and being assured that he could continue to carry a small client caseload.

Discussion Questions 1.

What were the reasons why Ben wanted a manager's job? Do you think any of them were good ones? Why or why not?

2.

What misconceptions did Ben appear to have about a job with more management responsibilities? Why did his time as acting supervisor not prepare him for his new role?

3. Why do you think that Ben's former coworkers treated him differently when he became their supervisor? 4. Why did the "perks" that Ben envisioned before he began his new job no longer seem important once he had been in it for a while? 5. What do we know about Ben that would suggest that he might miss working directly with clients in the role of a supervisor? 6. What did Ben learn about the possible effects that a job with increased management responsibilities can have on an individual's personal well-being, as well as his or her relationships with others?

Beco1ning and Remaining a Successful Manager

333

little appeal. But a decision to take on greater management responsibilities based on the wrong reasons may have permanent negative consequences for the individual's career, for the organization, and, most importantly, for the clients we seek to serve.

A Guide for Decision Making The statements in Box 14.1 are reflective of the major job expectations of social work managers as we have described them in this book. While they can be useful for considering whether a manager's job might be a "good fit" for the reader, they are no substitute for talking with other people about possible career goals. Friends, family, and, especially, bosses-people who already know what the job of manager entails-can all be helpful. There are many attributes that are desirable for someone who is contemplating a management

Box 14.1

D

Do I Want More Management Responsibilities?

irections: Place a check mark alongside each

statement with which you agree. 1. I would welcome additional manage.ment responsibilities. even if they did not result in a pay . increase. 2. It is more important to me to have more man-

13. I recognize that the good of the organization

or of its clients collectively sometimes must take priority over individual client needs and requests. 14. I have relationships outside the workplace that

can meet my social needs.

agement responsibilities than to have the title, privileges. or other "perks" that might go with a management job. 3. I want more management responsibilities for myself, not because of others' wishes or ambitions.

criticism or rid icule by subordinates. 16. I have no personal secrets that might be detrimental to the image of the organization if they were to become public knowledge.

4. I would look forward to creating and managing a

17- I can implement decisions with which I may per-

diverse staff. 5. I would not miss having less direct contact with

clients. 6. I recognize the importance of rules. policies. and

15. I can sometimes live with being the object of

so na lly disagree. 18. I would rather lead than follow. 19. I would enjoy having increased interaction with higher-level managers.

proced ures. ?. I would enjoy overseeing the work of others. 8. I would be comfortable delegating tasks and authority to others when the situation requires it.

20. Words like "uncertainty" and "challenge" sound

9. I would not mind assuming the ultimate respon-

22. I would enjoy the increased social obligations

sibility for others' actions. 10. I can handle being directive or saying no tooth-

ers' requests when the situation requires it. 11. I believe that I can be objective in evaluating the

contributions and achievements of others. 12. I could fire a staff member if it was for the good

of the organization or of its clients.

exciting to me. 21. I would occasionally be willing to risk offending

my superiors in order to advocate for others. that go with assuming a higher position in the organization. 23. I would enjoy becoming more "political." 24. When I have been in the role of manager, I have found it enjoyable. 25. I am willing to commit the time required to become a good manager.

334

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture career. For example, initiative, problem-solving skills, trustworthiness, intelligence, and a commitment to the goals of the organization are virtual prerequisites to success as a manager. However, the most important characteristic is the desire to do the job of manager. Good (and happy) managers enjoy the tasks of management, at least most of them. It is what often separates good managers from managers who are bitter and frustrated with their jobs, often because they just wanted to be a manager. Even the most happy and successful manager would not be expected to agree with all 25 statements in Box 14.1. However, if a potential manager disagrees with a large number of them (perhaps over 10?), this should serve as a warning signal that a career shift into a position with more management responsibilities might not be such a good idea, at least at the present time.

TAKING THE JOB When social workers are offered and accept a new job with more management responsibilities, they are either new to the organization (hired from outside it) or have been promoted from within it. Whichever route they have taken, there are issues to be addressed and potential advantages as well as problems.

Managers New to the Organization If hired from outside, new 1nanagers are usually a "virtual unknown" to staff members. They will be watched carefully for a v.rhile as staff members seek to find out who they are and how they will approach their job. When brand new to an organization, managers will have a "steep learning curve:' There is a lot to learn that everyone else already knows. They will make mistakes that others who have been around for a while would never make, while attempting to not lose respect in the process. They must be observant as they attempt to understand the organizational climate and the informal organization and to evaluate and get to know staff 1nembers and their strengths and weaknesses. A manager who is new to an organization is likely to feel very lost and very lonely. Staff members may be suspicious of and guarded around the new manager. They may be resentful of the "outsider" who got the job that one or more of them may have sought. As the new manager blunders through while learning on the job, staff members may see this as further evidence that he or she is not sufficiently qualified and is overpaid. (Everyone thinks someone else is overpaid but, of course, none of us ever is!) Confronted with these kinds of reactions, the new manager may be tempted to win over staff 1nembers with acts of kindness, perhaps by relaxing rules or being overly generous in granting their requests. Treat them like friends. Let them see that he or she is a "nice guy." Good managers (including teachers) know (often through experience) that this would be a costly mistake. They will tell you that, when assuming a new management job, it is better to be "tough" in the beginning. You can always "let up" later, if and when it appears that it will not be abused or perceived as a sign of weakness. Staff members will likely be relieved and pleased to learn that "She's not so bad after all" or "He really is human!" However, if a manager is excessively nice, friendly, lax, and so forth in the beginning, it will be extremely difficult (and resented by staff) when the manager must attempt to tighten up later.

Beco1ning an d Remaining a Successfu l Manager While a manager who is new to an organization may feel isolated and may have more self-doubts than one promoted from within who already "knows the ropes;' being an outsider also has distinct advantages. The manager who comes in as an unknown does not have to deal with prejudgments of his or her ability to do the job. Old friends will not be expecting special consideration or to be treated as favorites. Enemies will not be looking for signs of retribution, even when the manager is trying to be fair. All staff members must prove themselves to the new manager. Some will "try harder" than they might if they were already known to be "stars:' Others who were vie\ved as less competent may seize the opportunity for a second chance. While becoming familiar with the organization and how things are done, the new manager will undoubtedly have questions and will decide to challenge some of the "old ways" of doing things. Staff members may find this refreshing and are likely to appreciate changes, if they are implemented tactfully and in s1nall doses (Chapter 13). In contrast, a manager pro1noted from within is less likely to bring new, creative ideas to the job.

Managers Promoted from Within When a social worker assumes a new role with more manage1nent responsibilities within the saine work environment there are also both advantages and disadvantages. When an individual is promoted from \vithin the work group he or she will have a less steep learning curve. Both the manager's job and the job of subordinates are already understood. The ne\v manager will have already formed opinions about what needs to be done and may have some ideas about ho'v it should be done. The manager has had the benefit of a role model (the previous manager) and has formed an assessment of the subordinates with whom he or she will '"ork. Of course, these are not always advantages; the role model may have been a poor one and the predecessor's assessments of subordinates can interfere with the open mind needed in approaching the new job. Problems tend to relate primarily to making the transition to manager in a work environment where relationships already exist and must undergo change. In the new role, a manager may now have administrative authority over staff members who previously were peers, and now suddenly are subordinates. This situation can produce special problems. People tend to establish levels of formality and fanilliarity that are appropriate for the respective roles that they occupy. For example, close friendships, intense rivalries, good-natured teasing, and sharing of office gossip are not unusual among peers in a work environment. As long as they exist by mutual consent and do not interfere with the productivity of those involved, this interaction between peers can be harmless and can 1nake the job a little more enjoyable. When a person assumes greater manage1nent responsibility and becomes the boss of former peers, previous relationships have to change. As the manager assumes new responsibilities and spends more time in the role of manager, new patterns of relating to others will have to be developed. As discussed earlier in this chapter, it is often difficult for a manager to learn how much and what kind of change in social interaction is desirable. It can also be difficult for the former peers who are now subordinates. The manager is likely to feel especially isolated during the time of transition. Depending on the situation and the people involved, changes in relationships may need to be slight or they may need to be more dramatic. The best advice to the manager is: make only necessary changes. In making whatever changes are required, it is helpful if managers

335

336

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture communicate clearly to subordinates that it is the needs of the organization, not his or her intrapersonal needs that require the changes. Managers do not want staff members to conclude that they are now "too good for their old friends" or otherwise are impressed with their new status. However, reality dictates that managers probably cannot remain "one of the gang;' and efforts to make the change can result in resentment among staff members. Sensitive staff members generally recognize the need for establishing new relationships when one of their peers becomes their boss. While some might occasionally use an old friendship to seek special favors or otherwise try to manipulate the manager, most former peers know better than to try to exploit the situation. This is a time of experimentation for all parties involved as staff me1nbers and the manager renegotiate their relationships with each other. Behavior will change in many ways. For exan1ple, subordinates probably will not co1nplain about "the administration" as freely around the manager as they previously did. In turn, some topics (such as the work of other staff members) that the 1nanager may have previously discussed with coworkers are no longer suitable for even casual discussion between a staff member and the new boss. Some initial overreaction to the assumption of new roles is likely to occur on the part of both the manager and former peers. New managers often use reminders of their change in status {e.g., they may use their "manager" title on all written or electronic correspondence,) when they are not always necessary. Staff members may create a greater social distance from their new boss than is required. These responses actually can be useful. They serve to underline the reality that managers and those over whom they now have authority are not and cannot remain peers. Reassurances of mutual respect and continued friendships (but on a different level) usually come a little later as relationships gradually become redefined. Some staff me1nbers will be pleased that the new manager got the job, but some may not be. Any who sought it themselves may be especially resentful. Staff members will soon become aware that "something is different" in their relationship with the new manager. Even if a former close friend remains a confidant initially as the manager assumes new responsibilities, the same relationship probably will not continue for long. The power differential that exists will almost certainly cause it to change. It is just as well. It is not good for group morale for staff members to perceive that one subordinate has special access to or who appears to be treated differently by the manager. Inevitably, a former peer and close friend will disagree with a decision that the manager makes or the way that the manager performs some aspect of the job. If expressed openly and tactfully, the criticism may be an indication that a difficult interpersonal transition has been accomplished. The manager is now open to the second-guessing and critique that comes with the job, even from a for1ner close friend. He or she should resist the temptation to dismiss the criticism as bitterness over a lost friendship, or to seek validation from those other staff members who are all too ready to provide it (and there will always be some). Managers who possess the values, knowledge, and competencies of the social worker should be adequately prepared to handle the interpersonal problems that can occur when they find themselves with administrative authority over those who were previously their peers. They should be able to assess and to understand the motivation behind staff members' reactions and behaviors as well as their own. But this still does not guarantee that the transition will be an easy one.

Beco1n ing and Remaining a Successful Manager

NEW AND PREEXISTING POSITIONS Some new managers move into jobs that no one else has occupied previously. Their jobs are either newly created or are still in the process of being defined. The organization may itself be brand new or it may simply be moving in a new direction, perhaps by adding new programs. Other organizations have started seeking managers with specialized skills. For example, human service organizations are now recognizing the need for and hiring managers whose primary responsibility is in the area of grant management, marketing, or resource development. Managers thus hired may have the opportunity to revise and even develop their own job descriptions and to define their responsibilities. By being the first occupant of the job, they can quickly "put their own stamp on it:' And they will not have to deal with the ghost of their predecessor. More frequently, managers move into positions created long before their arrival. They are just the last in a line of people \vhose past management styles, personalities, and behaviors have left "acts to follow:' Inevitably, the influence of managers' predecessors continues to be felt for a period of tin1e after they have moved on to other responsibilities, often in the form of some "artifact:' For example, rules, or procedures that may seem as though they serve no useful purpose, often can be traced back to a previous manager who was a bit of a "control freak." Or, a preferred treatment nlethod such as the widespread use of support groups may have originated because a previous executive director was enamored of them, even though researchers may have concluded that they are ineffective for addressing some client problem. Depending on how their predecessors were perceived by staff, new managers face certain predictable difficulties that will impact on their ability to perform the tasks of management.

Following the Popular Manager In assuming management responsibilities previously performed by another individual who was highly liked and respected, a new manager faces an uphill battle. Comparisons, usually negative ones, are inevitable, at least in the beginning. Even if the previous manager had a few faults, they are likely to be forgotten or glossed over by a loyal staff. The Rebecca Myth 6 or the tendency to idealize a former occupant of a position and to regard the new one with suspicion and resentment, is a common problem. Thinly veiled criticisms such as "we never used to do it that way" can be expected. When the new manager makes mistakes, which most certainly will happen while functioning in a new role, staff men1bers 1nay express feelings of frustration. If the previous manager is still employed within the organization, the problem can be exacerbated. Staff members 1nay hope for and even scheme to get the previous manager to return. The difficulties inllerent in succeeding a popular manager often dissipate witl1 time. But they may not. Especially if differences in management style are very obvious, problems can get worse rather than better. If staff members' attitudes do not improve after a reasonable period of time, it may be necessary to address the problem directly. Negative comparisons, old loyalties, and unwarranted antagonism can be unpleasant for the new manager. But, more importantly, they can interfere \vith organizational goal achievement. Staff members may need to be reminded as clearly and directly as possible that the manager is indeed a different person \villi a different style and a different \Vay of doing things.

337

338

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture However, they will have to adjust to these realities. This point may have to be made repeatedly. If staff members expect to be treated as individuals by the manager (and this is a fair expectation), they will also need to treat the manager as a unique individual. They should be told this. However, the previous manager should not be disparaged in any way; this >vould only increase staff resentment. As was suggested earlier in this chapter, a social worker's management style should not be a carefully kept secret. It should be communicated regularly to staff n1embers in a variety of ways, thus making it possible for staff to predict with reasonable certainty what their boss will do, think, say, and so forth. As differences in management style from their predecessors become obvious and (it is hoped) eventually appreciated, fewer comparisons will be made. Managers, like any other professionals, have a right to be judged on their own performance without reference to others. This is a principle that is consistent with social work practice values. When presented as such, it is usually well received and accepted by staff members.

Following the Less Popular Manager The social worker who succeeds a manager who was generally not very popular and/or not well respected would seem to be more fortunate. Assuming that most staff members are dedicated and competent and that the cause of feelings about the predecessor resulted from his or her own shortcomings, the new manager is almost certain to be regarded as an improvement, at least initially. Indeed, a "honeymoon period" is likely to occur. Flattery >vill abound. Compliments on the new manager's approach to the job (usually accompanied by comparisons with the previous 1nanager's approaches) are likely to be common. Compliments can be very nice to hear, can be quite seductive, and can give the new manager a false sense of security. But the honeymoon period may not last for long. When the new manager makes the first mistake or just makes an unpopular decision, a tolerant attitude may prevail. Staff members may remind themselves and each other that "it used to be much worse:' But as the new manager continues to make demands and occasionally to offend (an inevitable part of the job of managing), harsh judgment may follow and resentment may quickly build. Another kind of comparison will occur. Similarities between the old and new managers will be pointed out along with expressions of disappointment. Some similarities inevitably will exist, in part because even the previous manager undoubtedly performed some tasks according to sound management principles. However, inaccurate and unfair generalizations may begin to occur as the new manager is erroneously perceived by staff members as "really no different" from the old manager. Staff members may become quickly disillusioned with and turn against the new manager. If their tendency was to blame the previous manager for problems on the job, they may easily fall back into the same old pattern in their relationship \Vith the new manager. Perhaps surprisingly, addressing the problems inherent in succeeding an unpopular manager involves a process very similar to that used in situations where managers must succeed a popular manager. In both instances, comparison and an inability of staff members to recognize and to respond appropriately to differences are the enemies. They must be confronted and neutralized. When following the less popular manager, it may be necessary to remind staff members that the new manager is different, but not totally different, from the previous occupant of the job. Defense of the predecessor's practices (those that were good) should be open and frequent, and complaints, criticism, and,

Beco1ning and Remaining a Successful Manager especially, ridicule of the former manager's work should be discouraged. It is tempting and easy to listen to "war stories" about the previous manager's alleged blunders. Derogation of his or her work can seem like a useful shortcut to acceptance by staff members. But this is a bad practice that will eventually cost a new manager more than it will gain. Not only is such behavior unprofessional, but it also sets a poor example for staff members by implying that it is okay to disparage other members of the team. Besides, neither the ne\v manager nor the staff members are in a position to fu!Jy understand the reasons behind the previous manager's decisions and behaviors.

Taking a Proactive Approach No matter how the new manager's predecessor was regarded, comparisons are likely to cause problems. Can they be totally avoided? No. But they can be greatly diminished if the new manager takes a proactive approach to management succession. A new manager needs to acknowledge and even to emphasize differences fron1 the previous occupant of the job, preferably before comparisons begin. A fust staff meeting is an excellent occasion to send the loud and clear message that a new era has begun. In words and actions tllat exemplify the new manager's individualistic approach to the job, it is a good idea to communicate t11e following message: My predecessor made some valuable contributions to this organization. I also plan to do what I can to help us achieve our objectives. But I want you to know that I am a different person. Sometimes I will act like your old boss and sometimes I will act quite differently. What I do I will do because, I believe, it is the best \vay to get tile job done. Whenever possible, I will try to let you know \vhy we are doing things the \vay we are doing them. I want you to know and understand my approach to my work, my "style." And you have a right to kno\v what I expect from you. Ask questions if I do not always make my expectations clear. Let me assure you that I \vill respect (and evaluate) each of you as an individual. I expect you to do the same for me. Such a strong statement is likely to get the attention of staf£ It is also likely to add to the anxiety over a change in managers that probably already exists. If the manager sees that this is occurring, the emphasis on difference should be tempered with assurances (if they can be 1nade) that staff members who do a good, competent job have nothing to fear from the change. Of course, the proactive communication that a new n1anager is both similar to and different from the previous manager should be more than sin1ply a verbal one. Actions should reinforce the message. If there is not an immediate opportunity to do this, the manager may wish to deliberately create one. Some clear-cut differences in expectations or behavior that everyone notices will suffice. They need not be differences of any great importance, only obvious ones. For example, did the previous manager remind a member of the support staff whenever it was time to make another pot of coffee? The new manager might simply go and make more coffee occasionally- a gesture that costs little in time or effort but is often appreciated. However, what if the previous manager sometimes made coffee when the pot was empty? The new manager may deliberately set up a roster of support staff members to perform the coffee-making job. Support staff members may be initially resentful, but they soon will just accept it as part of their "other duties as assigned~' The new manager can find some other (new) \Vay to show consideration for support staff, perhaps by making a

339

340

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture special effort to acquire some new office equipment or software that they have requested. Meanwhile, the manager will have reinforced the verbal message that differences in management style can be expected.

SURVIVING AND SUCCEEDING AS A MANAGER Some social workers seem like they would be good 1nanagers. They have established a record of competence in delivering direct services to clients or in successful intervention in larger social systems. They are bright, ambitious, dedicated workers who possess exceptional interpersonal skills. However, while they 1nay appear successful when they first take a job with more management responsibilities, they ultimately are not very effective in the role. Others take on the job with clear deficiencies. They may have little management experience or may have very limited knowledge of the area of practice in which they will be asked to function. They appear overwhelmed by their new jobs and struggle mightily. Yet, in a little while they are able to "grow into" the job, are successful, and may move on to even higher-level management positions. How does this happen? Apparently what individuals bring to the job of manager is sometimes less important than what they do after they get there.

Developing an Effective Management Style Style is important in all aspects of life. In some occupations (e.g., entertainers, politicians), it often see1ns more i1nportant than substance. Some competent managers have been fired because their styles differed too much from their bosses. Others have been very successful as managers, apparently on little more than their style. Whether we ultimately decide to seek a position with increased management responsibilities or remain in one with more direct client contact, all of us develop a certain approach to the role of manager. Our management style is likely to resemble that of others, particularly managers who1n we have knovvn and admired. But it also will be distinctive. We are who we are and we respond to situations in certain ways because of a complex interaction of life experience; psychological, cultural, and biological factors; and the impact of other social systems with which we must interact. We have developed our own distinctive personalities. They affect how we live, love, play, and so forth. Similarly, our distinctive management styles affect the way that we approach different management tasks. Our management styles are likely to be (and should be) extensions of our personalities. Thus our approach to the tasks of manage1nent likely will bear a close resemblance to our approach to the other tasks of life. But how we perform management activities and tasks also is based on the specific needs of a situation, what others have taught us about effective management (best practices), and what we have found to work. Thus, our management styles usually reflect comfortable compromises between our perceptions of the requirements of a situation and the way we would be most likely to address it-what seems to be bot h logical and natural (i.e., consistent with our personalities). There is some good advice that is essential for good social work practice (and for a happy life). It is "know thyself:' For managers, this translates to "know your management

Beco1ning and Remaining a Successful Manager style, let others know it, but do not be afraid to grow:· How can we identify our management style? Several theorists have attempted to identify nlanagement "types" that can be found in organizations. We alluded to one of these in Chapter 4 when \Ve discussed Theory X and Theory Y leadership styles. There are nU01erous others. One namely Champagne and Hogan's "Personal Style lnventory"7 is especially useful for understanding our management styles. Our personality and its reflection in our management style rest somewhere along a continuUill between untrusting and micromanaging on one extreme and very trusting and permissive on the other. Kotin and Sharaf used the terms tight and loose to describe these two extreme types. 8 They noted that tight administrators use formal reminders of their status differential; clear-cut delegation of authority and responsibility; reliance on rules and traditions; adherence to the hierarchical chain of co1runaud; and formal co1nmunication through regular meetings, memos, reports, and forms. On the opposite end of the continuum, loose administrators use primarily inforn1al reminders of status differential; rarely fall back on rules and traditions to influence; bypass the chain of command when desirable; prefer informal communication methods; and show a capacity to tolerate some of the role ambiguity that exists because of a lack of clearly designated roles, responsibilities, and authority. Here are some questions that, based on some of the discussions in this book, might be helpful for better understanding our management style: • Do I think that participative management is a good idea? What concerns would I have about using it? • Am I comfortable delegating tasks to others that are a part of my job responsibilities? If so, \Vould I prefer to delegate staff authority or functional authority? • Do I think of committees and task forces as useful, or do I see them as primarily a waste of tinle? • Am I most comfortable with rules and procedures, or '1-vould I prefer guidelines like policies that encourage staff members to use professional judgment? • If I see behavioral problems among staff members, am I more likely to perceive the issue as one of the staff members involved, or of a problem of the organization as a system? • What is my attitude about group cohesiveness among staff members? Do I perceive it as desirable, or does its presence threaten me? • What is my attitude about conflict between or among staff members? How would I prefer to deal with it? • Do I perceive the increased use of technology in hu1nan service organizations as more of a threat to client services or an opportunity to inlprove them? • Is the power that comes with a management job something I wish there was more of, or do I wish I had less of it? While all social \Vorkers have management styles that can be seen in the way they approach the activities of management, our management styles can and should change over time. They change naturally as we learn from experience, as we age, and as we rethink our attitudes and perceptions of people. They also change (or should) as situational requirements change. The best managers are versatile. For example, they can be tough and authoritarian when needed and they also can be understanding and supportive when required. This gives them some defmite advantages over other managers '1-Vho have a more

341

342

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture limited repertoire. The observation that, as a person, we may naturally tend to prefer a more controlling or a more laid-back approach to management does not absolve us from learning to use other approaches.

Managers' Needs and Organizational Needs It is often very difficult to determine the approach to management that is best for a given situation. In Chapter 4, we discussed how effective managers offer a mix of consideration and structure in the task of leading, and how the best balance of the two depends on such variables as the needs of staff members and the needs of the situation. But where do the needs of the manager factor into the equation? Problems can result when managers' own intrapersonal needs influence the ways they approach the job of manager. There are a number of ways that this can occur. We are social beings. We all desire to have others respond emotionally to us in certain ways. Thus we act in ways that promote these responses. As long as the response is desirable for the organization, this can be good. For example, as was noted earlier, effective managers act in ways that staff members learn to trust them, have confidence in them, and perceive them as fair. If a manager has an intrapersonal need to feel trusted, to be respected, or to be perceived as fair, his or her needs are very consistent with the needs of the organization. However, certain other types of actions on the part of managers that are designed to meet their intrapersonal needs can promote emotional responses and behaviors that are dysfunctional in organizations (see Box 14.2). For exa1nple, some managers seem to have a strong need to be feared and seek to gratify it in the workplace. They use intimidation, unpredictable "tirades:' public criticism, or sarcastic putdowns to generate fear among staff. They often see nothing wrong with this, rationalizing that managers need to maintain respect. But they fail to recognize that fear is not the same as respect and should not be confused with it. Respect, of course, is good. Like loyalty, it is earned. It results naturally >vhen, over time, a manager develops a reputation for being co1npetent, but also for being fair, trustworthy, and so forth. Respect makes the manager's job easier. For example, people are n1ore likely to do their best work or to comply with a special request from a manager v.rhom they respect rather than one who lacks respect. Thus it is good for the organization. In contrast, fear of a manager is not good for the organization. It immobilizes people, inhibits

Box 14.2 When Managers Attempt to Meet Their lntrapersonal Needs in the Workplace Need

How Achieved

Responses

Desirability

To be feared

Intimidation. rage, ridicule

Stress. immobility, humiliation

Undesirable

To be respected

Competence. fairness. trustworthiness

Dedication. loyalty. trust

Highly desirable

To be liked

Personality traits (humor. congeniality, kindness. etc.)

Enjoyable work climate

Desirable

To be loved

Ingratiation, special favors

Pity. loss of respect. ridicule

Undesirable

Beco1ning and Remaining a Successful Manager communication, and causes staff members to work under emotional duress. Managers who create a \VOrk environment that seems like a "reign of terror" are operating out of their needs, not that of the organization. They are little more than tyrants. Another nearly opposite need, the need to be loved, can also cause major problems i.vhen managers attempt to gratify it through their actions in the i.vorkplace. Again, a narroi.v but important distinction between two emotions is helpful here. In the same way that respect and fear are very different and have very different consequences for the i.vork environment, being liked as a manager and being loved are quite different in their importance to the job of managing. While not absolutely necessary in all cases (some people, for whatever reason, will always choose to dislike a n1anager), being liked by the majority of a manager's subordinates certainly makes the job of manager much easier. Being liked entails, among other things, being perceived as a "good person" who shares the san1e professional values and is a considerate, understanding boss. Staff members are likely to give their best efforts for a manager who1n they like. Liking promotes respect and vice versa. They are complementary and very closely related. Being loved is, of course, a basic need of human beings. However, it is best gratified through fan1ily and friends. Being loved by one's subordinates is both unnecessary and, perhaps, impossible given the power differential that exists. Managers perceived as ahvays trying to be loved are likely to be ridiculed or even pitied. Thus efforts to be loved by staff members can dissolve respect rather than promote it. A manager may, for example, make a special effort to "win over" a staff member by doing him the "favor" of pretending to overlook a problem behavior or by purchasing some unnecessary computer software that he has requested. Will the manager be loved for it? Not likely! Will it at least result in gratitude and some future loyalty or other payback? No, loyalty cannot be bought, and people don't generally like being reminded of past favors-it is embarrassing to them. They often prefer to engage in revisionist history in \.Vhich they \Vere totally deserving of \vhat was received! Let's be clear. We are not suggesting that the management style adopted by managers should not include various acts of kindness. There is no reason \vhy such actions as occasionally providing unexpected refreshments for staff meetings, sending thank-you notes to staff members for a job well done, or offering special considerations to a staff member at a time of a personal crisis should be perceived as an indication that the manager is unduly "needy:' Such actions, often characteristic of a more nurturing style of management, can be very effective for boosting staff morale, breaking down unnecessary boundaries, and promoting teamwork. So long as these are the reasons for them (and not the manager's need to be loved) and others perceive that to be the case, there is no problem. A note of warning is appropriate, however. Because the manager is in a position of power, staff men1bers are unlikely to complain about a nurturing management style, even if it is unwanted and n1akes them uncomfortable. Some people just want to do their job and to not have that kind of relationship with the manager. They should be encouraged to express this and their wishes should be respected. Effective managers stay in touch with the needs of their staff members, but they also know when to "back off:' To impose a nurturing relationship on all staff members, whether they desire it or not, can be just another form of tyranny. There is yet another way that managers sometimes cause problems by confusing their needs \.vith those of staff members or of the organization. It is particularly common among managers who have held management positions for a while (perhaps too long) and who have become overly identified i.vith the organization. It involves a logical fallacy. Senior

343

344

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture managers, especially those who have had a number of successes and have been praised and rewarded for them by board members or higher-level managers, often start to believe that anything that they need or want must be good for the organization. They may rationalize that they have a broader perspective on situations (as managers do) and access to infor1nation not available to others. Therefore, their perceptions of what the organization needs (which just happens to be what makes them look good) are always correct. Their successes gradually cause them to rely less and less on subordinates for input. They lose touch with the needs and preferences of others. An "I know what is best for them" attitude can develop. Opposition becomes less frequent over time. Staff members may be fearful of opposing the manager who may skillfully prevent an organized rebellion through a combination of "divide and conquer;' intimidation, and "buy-offs:' What is wrong with a knowledgeable, experienced manager making most important decisions with little or no input from staff members? For one thing, it can result in bad decisions, since no manager is infallible or has access to all needed information. But a paternalistic approach to management that may be perceived as self-serving is also just not effective. It does not promote desirable teamwork and an organizational climate conducive to the staff members' "ownership" of their work that is so important to organizational functioning.9 Staff members will not do their best work when they believe that they are merely working to pursue the manager's own personal goals and agenda. Effective managers recognize their own needs but do not attempt to gratify them through their relationships with staff members. They also work to remain humble and avoid behaviors that are (or can be misinterpreted as) elitist or self-serving and, thus, not in the best interest of the organization.

Growing as a Manager Regardless of the place that they occupy on an organizational chart, social workers who are successful in their management roles learn to think like a manager and to take on the personal identity of a manager. Unless they make conscious efforts to continue to develop and to grow as managers, they can easily slip in and out of their manager's role every day, perform the tasks of the manager, but never really perform them comfortably or particularly well. The best managers are lifelong learners. They are never content with their current knowledge and skills, always seeking to improve. This sounds like hard work, but it gets easier as it becomes a natural, comfortable approach to one's job. Peter Drucker (who we first mentioned in the discussion of MBO in Chapter 5) has made the observation that "it takes more energy to improve from incompetence to mediocrity than to improve from first-rate performance to excellence:· 10 The best managers remain sensitive to themselves and how they are performing as managers. They are constantly evaluating their work, identifying what seems to have been effective and what has not been effective. Brandon Toropov also points out the importance of knowing ourselves physically, for example, knowing what time of day we do our best work and when we should avoid making important decisions or when we have become too tired and need to quit for the day. 11 These insights help us to set and maintain high standards as managers. What else can social workers do to become better managers and to 1nore closely identify with management? For one thing, they can read and remain current on new theory

Beco1ning and Remaining a Successful Manager and developments within the field of management. They can subscribe to and read one or more journals within social work and/or in other fields such as manufacturing and business (many are now online) where the most research on management continues to be conducted and can even make their own contributions to knowledge by conducting research on social work management and writing articles for publication. Association with other managers also helps us to think and to feel more like managers. This can occur informally in semi-social situations. It can also take place at seminars and symposia that provide knowledge and skills to new and experienced managers. Some managers have chosen to form groups consisting of other managers and themselves who regularly get together to discuss topics of management relevance over lunch or at other convenient times. The group members (frequently from a variety of organizations) learn from each other at the same time that they form valuable managers' networks. Managen1ent is an integral part of social work practice. With reasonable effort and determination, it can also beco1ne an exciting and a gratifying activity for social workers.

SUMMARY In this chapter we built upon some of the insights developed in earlier discussions. We attempted to complete the reader's understanding of management within human service organizations by first examining some of the stresses that social workers in the role of manager often experience. One of them-isolation- led to a discussion of ho;v managers often struggle to find the level of interpersonal relationship with staff members that is optimal for performing their management tasks. One goal of this text was to help readers to be able to make more informed decisions about whether or not to seek more management responsibilities. There is a danger of making a hasty decision ;vhen the offer of a management position is made. We looked at some of the enticements that frequently lure social workers into management positions and why they are insufficient in the1nselves to guarantee either happiness or success. It was e1nphasized that it is not the desire to become a nlanager but the desire to do the job of the manager that is an important prerequisite to success. Social workers sometimes are new to the organization when they take a job with more n1anagement responsibilities; other times, they are promoted from within the organization. Either method of entry has both advantages and disadvantages, which were discussed. Special attention was given to the problems of management succession-following the previous occupant of the position-and how it needs to be addressed. Successful managers continue to grow and the importance of developing a management style consistent with one's personality was stressed. The dangers of a manager attempting to meet his or her own intrapersonal needs through the organization were discussed. Finally, it was emphasized that becoming a successful manager at any level requires a certain management "mind-set" and a commitment. One must learn to think like a manager and to take actions that will promote the development of an identity as a manager. Becoming and remaining a successful manager is a career-long challenge.

345

346

Part Three: Completing the Management Picture

In several previous chapters, we referred to the NASW Code ofEthics for guidance. The Code provides three statements in Standard 4.01 that clearly relate to issues discussed in this final chapter: a. Social workers should accept responsibility or employment only on the basis of existing competence or the intention to acquire the necessary competence. b. Social workers should strive to become and remain proficient in professional practice and the performance of professional functions. Social workers should critically examine and keep current with emerging knowledge relevant to social work. Social workers should routinely review the professional literature and participate in continuing education relevant to social work practice and social work ethics. c. Social workers should base practice on recognized knowledge, including empirically based knowledge, relevant to social work and social work ethics. 12

APP LI CATI 0 N After reading this book: 1. Are you less likely, about as likely, or more likely to seek a job with more management responsibilities? (A poll of your class members might make for an interesting discussion.) 2. What manage1nent tasks that were described are least appealing to you. Why? 3. What management tasks that were described do you think you would enjoy perforn1ing? Why? 4. Did anything that was discussed and that you had not previously considered help you to be more understanding of the work of managers who may be your current or past bosses? Explain.

Endnotes Chapter 1 1. Peter M . Kettner, Achieving Excellence in the Management of Human Service Organizations. (Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2002) p. 3. 2. Harold Koontz, Cyril O'Donnell, and Heinz Weihrich, Essentials of Management (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1986). 3. Arthur G. Bedeian, A Standardization of Selected Management Concepts (New York: Garland Publishing, 1986). 4. Henry Mintzberg, The Nature of Managerial Work (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980), pp. 86- 98. 5. James A. Stoner and R. Edward Freeman, Management (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1989), pp. 11-12. 6. Koontz, O'Donnell and Weirich, Essentials of Management, pp. 5- 6. 7. Eugene J. Meehan, Economics and Policy Making (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1982), pp. 19-38. 8. Adam Phillips, "A Mind Is a Terrible Thing to Measure:' The New York Times, op. ed. (London, February 26, 2006). 9. Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, Management of Organizational Behavior (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1982), p. 3. 10. National Association of Social Workers (Revised 2008) NASW Code of Ethics (Washington, DC: NASW Press, 2006), The Preamble. 11. Ibid. 12. Council on Social Work Education (Revised 2010 and updated August 2012) CSWE Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards (Alexandria, VA: CSWE, 2008), pp. 3- 8.

Chapter 2 1. William R. Dill, "Environment as an Influence on Managerial Authority;' Administrative Science Quarterly, II (March 1958): 409- 443. 2. James D. Thompson and William J. McEwen, "Organization Goals and Environment: Goal Setting as an Interaction Process;' American Sociological Review, 23 (1958): 23- 31. 3. Ibid. 4. Ruth E. Weber and Norman A. Polansky, eds., Social Work Research (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1975), pp. 185- 187. 5. See, e.g., Carl F. Brun, A Practical Guide to Social Service Evaluation (Chicago, IL: Lyceum Press), 2005; or Robert W Weinbach, Evaluating Social Work Services and Programs (Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2005).

347

348

Endnotes 6. Peter M. Blau and Richard W Scott, Formal Organizations (Scranton, PA: Chandler Publishing Company, 1962), pp. 42- 44. 7. National Association of Social Workers (Revised 2008) NASW Code of Ethics (Washington, DC: NASW Press, 2006), standard 1.01. 8. Richard L. Edwards, Philip W Cooke, and P. Nelson Reid, "Social Work Management in an Age of Diminished Federal Responsibility:' Social Work, 41 (1996): 473. 9. See, for example, Daniel P. Moynihan, Maximum Feasible Misunderstanding: Community Action in the War on Poverty (New York: Free Press, 1969), pp. 75- 101. 10. See, for example, John Ehrlichman, Witness to Power: The Nixon Years (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1982), pp. 207- 241 .

Chapter 3 1. Frederick Winslow Taylor, "The Principle of Scientific Management:' in Classics of Organizational Theory, 2nd ed., J. Shafrity and J. Ott, eds. (Chicago, IL: Dorsey Press, 1987), p. 75. 2. David Whitsett and Lyle Yorks, From Management Theory to Business Sense: The Myths and Realities of People at Work (New York: American Management Association, 1983), pp. 221- 241. 3. Ibid., pp. 221- 241 . 4. Ibid., p. 223. 5. Daniel Wren, The Evolution of Management Thought (New York: Ronald Press, 1972), p. 218; Claude George, The History of Management Thought (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972), p. 113. 6. Herbert Simon, Administrative Behavior (New York: Macmillan, 1976), pp. 20- 44. 7. Ibid. 8. Lewis Coser, The Functions of Social Conflict (New York: Free Press, 1956), pp. 151-157. 9. Alfred Marrow, The Failure of Success (New York: American Management Association, Inc., 1972), pp. 83- 102. 10. Chester Barnard, The Functions of the Executive (Can1bridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1938), p. 167. 11. Walton, M. Deming Management at Work (New York: Perigee Books, 1990). 12. Ibid. 13. Clara Jean Ersoz, "TQM: Health Care's Roadmap to the 21st Century~' Paper presented at the New Paradigms in Health Care Conference, Erie, PA, 1992. 14. See, e.g., Geert Hofstede, Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1980); or Charles Handy, Understanding Organizations, 3rd ed. (Har1nondsv;orth: Penguin Books, 1985). 15. See, e.g., Schein, E. Organizational Culture and Leadership, 3rd ed. (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2005).

Chapter4 1. Robert House, Culture, Leadership, and Organizations (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2004), p. 15. 2. Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard, Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources (Paramus, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1982), p. 3.

Endnotes 3. Warren Bennis, On Becoming a Leader (Nevv York: Addison-Wesley, 1989). 4. Ralph Stogdill, "Personal Factors Associated with Leadership," Journal of Psychology, 25 {1948): 35-71. 5. Edwin E. Ghiselli, "Managerial Talent:' American Psychologist, XVI (1963): 632-641. 6. M. W McCall Jr. and M. M. Lombardo. Off the Track: Why and How Successful Executives Get Derailed {Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership, 1983). 7. Fremont Kast and James RosellZ\veig, Organization and Management: A Systetns Approach, 2nd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974, p. 349. 8. Robert R. Blake and Anne Adams McCanse, Leadership Dilemmas: Grid Solutions (Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Company, 1991). 9. Robert House and Philip Podsakoff, "Leadership Effectiveness: Past Perspectives and Future Directions for Research," Organizational Behavior: The State of the Science, Jerald Greenberg, ed. (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaurn, 1994). 10. Douglas McGregor, The Human Side of Enterprise (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960). 11. Ralph Stogdill, "Personal Factors Associated with Leadership;' op. cit. 12. Ralph Stogdill, Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Theory and Research (New York: Free Press, 1974). 13. Reginald York, "Can Change Be Effectively Managed?" Administration in Social Work, 1(2) (1977): 196. 14. Fred Fiedler, A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967). 15. Michae.I Austin, "Managing Up: Relationship Building between Middle Management and Top Management:' Paper presentation at the National Association of Social Workers Annual Conference. New Orleans, September 12, 1987. 16. Mark Ezell, 'J\.dministrators as Advocates:' Administration in Social Work, 15 (1991): 15. 17. The Associated Press release, "Feds: For at Least 44 Minutes, Miners \Vere Thought Alive:· USAToday.com. January 11 , 2006.

Chapter 5 1. Harold Koontz, Cyril O'Donnell, and Heinz Weihrich, Essentials of Management (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1986), p. 73. 2. Ibid. 3. Grover Starling, J\tfanaging the Public Sector (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1993), pp. 210-211. 4. James D. T hompson, Organizations in Action (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967), p. 40. 5. See, for example, Rex A. Skidmore, Social Work Administration (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1995), pp. 53-54, or Koontz, O'Donnell, and Weihrich, Essentials of Management, pp. 102- 11 3. 6. Yvonne A. Unrau, Peter A. Gabor, and Richard M. Grinnell, Jr., Evaluation in the Human Services (Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock, 2001). pp. 67-70. 7. Walter Christian and Gerald Hannah, Effective Management in Human Services (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1983), p. 136. 8. Rex Skidmore, Social Work Administration (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1983), p. 72. 9. John M. Bryson, Strategic Planning/or Public and Nonprofit Organizations (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1995), pp. 4-5.

349

350

Endnotes

Chapter6 1. Bernard Neugeboren, Organization, Policy and Practice in the Human Services

2. 3. 4. 5.

(New York: Longman, 1985), p. 130. Harold Koontz, Cyril O'Donnell, and Heinz Weihrich, Essentials of Management, 4th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1986), p. 448. Koontz, O'Donnell, and Weihrich, Essentials ofManagement, pp. 79, 459-463. Amatai Etzioni, Capital Corruption: The New Attack on American Democracy (San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1984), pp. 76-80. Malcolm Gladwell, The Tipping Point (New York: Little, Brown, and Con1pany, 2002).

Chapter7 1. Harold Koontz, Cyril O'Donnell, and Heinz Weihrich, Essentials of Management, 4th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1986), pp. 180- 201. 2. Bruce S. Jannson, "Federal Social Legislation since 1961;' in Encyclopedia of Social Work, 18th ed., 1 (1987), p. 594. 3. Koontz, O'Donnell, and Weilirich, Essentials of Management, pp. 226-233. 4. Ibid., pp. 209-215. 5. Richard H . Jenrette, The Contrarian Manager (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997), p. 103. 6. Grover Starling, Managing the Public Sector, 4ili ed. (Belmont CA: Wadsworth, 1993), p. 303.

Chapter 8 1. National Association of Social Workers, 2006 NASW Code of Eiliics (revised 2008).

2.

3. 4.

5. 6. 7.

8.

(Washington, DC: NASW Press), standard 3.09e. Ernest Greenwood, '~ttributes of a Profession:' Social Work, 2(3) (July 1957): 55; Abraham Flexner, "Is Social Work a Profession?" Proceedings of the National Conference of Charities and Correction (Chicago, IL: The Hildman Printing Company, 1915), pp. 576-590. Robert Clifton and Alan Dahms, Grassroots Administration (Monterey, CA: Brooks/ Cole, 1980), p. 113. F. Ellen Netting, et al. "Volunteer and Paid Staff Relationships: Implications for Social Work Administration:' in Organizational and Structural Dilemmas in Nonprofit Human Service Organizations, Hillel Schmid, ed. (Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Press, 2004), p. 86. M. Loden and J. B. Rosenor, Workforce America! Managing Employee Diversity as a Vital Resource (Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1991). John F. Longres, "Can We Have Our Cake and Eat It Too?" Journal of Social Work Education, XXXII (2) (Spring/Summer, 1996): 159. Yvonne Asamoah, "Managing the New Multiculhrral Workplace" in New Management in Human Services, 2nd ed. Leon Ginsberg and Paul Keys, eds. (Washington, DC: NASW Press, 1995), p. 116. Roslyn Chernesky and Marcia Bombyk, "Women's Ways and Effective Management;' Affilia, III (1988): 48- 61; Bette A. Stead, ed., Women in Management (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1985); A. Herbert, "The Minority Administrator: Problems,

Endnotes Prospects and Challenges:' in Social Administration: The Management of the Social Services, Vol. l, Simon Slavin, ed. (New York: The Haworth Press, 1985), pp. 212-224. 9. Jack Levin and William Levin, The Functions of Discrimination and Prejudice (New York: Harper & Row, 1982), p. 65. 10. Ibid., pp. 81-89. 11. Alvin Gouldner, "Cosmopolitans and Locals.; Administrative Science Quarterly, 2 (1957-1958): 281-306, 444-480.

Chapter 9 1. Abraham H. Maslow, Motivation and Personality, 3rd ed. (New York: Harper & Row, 1987); Abraham H. Maslow, ''A Theory of Human Motivation:• Psychological Review, 50(4) (July 1943): 370-396. 2. Edward E. Lawler III and J. Lloyd Suttle, ''A Casual Correlation Test of the Need Hierarchy Concept;' Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 7 ( 1972): 265-587. 3. Douglass T. Hall and Khalil E. Nougaim, ''An Examination of Maslow's Need Hierarchy in an Organizational Setting;' Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3 (1968): 12-35. 4. Frederick Herzberg, Bernard Mausner, and Barbara Block Snyderman, The Motivation to Work (New York: Wiley, 1959), pp. 3-12, 126-128; Frederick Herzberg, "One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees?" Harvard Business Review, 46 (January/February): 53-62. 5. David C. McClelland, Studies in Motivation (New York: Appleton-CenturyCrofts, 1955). 6. Robert B. Hill, "Integrating Relations," in Encyclopedia of Social Work, Vol. 1 (New York: National Association of Social Workers, 1987), pp. 951-956. 7. See Musafer Sherif, "Intergroup Relations and Leadership: Introductory Statement;' in Intergroup Relations and Leadership: Approaches and Research in Industrial, Ethnic, Cultural, and Political Areas, M. Sherif, ed. (New York: Wiley), pp. 3-21. 8. Richard M. Emerson, "Power-Dependence Relationships;' American Sociological Review, 27 (1962): 31-41. 9. Lewis A. Coser, The Functions of Social Conflict {New York: Free Press, 1954): 15-31, 151-157. 10. See Joseph A. Olmstead, Working Papers No. 2. Organizational Structure and Climate: Implications for Agencies (Washington, DC: DepartJnent of Health, Education and Welfare. Social and Rehabilitative Service, 1973), pp. 95-98. 11. Eileen Gambrill and Theodore Stein, Supervision: A Decision-1\faking Approach (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1983); Ruth Middleman and Gary Rhodes, Competent Supervision (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1985); Carlton Munson, An Introduction to Clinical Social Work Supervision, 2nd ed. (New York: The Haworth Press, 1993); Carlton Munson, ed., Social Work Supervision (New York: Free Press, 1979). 12. Alfred Kadushin, Supervision in Social Work (New York: Columbia University Press, 1976). 13. Alfred Kadushin, Consultation in Social Work (New York: Columbia University Press, 1977).

351

352

Endnotes

Chapter 10 1. Walter Christian and Gerald Hannah, Effective Management in the Human Services (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1983), pp. 213-241; Eileen Gambrill and Theodore Stein, Supervision: A Decision-Making Approach (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1983), pp. 39- 106. 2. Alfred Kadushin, Supervision in Social Work (New York: Columbia University Press, 1976), pp. 286- 313. 3. National Association of Social Workers (Revised 2008) Code of Ethics (Washington, DC: NASW Press, 2006), Standard 3.03. 4. Theo Haimann and Raymond Hilbert, Supervision: Concepts and Practices of Management, 4th ed. (Cincinnati, OH: South-Western Publishing, 1987), p. 276. 5. Ibid., Standard 3.08. 6. Robert W. Weinbach and Karen M. Kuehner, "Improving the Use of Agency Resources through Peer Training;' Social Work, 32(3) (May/June 1987). 7. Laurence Peter and Raymond Hall, The Peter Principle: Why Things Always Go Wrong (New York: William Morrow & Company, 1969).

Chapter 11 1. National Association of Social Workers, Code of Ethics (Alexandria, VA: NASW Press, 1999), paragraph 2.10. 2. J. Jensen, "Letting Go: The Difficult Art of Firing;' The Grantsmanship Center News 9 (1981): 38- 42. 3. A. Sherwood, "Exit Interviews: Don't Just Say Goodbye;' Personnel Journal, 62 (1983): 744- 750.

Chapter 12 1. National Association of Social Workers (Revised 2008) NASW Code of Ethics (\.Vashington, DC: NASW Press, 2006), Standard 3.09G. 2. Paul Krugman, The Accidental Tourist (New York: WW Norton, Inc., 1998), pp. 101-104. 3. Dennis F. Galletta and Peter Polak, An Empirical Investigation of Antecedents of Internet Use in the Workplace, Proceedings of the Second Annual Workshop on HCI Research in MIS. Seattle, WA, 2003, pp. 47- 51.

Chapter 13 1. Kurt Lewin, Field Theory in Social Science (New York: Harper & Row, 1951). 2. Kurt Lewin, "Defming the Field at a Given Time;' Psychological Review, 50 (1943): 292- 310. 3. Alfred Kadushin, Supervision in Social Work (New York: Columbia University Press, 1976), p. 70. 4. Edward Lowenstein, et al. "The Management of Organizational Change: Some Findings and Suggestions:' Public Welfare, 31(1) (Winter 1973): 56- 57. 5. Arthur Pierson, "Social Work Techniques with the Poor:' Social Casework, 51(8) (October 1970): 481 - 485.

Endnotes 6. Johnson, M. and Stone, G. "Social Workers and Burnout: A Psychological D escription;' Jou rnal of Social Science Research, 10(1) (1987): 67. 7. Sue Henry, "Non-Salary Retention Incentives for Social Workers in Public Mental H ealth;' Adtninistration in Social Work, 14(3) ( 1990): 1- 15. 8. See Joseph A. Raeline, "Two-Track Plans for One-Track Careers;' Personnel Journal, 66(1) (January 1987): 96-101. 9. See, e.g., Peter M. Kettner, Achieving Excellence in the Management of Human Service Organizations (Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2002), p. 106, or John Tropman and H. Luke Shaefer, "Flameout at the Top- Executive Calamity in the Non-profit Sector: Its Precursors and Sequelae" in Organizational and Structural Dilemmas in Non-profit Human Service Organizations, Hillel Schmid, ed. (Binghamton, NY: The Hawo rth Press, 2004), pp. 178-179.

Chapter 14 1. S. Martin, "Women in Social Work: A Study of Their Perceptions of Power in Organizations;• Ph.D. Dissertation, Columbia, SC: The University of South Carolina, 1995. 2. Robert W Weinbach, "Meeting a Supervisory Responsibility: Shared Evaluation of Supervisory Potential;' The Clinical Supervisor, 10(2) (1992): 195-209. 3. Raymond M. Scurfleld, "Clinician to Administrator: Difficult Role Transition?" Social Work, 26 (198 1): 498. 4. Alfred Kadushin, Supervision in Social Work (New York: Columbia University Press, 1985), p. 300. 5. Burton Gummer, The Politics of Social Administration (Engle\vood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1990), pp. 29-48. 6. Alvin M. Gouldner, Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy (Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1954), p. 79. 7. David W. Champagne and R. Craig Hogan, "Personal Style Inventory;' The 1980 Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators (University Associates, 1981). 8. Joel Kotin and Myron R. Sharaf, "Management Succession and Administrative Style;' Psychiatry, 30 (1967): 237-248. 9. See, e.g., James A. Belasco and Ralph C. Stayer, The Flight of the Buffalo (New York: Warner Books, 1993), pp. 59-64. 10. Peter F. Drucker, "Managing Oneself;' Harvard Business Review (March-April, 1999): 67. 11 . B. Toropov, The Art and Skill of Working with People (New York: MJF Books, 1999), pp. 293-294. 12. National Association of Social Workers (Revised 2008) Code of Ethics (Washington DC: NASW Press, 2006), Standard 4.01.

353