Provocare Coaching

We, too often, believe in our bull shit, and the Social service sector is no different.   We attend a well-presented workshop and adopt theories and form the belief we have now become experts.  Everyone starts repeating the buzz words often out of context, and before you know its policy and dictates how we work.

The outcome focus approach, in my view, is one such initiative that keeps rearing its ugly head—often known today as Outcome focus, program logic, Collective impact, result-based accountability, you name it been branded in so many ways over the years.  It is nothing new, just a new language pedalling the same point, and we lap it up without question.

I even championed it myself, “when you know your end game and work backwards,  you will get a plan that helps you reach your destination”.

People love it because it sounds logical, it is aspirational, it is inspiring it gives you confidence.   However, if it is that good, indeed, all the wicked problems the social service sector wrestle with would be well and truly address by now.

So, what my problem with the theory?

Outcomes verse process and outputs are only a tiny fraction of the time we spend on our work.   Outcome focus is more comfortable to address than facing the ugly reality of the here and now.  To critically look at the fact that what we are currently doing might not be working is tuff on our egos.

Outcome-based goals are often a recipe for disappointment; it is far from optimal. It usually championed by the glass is half full perspective—people driven by achievement, envy, hyper-competitiveness and obsessed with comparison. As long as you are looking to the future, you don’t need to face reality and take responsibility for current poor practice. Positive and aspirational thinking should be championed but not at the cost of masking current denials.

It is an illusion that you can control outcomes, and judging performance or success by predetermined outcomes is missing the point of the intention of reflective practice and data collection.

It leads to people collecting data that champions their view of success. It leads to inflated results and narratives that often have no bearing on reality. People will tell you what you want to hear. It is a fact!  Data that only drives people to collect the positive informs us of nothing we need to know. Mistakes are part of existence as no one is perfect, and it’s time we become comfortable in collecting and analysing data based on truth-telling.

It can lead to people ignoring problem areas and feeling proud when they really shouldn’t.  80 % of our tenants are happy? Excellent, what about the 20% who are not? What about the 80% of our clients who, as tenants, are not satisfied with you?  Do we forget about them? How many people falling through the crack? Is it acceptable?

Domestic and family violence statistics are the classic example. Police are saying increased reporting is a good result and nothing to worry about, which it may be. However, does it show a decline in actual DV?  Does it demonstrate successful conviction or less repeat offending?  If the reporting number then goes down again, does this indicate successful interventions or do we become concerned again with under-reporting?  The areas of grey are many, uncomfortable and too often swept over.

Outcome driven people who are all guns blazing are inspiring but often not realistic. They steamed ahead to cut corners, and they are too often guided by the same fleeting momentum you can get from a good feel movie or concert, and that is not sustainable.   It leads to jumping to conclusions, and it fails to understand what the problem is; it fails to reality test assumptions, understand the complexity and what change needs to be affected.

The destination

As a relatively new long-distance commuter, I can tell you the outcome of my destination makes no difference to my journey, nor is it motivating.  My work journeys should take 1 hour 30 mins which are manageable, but you then hit Sydney traffic, and before you know, it is more like 3 hours and twice a day.

Planning to leave early, avoiding peak times only makes it marginally easier.

However, when I change my focus no to the destination but the journey and process, I can mentally prepare myself. Reducing my sense of urgency to reach the destination minimises the stress level.  Having good music, learning to laugh at the predictable encounters of dick heads on the road, and using the time productively, like making calls and catching up with people or listening to podcasts, all make the difference.

Happiness

One of the KPI’s often suggested for case managers is, did your client leave satisfied? Has their level of happiness increased?  Apart from the audacity of asking some who usually is going through or had trauma, are you happy after engaging with us? It is just plain wrong and subjective and missing complexity!

When some clients are happy, that indicates there could be a problem and the shit is about to hit the fan, especially the manic ones.

Matter of perspective

Take troubleshooting a tenant who is experiencing a long-standing Anti-social behaviour neighbourhood dispute case.   The client struggles to be heard or obtain positive action, and as an advocate, you make the right noises to the right people, and suddenly, the alleged offender is evicted.

Excellent result for the victim, shit results for the offender whose complex issues remains unresolved and further exacerbated. Who is more deserving of the outcome here? Don’t both have legitimate problems that need resolving what outcome value should be measured as a success?

 The community BBQ

You can put on community BBQ to increase connection and networking and speak directly to the community. You can do it, and it goes swimmingly successful, or you can put it on, and it has the opposite effect and spark fights. However, this shows you the level or cause of stress at that moment. I have seen it time and time again.

Should the funder then judge the outcome or the effort? Is there not value and lessons to be learned from both? And how does a currently favoured performance DEX system capture the grey? It doesn’t!

Final comments

Success is the journey rather than a destination. Learning as we go, understanding complexity shades of grey is not bad, and we should stop demonising it.

I still believe knowing your intended end game is essential. However, there is a need for a more balanced approach.  Outcomes goals should not preclude the consideration and value of outputs and process goals. Nor should it be used to procrastinate or shy away from the ugly negative truths.   It is all essential and valuable.

Process-based goals can help you gain clarity, build momentum, and it makes it much easier for people to know how to act.  Impact comes from action and reflection.

Energy and output lead to change and should be valued. What is wrong with just doing and see what happens?

Overly favouring an outcome agenda over action or process goals can be dangerously flawed. Let’s try to find the balance between both.