Staff Perspectives on Success Factors in Organizational Change in a Homeless Services Organization

1. ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE TACTICS IN A HOMELESS SERVICES ORGANIZATION: STAFF PERSPECTIVES ON SUCCESS FACTORS Tom Packard, D.S.W. School of Social Work San Diego State University tpackard@mail.sdsu.edu http://socialwork.sdsu.edu/faculty-profiles/current-faculty/tom-packard/ Network for Social Work Management Annual Conference, June 2017 New York City

2. ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE DEFINED Planned organizational change involves leadership and the mobilizing of staff to explicitly address problems or needs in the organization’s current state, to move the organization to a desired future state, using change processes which involve both human and technical aspects of the organization.

3. STATE OF THE SCIENCE Research which offers generalizable, evidence-based practice guidelines is not common. Methodologies: case studies, cross-sectional, qualitative, quantitative, unique variables Consistent and measurements are not used. Outcomes are typically not well-documented. Evidence for the assertions and prescriptions in the literature must be considered weak.

4. Theory, EBP, Implementation, and Results

5. Process and Content of the Change Initiative

6. THE SETTING • St. Vincent de Paul Village (SVDP): the main program of Father Joe’s Villages (http://my.neighbor.org/) • A range of programs for homeless people encompassing several city blocks near downtown San Diego. • 887 families, single men, and single women housed every night; more than 3,000 meals each day. • Programs include rapid rehousing, transitional housing, permanent supportive housing and affordable housing. • Ancillary services include employment and education services, therapeutic childcare, a state-licensed community clinic, Federally Qualified Health Center (behavioral and physical healthcare), a state-certified outpatient addiction treatment program, multidisciplinary team case management, and veterans assistance. • At the time of this study, there were approximately 180 staff.

7. FOCUS OF THE STUDY • A major programmatic and structural change to create integrated co-located multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) including a “Rapid Rehousing Team” • extended case management and employment services into two of the agency’s main programs and shifted the focus more firmly to moving clients to permanent housing. • Took place essentially over the period from November 2009 to July 2010.

8. RESEARCH METHODS • Quantitative data on the results of the change and the use of change tactics were gathered through the Organizational Change Tactics Questionnaire (OCTQ). • enables respondents to identify and assess an organizational change initiative by reporting the extent to which they observed any of 22 change tactics suggested in the literature and to indicate the extent to which each tactic was a factor in the success of the change process • Qualitative data: interview with the agency’s director of social services (the main change agent on the process); a focus group of staff who experienced the change process; and a content analysis of 44 documents

9. RESPONDENTS • E-mail survey to 180 staff • 79 accessed the survey response rate: 44%. • 55 indicated that they had experienced an organizational change process at work. • 36 indicated that they had experienced the change effort being studied here: the creation of integrated co-located MDTs. • 24% management, 70% line staff

10. SURVEY RESPONDENTS & DIRECTOR: RESULTS • Case managers more nimble through the merger of case manager and career counselor positions • Improved outcomes (e.g., permanent housing) • Time on the wait list decreased • Increased number of clients receiving case management services • MDT meetings resulted in improved communication • Team leaders: more accountability for client outcomes • Residents getting on a case plan sooner • More effective delivery of services • Short term residents now receive case management • Helped clients hold themselves accountable for their stay • Serving more clients from various backgrounds

11. Also… • Probably would have worked better if we had the financial resources (staff). • Still have a waitlist • I was not affected greatly and not really totally aware of all of the changes • Unable to tell, most heard observation is that everyone has more work and no recognition

12. QUANTITATIVE RESULTS: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE TACTICS QUESTIONNAIRE 12% of respondents indicated that goals for the change initiative were fully achieved 48% of respondents indicated that goals for the change initiative were fully or mostly achieved 40% said goals were only partly achieved

13. 16 MONTHS BEFORE & AFTER IMPLEMENTATION People who exited to permanent housing: Before 17% After 62% People who exited with employment income Before 51%. After 70%.

14. EXTENT TO WHICH GOALS WERE ACHIEVED: BY POSITION

15. EXTENT TO WHICH GOALS WERE ACHIEVED: BY AMOUNT OF INNVOLVEMENT

16. Colorado Study (13 counties; N=188)

17. % RESPONDENTS WHO OBSERVED CHANGE TACTICSObserved the Tactic: 1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree 5=Strongly AgreeTactic Was a Success Factor: 3=to a large extent, 2=some, 1=small, 0=not at all

18. % RESPONDENTS WHO OBSERVED CHANGE TACTICSObserved the Tactic: 1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree 5=Strongly AgreeTactic Was a Success Factor: 3=to a large extent, 2=some, 1=small, 0=not at all

19. % RESPONDENTS WHO OBSERVED CHANGE TACTICSObserved the Tactic: 1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree 5=Strongly AgreeTactic Was a Success Factor: 3=to a large extent, 2=some, 1=small, 0=not at all

20. LIMITATIONS • Generalizabaility: One organization • Sample size • A respondent’s position in the organization's hierarchy could affect their knowledge or opinion of the success of an initiative. • A respondent’s level of involvement in the change process could affect their knowledge or opinion of the success of an initiative. • “Successful” and “unsuccessful” were not precisely defined. • There may be variations based on factors such as the role of the change leaders, contextual factors, and conditions such as respondents’ views of the nature of an organization’s culture.

21. Implications • Program should have a good theory of change (causal factors, inputs, throughputs, outputs, outcomes) • Have an information system which can measure key factors • Considering org change: Consider all causal factors • Pick an appropriate EBP, other changes • Full implementation of changes • Use effective change tactics, leadership • Use follow up data, ask staff to assess success • Debrief implementation process for learnings

22. Change leaders should: • ensure that their change vision and plan are clearly responsive to a felt need • take the time necessary for dialogue with staff to provide clarity on the vision and plan • fully address staff concerns • provide opportunities for staff involvement in planning implementation details. • show executive and board support for the initiative • provide necessary resources (primarily staff time) • Have celar goals & objectives for client changes • Include monitoring and evaluating the process • institutionalize the change into agency operations and culture • Ask staff to assess success

23. Thank you • Was this a successful organizational change? • How would you assess success-failure? • Questions • Discussion