Preventing and Addressing Problems

Preventing and Addressing Problems in Human Services Organizations PREVENTING AND ADDRESSING PROBLEMS Human services administrators are responsible for recognizing problems within their organizations, addressing them, and taking the necessary steps to prevent them from re-occurring in the future (Berger et al., 2009). Unfortunately, the correct methods for achieving these goals are not always clear, so human services administrators must use their personal judgement when deciding on a plan of action. The process of recognizing and solving problems often involves the use of authority and supervision, or a combination of the two.

In this assignment, I will discuss a problem faced by Andrea Ingram, a human services administrator, and examine the methods she used to address these problems. Andrea Ingram runs an organization that offers 24-hour crisis services and shelter programs. Both programs are run out of the same building; however, the crisis staff and the shelter staff often act as if they are on separate teams. Ingram attributes this divide to a lack of understanding between the two sides, which results in both groups criticizing the other.

As the leader of the organization, it is Ingram's responsibility to help create a sense of cohesion among all her staff. She needs them to act in a unified manner and respect and support each other so that the integrity of the agency is not compromised. Cross-training is one of the methods Ingram uses to address the problems among her staff.

This involves crisis staff and shelter staff switching places, so that they can all gain a better understanding of what their co-workers' job roles entail, and what pressures are placed upon them to act in certain ways. Cross-training has the added benefit of providing all staff with the necessary skills to cover for each other in the case of an emergency. Another problem-solving method utilized by Ingram is group meetings.

In these meetings, crisis staff and shelter staff are given the opportunity to ask each other questions and defend their actions in a safe and constructive environment. As Ingram stated, there is usually a good reason why a staff member made a decision that others have criticized. In her experience, these group discussions lead to a greater degree of understanding and tolerance among her staff.

According to Bongo and Dill, supervisors are given authority by their organizations "which legitimizes their use of power to make decisions in collaboration with, or as directives to, frontline workers" (2009, p. 143). Although collaborative decision making is not always possible, it does increase staff morale and job satisfaction. When directive decisions are made, supervisors are urged to discuss with their staff in detail their reasons for making these decisions and how they will benefit the staff team or organization as a whole. Ingram's cross-training method demonstrates the use of authority.

She is exercising the power inherent in her position to temporarily change the roles of her workers and make them train for a position other than their own. She did not utilize collaborative decision making; however, her staff did understand the reasons for her decision. As a result, Ingram's cross-training method was received well by her staff and the exercise succeeded in bringing her staff together and reducing conflict. Supervision consists of formal or informal meetings between a supervisor and one or more of his or her staff (Community Care, 2005).

It is an opportunity to discuss a wide range of topics, including workload, training needs, support needs, and personal issues. Generally speaking, supervision is an exercise of authority. The supervisor is using his or her power to call mandatory meetings, requiring his or her staff to discuss certain topics, and using the information gathered through these discussions to make decisions that will affect his or her staff and/or the organization.

That being said, the degree of authority used during supervision varies widely depending on the model of supervision being executed. The different models of supervision fall along a continuum. At one end is the casework model, consisting of one-on-one sessions (Berger et al., 2009). At the other end is the autonomous practice model, "characterized by a staff member's professional autonomy" (Berger et at., 2009, p. 183). In the middle of these two extremes are group, team, and peer supervision models. Ingram's group meetings are a form of group supervision.

According to Berger et al. (2009), group supervision is the second most commonly used model of supervision, providing staff members with the opportunity for "peer-learning…and normalization of job-related stress" (p. 183). In my opinion, Ingram's use of cross-training and group meetings are productive methods for solving problems that occur between her two groups of staff. That being said, I feel as though these methods should be used on an ongoing basis to prevent problems from occurring in the.