NGRF - UK National Guidance Research Forum

I would argue much of what careers guidance practitioners end up doing has very little to do with guidance. This ties in with the debate about what is judged as being a positive outcome. I can think of instances where I might have given out a leaflet supplying information that I know will end up in the bin, or appropriately referred a client to a partnership agency according to contract requirements, but know full well that the referral system is so inadequate the client is unlikely to be picked up and assisted in the most appropriate way. This is a pointless, dispiriting and unethical activity, but an impact analysis based on the given project outcomes would deem it to be a successful interaction, that had quantifiable impact.

I also think of colleagues who are involved in using their guidance skills to elicit information from clients in order to complete Full Client Pictures as part of a contract for Jobcentre plus. It is my view that this is an activity of no conceivable benefit to the client, and offers no potential for moving forward but it does meet the criteria set by the particular government department, and I concede that a qualified guidance practitioner may perhaps elicit the information with a greater degree of skill and sensitivity than someone who had not been trained in guidance skills. However, I don't think they are being used with the intention of moving the client on, hence no positive outcome, no making a difference although again probably evidence of impact because of the use that can be made of the information gathered

I suppose what I am saying is simply this. In my view it is not at all unrealistic to expect a guidance intervention to lead to positive outcomes for the client in almost every case. However, much of the time spent by guidance professionals has very little to do with giving guidance, raising questions about whether those skills are being used appropriately. I think this is a real cause for concern because if there isn't any opportunity to use professional skills then why are they needed at all. This leads to the sticky question of deskilling of the profession...

I have been pondering your two questions, as I found they really made me reflect on my experiences as a practitioner, and in fact I find I have quite contradictory reactions to the issues you raise, so would be interested to know what others think. In terms of what gives the greatest professional satisfaction I am sure you are right that most practitioners can recall one or two particularly obvious successes where they know their intervention really did make a difference. These events are indeed especially personally rewarding and professionally motivating, and it is true that it would be unrealistic to expect every interaction to lead to such spectacular positive outcomes. I know I've got my own case studies that I draw on when I find I've had a bad day and wonder why I do what I do, and speaking for myself, memories of the big hits can help me get over the more cynical and jaded moments. However, I do remain convinced that it is not unrealistic to expect all guidance interventions to lead to some positive outcome, however minimal, otherwise, I would argue it isn't guidance, its something else. Nevertheless (and this is the contradiction) I would be very unhappy if a study of impact analysis that failed to find a means of capturing those outcomes resulted in me being found wanting. I believe guidance is all about achieving positive outcomes, but I don't believe these are all readily demonstrable, and your question has exposed my own suspicion about the limitations of impact analysis and associated fear of it being a tool of judgement rather than a means of identifying and building on good practice. I can only offer a personal perspective, but I really believe if I was responsible for a guidance interaction and could not detect any benefit for the client by the end of it, however minimal, I would seriously question what had gone wrong. It would make me reflect on my professional skills and I'd feel demotivated and that I had failed that individual. I'm not claiming never to have had an off day, or given rubbish interviews (would that I could) but I am willing to take responsibility for that and have tried to address it when it occurs. However, and this is the crux for me, I have very often been required to carry out activities with clients that in my view offered no possibility for progression or what I would view as positive outcomes as part of my professional role.