Posted by Les Walton on Tue, 14 April, 2009 in: Perspective

Supportive Intervention is based on the simple belief that the majority of people in education want to do a good job. It focuses on developing a positive organisational climate together with removing the ‘blockages in the system which prevent the well motivated able majority in education from achieving their potential’. Les Walton describes the beliefs which have underpinned the role of ‘The Supportive Interventionist’.

You should never lose sight of the fact that all you are doing is for children, or be embarrassed by continually reminding yourself and others of this core belief.

Whatever the procedures, the politics and the practicalities, we must not forget that children are at the centre of all we do.

After all, education is a process through which we all go – at the very least as children; it’s a major concern throughout parenthood or guardianship and is the very foundation of all that we do and achieve in life.

It’s not an exaggeration to describe education as the ultimate “people focused business”.

It stands to reason that I am a strong believer in the process which is Supportive Intervention in Education.

We must base our work on the simple belief that the majority of people in education want to do a good job and it is our job to help them do that. A question I always ask myself is “How can I help other people to do a better job, and how could they help me?”

So through Supportive Intervention I believe in “clearing the blockages” from the system which prevent the well motivated, able majority in education from achieving their potential. These blockages are more likely to be to do with systems, procedures and lengthy decision-making processes than with a lack of personal ability or capacity to carry out a given role.

This also has the important effect of allowing those previously prevented from progressing because of inadequacies or inertia in previous regimes to rise rapidly to the point where they can be most effective and most fulfilled in their work.

I believe where Supportive Intervention has worked best is when: 1. schools and Local Authorities actually ‘invite challenge’ 2. we intervene only when needed and wanted by all parties – schools and Local Authorities 3. The critical friend role is centre, providing honest feedback, but not instructing.

Increasingly Local Authorities and schools want to ensure there is absolute clarity about how Supportive Intervention works and how all the various support programmes and strategies mesh together.

I would like all Supportive Intervention to be based on three key aims: 1. all supportive interventions should be based on clear, agreed statements and principles. Then, any proposed action can be check out against the values and principles. This helps to ensure a consistent approach. It is important that the intervention team should be “be positive optimists” 2. we should working on the development of the self esteem of those in education: self esteem is essential for everyone to achieve their full potential - “therefore the person as well as the child is at the centre of everything we do” 3. always to demonstrate that the one thing we are absolutely passionately committed to is education: our work is based on a desire to serve children, parents and the community.

I see our work as having some parallels with helping people to cope with bereavement. “When people receive a critical report they feel they have lost everything they have worked for.”

“When organisations and their staff are in difficulty and under stress we should be able to help them stand back and be able to see a future ahead.”

It’s not appropriate for those providing intervention to present themselves as having answers - their job is to help people discover these for themselves and help new ways of thinking and dealing with their problems.

“It is important to demonstrate by personal behaviour that you are prepared to take risks and have set yourself challenging targets. Where there’s been a critical report, they need to know you will take calculated risks. If you go and play safe for your own selfish reasons, it doesn’t allow people to develop.”

The Supportive Interventionist avoids analysis based on anecdotes and individual bias; a systematic analysis should be based logically on data and information analysed systematically. This should be a common and consistently used principle for any intervention or policy recommendation.

“Where organisations are faced with overwhelming difficulties it is important to have some early gains, where possible to achieve some self improvement quickly which can be fed back to the organisation so people in it can feel appreciated and that problems are being acted upon and not being ignored.”

I have been quoted as saying I would even “celebrate grass growing”. I am not ashamed of the belief that one should continually feedback success to children and colleagues. It is important in offering Supportive Intervention to develop positive relationships with the media so that the revival of organisations can be widely recognised.

No organisation is as good as its report or as bad: we should ensure there’s a balanced critical judgement, and honest self evaluation.

I point to the wisdom of Peter Wood’s book “The Divided School” in saying that an organisation can be judged to be in difficultly if it has lost its sense of humour, its sense of fun.

Thus in providing intervention in a school or LA it is crucial to regain a sense of humour and develop a team spirit and that team leadership should be focused not on one individual but on the belief that everyone in the team has the capacity to become the leader.

It is important to continually express positive expectations of colleagues within teams – such as positive feedback should be honest, not patronising and focused on what they can actually do, rather than their personal attributes.

Again the positive intention about this is to help people to understand that most people around the organisation share their goals which may be summed up as the best chance for every child in the area.

Thus, when going in to provide intervention in an organisation whose internal currents may not be immediately evident, the person providing that intervention is likely to be seen as objective. He or she will have to rapidly understand its dynamics including those which may not be reality visible.

It is important to give people the opportunity to rise through the organisation quickly, particularly when the management team is dysfunctional. You also need to look to identify potential in the organisation to rise and develop opportunities and encourage empowerment of individuals so they can grow and support others.

It is absolutely essential you help the organisation to focus on producing outcomes which are validated by the people they are serving.

In other words, it’s not the person providing Supportive Intervention who should see that improvement but those whom they are serving.

An organisation under stress becomes inward looking and can forget it is still having an effect on those for whom it is working. It is a key part of my beliefs and work to ensure that people are clear about their own responsibility and their role: there must be clarity about this and the role of the organisation.

In keeping with our remit there must be a wish to help them do a good job and hold them accountable for their contribution; it should all be based within a supportive and positive framework.

The key area is a development of values and climate where people work. Supportive Intervention should work towards developing relationships within both formal and informal structures. Equally the consultant providing the intervention should not make judgements without sound evidence and an understanding of what is going on.

For many years I have based my philosophy of three principal sources: • Carl Rogers’ views about developing positive self regard and allowing people to grow • Peris view that it is a group joining together which can create results greater than one individual can achieve • Maslow’s belief that individuals need basic caring for – a good working environment, good working conditions which lead to higher needs of care and love.

I return to the parallel between the work of the Supportive Interventionist and the process of healing after bereavement: “Intervention support is a fine balancing act - just as if someone is being helped after going through bereavement.”

There is the fine balance between intrusive behaviour and when you can interfere or go too deep or get too involved. Equally you can be too objective or too distant in which case the organisation may feel you don’t care and you’re not part of the solution.

In the end your role is to be irrelevant: to be able to walk away from the organisation and hope it will have evolved and your feeling that it has the capacity to continue is well founded.

Les Walton OBE

Comments

No comments