The interprofessional practitioner: changing professional identity in social work

Twenty years ago the first joint training programme in learning disability nursing and social work was established as a collaborative project to develop practitioners able to work holistically with people with learning disabilities. Since then a number of programmes have continued this work and more recently the approach has developed in the mental health specialism. These programmes have changed the nature of singular social work education and created a new region of knowledge (Bernstein, 2000) for those who have experienced them. What began as a radical experiment in interprofessional education has been sustained by a strong commitment to the belief that the practitioners who qualify from such programmes are well equipped to support people with learning disabilities in changing and multi-professional services. As with much interprofessional education, however, there is an ongoing need to build an evidence base linking such education with successful outcomes in practice. This paper presents and explores the outcomes of a doctoral research study aimed at evaluating the impact of joint training in learning disability nursing and social work on the professional identity, skills and working practices of practitioners who undertook it. The research was undertaken with almost fifty jointly trained practitioners and involved a national survey followed by semi-structured interviews. The results suggest that practitioners who experience the dual socialisation inherent in this type of training found both gains and losses in the process. They appear to emerge, however, with a confidence, resilience and breadth of knowledge which were part of the early vision for this transformative approach to professional training. Bernstein B. (2000). Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity. Theory, Research, Critique. Revised Edition. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield (USA).

Absence makes the professional try harder? Meeting the needs of socially excluded young men who become fathers

Research on socially excluded young fathers has been minimally addressed in the literature (SEU 1999, 2004). Indeed, research on young parents which informs health and social care professionals is often presented ‘through the eyes of the mother’ (Reeves 2006). Young parents in general and young fathers in particular are notoriously difficult to gain access to and engage with (Tyrer et al 2005) particularly if they have had previous negative involvement with the statutory services. Moreover, as Daniel and Taylor (1999, 2001, 2003) point out, professionals working in the health and care services often have an intense ‘maternal’ focus and this often excludes fathers from discussion and decisions about their children. The focus of this paper, drawing on two narrative studies of young fathers aged between 15-24 from the US and USA, is to evaluate the features of professional relationships that young fathers describe as finding helpful. Indeed, the findings discuss moving away from a culture of parenting classes, which all the young men interviewed described as finding problematical and in some cases embarrassing, to a culture of support which actively draws on their strengths and helps them become providers for their new families.

Tied to the job: affective and relational components of nurse retention

Paper investigates whether affective and relational components of nurses' experience of work have a significant impact on their intentions to leave either the job or the nursing profession in models that control for other factors (sociodemographic, work conditions, perceptions of quality of care) that are known to affect career decisions. [Abridged Abstract]

Continuing Professional Development: rhetoric and practice in the NHS

This article explores the experience of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) by supervisory-level clinical staff in the National Health Service. Four main themes are highlighted in the literature, namely the nature and experience of CPD, its relationship with human resource management practices and in particular in career development and planning. These themes are examined utilising sources of (triangulated) empirical data based on a 2500 sample survey conducted across five NHS Trusts. A key finding was that responsibility for learning and development was perceived as belonging to the individual rather than the organisation. Other findings concern a lack of resource-based commitment by the organisation to CPD for clinical staff undertaking supervisory-level roles and evidence of 'credentialism' with its emphasis on seeking certificated qualifications. The findings raise concerns about the potential for clinical staff to become disillusioned and to perceive a potential breach in their psychological contract because of problems in reconciling their own interests with those of their professional body, and that of their employer in relation to CPD.

Bridging the gap with teamwork: collaborative leadership for communities of practice in the learning and skills sector

Collaborative approaches in leadership and management are increasingly acknowledged to play a key role in successful institutions in the learning and skills sector (LSS) (Ofsted, 2004). Such approaches may be important in bridging the potential 'distance' (psychological, cultural, interactional and geographical) (Collinson, 2005) that may exist between 'leaders' and 'followers', fostering more democratic communal solidarity. This paper reports on a 2006-07 research project funded by the Centre for Excellence in Leadership (CEL) that aimed to collect and analyse data on 'collaborative leadership' (CL) in the learning and skills sector. The project investigated collaborative leadership and its potential for benefiting staff through trust and knowledge-sharing in communities of practice (CoPs). The project forms part of longer-term educational research investigating leadership in a collaborative inquiry process (Jameson et al., 2006). The research examined the potential for CL to benefit institutions, analysing respondents' understanding of and resistance to collaborative practices. Quantitative and qualitative data from senior managers and lecturers was analysed using electronic data in SPSS and Tropes Zoom. The project aimed to recommend systems and practices for more inclusive, diverse leadership (Lumby et al., 2005). Collaborative leadership has increasingly gained international prominence as emphasis shifted towards team leadership beyond zero-sum 'leadership'/ 'followership' polarities into more mature conceptions of shared leadership spaces, within which synergistic leadership spaces can be mediated. The relevance of collaboration within the LSS has been highlighted following a spate of recent government-driven policy developments in FE. The promotion of CL addresses concerns about the apparent 'remoteness' of some senior managers, and the 'neo-management' control of professionals which can increase 'distance' between leaders and 'followers' and may de-professionalise staff in an already disempowered sector. Positive benefit from 'collaborative advantage' tends to be assumed in idealistic interpretations of CL, but potential 'collaborative inertia' may be problematic in a sector characterised by rapid top-down policy changes and continuous external audit and surveillance. Constant pressure for achievement against goals leaves little time for democratic group negotiations, despite the desires of leaders to create a more collaborative ethos. Yet prior models of intentional communities of practice potentially offer promise for CL practice to improve group performance despite multiple constraints. The CAMEL CoP model (JISC infoNet, 2006) was linked to the project, providing one practical way of implementing CL within situated professional networks.The project found that a good understanding of CL was demonstrated by most respondents, who thought it could enable staff to share power and work in partnership to build trust and conjoin skills, abilities and experience to achieve common goals for the good of the sector. However, although most respondents expressed agreement with the concept and ideals of CL, many thought this was currently an idealistically democratic, unachievable pipe dream in the LSS. Many respondents expressed concerns with the 'audit culture' and authoritarian management structures in FE. While there was a strong desire to see greater levels of implementation of CL, and 'collaborative advantage' from the 'knowledge sharing benefit potential' of team leadership, respondents also strongly advised against the pitfalls of 'collaborative inertia'. A 'distance' between senior leadership views and those of staff lower down the hierarchy regarding aspects of leadership performance in the sector was reported. Finally, the project found that more research is needed to investigate CL and develop innovative methods of practical implementation within autonomous communities of professional practice.