{"id":456,"date":"2015-03-31T17:03:54","date_gmt":"2015-03-31T16:03:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.iriss.org.uk\/innovate\/?p=456"},"modified":"2015-10-27T15:15:02","modified_gmt":"2015-10-27T15:15:02","slug":"the-view-from-here-analysis-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.iriss.org.uk\/innovate\/2015\/03\/31\/the-view-from-here-analysis-2\/","title":{"rendered":"The view from here: analysis"},"content":{"rendered":"
We were delighted with the wealth of data received from those participating in the project. This, however, made knowing where to start with analysis a little tricky!<\/p>\n
After much deliberation, we decided to start our analysis with the ‘reflection points’ (at the end of the recording week, we had asked participants to add a colour coded sticker next to text or diagrams that reflected: one thing they were proud of, one thing that stood out for them (good or bad), one thing they wished they could change and one thing that they wanted to tell their manager). It seemed apt to start with these reflections as these were the points that the participants themselves had identified as being most important after reflecting on their week.<\/p>\n
In order to analyse this data, we firstly transcribed each of the indicated quotations and then pulled out relevant themes. We then checked the internal validity of these themes by having another team member sense-check them according to their interpretation. We were then able to discuss any differences of opinion as well as settling on the best \u2018term\u2019 for the themes that we thought were emerging. This analysis was then used as a frame for a sense-checking event we ran directly with participating practitioners (checking external validity) on 11th March.<\/p>\n
Everyone who had taken part in the project was invited to come along to a session to help us make sense of the data received. Those who had participated in the work came from far and wide across Scotland, and so we were pleased that approximately a quarter of participants were able to come along on the day. We encouraged participants to bring any curious managers along with them on the day, although only a few took up this option.<\/p>\n
The aims of the day were to:<\/p>\n
After giving a broad overview and introduction to the day, we got straight into understanding the themes from the data.<\/p>\n
In order to facilitate discussion around this, for each \u2018reflection point\u2019 we pulled out quotes relating to each of the pre-identified themes and had them available for participants to read and interpret. We discussed these quotes as a group and finally asked participants to:<\/p>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n An overview of the conversations that emerged is outlined below.<\/b><\/p>\n Our analysis:<\/strong><\/p>\n Overwhelmingly we felt that that the data indicated that key pride-inducing moments were centred around working with the people they support and seeing improvement or building relationships.\u00a0 We broke this down into two key areas (1) seeing service user progression\/ surpassing expectations and (2) building relationships (this involved elements such as building trust and open dialogue).<\/p>\n Although it was clear that many practitioners were trying to do their best to support people, and that many were moving towards outcomes, there definitely still seemed to be a focus on tasks (things that practitioners do) and activities (things that people who are supported do), rather than outcomes.\u00a0 We were interested to tease this out at the event to see if practitioners made the same distinction.<\/p>\n At the event:<\/strong><\/p>\n All in all, as you might imagine, people really enjoyed talking about this subject!\u00a0 However, it was continually repeated that practitioners felt like they had to rely on personal pride to know that they are doing a good job. There was discussion that praise is often focused on tasks achieved\/ undertaken rather than being focused on relationship building.<\/p>\n Themes that emerged and that corroborated our initial analysis included:<\/p>\n The issue of building strong relationships was most frequently shared. There was a general consensus that it takes to establish a trusting relationship with a person. Practitioners felt there was a direct relationship between developing a strong rapport with a person and that person’s general well-being, progress and quality of life.<\/p>\n In terms of the distinction we’d made in our analysis around ‘outcomes’ and ‘activities’ practitioners at the event highlighted that often there was a disconnect between the outcomes that had been set and the activities that they undertook with the person (this was particularly true for the administration of medication). They felt that this might be due to the fact that often the outcomes are set were negotiated by people other than those who deliver the care.<\/p>\n Practitioners also interpreted the difference between ‘outcomes’ and ‘activities’ differently from us. Instead, they referred to the difference between ‘being’ and ‘doing’ and stated that often they were praised by managers for the activities and concrete actions that they did with people – rather than the simply ‘being’ and establishing connections with people. There was consensus by the group that the ‘being with’ (acting like family member \/ developing trust \/ establishing rapport) is harder to achieve, but it is the underpinning work that enables outcomes to be reached.<\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n Our analysis:<\/strong><\/p>\n We felt that there were three key strands emerging from the data on this topic, these included: (1) the emotional impact of the job, (2) concern for circumstances of people supported by services and (3) practical things that would make the job better.<\/p>\n At the event:<\/strong><\/p>\n Helpfully, the conversation relating to this topic validated the themes we’d initially identified, with some additions and links we possibly hadn\u2019t made. The main discussions always came back to emotional impact of the job, and the group in general used emotive language.<\/p>\n This was the strongest theme in this category. Participants added descriptors of emotions including ‘helplessness’, ‘feeling like you could never do enough’ and ‘feeling like you were sinking’. The group always came back to these feelings. They also talked about this being a reflection of caring about people.<\/p>\n This was another strong theme. People spoke more widely about policy and changes broader than their organisation and the ways that impacted on their job. This was linked back to emotional impact and feeling personally responsible\/guilty. People also talked in the groups about relationships – knowing the person really well and that being an asset, but also a challenge as they maybe weren\u2019t heard in their role, or because they had become \u2018indispensable\u2019 (a reliance they weren\u2019t comfortable with).<\/p>\n The group didn\u2019t actually speak about terms and conditions (a code that we’d used) – but did discuss working hours a lot. People generally felt \u2018staffing\u2019 was a key issue, more than it appeared in the original data. In fact, they felt that staffing was often the route of other issues – like excessive working hours, excessive paperwork.<\/p>\n Another issue that emerged was the challenging relationship with GPs and health professionals, who the practitioners at the event felt had different value bases, and didn\u2019t listen or respect their views. Issues around collaboration appeared more strongly at the event than in the data.<\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n Our analysis:<\/strong><\/p>\n This data was difficult to synthesise due to the very personal nature of issues that people wanted to address with their managers. It was also clear from the data that people had varied relationships with management. That said, key themes included: (1) the emotional impact of the job (which were almost equally balanced between negative\/positive emotions that they wanted to talk about) (2) wider systems issues that need to be addressed (including very small practical changes that need to be addressed) (3) feeling undervalued by colleagues and managers.<\/p>\n At the event:<\/strong><\/p>\n It was clear that the themes identified in the pre-analysis were relevant to the group with almost all practitioners thinking that they were ‘spot on’. It was clear from the discussion that the relationship the practitioners have with their managers is one of the defining features of whether or not they are happy in their work. These practitioners thought that the theme that came out most strongly was that of ‘value’ and ‘communication’.<\/p>\n Practitioners felt that ‘not feeling listened to’ or ‘valued’ was a theme that seemed to cross-cut many of the quotes that were provided. In three of the four discussions, practitioners highlighted an awareness of how hard everyone in the sector works, but they felt that managers seemed to forget what it is like to be on the frontline and the type of pressure this work provokes.<\/p>\n Similarly, those who were in attendance frequently sited the disconnect between the pay and conditions that they are offered and how valued they feel. There was an articulated gap between what it is expected that frontline staff will deliver and how they are recompensed for this work. It was felt that frontline workers in social care are generally lower paid than those in other sectors, with terms and conditions that are rarely as good.<\/p>\n More than any other ‘station’ the wider issues affecting health and social care were highlighted here through discussion. Many of the practitioners picked on a particular theme around the sector needing an ‘overhaul’ and highlighting that issues such as funding ( a ‘race to the bottom’) and capacity being at the root of many of the issues that staff present to managers. Again communication was clearly an issue here with the majority of practitioners stating that a lack of communication and honesty around cuts, changes to services, policies make it particularly difficult for them to support people to deliver outcomes. There was the feeling that as there is so much change in the sector it could often be difficult to be clear and consistent with people who are supported.<\/p>\nOne thing that you are proud of<\/b><\/h3>\n
\n
\n
One thing you wish you could change<\/b><\/h3>\n
\n
\n
\n
One thing you would like to tell your manager<\/b><\/h3>\n
\n
\n