the human service organization becomes an arena in...

the human service organization becomes an

arena in which different moral values compete for dominance

Hasenfeld, 2010Friday, May 13, 2011

2

community-based human service organizations

often lack frameworks to help guide their thinking and action (Delpeche et. al., 2003).

Praxis

Friday, May 13, 2011

critical community practice

Action based on critical theorizing, reflection,

and a clear commitment to working for social justice through empowering and

transformative practice.Paul Henderson (2007) in Butcher et al, Critical Community Practice


“is about empowerment; ... working with communities in a way that assists them to mobilize, and

effectively exercise a greater degree of power when challenging the construction and

maintenance of the social differences that shape their experience of disadvantage, exclusions, and oppression.”

(Butcher, 2007, p. 21) in Critical Community Practice

critical community practice


The shared beliefs, assumptions, and values of the organization are oriented towards empowerment,

collaboration, social justice and social change. These elements of consciousness are reflected in communicated

organizational values, mission, and vision, theory of change and general organizational discourse.

critical organizational consciousness

Evans, et al, 2011


Cri$cal Org.Consciousness

Cri$cal Prac$ce

High

High

Low

Low

“Ideology-‐prac4ce divide” Delibera4ve Cri4cal Prac4ce

Tradi4onal Services

1

2 3

4

Ins4nc4ve Cri4cal Prac4ce


S P E C

Critical practice can be framed by four principles:

Strengths-based - Acknowledging and appreciating individual and community strengths helps people thrive, but focusing on deficits diminishes their dignity.

Prevention - Preventing ill health and social and psychological problems is better than curing people who already suffer.

Empowerment - Well-being requires power, control, voice and choice.

Community Change - We cannot eliminate problems one person at a time. We must change conditions that lead to problems in the first place.

Prilleltensky, I. (2005), Evans, Hanlin, & Prilleltensky, (2007)www.specway.org


Quadrant I

Examples:Voice and choice in celebra4ng and building competencies, recogni4on of personal and collec4ve resilience

Quadrant II

Examples:Voice and choice in deficit reduc4on approaches, par4cipa4on in decisions how to treat affec4ve disorders or physical disorders

Strengths

Empowerment

Deficit

Aliena.on

Affirmation Field in Helping Professions

Quadrant III

Examples:Labeling and diagnosis, “pa4enthood” and clienthood,” ci4zens in passive role

Quadrant IV

Examples:Just say no! You can do it! Cheerleading approaches, Make nice approaches

Prilleltensky, I. (2005). Promoting well-being: Time for a paradigm shift in health and human services. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 33(66 suppl), 53 -60.

par$cipa$oncapabili$es


Quadrant IIIExamples:Crisis work, therapy, medica4ons, symptom containment, case management

Quadrant IExamples:Community development, affordable housing policy, recrea4onal opportuni4es, high quality schools and health services

Quadrant IIExamples:Skill building, emo4onal literacy, fitness programs, personal improvement plans, resistance to peer pressure in drug and alcohol use

Quadrant IVExamples:Food banks, shelters for homeless people, chari4es, prison industrial complex

Community

Preven.on

Individual

Reac.ve

Contextual Field in Helping Professions

Prilleltensky, I. (2005). Promoting well-being: Time for a paradigm shift in health and human services. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 33(66 suppl), 53 -60.

temporal

ecological


Action Research


The Challenge

Get an accurate picture of an organization’s community

practice through the lens of SPEC

Image taken from: http://libcom.org/files/Society-of-the-spectacle.jpgFriday, May 13, 2011

a participatory approach that generates

learning and action

The Goal

Image: http://z.about.com/d/psychology/1/0/R/8/student-thinking.jpgFriday, May 13, 2011

13

People and organizations benefit from a reflective process that

creates the organizational learning context through which members negotiate their different values, attitudes and perceptions http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidthibault/5062020370/

(Suárez-Herrera, 2009).


http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidthibault/5062020370/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidthibault/5062020370/

The SPEC Check

Empowerment Evaluation

Competing Values Framework

FeWerman, (1994); FeWerman & Wandersman, (2005)

Cameron & Quinn (2005)

Participatory EvaluationCousins & Whitmore (1998)

Participatory Action ResearchArgyris & Schon (1974); Fals Borda (1979); Kemmis & McTaggart (2000)

Delbecq, A. L., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1971); Delbecq et al. (1975)

Nominal Group Technique


double-loop learning - participants question existing frameworks underlying the organization’s goals, strategies and assumptions (Argyris and Schön, 1978; Suárez-Herrera, 2009)


SPEC Check Example: Early Educa$on Pre-‐school Program


“SPEC-iness”68%

62%

38%

17%

D

R

A

I

(N)


http://www.oasiscenter.org/#programsFriday, May 13, 2011

http://www.oasiscenter.org/

http://www.oasiscenter.org/

“Talking about this stuff always helps you think about the programs in a different way and my hope is that we can take some of this information back into how we judge our future proposals and future RFP’s….”

“Using the lens of SPEC is throwing down a big challenge. After an RFP is released, as an example, we could

bring it to the T-Team and rate it on its SPEC-iness and again after contracts are picked and reviewed”

“I’m gonna change my score…now that I’ve listened to you…”

I’m kind of thinking again…the program might advocate…but they don’t really do anything to change policies that are the root of the cause.”


“Process effects” (Cousins & Earl, 1992; Patton, 1998; Preskill 1994; Preskill &

Torres, 1999).

integrates critical reflection into organizational routines & culture

builds a capacity not only for critical analysis and critical reflexivity, but also for critical action

helps develop an appreciation and skills for evaluation

enhances dialogue & organizational learning

demystifies evaluation


“Honestly, I have a question. Is this gonna change anything?

{laughter} I’m sorry, I just have to ask that question. Is talking

about this going to change anything?”


Acknowledgements: NIck Mescia, Emily Thaden, Courte Voorhees, United Way of Middle TN, The Children’s Trust

Summary and Implications

The SPEC Check process…

Is informative: it generates a picture of an organization’s value choices

Is reflective: it facilitates critical reflection on human service practice

Is generative: it opens up possibilities for change

Image: newvaluestreams.com/ wordpress/?p=639

“Service technologies” in human services are value choices

Human service funding & practice is weighted towards amelioration

Organizations benefit from more opportunities for “reflective practice”


28

The SPEC Check: A deliberative approach to reflecting on program alignment with Strengths,

Prevention, Empowerment and Community Change (SPEC) principles in community based organizations.

Correspondence: [email protected]: @evanssd

Scot EvansUniversity of Miami

Slides: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4085143/SEvans_SPECcheck_CUexpo2011.pdf

The Critical Friend:


mailto:[email protected]




http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4085143/SEvans_SPECcheck_CUexpo2011.pdf

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4085143/SEvans_SPECcheck_CUexpo2011.pdf

ReferencesArgyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978) Organisational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley.

Butcher, H., Banks, S., Henderson, P., & Robertson, J. (2007). Critical Community Practice. Briston, UK: Policy Press.

Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (2005). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons.

Cousins, J. B., & Earl, L. M. (1992). The Case for Participatory Evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14 (4), 397-418. doi:10.3102/01623737014004397

Cousins, J. B., & Whitmore, E. (1998). Framing participatory evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, (80), 5-23.doi:10.1002/ev.1114

Delpeche, H., Jabbar-Bey, R., Sherif, B., Taliafero, J., & Wilder, M. (2003). Community Development and Family Support: Forging a practical nexus to strengthen families and communities. Newark, DE: Center for Community Research and Services.


Delbecq, A. L., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1971). A Group Process Model for Problem Identification and Program Planning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 7(4), 466 -492. doi:10.1177/002188637100700404

Evans, S. D., Prilleltensky, O., McKenzie, A., Prilleltensky, I., & Nogueras, D, Huggins, C. & Mescia, N. (2011). Promoting Strengths, Prevention, Empowerment, and Community Change Through Organizational Development: Lessons for Research, Theory and Practice. Journal of Prevention and Intervention in the Community, 39(1), 50-64.

Evans, S. D., Hanlin, C. E., & Prilleltensky, I. (2007). Blending ameliorative and transformative approaches in human service organizations: A case study. Journal of Community Psychology, 35(3), 329-346.

FalsBorda, O. (2006). Participatory (Action) Research in Social Theory: Origins and Challenges. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of Action Research (pp. 27-37). London: Sage Publications.

Fetterman, D.M. and Wandersman, A. (2005). Empowerment evaluation principles in practice. New York: Guilford Publications.

Fetterman, D.M. (2001). Foundations of empowerment evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hasenfeld, Y. (2010). “The Attributes of Human Service Organizations”, Ch. 2, pp. 9-32 in Y. Hasenfeld (Ed.). Human Services As Complex Organizations. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks California.


Henderson, P. (2007). Introduction. in H. Butcher, S. Banks, P. Henderson, &J. Robertson, (Eds). Critical Community Practice (pp. 1-15). Briston, UK: Policy Press.

Kemmis, S., &McTaggart, R. (2000). Participatory action research. In N. Denzin& Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 559–603). London: SAGE.

Prilleltensky, I. (2005). Promoting well-being: Time for a paradigm shift in health and human services. Scandanavian Journal of Public Health, 1-8.

Preskill, H. (1994). Evaluation’s role in enhancing organizational learning: A model for practice. Evaluation and Program Planning, 17 (3), 291-297. doi:10.1016/0149-7189(94)90008-6

Preskill, H., & Torres, R. T. (1999). Building Capacity for Organizational Learning Through Evaluative Inquiry. Evaluation, 5(1), 42 -60. doi:10.1177/135638909900500104

Suárez-Herrera, J. C., Springett, J., &Kagan, C. (2009). Critical connections between participatory evaluation, organizational learning and intentional change in pluralistic organizations. Evaluation, 15(3), 321 -342.


the human service organization becomes an arena in...

Documents