“What can we learn from an interim evaluation of a work-based leadership and management

1. Learning Research and Impact: Achieving rigour and relevance in HRD research26 October 2012 Portsmouth University 10.30am – 16.00pm “What can we learn from an interim evaluation of a work-based leadership and management development programme?” Dr Mary Hartog Dr Doirean Wilson Chris Rigby Department of Leadership, Work & Organisations (LWO) Middlesex University Business School

2. Stakeholders • The Client: local authority children & families service, facing public sector cuts, service change & redundancies • Participants: 60 middle - senior managers • Consulting Partner: designed & delivered workshops • University: provided action learning sets & a post graduate WBL qualification

3. Reason for the programme External context: Challenging: public sector cuts - “easy jet Council” vision of privatised local authority services Internal need: Critical need for Leadership “now more than ever” (Client) Response: strategic not reactive: need to develop leadership in the service Aims: • Unlock potential, improve performance 2. embed learning - via an academic programme, with theory to underpin practice & work based reflective learning assignments

4. Leadership and Management Development Programme In association with Hay Group & Middlesex University Hay Group One-day Mandatory Workshop: Building Team Effectiveness One-day Optional Workshop: Influencing Others • Pre-programme diagnostics: • Self assessment and 3600appraisals to provide evidence of • Leadership Effectiveness • Organisational Climate • Team Roles Inventory • Learning Styles • Motives & Drivers • Values One-day Mandatory Workshop: Leading for Change Three-day Core Module providing a mix of theoretical input, feedback on pre programme diagnostics and evidence for Personal Development Plan One-day Optional Workshop: Coaching Others One-day Mandatory Workshop: Managing Performance Post Graduate Certificate in Leadership & Management Practice One-day Optional Workshop: Intelligent Commissioning One-day Mandatory Workshop: Partnership Working XDW Action Learning Set 1 Action Learning Set 2 Action Learning Set 3 Assessment Workshop Review of Learning & PDP MBS4301/A Programme Plan MBS4303 Action Research Project & Report MBS4305

5. Evaluation strategy Sources of data • Work Based Practice assignments • 1-2-1 interviews – target 20 participants* • 1 focus group

6. Evaluation Approach • We define evaluation in terms of adding value • As researchers, we are interested in what we can learn about the impact of the programme, the integration of learning to their practice, and the value of the different learning interventions to help them manage & navigate their work issues & change • The sponsor is interested in how the programme adds value in terms of improved performance and what the organisation can learn about becoming a learning organisation

7. Theoretical influences We draw on: • Easterby-Smith (1986) Evaluation (Prove, Improve and Learn) • Hamblin (1974) levels of learning Evaluation • Weinstein (1995) action learning • Vince & Martin (1993) Inside AL • Reynolds & Vince (2004) Organising Reflection

8. Interim findings from 1-2-1 interviews Method of analysis: Drawing on Silverman’s (2012) critique of the interview, used intensive analysis to highlight three stories • ‘distinctive differentiation’ • ‘top & bottom slicing’ (context & programme) • the quality of analysis • Constructivist reading of narratives • + drawing on four discourse lenses Maybe (2012)

9. Story 1 - Social Work Manager in Child Protection (safe-guarding) • Not directly impacted by cuts or redundancies but ‘change is all around’. 20 yrs exp • Senior managers have low profile, staff are not `well held`. • ‘All-consumed’ safeguarding children: limited WLB `work intensification is untenable`. Big `aha` legacy 24/7 availability* on verge leaving the organisation ‘needs to learn to do her job differently’ ‘giving herself permission’ • ALS did not gel – no peer support; Assignments: ‘another thing on the pile’ but useful – ‘written down’, ‘kept her on track’

10. Story 2: Partner from Voluntary Sector managing pre-School Project & Children’s Centre • 40 yrs in borough. Funding cut 50%, new mgr • everyone re-apply for their jobs • Project: team working, team away day, shared learning • 360 ‘holding them back’ : Delegates more. • The course ‘real’; ALS ‘supportive’; project plan = live document ‘helped me focus & support staff • Big `aha`: realisation she is supporting her staff but she is not getting same support from her managers

11. Story 3: LA Manager in support Role • More responsibilities • Belief: ‘doing a rubbish job’ ‘worrying about being cut’, ‘can’t cope phase’ • Avoids conflict & hopes she is liked • ALS ‘weird’ put everything into perspective • Project: self – motivation & influencing • Doing more coaching (style) & delegating • Aware using the same language as her bosses • Big `aha` See the SMT in process of ‘storming’

12. Lessons we are learning • Story 1: evidence of individual learning & development journey • OD Gap 24-7 availability toxic – role SMT • Story 2: evidence of individual & team learning at local level, positive results • Again - absence SM support • Story 3: before & after individual journey transformative • The value of having the tools of the trade- moral imperative for organisations to provide them

13. So, what has the interim evaluation highlighted? • The vitality of Work based learning ‘real’ • 360 feedback connected individual & team • Assignment (plan & project) helped keep people on track • Projects helped participants mange the process of change

14. The OD gap • However, the interventions (workshops and ALS’) are only part of the process • The interviews, the transcript analysis, the report to client and the dissemination are all vital elements in the OD process • We need to keep individual and organisational learning in mind simultaneously

15. Thank you for listening Any Questions