Vol.
9, No. 4
July 2004
Agency
Culture: A Big Influence on the Use of Outcome Data
Why do some agencies make
active use of outcome information in their decision making, while others
do not? Most of us would probably say it has something to do with resources.
Especially North Carolina, where many of the child welfare agencies that
seem furthest along in this area are in larger, wealthier counties, this
seems like a reasonable answer.
Reasonable, perhaps, but
not altogether correct, according to a recent study. Although technical,
financial, and personnel resources are required to use outcome information
in decision making, the single most important ingredient may not be money,
but agency culture.
The
Study
In 1999 researchers Hodges and Hernandez explored the relationship between
organizational culture and the use of outcome information in four child-serving
mental health agencies in Texas. All four agencies received training in
the analysis and use of outcome information, periodic outcome information
reports, and support from a state agency. However, two agencies were high
users of outcome information and two were low users of outcome
information.
When they looked at the
culture in high-use agencies, researchers found:
- Long-standing partnerships
with state-level staff and local child-serving agencies
- Problem-solving that focused
on processes, not individuals. Data was viewed as feedback that enabled
staff to see what worked and when to make corrections
- Appreciation of data. Staff
could give examples of how outcome data had improved their responsiveness
to families
- Communication that was
bottom-up and top-down, and that supported team work and shared responsibility
for outcomes
- Broad sharing of outcomes
information throughout the agency
- A willingness to take calculated
risks based on outcome data. This allowed agencies to pursue innovative
approaches for reaching performance goals
By contrast, researchers
found low-use agencies were characterized by:
- A lack of partnerships
at the state and local levels. Agencies were concerned with their autonomy
and independence
- Disinterest in outcome
information among direct service staff. Data was seen as the province
and responsibility of managers and administrators
- Communication about outcomes
was top-down and minimal
- High staff turnover
- A sense that serving children
was overwhelming
The sidebar below highlights
the cultural differences between two of the four agencies analyzed by
the study.
Connection to Practice
When thinking about this study, readers should not focus on the specific
traits discussed: Hodges and Hernandez did not find a cause and effect
link between specific cultural characteristics and an agencys ability
to use outcome information.
Instead, readers should
focus on the central role played by organizational culture. All of the
agencies in this study had access to outcome information and the training
and support needed to work with it. The defining difference was that in
some of the agencies the organizational culture supported self-evaluation
and the use of data. In the others it did not.
Thus, if an agency is
serious about using data it should look first at whether its vision, mission,
and valuesas well as the training its workers receiveall support
the idea that outcomes data can play a key role in creating better results
for children and families.
References
for this and other articles in this issue
|