University of Portsmouth

MSc Human Resource Management / Development Dissertation

Title: A critical evaluation of the learning and development activity that aims to build

resilience of those working in the adult social care sector in England.

Author: Michelle Spirit

Date of Submission:

Dissertation Supervisor: Kerry Collier

Student Number: 706605

i

Portsmouth Business School

MSc Human Resource Development

Title: A critical evaluation of the learning and development activity that aims to build

resilience of those working in the adult social care sector in England.

Author: Michelle Spirit

Dissertation Supervisor: Kerry Collier

Year of Submission: 2014

This research dissertation is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the

degree of MSc Human Resource Development. I. the undersigned, declare that this report

is my own original work. Where I have taken ideas and/or wording from another source,

this is explicitly referred to in the text.

Signed_________________________________________Date__________________

I give permission that this report may be photocopied and made available for inter library

loan for the purpose of the research. This includes an electronic copy being made

available to University students.

Signed_________________________________________Date__________________

ii

Abstract

University of Portsmouth Business School

MSc Human Resource Management / Development Dissertation

The purpose of this study was to identify the critical success factors of learning and

development activity that aims to build the resilience of a workforce under severe pressure,

the adult social care sector in England in which 1.75 million are employed. The sector

recognises the need to do this, but there is currently no consensus as to how it is to be

achieved.

To carry out the research it was necessary to reach an understanding about what the word

resilience means. Definitions describe it variously as a process, personality trait and

outcome. The common thread was that resilience is based on internal and external factors.

There was also the need to understand current practice. This was found to include: building

emotional intelligence, social confidence, reflective ability, self-awareness, empathy, mind-

state awareness and thinking skills. It also included a number of learning methods, the most

valuable of which were regarded by respondents as experiential learning and group

discussion.

An interpretivist philosophical framework was used to inform the research along with

inductive reasoning. A multi method approach was adopted which gathered information

using a web enabled questionnaire. The results from the questionnaire informed an action

research approach which included attending a three day resilience building programme for

social care workers, participant observation and use of a pre and post questionnaire in an

attempt to identify critical success factors. These results were triangulated.

Recommendations based on indications of critical success factors include incorporating in

learning ways of building resilience, emotional intelligence (including self-awareness),

mindfulness, dysfunctional teams and understanding resilience. They also include

considering building in an understanding of external factors that contribute to resilience,

providing time for reflection into learning activity, offering opportunity for action planning

and making use of experiential and group discussion learning methods.

iii

CONTENTS Page

Title page i

Abstract ii

Contents iii

Appendices iv

List of Tables and Figures v

Glossary v

1. INTRODUCTION, CONTEXT and OBJECTIVES 1

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Context 3

1.3 Research questions 4

1.4 Chapter summary 5

2. THE LITERATURE REVIEW 7

2.1 Introduction 7

2.2 History of the word “resilience” 7

2.3 Defining resilience 8

2.4 Focus for resilience learning and development 9

2.5 Learning and development methods 10

2.6 Approaches that aim to build resilience 10

2.7 Chapter summary 16

3. THE METHODOLOGY 17

3.1 Philosophical approach 17

3.2 Approaches used 17

3.3 Strategies 18

3.4 Sample Frame 19

3.5 Questions 21

3.6 Choices 21

3.7 Time Horizons 22

3.8 Techniques and procedures 22

3.9 Ethics 23

3.10 Chapter summary 24

iv

4. EMPHIRICAL DISCUSSION OF DATA 25

4.1 Web-administered questionnaire 25

4.2 Course evaluation 26

4.3 Duration of training 26

4.4 Rating activities 26

4.5 Learning methods 29

4.6 Learning impact 30

4.7 Topics most like to see included 31

4.8 Training provision 32

4.9 Training event analysis 32

4.10 Reasons for taking part 32

4.11 Topics most valued 34

4.12 Ability to build resilience 36

4.13 Course impact 40

4.14 Most useful thing learnt 42

4.15 Course improvement 43

4.16 Chapter summary 43

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 47

5.1 Introduction 47

5.2 Research approach and methods 48

5.3 Limitations 49

5.4 Learning and development content 50

5.5 Potential critical success factors 51

5.6 Recommendations 52

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

Web-administered questionnaire

Pre event questionnaire

Post event questionnaire

Questionnaire results

v

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Page number

Table 1: Length of training 25

Table 2: Usefulness of activities 26

Table 3: Learning methods and usefulness 27

Table 4: Learning impact 28

Table 5: Topics most like to see included 29

Figure 1: Reasons for enrolling onto resilience programme 30

Figure 2: Highly rated reasons for enrolling 31

Table 6: Ability to build personal resilience 33

Table 7: Ability to build staff resilience 34

Table 8: Ability to build organisation resilience 35

Figure 3: Impact of Building Resilience course 37

Table 9: Most useful thing learnt 39

Table 10: Approaches to building resilience 45

vi

GLOSSARY

ADASS Association of Directors of Adult Social Services

ASYE Assessed and Supported Year in Employment

BASW British Association for Social Work

CPD Continuing Professional Development

CSW College of Social Work

NCPQSW National Centre for Post Qualifying Social Work

NMDSSC National Minimum Data Set Social Care

NSASC National Skills Academy for Social Care

NQSW Newly Qualified Social Worker

PCF Professional Capabilities Framework, developed by the SWRB and owned

by the College of Social Work provides a framework for the way social

workers should think about and plan their careers and professional

development. A backdrop to both initial social work education and

Continuing Professional Development after qualification.

Service

User

Individuals eligible to access social work services and those who define

themselves as potential users of social work services.

SfC Skills for Care

SWRB Social Work Reform Board

SWTF Social Work Task Force

UNISON Trade Union for those delivering public services

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION, CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVES

1.1 Introduction

The Social Work Task Force (SWTF 2009) has emphasised the danger that social workers are

not sufficiently resilient to survive their career, and that social work educators need to

develop the curriculum in order to enhance the resilience of trainees. This is emphasised by

the Social Work Reform Board (SWRB, 2010) in their report “Building a Safe and Confident

Future; One Year On”, in which the need for an emotionally resilient workforce is a

recurrent theme, and where roles in the sector are defined as “emotionally demanding”

needing “stamina, emotional resilience and determination” to work with client groups with

complex and changing needs. Laming (2009, p52) also highlighted that those working in the

sector need to “develop the emotional resilience to manage the challenges they will face”,

recommending a full remodelling of social work training including the development of

emotional resilience.

The Social Work Task Force (SWTF) (2012) recently noted:

“Social work calls for a particular mix of analytical skills, insight, common sense,

confidence, resilience, empathy and use of authority. Social workers are unlikely to

develop these skills unless provided with high quality education and training that

continues throughout their careers…”

The rationale for this research is to examine what approaches are being used in the sector

to build resilience, and the critical success factors of those approaches as whilst the sector

itself has recognised this as an important activity, there is no consensus as to how this is

best achieved. Indeed, the work of Morrison (2007) suggested that curriculum of knowledge

for social workers tended to be content- driven, with little focus on emotional management

or building resilience. This is despite knowledge that resilience has been shown to be an

attribute that can be learnt, particularly when good use is made of experiential learning

(Cherniss, C., Goleman, D., Emmerling, R., Cowan, K., & Adler, M. (1998).

2

The need to build the resilience of the social care workforce is highlighted by the work of

Kinman & Grant (2011) who found social workers report higher levels of work-related stress

and burnout. Schaufeli, Maslach, & Marek, (1993, p. 14) state that “a syndrome of

emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and reduced personal accomplishment occurs

among individuals who do people work of some kind, more that many other occupational

groups, the effects of which include absenteeism, turnover, low morale and personal

dysfunction, such as physical exhaustion, increased use of alcohol”. Mike Bush (2011) found

social workers to be as vulnerable as those using services to mental health problems, and

Collins, S., Coffey, M and Morris, L. (2010), identified social work practitioners to be

experiencing high levels of stress. High vacancy (5-16%) and turnover rates (7-30%)

contribute to staff shortages, excessive workloads and reliance on temporary staff in the

sector, making social work practice increasingly difficult (Eborall & Garmeson, 2001). In a

study of 240 trainee social workers, 43 per cent had scores of psychological distress higher

enough to warrant psychological intervention (Kinman & Grant, 2010). Reasons for these

findings are suggested below. Addressing the need to build the resilience of the workforce

as highlighted by the literature review could:

a) Counter the risk of poor psychological, physical and behavioural responses which will

impact negatively on performance (Palmer & Cooper, 2010), as those that are less

resilient find it difficult to make rational, logical decisions which has important

implications as the ability to make good judgments, so crucial to the successful

performance of those working in social care, is reduced (Rately, 2001).

b) Reduce the high levels of turnover as social workers on average remain in the profession

for less time than those working in professions similar to social work such as nurses

(Curtis et al., 2009), with the most common reason given for leaving being the stressful

nature of the job. NMDS-SC show a turnover rate of adult social care workers in 2013 of

22.2% (Skills for Care, 2014), against a national figure of 11.9% (CIPD, 2013).

c) Reduce the risk of presenteeism, with 28% of employers in 2012 reporting that they had

seen an increase in the number of people coming to work ill (CIPD, 2012), particularly

where there are concerns over job security and the threat of redundancy. The recent

3

cuts in adult social care budgets are likely to have increased the risk of presenteeism in

adult social care.

d) Help combat absenteeism. Of the 151 cases allocated to the British Association for Social

Work advice and representation team, three in five involved social workers who were

absent from work due to work-related stress (Community Care, 2011b). An average of

6.2 days were taken between June 2013 and July 2014 (Skills for Care, 2014).

e) Lift morale. When levels of resilience are high it is more likely that that moral will stay

high, and that employees will be able to stay focused and positive and continue to

deliver high quality services even when under strain (Robertson and Cooper, 2013).

1.2 Context

Those working in the adult social care workforce are responsible for some of the most

vulnerable members of society, demanding high emotional and cognitive labour. Agency

pressures, large case loads, increased complexity of cases, poor organisational culture and

ever changing social policies all serve to contribute to an adverse working environment

(Adamson et al., 2012). There also appears to be a culture of working long hours, Liquid

Personnel (2012) finding that social workers work an average of eight hours overtime each

week.

Furthermore, adult social care workers have to deal with complex dynamics that include a

range of personal, organisational and professional factors including physical and verbal

threats and violence from service users, the uncertainty involved with working with

involuntary clients in unknown neighbourhoods, the pressure that is experienced by those

working in a sector under intense public scrutiny and mistrust combined with the very

nature of social work practice. Additionally adult care social workers often experience

limited support from their managers, competing demands between the client and agency,

culture of blame, work overload, high staff turnover and shortages of a skilled workforce

(Coffey et al., 2004). These factors indicate resilience to be a key attribute needed by thos e

working in the sector (Ellett, et al., 2007).

Contextual factors increasing the need for a resilient workforce include:

4

a) the need to save £800 million in the 12 months to April 2014, £104m of this to be

achieved through direct withdrawal of services (ADASS, 2013)

b) greater numbers of people seeking social care support, many with complex needs

(State of the Social Care Workforce, 2010)

c) the Health and Social Care Act 2012, which will result in uncertainty and change due

to integrated health and social care commissioning.

Helga Pile, UNISON National Officer for Social Workers, emphasises the current challenges

(Pile, 2011);

Workloads have spiralled out of control… The clear message from our members in

social work is that stress rates are high and climbing… When social workers are

forced to take time off for stress-related illness they are often thrown straight back

in when they return.

…and it is a significant sector, with 1.75 million paid jobs alone in the adult social care sector

(State of the Social Care Workforce, 2010). Finding ways of building the resilience of just a

small percentage could bring real return on investment.

The question is, have organisations found learning and development approaches that can

help achieve this? If so, what are the critical success factors of such approaches?

1.3 Research Questions

The research questions posed by this study, have been constructed based on the knowledge

that building resilience would bring benefit to the sector, that learning and development

could help play a role in achieving this and that there are currently gaps in knowledge

regarding what approaches are being used, with whom and their effectiveness. For these

reasons, the research questions for this study are as follows:

1) What are the main learning and development approaches to building worker

resilience in the adult social care sector?

2) What are the learning and development critical success factors?

The research objectives are then to gain an understanding of the main learning and

development approaches that are being used to build the resilience of those working in the

5

adult social care sector, and to gather information in order that the critical success factors of

approaches used can be identified. This information can then be used to inform the

development of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) content, delivery and

assessment methods appropriate to social workers working in the adult social care sector,

and the content and assessment of the Social Work degree, and Assessed and Support Year

in Employment (ASYE) which comprises the first year in employment in a social care setting

following the social work degree. It could also be used to embed training and development

approaches into business and human resources strategies, and thus play a valuable role in

mitigating against a number of the factors associated with low resilience.

To identify the critical success factors individuals that have taken part in resilience learning

and development will be approached through use of web administered questionnaires,

action research and participant observation of a three day resilience building learning and

development programme to examine participant views regarding:

duration of learning

reasons for enrolling

topics found to be of most value

usefulness of learning methods

how the learning impacted on ability to build resilience

topics respondents would most like to see included in resilience learning

who delivers the learning and development

ideas for improvement

1.4 Chapter Summary

In this chapter the rationale and context for the research has been considered, including the

sector’s own recognition of the need and benefits of enhancing the resilience of a workforce

of 1.75 million, the psychological distress some in the sector experience and the impact this

is having. There currently appears to be a lack of consensus as to how this is to be achieved.

Contextual factors that impact on resilience, and which could continue to do so in the

future, include reduced budgets, increased demand for services and an environment which

experiences continued uncertainty and change. Understanding more of the critical success

6

factors of learning and development activity could inform human resource development

approaches that will boost the resilience of the workforce.

7

CHAPTER 2

THE LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This literature review aims to establish context, to define what resilience is along with its

meaning in the adult social care sector, and to distinguish and synthesize what has already

been discovered about the learning and development critical success factors associated with

building resilience. It highlights the various ways in which resilience can be defined which

include a focus on personality traits, outcomes or process. The literature review also

identifies attributes that learning and development activity could focus upon to build

resilience. As a common frame of reference this research uses the basic conceptualisation of

resilience as an individual’s ability to adapt and bounce back despite adversity which

recognises the different aspects of resilience and the understanding that both individual a nd

external factors interact.

2.2 History of the word “resilience”

The word resilience was first used in the context of developmental studies of children who

were believed to be functioning well despite less than healthy family backgrounds. An early

example includes the work carried out by Emmy Werner (1982). Werner was one of the first

people to use the term resilience to describe children that despite growing up in a poor area

of Hawaii with parents who were often out of work, alcoholic or suffering from a mental

health problem, did not display destructive behaviours. Werner noted that this smaller

group of children had resilient traits.

Later research built on this work, for example, that undertaken by Luther, S and Cicchetti.

(2000) who identified those traits and the factors which were believed to “buffer”

individuals from the effects of traumatic situations, which included external factors, for

example, social and structural, that build resilience, developing concepts such as hardiness,

learned resourcefulness, local of control and stamina (Luther, S and Cicchetti, D. 2000).

8

2.3 Defining resilience

Many definitions used to define resilience consistently use the theme of recovery and

bouncing back in the face of challenges and adversity. Examples include “The positive

psychological capacity to rebound. To bounce back from uncertainty, conflict, failure or

even positive change, progress or increased responsibility.” (Luthans, F. 2002). Other

definitions highlight that resilience can also be focused on dealing positively with the

adversity, for example “being able to face up to reality, improvise in the face of unfamiliar

challenges, and at the same time find a source of ‘meaning’ in the challenges that

encourages long-term thinking while affirming a sustaining sense of purpose” (Coutu, 2002).

Most conceptualisations are consistent in identifying resilience as a dynamic process that

involves a personal negotiation through life that fluctuates across time, life stage and

context (Tusaie and Dyer, 2004).

The focus of this research project is the development of resilience in adult social care.

Research into the definitions used by the social care sector itself found frequent difficulty in

conceptualising and articulating the construct of resilience, with most definitions referring

to it as a personality trait that enables an individual to cope with most life events

(McMurray et al., 2008), thus countering research which describes it as an attribute that can

be developed rather than a static personality factor (Cherniss et al., 1998).

The Sector Skills Council, Skills for Care, that leads national learning and skills development

strategy in adult social care offers the following definition: “The general capacity for flexible

and resourceful adaptation to external and internal stressors” (Klohen, 1996) recognising

that resilience is dependent upon personal perception of events, and the events

themselves. Kinman and Grant (2011) who have undertaken research focused on resilience

in the social care sector describe resilience as a protective factor that enhances an

individual’s ability to manage stress; as a positive construct which “…enables one to

overcome stressors or withstand negative life events and, not only recover from such

experiences, but also find personal meaning in them” (Grant and Kinman, 2012, p.1).

Resilience could also be described as a process rather than a personal attribute, for example

“demonstrating resilient adaptation in the face of adversities of traumas.” (Luthar and

Ciccchetti, 2000), or an outcome; not a process nor a personality trait but a “manifested

9

competence in the context of significant challenges to adaptation or development” (Masten

and Coatsworth, 1998, p. 206).

2.4 Focus for resilience learning and development

When considering the critical success factors of learning and development interventions it

can be useful to examine the qualities and attributes that those working in the sector

believe indicate resilience. Grant (Community Care 2012), identified these as:

self esteem

enthusiasm

optimism and hope

openness to experience

strong sense of identity

a high degree of autonomy

self awareness and emotional literacy

critical thinking skills

the ability to set limits

well developed social skills and social confidence to develop effective relationships

flexibility and adaptability

ability to use a range of coping strategies

creative problem solving skills

ability to draw on external and internal resources

adaptation to change

persistence in the face of challenges, setbacks and adversity

sense of purpose

ability to derive meaning from difficulties, learn from experience

an orientation towards the future

sense of humour

10

2.5 Learning and development methods

Different methods of learning and development have been used to build resilience. These

are determined by the extent to which the support is directed at:

(1) Internal factors that build personal resilience (Kelley, T.M. 2005) which includes: a sense

of control over one’s life, perseverance, emotional management and awareness, optimism,

perspective, sense of humour, a belief in one’s own capabilities and the ability to problem

solve.

(2) External factors such as social networks, workplace supervision, mentoring, work place

practice (Mocke et al., 2002).

(3) A combination of approaches which build internal capacity and shape external factors in

order to build resilience such as individual dispositional attributes, family support and

cohesion, and external support systems (Richardson, G. 2002).

2.6 Approaches that aim to build resilience

There is considerable literature and research focused on resilience in children and young

people, yet far less about the resilience of adults, or social workers (Rutter, 1987). The

sector has recognised the importance of resilience, the College of Social Work, Professional

Capabilities (2010), mapped against the Social Work Professional Capabilities Framework

(PCF), presents statements of competence for new and experienced workers to those with

extensive experience. These statements include “able to describe the importance of

emotional resilience in social work, show awareness of…emotional resilience…with support,

take steps to manage and promote own…emotional resilience”. However, whilst the sector

is clear that there is a need, how this is to be achieved is less clear.

A framework developed by Beddoe et al., (2011) identifies factors that build social worker

resilience, including individual factors, organisational factors and social worker education

and training. This framework includes the need to build optimism, coping strategies,

problem-solving skills and self-care.

Research undertaken by Kinman and Grant (2012) found that social work students that

scored as having more emotional intelligence, social confidence and better reflective ability

11

were more resilient suggesting that developing these abilities in adult social care worker

training would foster resilience. Building emotional intelligence, social confidence and

reflective ability into learning programmes could then be a critical success factor of learning

programmes aiming to build resilience.

This is further reinforced by comments made by Kinman who took part in a Community Care

web chat (Community Care 2012), in which she stated that

“…resilience is a complex and multi-faceted phenomenon, and we have found that it

is underpinned by several competencies, including emotional intelligence,

appropriate empathy, social competence and reflective ability. Interventions should

aim to enhance these competencies which, in turn, will enhance resilience and

wellbeing.”

Other research suggests that learning and development approaches to build resilience in the

sector should:

a) help students to learn to recognise when adversity has become too great and they

are experiencing the early signs of stress and burnout (Collins et al., 2010)

b) teach the skill of learning empathy: the ability to take perspective and demonstrate

warmth (Grant and Kinman, 2012)

c) teach reflective qualities which include “how self-awareness has been constituted

through direct experience” (Kondrat, 1999, p.451)

d) develop the skill of mindfulness (Lynn, 2009)

e) create effective supervision which allows feelings and emotions to be worked

through along with the provision of valuable space for reflection (Rajan-Rankin,

2013).

Kinman and Grant (2012) provide specific suggestions of competencies social workers need

to develop in order to build resilience. These include

a) emotional intelligence: the awareness of one’s own and others’ emotions and ability to

regulate these

12

b) reflective ability, finding in their research that trainee social workers who are better able

to reflect on their thoughts, feelings and beliefs and more able to consider the position of

other people and who can use their reflective abilities to communicate effective with others

tended to be more resilient to stress and to be more psychologically healthy

c) empathy , emphasising the need for a holistic understanding and recognition of the need

to avoid over-empathising with service users and the importance of clear emotional

boundaries

d) social competencies including communication skills, self-confidence and the ability to be

assertive.

‘Wellbeing days’ have been created by the University of Bedfordshire for social work

trainees based on these suggestions, the content including:

a) Mindfulness workshops which teach individuals the skills and practices of focussing non-

judgementally on the moment and which has recently been found to alter brain and

immune system functioning (Davidson, R. & Kabat-Zinn, J. 2003),

b) peer coaching to provide space for reflection

c) reflective supervision workshops

d) thinking skills which include cognitive behavioural therapy principles

e) self-awareness and action planning workshops to help individuals to reflect on their own

responses to stress and how to use this awareness to build an individual resilience building

action plan.

Anderson, D. (2000) examined how Social Workers coped with pressure. The findings

showed that neither the use of active or avoidant coping strategies saved these workers

from burnout and that the problem solving strategies that were taught and used most did

not help deal with the emotional content of their work, suggesting the use of coping

strategies to prevent and help individuals recover from burnout does not help as

significantly as might have been assumed.

13

The work of Rajan-Rankin (2013) found that whilst emotionality expressed by service users

was viewed as legitimate, expression of one's own emotions e.g. staff, was perceived as

unprofessional.

To add to this the work of Adamson (2000) highlights the debate that coping that focuses

primarily on managing feelings of emotional distress may be more useful in the context of

supporting resilience than coping that emphasises problem solving, which focuses only on

the source of the stress. This is further reinforced by the work of Graham and Shier (2010)

and Rajan-Rankin (2013) who note that managing personal and professional boundaries

and work–life balance promote subjective well-being and longevity in social care.

The National Centre for Post Qualifying Social Work based at the University of Bournemouth

have a Masters Level, three day full time equivalent part time programme Self Leadership –

Building Personal Resilience and Relationships that Work with Health & Social Care. This

provides qualified social workers along with health care workers an opportunity to increase

self-leadership capability and capacity to better manage self and others under the multiple

pressures of the work environment. The development focus of this unit is the quality of the

leaders thinking, creativity, and deeper self-awareness in the moment. Self-awareness and

mind state awareness and management are core elements of the programme.

The University of Birmingham (Paris, 2012) has also developed a programme for social

workers that aims to build resilience through reflection.

Community Care commissioned Kinman and Grant to produce an e guide to help those in

social care develop their resilience (Community Care 2012). This offers ten top tips (Annex

2). These include:

1. building a community of support

2. time management

3. developing achievable goals

4. keeping an emotion diary to develop greater awareness of emotions

5. preparation for supervision

6. prioritising work-life balances

7. building in time to relax

14

8. learning from experience

9. remaining hopeful and optimistic

10. being kind to oneself.

Anghel et al., 2010, developed an educational programme using experiential learning,

critical reflection, and creative media (drama, painting, sand tray, movement) to enhance

student learning for BA Social Work students. The programme aimed to offer personal

development through self-awareness which included:

a) experiential learning which recognised the need to develop learning styles which

balance experiencing and conceptualising in order to help individuals respond

flexibly in adapting to situations and learn analytic and interpersonal skills

b) reflection, specifically insight into how personal background affects learning and

practice; the unavoidable impact of the emotional content of the interactions

between social worker and client

c) the use of creative mediums in order to develop creativity; enhance confidence;

value diversity; enable trust; facilitate the use of inner intelligence and imagination

which are seen as core problem-solving and coping skills. Sessions included five

three-hour workshops. The content included:

i) creative mediums sessions exploring the strengths that brought them to

social work: visualisation; symbolic painting; small group drama

ii) a drama session exploring their own past responses to fear, risk and

uncertainty and what helped them cope: using a classic story and costume

role play

iii) a movement session exploring empathy and self-awareness: individual,

pair and group exercises using movement and music

iv) a sand-tray session exploring their personal journey and examples when

they proved resilient: using sand and symbolic objects. Each session included

warm-up, creative exercises, group discussion and individual reflection using

the personal diary.

Ryan et al., (2004) recognises the link between optimism and resilience, and pointed out

that optimism was associated with workers having a belief in their own ability, their self -

15

efficacy, based on good experience from previous situations, from perceiving situations as

opportunities and challenge and the importance of developing knowledge and

understanding of optimism during learning programmes, and the need for social work

organisations to continue to develop expertise and belief in optimism as a part of

supervision and on-going professional development.

In addition to the work underway in the adult social care sector there are a number of

organisations that deliver resilience building activities across a number of sectors as

described in “Developing resilience – an evidence-based guide for practitioners produced by

the CIPD”. Each offer a range of approaches. All offer half to whole day training events.

These include:

a) Psychological First Aid and London Resilience both of whom deliver training to those

responding to emergency situations

b) Integration Training with a focus on relaxation, mindfulness, CBT techniques,

problem-solving approaches, social support and empathy, optimism, gratitude,

mood management and emotional intelligence

c) Smithfield Performance that explore thinking, behaviour, internal motivation and

lifestyle factors that impact on resilience, situation interpretation and lifestyle

choices

d) Robertson Cooper who examine the nature of stress and how it interacts with

people differently along with coping mechanisms and tools

e) COPE OHS with a focus on CBT techniques

f) The Mayo Clinic with a focus on integrating resilience education and training with

medical care, mindfulness, cognitive (attention, memory, judgement and problem-

solving), physical, emotional and spiritual (forgiveness, acceptance, compassion, true

meaning and purpose

g) Trauma Resilience Training that focus on the development of pre-trauma skills to aid

conscious control of responses and thoughts, relaxation techniques

h) In Equilibrium who examine the extent that life experiences are within or out of

control of the individual, optimism and negative thinking, emotion regulation

16

i) Organisational Health Psychologists who have four principles of personal

effectiveness: control, aligning actions to values, antidotes to negativity and

psychology of stress prevention.

2.7 Chapter summary

This is a sector under severe pressure, with evidence that many in the workforce struggle to

cope resulting in high absenteeism and increased risk of presenteeism. In response to

recognition that support is needed to build a more resilient workforce ways being used to

achieve this include building the competencies that underpin resilience such as emotional

intelligence, social confidence and reflective ability into programmes. Self-awareness,

working through emotions, developing empathy, mind state awareness and thinking skills

are other elements of approaches being used. There is an argument that it would be more

effective to help practitioners manage the feelings of emotional distress rather than

problem solve. Training varies insomuch as some focuses on building internal capacity, some

the management of external factors and others a combination of the two.

The literature review found some confusion about what resilience really means within the

sector, although the concepts of adversity and positive adaptation are embedded into most

definitions.

The issues that will be considered when collecting organisational data will be the nature of

the learning and development activity already underway in the adult social care sector, and

how those taking part in such activity perceive this, including those topics found to be of

particular value, training methods used and their usefulness, reasons for enrolling,

differences in perception at the outset of learning and development compared to those

realised on conclusion, impact of learning and ideas for improvement.

17

CHAPTER 3

THE METHODOLOGY

This chapter describes (1) the philosophical approach, (2) approaches used (3) strategies (4)

choice of method (5) time horizons and (6) techniques and procedures (Saunders, Lewis, &

Thornhill, 2007). This includes justification of the selected methods of data collection, the

sample frame and an explanation of the questions.

3.1 Philosophical approach

The philosophical framework does not reside within one philosophical domain as the

research will include a mix of interpretivist and positivist philosophy (Saunders et al, 2007)

(Anderson, 2009). Interpretivist chosen as the most appropriate and relevant to the

research in recognition of: (1) the need to understand the differences between adult social

care workers in their role as social actors (2) the need to adopt an empathetic stance,

entering the social world of the adult social care workers and understanding their

perception and world from their point of view (3) views regarding resilience are based on

interactions between people and are thus not always predictable, and (4) as the research

will examine the meanings and experiences of different people in different situations.

Positivist chosen as most relevant to the research as there is the need to break current

approaches to building resilience into component facts and to gather and study the

relationship between these facts.

3.2 Approaches used

An inductive reasoning approach will be used as the research will commence with an

exploratory phase get a feel for the subject, develop a better understanding of the nature of

the problem and through interpreting the data gathered, developing theory. This was

chosen as there is currently no hypothesis at to what the critical success factors are, and for

this reason a deductive approach rejected. The inductive approach was felt more

appropriate to the research as it was considered important to understand the context

within which development activities that aim to build resilience in the sector take place and

that to recognise, in line with an inductive approach, that research subjects are humans and

18

as such their feelings and thoughts regarding the efficacy of learning and development

activities derived as a consequence of their perceptions.

3.3 Strategies

A action research was selected to gain an understanding of the context and processes being

enacted (Morris and Wood, 1991) enabling the “what,” and “how?” answers regarding the

critical success factors of training and development activity to be identified, for example to

understand more about the training and development identified by the literature review is

being delivered, including:

What?

The literature review identified three approaches to building resilience: understanding and

managing internal factors, external factors or a combination of both, along with a variety of

methods used to deliver learning. The research will distinguish between the substance of

the programme being delivered for example how to increase resilience in those working in

adult social care, and the processes being used, such as how the learning and development

is being delivered (Yin, 2003). This will include the extent to which the following are

included:

(1) Self-awareness

(2) Time management

(3) Emotions awareness and management

(4) Work life balance

(5) Relaxation techniques

(6) Optimism and combatting negativity

(7) Self-care (being kind to oneself)

(8) Development of support networks

(9) Psychology of stress prevention

How?

(1) Formal training delivery

19

(2) Experiential learning

(3) Reflection

(4) Use of creative mediums

(5) Use of accredited / non accredited learning

(6) E-learning

Using this approach will provide an understanding of the learning and development taking

place, an holistic understanding of the subject of the research and the interrelationships

between numerous factors (Fisher, 2007) which includes participants, training, approaches

and theories underpinning training and development activity, individual needs. A limitation

of this approach will be a lack of representativeness, but action research was chosen as this

will allow for (1) insight to be achieved (2) the opportunity to expand and draw conclusions

that could apply to future programmes. One of the criticisms of the action research

approach is that it does not allow for the identification of generalizable conclusions,

however, whilst this is true, it is believed that conclusions will still be of value to the sector

as these can “always be tried out by other persons in their own practice, to see if they work

for them” (Hamilton, 1981), (3) the chance of identifying the attributes of a successful

programme. The chosen methods were therefore selected in order to gather information to

understand issues, provide the flexibility needed to allow the emphasis of the research to

change as the process unfolds and ultimately to identify possible critical success factors .

3.4 Sample frame

Non-probablity, self-selection sampling (Saunders & Lewis, 2012) will be used as few

individuals have taken part in learning and development that builds resilience and it will

therefore be necessary to use contacts and the literature review which identified

organisations delivering resilience building activity, to identify gatekeepers who can then

invite individuals to complete a questionnaire. The individuals can then choose whether to

take part. The aim is to engage 30 respondents. This number is based on the suggestion

that “a sample size of 30 will usually result in the sampling distribution for the mean that is

very close to a normal distribution” (Saunders and Lewis, 2012: 266). Respondents will be

asked to state who delivered the learning and checks made to ensure a range of training

provision is included in the sample. Whilst a census approach would afford more reliability,

20

validity and credibility, this would be an impractical approach due to budget and time

constraints. The purpose of using questionnaires in the first stage will be to get a feel for the

research topic and those areas that could comprise critical success factors, and therefore

not essential to ensure an illustrative and representative sample is achieved.

Information will then inform the creation of pre and post questionnaires that will be used to

investigate potential critical success factors of a three day resilience building training event.

It is recognised whilst not statistically representative, that adopting self-selection sampling

will help provide information that will allow potential critical success to be identified.

21

3.5 Questions

The questionnaire is included in the annex.

The literature review found the need to have a resilient workforce to be a focus of the

sector, and a range content and learning methods used to achieve this. Little was found that

evaluated the perceived or actual success of training. The research aims to seek out

information that can help address this gap by identifying the success factors of learning

activity. For the three day training event, themes will include:

1. What motivated sign up?

2. What topics were of most value and why?

3. What methods were of most benefit and why?

4. What are your thoughts about the topics and efficacy of the learning methods used?

5. How would you evaluate the success of the activity?

6. Is there anything you feel would have improved the activity?

7. Has the activity made an impact on you? The organisation?

8. What factors do you believe made the most impact?

3.6 Choices

A multi method approach will be used, one approach facilitating another, each completing

the other. The first stage will be to gather quantitative and qualitative data through use of

open and closed questions posed in a web administered questionnaire from those that have

taken part in learning to build resilience. The results will inform an action learning approach

which will use questionnaires to gather quantitative and qualitative data both before and

after the three day training programme, and overt observation of those taking part which

will include systematic observation, self-memos that allow for ideas to be recorded as they

occur, and interpretation of participants behaviour. This choice will allow for the experience

to be shared by “not merely observing what is happening but also be feeling it” (Gill &

Johnson., 2010. P 161). Observation will also allow for the context in which the

respondent’s comments are set and the “nuances of meaning with which the respondents

garnish their responses” (Saunders & Lewis., 2012. P 342). A mono method was rejected as

22

this would not provide sufficient depth of data nor opportunity to triangulate and thus

reduced chance of achieving reliable, meaningful and credible results.

The purpose of the initial questionnaire will be to get a feel for the key issues and success

factors, and to inform the preparation of the pre and post questionnaires. This will offer

some confidence that the research is addressing the most important issues. The

questionnaires will allow interviewees to explain and expand on comments, particularly

relevant to the interpretivist approach. Results will be transcribed and analysed using a

quantitative and qualitative approach. It is recognised that a could be encountered in

accessing adult social care workers that have taken part in learning and development to

build resilience.

3.7 Time Horizons

The web administered questionnaire will be used initially followed by attendance at a three

day building resilience programme at which action research using pre and post

questionnaires and direct observation will be employed.

3.8 Techniques and procedures

A number of data collection techniques will be used in combination. They will include web

administered questionnaires which will be used for initial mapping of activity and to get an

overall “feel” for the topic being researched (Fisher, 2007), a pre and post questionnaire

supplemented by participant observation of those that took part in the training and

development activity delivered. Approval will be gained from those taking part in the

training to observe. Data collected will then be triangulated. Likert scales will be used in all

questionnaires used, providing fixed choice options to measure attitudes and opinions

(Bowling, 1997). This scaling method is chosen as it is easily understood, requires more than

a yes or no answer, allowing for degrees of opinion to be identified and therefore a greater

depth of analysis achieved. Question wording will follow the checklist presented by

Saunders, et al (2007). Scales chosen were based on discussion of scales by Likert and

Guttman, as found in Corbetta (2003). Quantitative data gathered will be analysed.

23

Comments from respondents will also be sought, this qualitative method helping draw out

more in depth responses.

Survey Monkey will be used to introduce and administer the on-line questionnaire,

questionnaires that will be used pre and post training will be introduced in person at the

training event, and observations will take place at the building resilience event.

To gain access to individuals suitable and willing to complete the initial questionnaire, adult

social care strategic and membership bodies will be approached making use of contacts and

building new contacts in the sector along with those organisations identified by the

literature review as delivering resilience training to those working in the adult social care

sector. The approach will explain clearly the purpose of the research, access required,

benefits to the organisation of taking part and will aim to build credibility in order to

encourage participation. Each will be asked to publicise the research and to provide an

invitation to complete the questionnaire. Strategic bodies will include the National Skills

Academy for Social Care, Association of Directors of Adult Social Services, Skills for Care,

Community Care, National Centre for Post Qualifying Social Work, British Association for

Social Work and the College of Social Work. To address the risk that 30 questionnaires will

not be completed using this method, postings onto forums and discussion boards will be

used to publicise the research along with a link to the questionnaire to help achieve the

target.

All identifying characteristics of student respondents will be masked and names anonymised

to protect confidentiality.

3.9 Ethics

Key considerations for the research include the need to ensure the privacy, confidentiality

and dignity of organisations and individuals involved in the research. The research

recognises that employers may not wish to have comments made by an individual

attributed to their organisation, particularly where these are centred on sensitive issues

such as bullying, management and leadership style and support, blame culture and poor

resources. The emphasis of the research is solutions rather than causes or evidence that

24

stress is an issue in the sector. Nevertheless this topic is likely to be raised in the context of

why resilience was identified as a topic for learning and development activity. All

respondents and participants will be informed that questionnaire responses and any

observation and notes will be held in confidence and that their details and those of their

employing organisation will remain confidential.

3.10 Chapter summary

An interpretivist philosophical framework will be used along with inductive reasoning. A

multi method approach will be used which will include gathering information about existing

learning and development practice using an exploratory approach to gather primary data

using a web administered questionnaire with a group of 30 adult social care workers who

have taken part in learning and development focused on building resilience. Results from

this will be used to inform an action research approach to further attempt to identify the

critical success factors of learning and development activity such as the content, preferred

learning and development methods, most favoured and useful elements, and impact of an

intensive three day building resilience programme. Pre and post reflections and views of

respondents will be gathered along with over participant observation of the full three day

programme.

25

CHAPTER 4

EMPIRICAL DISCUSSION OF DATA

4.1 Web-administered Questionnaire

A total of 19 questionnaires were completed by a variety of individuals working in adult

social care, less than the target of 30. All strategies and contingency strategies were used as

described above, with the National Skills Academy for Social Care publicising the research

nationally to members via their monthly e-newsletter, Universities with social work

programmes encouraging participation, private providers delivering resilience training being

approached to take part, but with little success. Reasons for the low response rate included

the relatively low numbers of those working in adult social care participating in

development activity focused specifically on building resilience and some commercial

sensitivity from those delivering such training to share information. This unanticipated

commercial sensitivity also impacted on the research method that involved contacting

training providers directly. Other national organisations such as BASW, ADASS and Skills for

Care were not able to encourage participation as the time needed to submit, and have

approved a request for the research, was prohibitive: there was a tight timescale in which

the research data needed to be collected. However, despite the short-fall in returns, the

objective of being able to get a better feel for the subject to inform more in depth research

and analysis was realised from the 19 respondents completing the questionnaire, and

information emerged that could be used to inform the next stage of the research, including:

Self-awareness, managing emotions, spotting the emotions in others and time

management/achieving work life balance to be perceived to be of most use in

building resilience

Better capacity to make informed judgements and improving the quality of services

delivered the most significant impact of training

The strong focus on building internal, rather than external capacity, to cope with

adversity and pressure.

4.2 Action research and observation

26

To further investigate the information gathered in order to build a more robust and reliable

picture of the critical success factors of training to build adult social care worker resilience, a

three day resilience building programme delivered by the University of Chichester, with 18

of the 24 delegates attending working in adult social care, was attended over the three day

period and action research and participant observation methods employed.

4.3 Duration of training

The length of training attended by those completing the web administered questionnaire

varied as can be seen from Table 1 below.

Duration Total

1-3 hour workshop 6

Half day training / workshop 3

One to two day training / workshop 7

Three or more days training / workshop 3

Total 19

Table 1: length of training

The Annex provides full data. Results show a fairly even distribution of the length of training

delivered, although little over three or more days. The literature review found most

examples to be short events such as the wellbeing days hosted by the University of

Bedfordshire, three hour workshops (Anghel et at., 2010), a full time equivalent of three

days learning at the University of Bournemouth and up to one day training delivered by

private training providers. These findings reinforce the literature review finding that training

is generally based on short events.

4.4 Rating activities

Those completing the web administered questionnaire were asked to rate activities using a

five point Likert Scale, justification for this choice given in Section 3. 1. A score of one was

27

described as being not at all useful and a score of five extremely useful. The results to the

question regarding usefulness of activities are presented below in Table 2.

10 activities scored four or higher which would indicate that the following topics were of

particular use to respondents; self-awareness, managing emotions, spotting the emotions in

others and time management/achieving work life balance. This reinforces the work of

Kinman & Grant (2012) who found that social work students with higher emotional

intelligence, social confidence and reflective ability were more resilient. However, i t cannot

be assumed that those activities scoring less than four were not found useful as there was

some polarisation of scores, some finding these activities extremely useful. Social

confidence whilst scoring low overall, scored very highly for all but three candidates who

had given this a one for usefulness thus lowering the mean average rating. It could also be

the case that the quality of the trainer, or interpretation of the topic, affected the results, or

that the respondent did not understand these terms. Strong conclusions have not then been

drawn.

28

Topic Rating

Self-awareness 4.47

Managing emotions 4.41

Spotting emotions in others 4.25

Time management / achieving work/life balance 4.25

Perspective 4.22

Communication 4.21

Problem-solving skills 4.13

Action planning individual responses to stress 4.06

Reflective skills 4.05

Mindfulness 4.00

Social confidence 3.94

Assertiveness 3.94

Early signs of stress and burnout 3.89

Reflective supervision skills 3.76

Thinking skills (for example CBT principles) 3.76

Self care 3.47

Learning optimism 3.39

Relaxation skills 3.38

Alternative therapies 2.27

Table 2 Usefulness of Activities

29

4.5 Learning methods

Responses to the question regarding methods and usefulness of the training used are

summarised in Table 3 below where 1 = not at all, 5 = very useful.

Method Methods and

Usefulness

Experiential learning (learning by doing) 4.63

Group discussion 4.50

Individual reflection 4.17

Presentation by course leader 4.16

Action planning how you will implement resilience building techniques

4.06

Drama / role play 3.67

Table 3: Learning methods and usefulness

Experiential learning was viewed as the most useful training method used, with over half

those completing the questionnaire stating this was very useful, and none less than useful.

This supports the finding of Cherniss,. C et al (1998) that resilience is an attribute that can be

learnt when effective use is made of experiential learning. This suggests that experiential

learning could be a critical success factor. Group discussion also scored highly. All, bar one

method, scored highly and were thus considered useful methods, with the exception of

drama and role play, however, even a lower score in this could be due to respondents not

having being exposed to this learning method or poor facilitation. Only further questioning

would have established this fact.

30

4.6 Learning impact

In answer to the question “How did this learning impact on you?”, responses are shown in

Table 4 where one equalled not at all and five very significantly.

Impact

Better capacity to make informed judgments 3.94

Improved quality of service you deliver 3.84

Greater awareness of how to build personal

resilience

3.68

Increased or sustained high morale 3.58

Reduced risk of absenteeism 2.87

Reduced risk of burnout 2.76

Table 4: Learning impact

The greatest impact therefore was found to be better capacity to make informed

judgements, a critical skill for adult social care workers (Rately, 2001), and improved quality

of services delivered, again of key importance to successful performance in the sector.

Searle and Patent (2012) and Curits et al., (2009), found high turnover to be a concern in the

sector, and whilst relatively lower scores were in evidence for lowering the risk of

absenteeism and burnout, a third responded that they were unsure whether or not this

would be the case. Lower scores could also have been due to this not being perceived as a

risk by respondents.

31

4.7 Topics most like to see included

Reponses to the qualitative question as to “What topics would you most like to see included

in a resilience programme?” varied. The range can be seen in table 5 below:

Comments

Examples of real life difficulties / scenarios and how you might cope with these situations

Techniques

Frameworks/theory around risk/protective factors; strategies and practical approaches

Mindfulness, communication skills, emotional awareness

Learning from experienced social workers

Use of Action Learning to support reflection and build resilience

Time Management

Links between emotion and behaviour, prioritising work, understanding that not everything

is urgent

Anxiety control

Strategies for supporting others to cope

More on managing emotions and role play

How to boost the elements that create resilience in life

Table 5: Topics most like to see included

Almost all suggestions made are based on building the internal capacity of an individual to

enable them to cope with adversity, not external factors such as those identified by Mocke

et al., (2002) Beddoe et al., (2001), and Richardson (2002), such as social networks,

workplace supervision, mentoring, work place practice, family support and cohesion and

external support systems. Whilst suggestions made reinforce the importance of building

internal capacity and therefore consideration of this as a critical success factor, further

investigation would be needed to establish why so few had mentioned external factors

before drawing any conclusions as to whether their inclusion could be regarded as a critical

success factor.

32

4.8 Training provision

The research set out to identify who delivers resilience training and the nature of this

learning. The results from respondents indicate that predominantly external training

providers are being used, that the learning does not form part of accredited training

programmes, or form part of a larger programme of learning. This reinforces the literature

review finding of little accredited provision on offer and brief specialist training being

commissioned. This may suggest that a critical success factor is having the required

specialist knowledge needed to deliver a programme of this nature, the necessary funding

needed to be able to commission the training from external providers and knowledge of

who provides the learning and what learning they are providing.

4.9 Training event analysis

A pre, and a post training questionnaire were developed, informed by the results of the

literature review and on-line survey. Both are included in the annex. To supplement this

research method, observations were made, allowing for the context of questionnaire

responses to be understood and to experience at first hand participation.

4.10 Reasons for taking part

Question one asked what the purpose of taking part in the training was. A score of one

equalling not at all a significant reason for enrolling and five a very significant reason.

Results are at Figure 1.

33

Reasons for enrolling onto resilience building programme

As can be seen, building team and organisational resilience, improving service quality,

building staff member’s resilience and reducing burnout risk scored highly. Given the value

of reducing burnout, it might be useful to reflect on the work of Anderson (2009) who found

that where reducing burnout is a key objective helping workers cope with the emotional

context of their work would be of benefit. Building personal resilience was not provided

with similarly high ratings, with 47% rating this reason as a three, 35% a four and a relatively

low 18% a five.

Findings are further analysed by extrapolating only those that responded to the question

highly, with a four or five, as is shown in Figure 2 below.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9R

esp

on

de

nt

nu

mb

er

Reasons for enrollment

1

2

3

4

5

34

Figure 2: Highly rated reasons for enrolling.

The literature review identified the sector’s strong focus on managing and promoting

individual resilience, highlighted by the sector’s own PCF. The results show a more

significant reason for enrolling to be a desire to help others build their resilience whether

this is as part of team or organisation. This may indicate that a critical success factor might

be to give individuals the skills and knowledge to help them confidently help others given

the motivation of participants to do this.

Making better improved judgements and reducing absenteeism also received relatively low

scores which could suggest a lack of knowledge of the link between resilience (coping with

stress) and absenteeism, or few issues with absenteeism in their employing organisation. A

critical success factor might then be the need to raise awareness of the link between

resilience and absenteeism.

4.11 Topics most valued

Question two asked respondents to rate the topics of most value. This was asked in both

the pre and post questionnaire. A rating on one = not at all valuable, five = extremely

valuable. Findings of note include:

0123456789

4

5

35

94% respondents gave a score of four or five before and after training, to ways of

building resilience, 80% to emotional intelligence, 77% mindfulness, 76% to

dysfunctional teams, and 71% understanding resilience. There was little difference

between scores pre and post questionnaire.

88% rated building resilient teams four or five at the outset and conclusion, 35% a

higher rating on conclusion than at the outset

Action planning was rated by 80% at a four or a five in terms of its value both before

and after the training. 40% found this more valuable, and 27% less valuable than at

the outset

35% gave meeting emotional needs a higher rating on conclusion than at the start of

the training, 76% at the outset.

72% gave learning optimism a rating of four or five before the learning and slightly

less, with 67% on conclusion

67% gave spotting the signs that stress has become an issue a four or five both

before and after the training, 17% found this was slightly less useful than they had

anticipated at the outset, giving a five at the start as to how useful they thought it

would be, and a four on conclusion. 11% however raised their rating from a four to a

five.

Emotions in organisation life whilst not scoring highly at the outset or conclusion, did

show some significant distance travelled in terms of movement of scores, with 44%

giving this a higher rating in terms of value on conclusion than at the outset.

When identifying the critical success factors, these results indicate that, due to the high

values awarded both before and after the training, that a critical success factor could be the

inclusion of:

a) ways of building resilience, as highlighted by the literature review as being a key

concern for the sector

b) emotional intelligence, supporting the suggestion by Kinman and Grant (2012) that

resilience is underpinned by emotional intelligence

36

c) mindfulness, supporting Lynne (2009), who suggested resilience can be built by

learning mindfulness practice

d) dysfunctional teams, further reinforcing the interest in team working

Building resilient teams, action planning and meeting emotional needs, being more

highly valued on learning conclusion, suggest that a further critical success factor may be

to ensure adult social care workers and training providers recognise the value of these

topics. This would support the work of Rajan-Rankin (2013) who reported that feelings

and emotions needed to be worked through with space for reflection, both of which can

be supported by the process of action planning. Emotions in organisation life, scoring

more highly on conclusion, could also suggest, along with the work of Morrison (2007)

who found the sector’s training curriculum focused heavily on content rather than

emotions management, that a critical success factor could be recognising, and

responding to the need to focus on meeting emotional needs, rather than solely the

intellectual needs of workers.

4.12 Ability to build resilience

For the next three questions respondents were asked to rate their response using a Likert

scale as follows:

1 = Not at all 2 = Slightly 3 = Not sure 4 = Quite 5 = Very

Question 3 asked “How able to build your own personal resilience right now?” This question

repeated for the post event questionnaire in order to measure distance travelled during the

three days. Responses were as follows (see table 6 below).

37

Pre response Post response Number % (rounded to nearest %)

Not at all Quite 1 6

Not sure Quite 2 11

Quite Quite 8 44

Very Quite 1 6

Slightly Quite 1 6

Not sure Very 1 6

Quite Very 4 22

Table 6: Ability to build personal resilience

This shows that just under a half felt no more able to build their resilience than at the

outset. However 50% reported that they were more able to build their resilience on

conclusion than at the outset, 22% from quite able to very able. One person representing

6% of the total moved from feeling very able to only quite able.

Comments and observations

Comments include:

Pre questionnaire comments include “experience of depression due to transition”,

“Interested in signs of stress/burnout and avoiding this - staying sane for the latter years of

my career” and “my experience of stress and managing my resilience is that I am aware of

what affects my resilience. What I need to do is manage it”.

Post questionnaire comments:

These included “much more than at the start of the course. v insightful,” and, “the course

has been very empowering + confirming some things I do already and others I want to be

better at…” Other comments focused on the need take time to reflect on the course “Lots

of helpful tools + tips. Will need to reflect on and work on these.” “More than when we

started but it remains a work in progress and lifelong” . These comments indicate that some

respondents gained skills needed to build personal resilience but that for some there was a

38

need to reflect to achieve impact. This was reinforced by listening to comments made on

the final day “this has been a great course, thank you so much. There has been lots to take

in and I need to really think about how I can use what you have been telling us about to do

things differently”

Participant observation found that many on the first day felt that external factors, such as

the organisation was to blame for low resilience “they are continually changing our

structure, how we do things. I just get to grips with one way and then it’s all up in the air

again, I just don’t feel in control at all …” and “I am being asked to do a lot more things now

and sometimes feel I just can’t cope”. One commented that “I am really at the end of my

tether and think I just need to find another job”. This is in line with Collins, S., et al (2010),

Kinman & Grant, (2011), Skills for Care, (2014), CIPD, (2013) who identified that

practitioners in the sector were experiencing high levels of stress.

In response to Question 4, How able to build the resilience of staff do you feel right now?

The question repeated in the post questionnaire, responses were as follows in Table 7.

Pre response Post response Number % (rounded to nearest %)

Not at all Not sure 1 6

Not sure Not sure 3 17

Not sure Quite 5 28

Not sure Very 1 6

Quite Slightly 1 6

Quite Quite 6 33

Quite Very 1 6

Table 7: Ability to build staff resilience

These figures show that half felt that they were no more able to build the resilience of staff

than at the outset. However the remaining half all indicated that their ability to build the

resilience of staff had increased, albeit to a lesser extent than building personal resilience.

39

Pre event questionnaire comments of note included “Dysfunctional organisation, every man

for himself culture” “…some more tools to do this would be helpful” and “As all people are

different I need to recognise signs in others and how individual needs can be met”. This is in

line with Collins et al., (2010), who highlighted the need to help students recognise early

signs of stress and burnout.

Post event questionnaire comments included “In that I am aware of what stops this

happening in the organisation”, “More equipped with tools and strategies, knowledge to

take forward and apply” and again highlighting the need for reflection, “Lots to take in and

want to process a bit more on how/which bits to use in the team,” and “Need to

review/reflect on tools provided and see how I can use these with my team.” The literature

review found significant reference to the reflective capacity of individuals, linking this to

resilience (Rajan-Rankin, 2013). Indeed the programmes developed by the University of

Birmingham and the University of Bedfordshire were based on building resilience through

reflection. This could therefore indicate that learning the skills of reflection and providing

tools and space needed to do this could also be a critical success factor.

Observation found delegates eager to gather practical tools and techniques to build

resilience. An example included the use of laughter to build resilience which proved popular

with several wanting more information in order to be able to use this with staff members “I

think we could really do with Lisa (laughter coach) at our hospice. I am going to get her over

to us I think” and “it’s shocking how little we laugh. Must do more of this with staff as it

helps us bond and release some of the pressure”. This might add weight to the theory that

experiential learning, as laughter therapy is, is of value when building resilience (Chernis, et

al,. 1998).

In response to Question 5: How able to build the resilience of the organisation do you feel

right now? The question repeated in the post questionnaire, responses were as follows (see

Table 8)

40

Pre response Post response Number % (rounded to

nearest %)

Not at all Quite 1 6

Not sure Quite 2 11

Quite Quite 8 44

Very Quite 1 6

Slightly Quite 1 6

Not sure Very 1 6

Quite Very 4 22

Table 8: Ability to build organisation resilience

This shows that 28% moved from “not sure” and “quite” to very, and 23% strengthened

their perception of their ability to build organisational resilience.

Comments before the course indicated that some felt that it was unlikely that much change

to the organisation could be made “I am sure I could help but maybe don’t have enough

influence to” and ““not sure how I can influence this” and then on conclusion “still not sure

how I can influence this”. Post event comments included “much more affirmed of the need

to do this” and “More tools, techniques, ideas to share and implement”. However, these are

the comments of only a small minority of respondents and therefore generalizable

conclusions cannot be drawn. Participant observation reinforced this finding with many

individuals expressing doubt that they could impact on external factors that influence

resilience as determined by the organisation as they had insufficient authority to do so, “I

am not senior enough where I work to do much about what happens ‘up there’”.

4.13 Course impact

The following questions aimed to measure the impact and views regarding how to improve

the course.

Question 7 asked “How do you think the course will impact?” Statements of potential

impact were listed and respondents asked to rate on a Likert scale of 1 = not at all, to five =

very significantly. Responses are at Figure 3 below.

41

This shows where the perception of the most significant impacts lay. It illustrates that

building personal and staff member resilience had the most significant perceived impact.

Improved service quality also had high ratings along with reducing risk of burnout and

increasing morale. Building team or organisational resilience and making better judgements

scored less highly.

Comments provided by respondents included being able to “introduce the concepts to

others”, “being far more knowledgeable that I was” that there is “always more to learn”

and that “notes and exercises great but need more learning outside the training room”.

Observation found some participants believed the course would impact significantly on a

personal level “it’s not just at work that I will be able to do some of these things, but at

home to”, and “this has been a fantastic course, one of the best I have been on, I feel like I

will really able to do things differently now”

This is represented in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3 Impact of Resilience Building course

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1

2

3

4

5

42

4.14 Most useful thing learnt

Question 8 posed the question “What was the most useful thing you learnt?”

All responses are included in the annex. In summary these were broad in nature and

therefore, although there was some clustering that can help determine critical success

factors. These key areas include emotional intelligence, spotting the signs of stress,

personality and resilience, importance of humour and laughter to build resilience,

mindfulness and organisational resilience as can be seen from table 9.

Theme Post questionnaire comments

Emotional

Intelligence

“more in depth knowledge of emotional intelligence, emotion in

organisations”

“emotional competence framework”

“the benefits of actively recognising emotional intelligence in how

individuals relate to one another in whatever role”

Spotting the

signs of stress

“the importance of knowing self and triggers to stop “burnout “ before it

starts”

“recognising the signs of stress”.

Personality

and resilience

“understanding personality types and team dynamics”,

“content of day 3” (which included personality theory linked to resilience)

“colours exercise”

Use of

humour and

laughter

“the role of laughter and smiling”

“reminded to laugh and smile more,”

“...reminded to laugh more! Take time out and be playful and enjoy life”

“…enjoyed the laughter therapy”

Mindfulness “to accept emotions and turn towards them – not see emotions such as

anxiety or stress as toxic” “mindfulness…”

“Mindfulness”

Organisational

resilience

“content of day 3” (which was included organisational resilience)

“tools and info regarding organisational emotion / influencing factors”

Non clustering “I liked the guided visualisation and sense of positivity”

43

comments “impact of the organisation on the individual and vice versa and how often

the organisation doesn’t take responsibility for the damage (and lack of

attention) to the individual’s resilience”

“The breadth or insight. The academic insight”

“The areas to focus on for supervising and managing trainees and ASYEs

(newly qualified staff)”

“I liked the concept of emotional labour which I want to take back and

discuss with the management team to see how we can develop it for our

staff”

Table 9: Most useful thing learnt

4.15 Course improvement

Question 9 asked “How would you improve this course?” Clustering of comments focused

on the suggestion that breaks be shorter. Other ideas included more information before the

course, more handouts, articles and theory. One person felt the third day was rushed with

lots of contributions in three days and whether “splitting the days would allow some

reflection time to consolidate learning”. Others had no suggestions but were keen to

express positive feedback which included “very good!”, “Nothing” “Very well constructed,

great content. Best course I have been on in a long time” and “thoroughly enjoyed all

aspects of the three days. Can’t think of anything to change. Diverse and engaging each day”

Again all comments are listed in the annex.

4.16 Chapter summary

The web administered questionnaire found activities that were believed to be of particular

use included self-awareness, managing emotions, spotting the emotions in others and time

management/achieving work life balance, supporting literature review findings (Kelley,

2005) (Kinman & Grant, 2012) (Anderson, 2000) (Rajan-Rankin, 2013). All methods of

training delivery were deemed useful, experiential learning the most useful, with the

exception of drama / role plays. This adds weight to the work of Chernis, et al,. (1998) who

found that resilience can be built when good use is made of experiential learning. The most

significant impact was found to be increased capacity to make informed judgements and

44

quality of services delivered. A range of topics were suggested as topics respondents would

like to see included in a resilience programme, all of which were focused on building the

internal capacity of an individual to enable them to cope with adversity and pressure.

The action research and participant observation

The pre-questionnaire found the most common reasons for enrolling onto the programme

were to build the resilience of teams/organisations and to improve the quality of services

delivered. Reducing burnout also scored highly in relation to other topics, this being of

significant relevance to the adult social care sector as identified by Kinman & Grant (2011).

Building personal resilience was not afforded the same high rating, nor was reducing the risk

of absenteeism, despite this being a significant issue for the sector. However, this might

have been, in some measure, due to the general content-driven rather than emotion

management focus (Morrison, 2007) the sector is used to which may have led to a general

feeling of uncomfortableness stating that there was a need to build personal resilience.

Observations of participant discussion and comment over the three days showed many

shared experiences of unsupportive management, work pressures, conflict between client

and agency, supporting the literature review findings, (Curtis et al., 2009), (Pile, 2011)

(Adamson et al., 2012). Many participants also frequently commented on their lack of

personal resilience rather than that of teams or the organisation and the post event

questionnaire found the most significant impact had been to build personal resilience.

Content regarded as most valuable before and after the event included ways of building :

Personal resilience

Emotional intelligence

Dysfunctional teams

Mindfulness

Understanding resilience.

This supports the work of Kinman and Grant (2012), who found emotional intelligence a key

factor in determining resilience, and that of Lynne (2009) who recommended mindfulness

45

practice to build resilience, and the work of Davidson & Kabat-Zinn (2003) who have

evidenced changes in brain functioning for those practicing mindfulness.

Content regarded as more valuable on conclusion than at the outset included:

Building resilient teams

Action planning

Meeting emotional needs and emotions in organisation life.

Building resilience teams would help address the need to acknowledge, and put in place, the

external factors that contribute to resilience for those in the sector. Action Planning would

help provide opportunity to reflect, practice and reinforce skills learnt where actions are

implemented, reflection being an important tool in helping build resilience.

Building optimism and spotting the signs of stress scored slightly less at the end of the

programme than at the beginning. This is interesting in the context of Ryan et al., (2004)

who recognised the link between optimism and resilience, and Collins, et al., (2010) who

believed that it was important to help students to learn to recognise when adversity has

become too great and they are experiencing the early signs of stress and burnout.

The most significant impact lay with building personal and staff resilience. Still significant,

although slightly less so, were impacts around reducing burnout and improving service

quality. As the literature review identified, burnout is of significant relevance to the adult

social care sector (Kinman & Grant., 2011). Boosting team or organisational resilience and

the ability to make better judgements did not score as highly. The need to take time to

reflect on the learning was highlighted in order to determine impact was in evidence in both

participant observation and post questionnaire results.

Responses to the question regarding the most useful thing learnt were found to be

emotional intelligence, spotting the signs of stress, personality and resilience, use of

humour and laughter, mindfulness and organisational resilience.

46

Ideas of how the course could be improved varied, although several mentioned the need for

shorter breaks. The suggestion that the days could be split would help address the need for

space for reflection.

47

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter reviews and summarises the research, identifies the methods used and their

implications in this study.

The purpose of the study has been to identify the main learning and development

approaches to building worker resilience in the adult social care sector and critical success

factors of such learning.

This was driven by knowledge that adult social care work is a complex and pressured sector

in which to work (Curtis et al., 2009), (Pile, 2011) (Kinman & Grant 2012),(Adamson et al.,

2012), and resilience something the workforce will need in order to manage the challenges

it now faces (Laming, 2009),(SWTF 2009), (SWRB, 2010).

Challenges include both internal and external factors:

Internal factors

High emotional and cognitive labour

Some verbally and physically abusive clients, many of whom are involuntary

Often requires long working hours

Tension between meeting the needs of client and the agency

Nature of work

External factors:

Under constant public scrutiny

Facing severe budget cuts and ever increasing demand for services

Poor management support

48

The sector has high absenteeism and turnover. With a workforce of 1.75 million (Skills for

Care, 2014), understanding how to build resilience could offer real benefits. Whilst the

sector recognises this, there is little consensus as to how this could be achieved.

5.2 Research approach and methods

It was important for the research to understand the term “resilience”, which has been

described as a personality trait, an attribute that can be developed, an outcome and a

process. For the purposes of this study the definition used was that it is a construct that

“enables one to overcome stressors or withstand negative life events and, not only recover

from such experiences, but also find personal meaning in them” (Grant and Kinman,

2012,p.1). This was chosen at it encapsulates that it is defined by external and internal

factors, and how individuals respond and learn from adversity.

The philosophical framework within which this research was based was interpretivist as

there was a need to understand the differences between adult social care workers in their

role as social actors, to enter the world of workers to gain their perspective, as building

resilience, is based on interactions between people and is therefore not predictable; and as

meanings and experiences of different people needed to be explored (Saunders et al.,

2007). An inductive reasoning approach was used as the context in which activities take

place was an important consideration.

A multi method research style was used, information and data then triangulated in order to

draw conclusions. An inductive approach was adopted and primary data gathered to explore

and get a feel for the subject and potential critical success factors (Saunders et al, 2007).

The first stage used a web administered questionnaire, posing qualitative and quantitative

questions, with a self-selected sample of adult social care workers that had taken part in

learning and development that aimed to develop resilience using the literature review of

activities to inform the questions posed and organisations to contact. 19 individuals

completed this questionnaire, less than the target of 30. Reasons included fewer than

anticipated numbers taking part in resilience learning, commercial sensitivity from providers

and prohibitive length of time needed to submit an application, and gain approval from

national organisations, the gatekeepers of adult social care workers. Despite only realising

49

19 returns however, results usefully informed the next stage of the research which included

an action research approach. A three day Resilience Building course was delivered by the

University of Chichester, targeting social care workers, and permission gained to use a pre

and post questionnaire to collect information, from adult social care workers, and with their

permission, observe participants. The analysis and interpretation of both helped begin to

identify patterns that would enable the critical successful factors of learning that builds

resilience to be identified.

5.3 Limitations

Whilst this approach would use human insight and experience, a weakness was the

“dependence on the researcher’s skill, training, intellect, discipline and creativity. The

researcher is the instrument of qualitative enquiry” (Patton 1988). A further weakness was

that the researcher delivered an element of the resilience training which therefore exposed

the research to the risk of researcher bias, questionable impartiality and ability to gather

honest participant responses. The external validity of this research could also be questioned

as “In qualitative research, a small non-random sample is selected precisely because the

researcher wants to understand the particular in depth, not to find out what is generally

true of the many” (Merrian 1998:208). The questionnaire approach also, whilst allowing for

unlimited comments to be made by respondents, may not have allowed for the depth of

enquiry necessary in terms of the thoughts, views, interpretations, priorities, processes,

feelings and experiences of participants in the training. The numbers involved also limited

the validity of the results.

Whilst the quantitative methods used ratings scales which allowed for a more systematic,

analytical and disciplined approach to supplement the qualitative methods used, allowing

identification of patterns to emerge, this approach was limited in that it resulted in a lack of

opportunity to probe responses made, once again impacting on the credibility and validity

of the research. Despite these limitations the research methods did allow for some insight

that could inform further work in order to identify generalisable conclusions regarding

critical success factors.

50

5.4 Learning and development content

Learning and development topics delivered as part of resilience building programmes are

summarised in Table 10 below.

Internal focus External focus Internal and external combined

Perseverance Social networks Individual dispositional attributes

Emotion management and

awareness

Workplace supervision Family support and cohesion

Optimism Mentoring External support systems

Perspective Work place practice Prioritising work-life balances

Sense of humour Building a community of support

Self belief

Problem solving

Self care

Coping strategies

Spotting the signs of stress

Empathy

Reflective qualities

Mindfulness

Self awareness

Time management

Goal setting

Relaxation time

Table 10: Building adult social care worker resilience training content

Table 10 highlights the larger volume of content based on building the internal capacity of

an individual, with less emphasis on external factors which are considered by many to be of

real importance in building resilience (Luther & Cicchetti, 2000), (Clohen, 1996), (Mocke et

al., 2002), (Richardson, 2002). Further research could help identify the extent to which the

inclusion of external factors could constitute a critical success factor as it would appear,

hitherto be afforded less priority.

A further implication is the number of topics included, as illustrated in Table 10, along with

their breadth, suggesting complex decision-making and informed knowledge would be

needed by those commissioning learning in order to choose the most suitable learning

51

programme. It also suggests highly competent individuals able to deliver such specialised

content would be needed.

5.5 Potential Critical success factors

Content

The literature review and research suggest that content regarded as “critical” could

potentially be regarded as:

building resilience

emotional intelligence (including the competence self-awareness)

mindfulness

dysfunctional teams

understanding resilience

However, given the limitations as stated above, further research would be needed to

establish the reliability of this finding.

Other content that may potentially be critical includes: building resilient teams, emotions in

organisation life and meeting emotional needs as these were areas that received reasonably

high ratings in the post questionnaire, and those identified by the literature review as

elements that research and training providers include in their training. The extent to which

learning should focus on building personal resilience and/or that of others is also an area

that requires further research.

Areas which respondents classed as “the most useful thing learnt” that have not already

been highlighted as a potential critical success factor that are worthy of further exploration

include personality and resilience, organisational resilience and use of humour and laughter

in building resilience.

52

Reflection time

Having time to reflect on learning could be a further critical success factor. This would

provide space for consolidation of learning and encourage workers to consider which areas

to practice to reinforce new thinking and behaviours, practice crucial to developing and

embedding the skills associated with emotion (Chernis, et al 1998) (Rately 2001).

Action Planning

Encouraging the creation of individual action plans could provide a framework to reinforce

areas for practice and development and the need for reflection.

Learning methods

The literature review found training provision included experiential learning in recognition

of the need to balance experiencing with conceptualising when learning how to build

resilience (Anghel, et al,. 2010). Experiential learning was regarded by respondents as the

most useful learning methods along with group discussion. Building opportunity for

experiential learning could also therefore constitute a critical success factor.

5.6 Recommendations

Agreeing a common definition

The sector would benefit from having in place a common definition of resilience as the

literature found some confusion regarding what the word means. This would aid the

facilitation of learning focused on helping participants understand what resilience is, one of

the factors that could be considered critical. This should reflect on both internal and

external factors that help people cope with, and learn from, adversity and challenge.

Learning content

Further research could help understand the extent that content should include building

resilience, emotional intelligence (including the competence self-awareness), mindfulness,

dysfunctional teams and understanding resilience. This work could also include linkage

53

between personality and resilience, spotting the signs of stress and use of humour and

laughter to build resilience.

Including external factors that help build resilience

Many of the approaches used focused on managing the internal factors that determine

personal resilience. This appears to be a gap; understanding the role that external factors

can play in building resilience could be an important strand of a learning and development

activity. This would also have resonance for those wishing to build team and organisational

resilience, teams and organisations forming part of an individual’s external world and

building team and organisational resilience forming a strong motivator for many that

attended the training programme.

Including experiential learning and discussion

Experiential learning and opportunity for discussion should be built into learning

programmes. These methods would be conducive to developing self-awareness, emotion

management, emotional intelligence, mindfulness, reflective skills, understanding resilience,

building resilient teams, emotions in organisation life, meeting emotional needs and

understanding of dysfunctional teams, the most valued elements of programmes .

Providing space for reflection

The suggestions that space for reflection and that the course could have been split to allow

time for such reflection and consolidation indicates that any programme of more than one

day might be better structured as days set apart to allow participants to reflect and also

practice the skills learnt, thus providing opportunity for further experiential activity which

the literature review has shown is so crucial to developing skills associated with emotion

such as resilience. The quality of discussion on return could potentially also be of real value

as facilitators allow participants to explore and learn from each other’s individual

experiences. Building in opportunity for action planning would help achieve this.