Hot
Topic Archive
July
2006
An
interview with Linda Graff
~Australian
Corrective Action Workshop Series 2006~
OzVPM
Director Andy Fryar
with Linda
Graff
Next
month, Canadian trainer and author Linda Graff will
visit Australia for the second time. Her workshops
around the country are focussing on the discipline
and dismissal of volunteers - or 'corrective action',
probably the element of volunteer management that
we struggle with more than any other. We thought we
would catch up with Linda and ask a few questions
about the topic prior to the tour to whet your appetite.
OzVPM:
"Corrective action" seems like a harsh topic connected
to volunteers. Why are you offering this particular
session on this Australian tour?
Linda:
Yes, you're right, Andy. "Corrective action" can seem
like a hard line topic, particularly when related
to volunteers. And indeed, some coordinators of volunteers
do wonder if they even have the right to ask volunteers
to enhance their performance. My perspective on this
is fairly straightforward and goes like this:
If
an organization - any organization in any sector -
social services, sports, education, health, faith
communities, culture ... anywhere, really - if the
organization is asking volunteers to perform fairly
"low level" work, corrective action is probably not
an issue. For example, if volunteers are performing
routine, menial work that does not involve significant
responsibility, risk, or trust (and I'll define that
a little more fully in a minute), then the standard
of volunteers' performance is not likely to be a serious
issue. Not that the work is not important. But how
well the work is done, and/ or the degree of reliability
of the volunteer can be allowed to slip somewhat without
serious consequences.
If
however, volunteers are being asked to perform important
work (and each organization will define for itself
what is most important), then I would suggest organizations
not only have the right , they actually have the responsibility
to ensure that their volunteers' work meets minimum
standards. And that may, from time to time, require
intervention of a corrective action nature.
OzVPM:
You mentioned the concept of "position of trust".
Can you define that for us?
Linda:
A position of trust can involve one or more of three
characteristics. First, and probably top of mind are
those positions that give volunteers access to vulnerable
people. Unsupervised access is of most concern, of
course, but any access to vulnerable people from which
a volunteer might develop an inappropriate or otherwise
harmful relationship with the person or persons in
question is what we probably need to give most consideration.
"Vulnerable," by the way, can mean any number of things.
Obviously children top the list, but people can become
vulnerable for many other reasons. For example, advanced
age can make a person as vulnerable as youth. The
abuse might take a different form - with older people,
financial abuse is probably most likely, while, unfortunately,
sexual abuse or improprieties are more likely with
children - but the vulnerability is there, regardless.
Also, people who have a significant disability, people
who do not speak the dominant language, people who
cannot read, and people who have experienced abuse
in the past are all more vulnerable.
The
second type of position of trust involves access to
private, confidential, business, or otherwise sensitive
information. Unfortunately, this kind of valuable
asset can be misused. Identity theft is one of the
emerging issues we need to give increasing consideration
to, while the use of confidential contact information
for personal gain could arise with a volunteer who
is in such a position of trust.
The
third type of position of trust is that which gives
volunteers access to money or other valuables. We
are increasingly calling on volunteers to help with
fundraising activities and that brings them into direct
contact with sometimes quite sizable amounts of cash,
some of which is nearly impossible to track. In other
settings volunteers have routine access to valuables
and assets such as computers, cell phones, and, in
the case of museums and historical societies, sometimes
priceless artifacts. In some settings the assets belong
to the organization. In other cases, they may belong
to clients, staff, or other volunteers.
OzVPM:
Thanks for that explanation. And so the point is that
in these kinds of high-demand or high-risk positions,
organizations need the capacity to adjust volunteers'
behaviour?
Linda:
Yes, exactly. And in the more extreme cases, organizations
may very well be required to implement quite serious
corrective action.
OzVPM:
Can you describe what you mean by "corrective action"?
Linda:
Sure. In its simplest form, corrective action is a
kind of problem solving. An inconsistency or undesirable
situation exists, and corrective action is taken.
In the context of these workshops, we are talking
about corrective action related to volunteers' work
performance. The organization perceives that what
or how the volunteer is performing his or her duties
is not meeting the standards that the organization
requires, and therefore, some kind or degree of "correction"
is called for. The organization intervenes with the
volunteer to bring about a satisfactory resolution
to the problem.
OzVPM:
Corrective action sounds very negative.
Linda:
Yes, that is a quite common interpretation of the
phrase, and yet my approach to this workshop on corrective
action is exactly the opposite. At the core of my
session is the notion that corrective action involves
a long continuum of potential interventions from the
organization, some of which, frankly, are disciplinary
in nature. Those represent the formal forms of corrective
action. However, the largest part of the continuum
involves much less formal intervention from the organization,
and in fact, starts with a range of very positive
strategies designed to reinforce excellence in volunteer
performance.
My
opinion is that the more we can notice and acknowledge
volunteers doing the "right" things, the better off
we all are. Reinforcing good work helps to ensure
that the good work continues. That's a pretty simple
fact. And when things are going well, volunteers have
a better experience and the organization has its objectives
met. The lesson is that managers of volunteers should
make concerted efforts to reward excellence. That
represents a "win-win" situation for everyone.
OzVPM:
You mentioned the concept of formal and informal intervention.
Can you say more about that?
Linda:
Sure. That is an important aspect of the continuum
of corrective action. Starting from one end, we have
the positive steps to reward quality work. So recognition,
support, appreciation, coaching, enabling, promotions,
and so on are examples of the kinds of things we can
do to encourage volunteers to continue to do good
work. However, when a volunteer's performance does
not meet standards or expectations, the reality is
that in most instances, the necessary "correction"
is relatively minor, and an informal intervention
with the volunteer - a simple chat, for example -
will often bring about the desired change.
When
the informal style does not bring the needed change,
or where the performance issue is more serious to
begin with, the organization may choose to be more
formal in its approach to the volunteer, but still
take a very positive, supportive and enabling approach.
For example, working with the volunteer to identify
precisely what the standards and expectations are,
what the desired changes would look like, sorting
out how the organization can work with the volunteer
to help them be successful in their attempts to get
better at what they are doing - these represent a
more formal approach, but still perhaps not disciplinary
in nature. At this point a plan may be put in place
with specific objectives, time lines, and so on, but
the interaction is still very positive and success-oriented.
OzVPM:
So does discipline of any sort actually have a place
on the corrective action continuum?
Linda:
Yes, it does. When a volunteer's performance is seriously
substandard, when a volunteer's presentation style
puts the organization in a very bad light, or when
a volunteer does something that puts themselves or
others in jeopardy, the organization may very well
need to launch a corrective action of a disciplinary
nature. In these cases, which, by the way, are quite
rare - they happen, but relatively speaking, not very
often - organizations might consider a policy and
procedure such as the "progressive discipline process"
of verbal and written warnings, suspension, and outright
dismissal. My guess is that many organizations will
already have this kind of system in place for paid
staff.
I
need to emphasise that the need for disciplinary intervention
with volunteers does not happen very often. However,
when an organization does have a volunteer who is
"behaving badly" or dangerously, or inappropriately,
I do believe it must step in as the situation requires.
Volunteers are the agents of nonprofit organizations
in roughly the same way paid staff are. If a volunteer
does something inappropriate, or illegal, or dangerous,
the consequences can sometimes be quite dire, and
the organization's failure to address these kinds
of situations would be, in my view, inappropriate,
and perhaps even irresponsible.
OzVPM:
So the nature of the volunteer's duties are important
in determining how the organization should respond?
Linda:
Yes, precisely. There is this notion, in human resources
management, called "consequence of error". It means
just what it suggests - what, or how serious, is the
consequence if the person - paid or unpaid - commits
an error in the performance of their duties. That
is a concept we explore in some detail in the workshop.
OzVPM:
How do you plan to deliver this information in the
workshops?
Linda:
Good question. This workshop is very content-heavy.
Participants will come away from it with lots of information
about corrective action and the range of strategies
available to help volunteers be the very best they
can be for the organization and the people it works
with. We also spend a lot of time talking as a large
group about the specific questions and issues that
participants face on an every day basis. So those
in attendance will have a chance to get a good sense
of where other organizations are at with this material.
And there are good how-to tools in the substantial
hand out package as well that people take home with
them for ready application.
Why
not share your own thoughts on how you deal with corrective
action within your volunteer program?
~
What stops you doing it as well as you might like?
~
What experiences have you had? (good or bad)
~
What are the consequences of not dealing with issues
as they arise?
Let's
hear from you
It's
not too late to...
Respond
to this month's Hot Topic
(Be
sure to add your name, title and organisation to your
message)
Should
this link not open your regular email browser, simply
send your reply to response@ozvpm.com
Read
other people's responses
Print
version
The
contents of this Hot Topic are copyright © 2003
- 06 OzVPM.
You may reproduce this Hot Topic in part or in full
on the condition that the author, source and website
address (www.ozvpm.com)
are quoted. OzVPM copyright
policy
Visit
this month’s ‘Hot
Topic’ on the Energize web site.
|
