Views about features of effective practice
The Job Broker managers and staff interviewed made a number of comments about the linkage between the effectiveness of their service and the approach to managing the Job Broker contract.
First, they stressed the importance of recognising the realities of the funding structure and the importance of outcomes, and understanding this within the context of the likely client group, in designing and managing the service. Some of the better performing Job Brokers felt this had been done well in their organisation. Among those with low job entry and/or sustainability rates some felt that awareness of the need to manage the service actively within the realities of the contractual arrangements had come only recently. An active awareness of the realities of the contract did not necessarily mean more targeting in registration, although some felt that their higher performance levels were the result of thinking carefully about who the service was appropriate for and reflecting this in who they registered. Other issues that were seen as relevant were the importance of understanding the nature and extent of support that would be required to help clients, being clear with staff about the scope and focus of the service, good planning and budgeting, ensuring that staff understood the contractual arrangements and financial realities and were involved in planning the service, and using management information to monitor performance and adapt the service if necessary.
Some managers also stressed the importance of encouraging innovation, encouraging adaptation of the service and ‘not stagnating’. Staff also commented positively on management styles which involved praise, feedback and confidence-boosting, and which involved a focused and ‘business-like’ approach without making staff feel pressurised or compromising the quality of the service.
Analysis across the performance groups
It was possible to look at three aspects of management across the different performance groups. The first is how far different services targeted registration in different ways. The highest performing Job Brokers were not, on the whole, more selective in their registration practices, although some were, and as noted earlier, some had other programmes which could be used for early intensive work before registration for NDDP. But there were also more effective Job Brokers which seemed not to target or select and which did not operate other contracts alongside job broking. There seemed to be more use of targeting registrations among the Job Brokers with less effective performance rates, some of whom also used other contracts pre-registration. In some cases, this reflected the recent push to achieve 25 per cent job entry rates in order to retain the Job Broking contract, but in others it was a practice of longer standing. However, among those with high sustainability rates working with relatively disadvantaged clients, selection in registration had either been avoided or was a more recent, and not warmly embraced, approach. Second, there were some comments about the use of management information by different Job Brokers, although this was not consistently explored across the sample. Almost all the strongest performing Job Brokers were making active use of management information. They described circulating information about performance across the team, comparing the performance of different teams, having team or individual targets, regularly reviewing performance and adapting the service in the light of it, and using management information systems to chase progress, for example to ensure that evidence of sustained work was collected. Where they commented, staff were generally positive about these approaches and did not see them as adversely affecting the quality of the service provided to clients.
Although the picture among Job Brokers with lower performance levels was mixed, overall, they spoke less about using management data, or described it as a recent change in their approach often prompted by concern about meeting the 25 per cent job entry target. Some did have either individual or team targets but there were more mixed views about them among staff, who expressed some discomfort about them or said that little seemed to be made of not achieving them. Some Job Broker managers here said they were now making more active use of management data, and felt, on reflection, that it should have been used actively earlier.
The final issue on which there was some qualitative information is the role of managers themselves. Again the information is somewhat patchy. However, there appeared to be differences between Job Broker organisations in how directly involved the manager was in the local Job Broker service, how large a part of their role it was, and how much detailed knowledge they had of the practices of their team. For several of the Job Broker managers with lowest performance levels, the management of the Job Broker contract was only a small part of their work, while this was the case for only one of the most effective Job Brokers. Again there is likely to be some circularity here: the more effective the service, the more it is likely to be seen as an important aspect of a manager’s roles.
Again, the picture is a mixed one. However, there are indications that strong management of the Job Broker contract is associated with effectiveness.