Policy and the pace of changes

As with the first focus group, the consensus was that the introduction of a points had had no effect on their day-to-day work:

‘To be honest, life has gone on at the same sort of pace and I haven’t even thought about the change in the way of working - it’s just been head-down

and go for it.’ (Jackie, p.1)

‘We’ve still very much got our targets very much in interviews, Action Plans, groups and we haven’t had any flexibility really - to work within that - that’s been described by the [...]so the flexibility and the thought was there, ...but it didn’t materialise.’ (Fiona, p.1)

‘That’s exactly what I was about to say, at ground level we’ve still got the

same targets.’ (George, p.1)

As the focus group interview gave them the chance to consider the introduction of the points tariff, there was a slight sense of disappointment, tempered with previous experience of change being heralded as beneficial, but not living up to that promise:

‘It’s like everything, when it’s first introduced, I think it’s always first introduced as a real opportunity...’ (Fiona, p.1)

‘I don’t remember feeling surprised when it wasn’t [a real opportunity]

though..’ (Scott, p.1)

One practitioner considered the introduction from the perspective of senior management, and identified advantages: ‘The flexibility has been the way Head Office has been able to manipulate what figures have come in and in the end what

they need..’(Harriet, p.1). Another practitioner, the team leader, did identify a small but significant area of flexibility in the way groupwork in school is recorded: ‘I would say the only bit of flexibility we have had... Sorry to be a positive one...is that

we can now add the groups together over Year 9 and 10 and come out with a sum’

(Fiona, p.2). It is interesting that she prefaces her positive comments with a throwaway apology, perhaps aware that her contribution would not accord with the group’s position. On further reflection however, she concludes: ‘I think it is [pretty

constrained], but I just wanted to say that that there’s that little bit between Years 9

and 10’ (Fiona, p.2).

The first focus group had made reference to the so-called ‘refocusing’ of the Careers service. Whilst everyone in the group was aware of the impending policy, there was uncertainty about the likely impact of the change: ‘I don’t think we know too much about the future’ (Fiona, p.16) and:‘I don’t know how long it could have gone on for with people’s goodwill, but everything’s changing anyway’ (Jackie, p.11). A recognition there of the psychological contract with the employer, where goodwill has, up to this point, been assumed by the company. The most likely anticipated change would be a direct impact on the careers guidance interview, the core business of the practitioners: ‘We don’t know what we’re doing. Whereas I think we should be going to greater depths with certain groups and I know that’s there, but we’re

probably gonna grab the bits of guidance and say work with these, work with them

and doing little bits here and there ....and the whole thing’s gonna be diluted’

(Harriet, p.10). Whilst recognising that refocusing would mean more in-depth guidance for those clients who have greater demonstrable need in terms of disaffection or social exclusion, there are concerns about the universality of provision: ‘An actual guidance process, where you are there to follow up those that really need following up... there’s going to be quite a bulk of people that actually

slip through that net’ (Harriet, p.10) and: ‘I don’t know yet what’s going to happen, but it sounds to me that an individual interview for everybody is not going to happen

in the future and I think that’s a real shame because lots of people who wouldn’t

actually qualify for the ‘hard to help’, you know, title, but they need help’ (Fiona, p.16).

Although the actual changes coming their way were relatively intangible at the time of this focus group, there is an awareness that things will change, and new demands

will be made. The goal post analogy is employed as in the first group and in the questionnaire responses; ‘...suddenly the goal posts are moving completely and that’s a bit sad really. However, if you actually think about pressures on us,

suddenly now the pressures of completely switching the way you work is going to be

far more intense’ (Jackie, p.16). Jackie concludes that the end result of the refocusing agenda will be to undermine the guidance process completely, although she predicts that rather more will be lost than the policy change intends: ‘And a couple of years down the road, they’ll probably find they’ve chucked the baby out

with the bathwater’ (Jackie, p.10). This reinforces the point made in the first focus group that while a practice can be dismantled by policy directive, it can in turn be reinvented as new policy.