This paper examines how a human services administrator addresses internal conflict between crisis staff and shelter staff within a dual-program organization. Drawing on concepts of authority, supervision models, and collaborative decision-making, the paper analyzes two key strategies: cross-training and group meetings. It situates these methods within established supervision theory — including the continuum from casework to autonomous practice models — and evaluates their effectiveness. The paper concludes by arguing that proactive, ongoing application of these strategies, combined with open communication and an open-door policy, is essential for preventing problems before they arise rather than simply responding to them after the fact.
This study guide is drawn from PaperDue's library of 130,000+ paper examples across 47 subjects.
Human services administrators are responsible for recognizing problems within their organizations, addressing them, and taking the necessary steps to prevent them from recurring 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 judgment 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.
The administrator examined in this paper runs an organization that offers 24-hour crisis services and shelter programs. Both programs operate out of the same building; however, the crisis staff and the shelter staff often act as though they are on separate teams. She attributes this divide to a lack of understanding between the two groups, which results in each side criticizing the other. As the leader of the organization, it is her responsibility to help create a sense of cohesion among all her staff. She needs them to act in a unified manner and to respect and support each other so that the integrity of the agency is not compromised.
Cross-training is one of the methods used to address conflict among staff. This involves crisis staff and shelter staff switching roles so that everyone gains a better understanding of what their coworkers' job responsibilities 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 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 the administrator noted, 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 staff.
According to Bogo and Dill, supervisors are granted authority by their organizations "which legitimizes their use of power to make decisions in collaboration with, or as directives to, frontline workers" (2008, 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 those decisions and how they will benefit the staff team or organization as a whole.
The cross-training method described above demonstrates the use of authority. The administrator is exercising the power inherent in her position to temporarily change the roles of her workers and require them to 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, the cross-training initiative was received well by staff and succeeded in bringing the two groups together and reducing conflict.
Supervision consists of formal or informal meetings between a supervisor and one or more staff members (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 uses his or her power to call mandatory meetings, requires staff to discuss certain topics, and uses the information gathered through those discussions to make decisions that will affect staff and/or the organization. That being said, the degree of authority exercised during supervision varies widely depending on the model of supervision being used.
"Supervision continuum from casework to autonomous practice"
"Ongoing cross-training and meetings prevent future conflict"
"Proactive strategies empower staff and prevent problems"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.