Fluent Essays

In most organizations and programs today, leaders are acutely aware of the limitations that political, bureaucratic, organizational, and training challenges place on effective service delivery and effective interagency collaboration. Based on the reading about a strengths-based focus for leadership and supervision, in your initial post, examine how you would leverage strengths in building a coalition to pursue important community objectives. Describe how you have used a strengths-based approach or have observed the use of a strengths-based approach in a project within your organization or community. 125 5 A Strengths Focus and Quality Leadership Success is achieved by developing our strengths not by eliminating our weaknesses. — Marilyn vos Savant � A DIRE NEED TO EMPHASIZE STRENGTHS Up to this point in the book, great emphasis has been placed on the importance of discovery and making meaning of worker needs, values, goals, and strengths as a means to foster quality leader–member rela- tionships and to inspire and engage workers to feel better, develop better, and perform better as they carry out their important roles of helping. While needs, values, and goals all form important aspects of a Responsive Leadership Approach, it is for very important reasons that a strong emphasis be made regarding a strengths focus as a key ingre- dient in enhancing worker morale, engagement, commitment, and overall performance—a need for an emphasis so strong that a focus on strengths and quality leadership warrants its very own chapter! There are several very notable reasons for making the strengths focus aspect of the Responsive Leadership Approach a stand-alone chapter in this book. First, a focus on values, needs, and goals is de, G. S. (2015). Responsive leadership in social services : A practical approach for optimizing engagement and performance. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(http://ebookcentral.proquest.com,_blank) href=http://ebookcentral.proquest.com target=_blank style=cursor: pointer;>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from capella on 2021-08-08 13:03:16. C o p yr ig h t © 2 0 1 5 . S A G E P u b lic a tio n s. A ll ri g h ts r e se rv e d . PART II FROM CONCEPTS TO PRACTICE126 already quite common and forms an integral aspect of frontline worker training, performance development, and most approaches to supervi- sion and employee management. A focus on strengths, however, while theoretically and philosophically in line with social service values and guiding principles is less common and, from the experience of many workers in the field, does not make up an integral aspect of employee supervision, performance development, and/or performance manage- ment. As a matter of fact, when it comes to most performance manage- ment approaches, in particular, a focus on employee strengths is often rare altogether and in some cases nonexistent. A second reason for making an emphasis on strengths in supervi- sion and management a necessary focus has to do with the reality within the current political, bureaucratic, organizational, training, work, and service-delivery realities of social services. Many of these social service dimensions are actually antithetical and/or provide coun- tercurrents or impediments to the use and sustainability of a strengths focus within supervision and/or management. Finally, promoting and illustrating a strengths approach in supervision and management is critical because consistent operationalization of a strengths perspective in leadership is difficult to do and maintain, especially if it is not the most common modality utilized by most supervisors and managers. In addition to the myriad of social services context challenges that exist as impediments to a strengths focus, the reality is that many supervisors and managers have not been taught to operationalize a strengths-based approach in practice. Most of us can understand what a strengths-based approach is philosophically and in principle, but most supervisors and managers have not been taught how to apply, integrate, and/or sustain a strengths-based approach in practice with their team members. It is for these reasons and many others that a strengths focus as it relates to quality leadership occupies a full chapter in this book. The remaining discussion will focus on the challenges that exist to utilizing and sustaining a strengths-based approach to social services supervi- sion and management, including the negative implications a problem- saturated environment has on supervisors, workers, and clients. In addition to this, the discussion will outline what a strengths perspec- tive in leadership can look like and will make strong linkages between a strengths focus and quality leadership. A variety of strengths-focused tools, strategies, and practice examples will be offered. Finally, the chapter discussion will conclude with a clear illustration of the power- fully positive implications of a strengths focus in the context of super- vision and management in order to create a greater quality leadership experience for all team members. de, G. S. (2015). Responsive leadership in social services : A practical approach for optimizing engagement and performance. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(http://ebookcentral.proquest.com,_blank) href=http://ebookcentral.proquest.com target=_blank style=cursor: pointer;>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from capella on 2021-08-08 13:03:16. C o p yr ig h t © 2 0 1 5 . S A G E P u b lic a tio n s. A ll ri g h ts r e se rv e d . 127Chapter 5 A Strengths Focus and Quality Leadership � CHALLENGES TO A STRENGTHS FOCUS IN SUPERVISION AND MANAGEMENT The Importance and Relevance of a Strengths Focus Very few people would disagree about the importance of utilizing a strengths perspective in the context of social services supervision and management. More than ever, a focus on strengths forms an integral cornerstone to most frontline-person and family-centered helping interventions and is consistent with social service philosophy and guiding principles. Many social service workers find a strengths per- spective favorable and in line with their personal and professional values and goals for helping. Focusing on strengths with individuals, families, and communities is in line with the way most frontline social service workers prefer to work. In addition, many organizational and program missions and visions have incorporated and/or reflect the importance of a strengths focus within operational support and service delivery. It is in this light that a strengths-based organizational and management approach seems like it would make sense and be com- monplace. Unfortunately, however, there exist a myriad of environ- mental influences and challenges that unintentionally operate as impediments to the utilization and implementation of a strengths- based approach in supervision and management. Social Services: A Problem-Saturated Environment In order to gain an understanding of the incongruence between the importance of a strengths focus in theory and what is actually happen- ing in practice, we must consider the overall environment—the context in which supervision and management of workers occurs. Social ser- vices in general maintain a predominantly problem-oriented focus, and the realities that challenge a strengths perspective occur at every level of the system, impacting and thereby influencing the way worker supervision and performance development training occur and how these processes are carried out in the field. Most social services organizations operate from mandates that maintain a focus on safety, risk assessment, risk management, and reduction of harm, albeit in the context of promoting overall well-being and health. Unfortunately, what is inherent in most problem-oriented paradigms and service delivery approaches is that the area of inquiry and/or focus of attention is centered on what is not working or what needs to be fixed. Such a focus inevitably leads to a starting point of de, G. S. (2015). Responsive leadership in social services : A practical approach for optimizing engagement and performance. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(http://ebookcentral.proquest.com,_blank) href=http://ebookcentral.proquest.com target=_blank style=cursor: pointer;>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from capella on 2021-08-08 13:03:16. C o p yr ig h t © 2 0 1 5 . S A G E P u b lic a tio n s. A ll ri g h ts r e se rv e d . PART II FROM CONCEPTS TO PRACTICE128 inquiry and operation based on deficits, weaknesses, threats, dysfunc- tion, and deficiencies. A problem orientation is prevalent and evident at all levels across various social service sectors and influences the context of most approaches to the structure and process of social ser- vices supervision practice. Political agendas, bureaucratic priorities, and legislated mandates also influence and impact operations and service delivery models, sub- sequently shaping the focus and process of supervision sessions. For instance, most helping agencies utilize a biomedical approach as a foundation for assessment and intervention. In addition to this, many programs and service delivery models are highly influenced by the fis- cal need and encouragement of and/or a politically mandated use of the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) as a requirement for intake, assessment, and intervention. Because supervi- sors and managers are providing guidance and support for workers operating within the predominantly biomedical and DSM-driven para- digms, a great deal of case management and support discussions are focused on the attainment of well-being by fixing or changing dysfunc- tion, deficits, abnormalities, erroneous thinking, and/or pathological behavior. Although strengths-based assessment and intervention has become a more important aspect of social services intervention and support, the reality remains that in practice, a focus on strengths does not take up a great deal of time when it comes to supervisor–member discussions around supportive case management reviews. Instead, the predominant supervision focus continues to be around crisis situa- tions, stressful challenges, problems, and problem solving. Problems With Training Social service training endeavors to prepare supervisors and managers with the knowledge and skills to educate, coach, support, develop, and delegate tasks to their team members in a way that enhances the con- sistency and quality of supportive service being provided to clients. However, like the overall context of social services in general, most supervisory training programs take a problem orientation and problem- solving focus. Supervisors and managers are presented with many theoretical models and orientations for understanding a variety of people and systemic problems in order to understand and solve them. A focus on strengths is often omitted from the traditional problem- solving approach because the initial starting point for inquiry is on what is “wrong” and/or what needs to be fixed. Supervisors and man- agers are trained to ask “Why?” and to gather information so that they de, G. S. (2015). Responsive leadership in social services : A practical approach for optimizing engagement and performance. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(http://ebookcentral.proquest.com,_blank) href=http://ebookcentral.proquest.com target=_blank style=cursor: pointer;>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from capella on 2021-08-08 13:03:16. C o p yr ig h t © 2 0 1 5 . S A G E P u b lic a tio n s. A ll ri g h ts r e se rv e d . 129Chapter 5 A Strengths Focus and Quality Leadership can assist in successfully solving a variety of problems. In essence, they are taught to assess and interpret situations so that they can manage to problem solve them successfully. There are curricula that attempt to incorporate a focus on strengths, but it is often minimal in comparison to the predominantly problem-oriented approaches offered. In addi- tion, when curricula offer a segment on strengths-based supervision, I have found that the emphasis pertains more to the looking for strengths, falling short, however, on the skills and tools for a tangible and practi- cal application of a strengths approach to supervision practice. A key area that often forms a core element of supervisor and man- ager training is employee performance development. Most approaches to employee development operate from an overall behaviorist approach, meaning that supervisors are encouraged to learn a variety of human- behavior and system theories and models in order to interpret the attitudes and behaviors of employees so that they can develop more capable, confident, and competent employees. While employee devel- opment and management represent positive endeavors geared toward enhancing staff capacity to work toward better outcomes for clients and organizations overall, a behaviorist approach contains an inherent bias toward interpreting and managing employees, versus engaging and understanding their individual experiences. In addition to this, most developmental and behavioral approaches focus on competency development from the perspective of a deficit-based and/or perfor- mance-weakness model, once again minimizing the emphasis and/or omitting altogether a focus on employee strengths. Problems With Professional Development Finally, when it comes to supervisory training curricula for working with “challenging” employees, most approaches to performance man- agement for supervisors take on an “undesirable performance” lens while emphasizing management of performance through the interpre- tation of a variety of human-behavior models and theoretical and developmental orientations, all geared toward managing or changing poor employee attitudes and behaviors in order to bring about more desirable outcomes. In my experience as an academic and a trainer in a variety of course modules, very few performance management approaches contain a focus on strengths. Performance development and performance management are actually the same thing; however, the former term is often used in the context of proactive and positive employee development whereas the latter term is often used in a not-so-positive context, usually when an de, G. S. (2015). Responsive leadership in social services : A practical approach for optimizing engagement and performance. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(http://ebookcentral.proquest.com,_blank) href=http://ebookcentral.proquest.com target=_blank style=cursor: pointer;>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from capella on 2021-08-08 13:03:16. C o p yr ig h t © 2 0 1 5 . S A G E P u b lic a tio n s. A ll ri g h ts r e se rv e d . PART II FROM CONCEPTS TO PRACTICE130 employee is struggling with competency development and/or is involved in some sort of discipline process. This dynamic is evident when a manager is talking about an employee plan. Often when we hear someone referring to a performance plan, it’s in the context of regular performance appraisal and development. However, when we hear reference to a performance management plan, it is often in the context of a “challenging worker” and/or a worker who is demonstrat- ing and/or engaging in “undesirable” behavior. Regardless of what term is used and/or the context, both performance development and performance management processes operate from a deficit base and/ or performance weakness stance. The predominant focus is on devel- opment of the undesirable performance behavior. In my conversations with thousands of frontline workers, their experience in general has been that performance development focuses on areas of weakness or required development and is often lacking in a strengths focus. Similarly, a performance management plan rarely contains a focus on strengths as the behavior that is being targeted is often problematic and the documentation that has been gathered to build a plan is often focused on areas such as undesirable, inappropriate, or unprofessional attitudes and/or performance. An important contextual reality that challenges the consistent utili- zation of a strengths focus within supervision and management is that the above-mentioned problem orientations are often in operation in a highly stressful, crisis-oriented, fiscally and resource-restrained environ- ment where workers and supervisors are expected to do more with less. When supervisors have a strong desire to help workers solve a variety of people and systemic problems in the context of perceived time and energy limitations, they are naturally encouraged to get to the problems quicker for the sake of overall efficacy. Unintentionally and inevitably there is less space and time for a discussion of what is going well, a dis- cussion and subsequent development regarding team-member strengths. Problems With Managing Performance Problems While many workers in various fields report that their experiences with performance evaluations and appraisals are less than satisfac- tory, worker reports of performance management and discipline range from negative to outright humiliating. At a time when workers are struggling to perform in a preferred and expected manner, when they are probably feeling less than confident and capable, a strengths perspective would be helpful to provide a more positive experience of themselves and/or their work. However, often when performance de, G. S. (2015). Responsive leadership in social services : A practical approach for optimizing engagement and performance. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(http://ebookcentral.proquest.com,_blank) href=http://ebookcentral.proquest.com target=_blank style=cursor: pointer;>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from capella on 2021-08-08 13:03:16. C o p yr ig h t © 2 0 1 5 . S A G E P u b lic a tio n s. A ll ri g h ts r e se rv e d . 131Chapter 5 A Strengths Focus and Quality Leadership management is initiated, the process and the impacts move in the opposite direction of a strengths approach. Most approaches to employee discipline are based on the princi- ples of punishment, and the problem-oriented and deficit-focused processes within performance management do little to motivate work- ers to change their behavior. When reprimands, progressive discipline, and suspensions are utilized as logical consequences and when sup- port and clear direction for change are lost within a disempowering and intimidating process, an employee’s capacity to be engaged and positively motivated is seriously limited, if not curtailed altogether. It is my experience that a strengths focus is missing altogether when employees are being reprimanded or disciplined for undesirable and/ or poor performance. At a time when a strengths focus should be uti- lized, it seems that most managers’ time and energy are placed into a “tunnel” focus, searching for problems and/or justifications for repri- manding, suspending, and even terminating a worker from their job. Unfortunately, when workers have a negative experience within the process of performance management and/or discipline, they are less likely to be positively engaged in the process. Approaches to disci- pline that are deficit focused and punitive often encourage what seems to be compliant behavior, when efforts and energy—instead of being placed in the work—often are geared toward “laying low,” dodging responsibility, or just doing what is necessary to get through the shift. This type of engagement with the work does little to bring about pre- ferred performance and outcomes for the clients being served. � A PROBLEM FOCUS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR WORKERS Optimal employee engagement, motivation, and performance are dependent upon two major factors: (1) the quality of the leader–member relationship and (2) the support and development of the employee’s capacity to carry out his role of helping to the best of his abilities. An emphasis on deficits and weaknesses within a problem orientation to supervision and/or management can present a formidable challenge to both of these processes, with a negative result for employee, team, and eventually client outcomes. Chapter 1 emphasized the reality that many workers across the social service sectors are unsatisfied with their supervisors and/or their experience of supervision overall; they are disillusioned with the quality of leadership. It is my belief that the predominant emphasis on de, G. S. (2015). Responsive leadership in social services : A practical approach for optimizing engagement and performance. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(http://ebookcentral.proquest.com,_blank) href=http://ebookcentral.proquest.com target=_blank style=cursor: pointer;>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from capella on 2021-08-08 13:03:16. C o p yr ig h t © 2 0 1 5 . S A G E P u b lic a tio n s. A ll ri g h ts r e se rv e d . PART II FROM CONCEPTS TO PRACTICE132 problems over strengths in the context of supervision and worker development, which continues to persist in social services, is in large part the contributing factor to such a stark and concerning reality. To put it bluntly, a predominant focus on problems, deficits, and weaknesses just does not feel good. When employees consistently hear what they are not doing well or what needs to be changed in the con- text of supervision and performance development, it can create feel- ings of negativity and pessimism and a sense of blame. As a matter of fact, in highly stressful situations, a strict focus on problems can lead workers to feel judged or criticized by their manager and lead to feel- ings of shame, guilt, and even fear. It is these types of experiences that can be detrimental to the quality of the leader–member relationship, compromising trust, respect, integrity, and empathy. A problem orien- tation is less than inspiring or motivating for frontline workers. One of the greatest dilemmas of a work environment predomi- nantly focused on problems at the expense of strengths is that it can engender and perpetuate serious value incongruence. One of the great- est impediments to good practice occurs when workers are expected to operate outside of or out of step with their values. Many workers expe- rience a confusing contradiction when they are encouraged by their organization and supervisor to work from a strengths-based perspec- tive in practice yet experience the opposite in the context of their own support and development. For many workers, this experience can be disconcerting. For others, it may be disillusioning and/or demoralizing altogether. Regardless of individual worker experience, a common con- sequence of working within a set of incongruent and conflicting value sets is that it is less than motivating or engaging. For many workers, it can be demobilizing. Problems Limit Worker Potential The negative impacts resulting from a predominant and persistent focus on problems are immeasurable. As a matter of fact, it is my belief that a problem orientation actually curtails the identification and devel- opment of human potential. We know that quality leader–member relationships are essential for accurate discovery of the employee’s story and the subsequent development of her capacities. When workers experience a low level of trust and safety in the context of their professional relationship with their manager and they fear the possibilities of being judged or criticized, there may be a reluctance to be honest about the information they might need to know or the things they may be struggling with. When overall safety is de, G. S. (2015). Responsive leadership in social services : A practical approach for optimizing engagement and performance. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(http://ebookcentral.proquest.com,_blank) href=http://ebookcentral.proquest.com target=_blank style=cursor: pointer;>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from capella on 2021-08-08 13:03:16. C o p yr ig h t © 2 0 1 5 . S A G E P u b lic a tio n s. A ll ri g h ts r e se rv e d . 133Chapter 5 A Strengths Focus and Quality Leadership compromised, honest communication between worker and supervisor begins to break down. When communication breaks down, a supervi- sor’s ability to access the employee’s story is seriously compromised. When discovery is compromised, development of the worker’s capacities and the delivery of preferred outcomes are subsequently compromised. When employees withdraw from open and honest dialogue with supervisors in an attempt to keep themselves safe, they hold back not only their limitations but also their potential and their strengths! Yes, this is a major consequence when there exists lack of safety and trust: people hold back. And when workers hold back, they also hold back what they are capable of, including their strengths, talents, and poten- tialities to perform optimally! I believe that this dilemma represents one of the greatest pitfalls and perils of a predominant deficit and problem orientation. When trust and safety within a leader–member relationship are compromised and a problem-oriented approach to supervision and performance develop- ment are operating, it is not uncommon for workers to hold back; that is, their efforts and energy may be going into refraining from expressing or asking questions in order to avoid making a mistake or asking a question about what they feel they should already know. This becomes problem- atic because, as stated previously, by holding back, workers are unable to demonstrate what they are capable of, thereby limiting the manager’s understanding of the employee’s story, in particular his strengths and potential capabilities. This dynamic becomes even more problematic when employees that are struggling with performance are placed on a performance management plan and/or some sort of disciplinary process. Unfortunately, what can unintentionally be created is a reciprocally determining self-fulfilling prophecy. What I mean by this is that because most performance management approaches are problem-focused, often punitive in nature and altogether lacking a focus on strengths, there is a tendency for workers to feel criticized, judged, incompetent, and even blamed for their poor or undesirable performance, representing a less- than-positive experience. It is at this juncture that the potential for dif- ficulties between the supervisor and the worker can be exacerbated. The more a supervisor “puts on the pressure” through a traditionally puni- tive and problem-oriented approach to performance management, the more likely a worker will alter her behaviors in response to that pres- sure. And because the supervisor is missing the meaning of the employ- ee’s story, there is all sorts of room to misinterpret the meaning of the particular attitude and/or behaviors. Two great examples of this operating dilemma can be found in the scenario of Barb and Brandon in Chapter 3 and in the scenario of de, G. S. (2015). Responsive leadership in social services : A practical approach for optimizing engagement and performance. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(http://ebookcentral.proquest.com,_blank) href=http://ebookcentral.proquest.com target=_blank style=cursor: pointer;>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from capella on 2021-08-08 13:03:16. C o p yr ig h t © 2 0 1 5 . S A G E P u b lic a tio n s. A ll ri g h ts r e se rv e d . PART II FROM CONCEPTS TO PRACTICE134 James, which was initiated in Chapter 4. In both cases, when the man- ager was asked to comment on the strengths of the worker or on what is going well, they came up short. As a matter of fact, both managers stated that there was “nothing good” at all going on with the worker in the situation. However, we know from Brandon’s experience that his story contains a plethora of strengths and, as we will see from James’s situation, offered in Chapter 7, things are not nearly as bad as they seem there either. As a matter of fact, they are not bad at all! As stated before, the impacts and consequences that arise when a strengths approach is limited or missing altogether in the context of supervision and worker development are multifarious and immeasur- able. A predominant focus on problems and limitations is linked to jeop- ardizing the quality of the leader–member relationship as well as curtailing the development of worker potential. We can also surmise that negative implications affect a worker’s sense of well-being, job satisfac- tion, motivation, development, engagement, and ability to perform optimally. Such experiences have a tendency to impact the whole team and create a contagion that contributes to the perception of the overall work environment as negative, thereby adding stress and contributing to intent to leave and eventually burnout. And because we …