A response to ANNONYMOUS

Someone who chose to remain anonymous responded to my recent comments on high stress jobs in the following way:

pete,
i'm one of the same the british research refers to as working with stress. i see stress as self induced and as a social worker deal with the products on a daily basis. I find the lack of management support and the present lack of resources the most frustrating aspect of the work. This then, seems to support your 'achievement' theory. Social Workers here are in demand and short supply because of the lack of resources and, generally, people's expectations that 'social services will sort it out'

Whenever anyone suggests that there is lack of management support and lack of resources I am afraid that while I have to agree I have a different approach to the sigh of resignation which seems to accompany this comment.

It is true. In recent times, the managers that I know and love, seem to be faced with such a competitive environment that they spend most of their time in developing and implementing personal survival strategies. This generally seems to mean that they have a lot less time for their staff. Short sighted as this approach is, in my view, as they do not recognise the reality that a supportive and enthusiastic and hard working staff actually are the necessary preconditions for achievement and hence a built in buffer of success against any attempts by others to interfere in their quest for promotion, greater remuneration and a more public profile.

Were they to realise this the staff would in fact get the support that they need and merit.

Let us note that support does not have to be warm puppy love. It can sometimes be strict discipline and sometimes very difficult conversations which force a staff member to confront some personal realities of which they are unaware.

Throughout supervision there is a real need to continue to maintain what Carl Rodgers would have referred to as "unconditional positive regard" while at the same time being able to tell someone exactly what it is that in the opinion of the supervisor they are doing wrong or how they are coming across to others - whether in their team or to their clients.

However, all that aside. If your 'fearless leader' is not competent (for one reason or another) then DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!

There is nothing wrong with you as a worker creating the necessary conditions for appropriate supervision. There are peer reviews that are possible, there is the opportunity to seek supervision outside the agency that employs you, there is the opportunity to create a solid level of support among colleagues which can then present the need for supervision and support as a group to the management so that you can be more effective in trying to gain what you want.

Social workers have been trained to manipulate situations to obtain some results for their clients. On this occasion use those same skill sets to obtain what you want for yourself.

As for the lack of resources argument - it is also true. We have been "doing more with less" for years AND the work load increases annually. So get smart about it and once again DO SOMETHING!

If all else fails - read my article about an addition to the Management By . . . series which I call MBB or "Management by Begging" (it's in the archives somewhere or if you can't find it let me know and I will publish it again).

You will NEVER find this technique in a text book.

The reason is simple - anyone who is good at obtaining resources to which they have no legal right is not going to publish for all the world to see how they do it. Well, I have! So benefit from my largesse

I know that it is trite to end on this note, but . . .

If you really want to thrive in a competitive environment then turn every nightmare into an opportunity and suddenly you will find things a lot less stressful.

Once again if you want to know HOW I can help just ask me - but my rates for commercial services still stand.

NB:

My partner has insisted I add her comments to this note as she is OUTRAGED by my one eyed view on this subject that people can effect change within their organisation (even though this is desirable if it can be achieved).

She (who has written HER Master's Thesis on "Organisational Stress and Staff Attrition" says:

Social Workers, and others in Human Service organisations to name a few, are confronted with at least 3 types of stress on a daily basis. 1) personal (related to life events) 2) job related (pertaining to the nature of the work ) and 3) organisational stress (related to the relative levels of infrastructure, resources and management support).

The research for the thesis, which is now a bit dated but seems to still hold true, surveyed over 100 social workers who had left their jobs in an Area Health Service in New South Wales, Australia over a 3 year period. It showed that the social workers could cope with the ongoing job related stress and occasional personal stress IF there was a supportive organisation and adequate resources. However, the combination of high levels and ongoing job related stress and organisation stress (low resources such as inadequate staff levels and limited funds, lack of supervision and support etc) could not be sustained over time.

So while it is true that the sample did survey people who had moved on from their jobs and so it could be argued to be a somewhat "biased" sample, it was a useful guide for those in social work management to remember that most social workers in the study felt that they had to do something about the situation. However, the majority chose to leave their positions in search of a more supportive organisation, rather than continue to struggle with the organisation that had not proven to provide adequate support. This is a wake-up call for organisations, but unfortunately most either are constrained or do not have the understanding and so end up blaming the individual for not coping rather than seeing the bigger organisational issues and doing something about it.