organisational change in barnardos developing relevant ... · specifically, barnardos moved from...

Organisational Change in BarnardosDeveloping relevant capacityA case studyMay 2013

The Centre for Effective Services (CES) is a not-for-profit company limited by guarantee

(Company Number 451580 and Charity Number 19438 in Ireland). The work of the Centre is

supported by The Atlantic Philanthropies, the Department of Children and Youth Affairs and

the Department of Environment, Community and Local Government

Copyright © The Centre for Effective Services, May 2013

Published by the Centre for Effective Services, Dublin

The authors of this report are ANNE COLGAN and MARY RAFFERTY

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval

system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,

recording or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing of the copyright holder.

For rights of translation or reproduction, applications should be made to

Centre for Effective Services, 9 Harcourt Street, Dublin 2, Ireland.

The Centre for Effective Services

9 Harcourt Street

Dublin 2, Ireland

Tel: +353 (0) 1 4160500

Email: [email protected]

www.effectiveservices.org

and

65-67 Chichester Street

Belfast BT1 4JD

Northern Ireland

Tel: +44 (0) 28 90 438 433

Email: [email protected]

Acknowledgements and appreciation

The authors wish to acknowledge the significant support they received from all stakeholders

in the course of this work.

The CEO and staff members of Barnardos were generous with their time, thoughtful in their

responses and open to challenge.

Table of contents

Chapter 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background and context ................................................................................................... 1

1.2 This case study .................................................................................................................. 1

1.3 An overview of strategy development and implementation ........................................... 1

1.4 Separate and Integrated organisational capacities – development and use ................... 2

1.5 The influence on the wider field ....................................................................................... 2

1.6 The scope of the report .................................................................................................... 2

1.7 Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 3

1.8 The organisation and structure of the report ................................................................... 3

Chapter 2: The overall strategic development process ....................................................... 5

2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 The strategic intent ........................................................................................................... 5

2.3 The context: the opportunity for change ......................................................................... 6

2.4 Openness to change .......................................................................................................... 7

2.5 Securing funder support ................................................................................................... 7

2. 6 The vision for change: decisions about where to begin .................................................. 8

Chapter 3: Designing and managing the strategic development ........................................ 10

3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Overview of the service design and development processes ........................................ 10

3.3 Developing capacities to support change ....................................................................... 14

3.4 Managing time ................................................................................................................ 16

3.5 External resources and supports .................................................................................... 16

3.6 Capturing and using organisational learning .................................................................. 18

3.7 Stakeholder partnerships ................................................................................................ 21

3.8 The Atlantic Philanthropies role and relationship ......................................................... 22

3.9 Barnardos and the field .................................................................................................. 24

Chapter 4: Developing sustainable capacity: The learning from the Barnardos case study 27

4.1 The idea of sustainability ................................................................................................ 27

4.2 Being ‘alive’ to context ................................................................................................... 27

4.3 Understanding organisational capacity .......................................................................... 28

4.4 Capacities that mattered ................................................................................................ 29

4.5 The role of ‘hidden’ capacities ........................................................................................ 30

4.6 Making use of organisational learning ............................................................................ 30

4.7 Change agent roles ......................................................................................................... 32

4.8 Time for change .............................................................................................................. 33

4.9 The commitment to evidence-based practice ................................................................ 34

4.10 Involving stakeholders .................................................................................................. 36

4.11 The grantee/funder relationship .................................................................................. 36

4.12 Barnardos and the field of children’s services .............................................................. 37

4.13 Summary and overview ................................................................................................ 38

References and bibliography ........................................................................................... 41

Appendices ..................................................................................................................... 42

Table of Figures

Figure 1: Strategic Plan 2005- 2009 ......................................................................................................... 5

Figure 2: The Quality Framework........................................................................................................... 11

Figure 3: Improved Fidelity and Outcomes ............................................................................................ 35

Chapter 1 Introduction

Page 1 of 48

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Background and context

The Atlantic Philanthropies has commissioned the authors of this case study to undertake a

review of capacity building strategies, to document and learn about the implementation and

impact of capacity building strategies in a sample of Atlantic grantees. Other materials

generated through this review, which may be of interest to readers of this case study,

include a Review of the Literature on Capacity Development, a Workbook to support

practitioners in reviewing organisational capacity and materials and tools for evaluators.

1.2 This case study

The Atlantic Philanthropies has had a significant involvement with Barnardos, over a long

period of time. A range of in-depth evaluation studies, including randomised control trials

have been/are being undertaken in relation to specific programmes and initiatives. The

evidence and learning from this work, alongside the extensive materials and documentation

developed by Barnardos in support of specific programmes, are a valuable resource to

policymakers, funders and service providers in the wider childcare sector.

The rigorous evaluation path is a very good route to learning about the process, impact,

value and limitations of the specific initiatives and will have significant value inside

Barnardos and in the field of children and families. However, the organisational experience

of Barnardos during this extensive change and over the period of involvement of the

Atlantic Philanthropies is equally valuable. Specifically, Barnardos moved from delivering a

wide range of services to a smaller, needs-led, outcome focused service in a relatively short

time. This has required the organisation to change: to think differently and to do things

differently. This case study focuses on the learning about the process of change, captures

key elements of the supports for and barriers to change and identifies the correspondence

between the literature on capacity development and the experience of Barnardos in

undertaking such development.

1.3 An overview of strategy development and implementation

This study examines the strategies for developing capacity and transforming a model of

service in a large national organisation providing services to children living with

disadvantage and their families. It is an account of the service development journey and a

description of the significant organisational change involved, with a particular focus on how

the organisational capacities needed were identified and developed. The process of design

and implementation involved a large number of staff at all levels in the organisation. The

reconfiguration of the organisational vision and practice required all staff, throughout the

organisation, to understand, adopt and practice new knowledge and skills.

Rather than focus on the rationale for individual models or programmes within the overall

organisational change, this study examines the work involved in developing the strategy, the

process of building understandings and commitment to the change, supports and

constraints on movement and progress, planned and unplanned issues of development,


Page 2 of 48

implementation and pace. This includes learning about the organisational capacity required

to undertake this work and the capacity development process – how did management

understand the requirements, what development strategies were undertaken, how were

these resourced and evaluated and how are the relevant capacities understood now, in

retrospect?

1.4 Separate and integrated organisational capacities – development and use

This study explores the learning about the alignment of capacities in different parts of the

organisation – leadership, resources, communication – to support the change in delivery

model. The connection between policy and funding changes and particularly how financial

grants were used to develop and shape the new direction for the organization, is of

particular interest: what did grant money from AP enable or create, in terms of capacity?

1.5 The influence on the wider field

Barnardos set out to enhance and strengthen its influence and role as a national

organization and leader in the field. This study examines how this development was planned

and undertaken. This is potentially valuable learning about the establishment and

development of ‘cornerstone’ organizations, including understanding the networks and

relationships Barnardos has established or developed as part of its strategy. This study

reports on how a strategic analysis of its position in the broader field shaped organisational

thinking about relationships, collaboration, partnerships and networks.

The radical changes within Barnardos have had an impact throughout the sector as

Barnardos relationships with practitioners, managers and funders in large and small,

statutory and voluntary organisations have changed

1.6 The scope of the report

As agreed in the Terms of Reference for this case study, the overall aim is to document and

learn about the implementation and impact of capacity building strategies which were

developed through and for an extensive organisational change programme supported by

the Atlantic Philanthropies. The focus is on the process of change rather than the content or

detail of change. Comprehensive descriptions of individual programmes are available in the

form of Progress Reports, Evaluation Reports, programme manuals and other materials.

These are not included here.

Most data was collected and analysed in late 2011 and early 2012. The analysis focuses

primarily on the development and implementation of the Family Support Strategy 2007 –

2012. The Family Support Strategy was based on the McKinsey Strategic Plan (2005- 2009)

co-funded by the Atlantic Philanthropies and the One Foundation and was developed over

year 1 and 2 of the McKinsey Strategic Plan. The work and focus of Barnardos Strategic Plan

Blueprint for Children, 2011 – 2016 is not included.

The case study sets out to review and distil learning. It is not an evaluation, although it may

report evaluative insights and perspectives of those involved and locates the learning from


Page 3 of 48

this organisational experience in the context of the literature on capacity development,

organisation development and implementation science.

No financial data were examined in the course of this study and no attempt is made to

examine costs, relative costs or value for money.

1.7 Methodology

The Terms of Reference for the case study were agreed with the Atlantic Philanthropies and

Barnardos. The authors were guided by the early interests and focuses of Atlantic

Programme Executives and the Director of Children’s Services in Barnardos. Mary Rafferty

undertook detailed interviews with the Director of Children’s Services, the heads of Service

Design and Research, the Children’s Services Management Team, members of the Senior

Management Team, including the CEO and the Director of Internal Services. She also met

with two Programme Executives from the Atlantic Philanthropies. The authors reviewed a

wide range of plans, proposals, reports and evaluations extending from 2006 to 2011.

Additional documentary material was provided by the Director of Children’s Services. These

are listed in the Appendices.

This report is limited to the views of internal Barnardos managers and those of a significant

funder. As yet, the perspectives of stakeholders outside Barnardos and the Atlantic

Philanthropies, for instance, policy-makers, commissioners and other providers, have not

been sought.

1.8 The organisation and structure of the report

Chapter 2 describes the intent and vision for change, the changes in context, internally and

externally that helped to mobilise interest and focus on change and the organisational

capacities already existing in Barnardos that allowed it to recognise and exploit

opportunities for change.

The key elements of that service design and implementation process, and the approach to

aligning and managing the capacities that were needed for the project are described in

Chapter 3. The relationship between Barnardos and Atlantic Philanthropies as funder are

examined here. The approach adopted by Barnardos to taking part in and developing the

field of services for children and young people is explored.

Chapter 4 highlights some important learning from the literature on capacity development

and points to the many ways in which the change process in Barnardos demonstrates and

confirms this learning. As well as stressing the correspondence between recommended

practice in the literature on capacity development and implementation science, this chapter

also describes examples of differences between the literature and experience in this

organisation.


Page 4 of 48

Relevant background material and summaries, including a chart of the Organisation

Structure and the Logic Model for Barnardos Family Support Services developed through the

strategic change are provided in the Appendices.

Quotations are used throughout the report to illustrate, describe and elaborate. Where

these are verbatim, they are not attributed. In some cases, the role of the speaker is

obvious, in other cases not. The role or identity of the speaker is not considered relevant

and is omitted. Where quotations are from written documentation the source is given and

referenced in the Bibliography.

Chapter 2: The overall strategic development process

Page 5 of 48


2.1 Introduction

The Barnardos strategic development process did not happen in a vacuum. The change

programme on which the organisation embarked in 2005 built on a foundation of earlier

work, took advantage of a confluence of factors that facilitated change, and was led by a

vision for new organisational possibilities. This chapter describes the intent and vision for

change, the contextual factors that helped to create the ‘right time’ to begin and some of

the existing capacities that made it possible to grasp the opportunity that presented.

2.2 The strategic intent

The Children’s Services Family Support Strategy (2007-2012) was one of the 5 key pillars of

Barnardos’ Strategic Plan for the period 2005 -2009. The Family Support Strategy was

integrated with and supported by the other pillars – Research and Evaluation, Advocacy,

Field Building, Funding and Supporting Capacity.

Figure 1: Strategic Plan 2005- 2009

The strategy envisaged that Barnardos would move from providing a multiplicity of services

to providing a core set of eight services based on new or refocused service designs. The

work activities to deliver the new services were service development, implementation,

research and evaluation, and field building. The eight new or refocused services which were

the subject of the strategy were:

1. Wizard of Words (Wizard of Words, a school-based, intergenerational, paired reading

programme; Literacy and Numeracy support service)

2. Friendship Group (programme for 6-8 year olds aimed at increasing positive peer

relationships, social and emotional skills)

3. Tús Máith (early years school readiness programme)

4. Partnership with Parents

5. Parent Coaching


Page 6 of 48

6. Gust (Growing Up Strong Together – individual work with children (and Roots of

Empathy in 2011 Strategic Plan))

7. Transition Group to Secondary School

8. Building Blocks (early years parent-child relationships)

The strategy planned that five of the eight services would be in the pilot phase by 2009, six

ready for roll-out by 2011, with the remaining two in the pilot phase and ready for rollout

later. Other services addressing specific needs and with existing service level agreements

continued to be delivered alongside these new programme developments.

This major transformation programme required an overarching capacity to engage in a

complex and multi-faceted change process, moving through evidence-informed design to

implementation, and driven by a needs- led outcomes framework. The plan is summarised

in the Family Support Logic Model (2008)(see Appendix 1).

2.3 The context: the opportunity for change

The 2005 - 2009 strategy was a direct outcome of Atlantic Philanthropies’ investment in an

earlier strategic review of Children’s Services, management, and facilities. This investment

enabled a radical acceleration of Barnardos’ organisation development and capacity, which

laid the foundations for the 2005 Strategic Plan. The 2005-2009 Strategic Plan was co-

funded by Atlantic Philanthropies and the One Foundation.

Other foundational work included an external audit of early years’ services, a review of

evaluation processes, and a series of surveys with service users and staff, which pointed to

high levels of satisfaction with Barnardos work and also helped to identify important focuses

for change and development.

Before 2005, Barnardos was seen as a ‘good’ organisation – reliable, effective, and

responsive. Although it was a national organisation, the service delivered by Barnardos

varied considerably from one – local - setting to another. Services had evolved organically,

often in response to a local need, the availability of local resources (e.g. funding from an

individual Health Board), interest from a local health board being met with interest by a

local Barnardos manager (regional or even project). While the range of services was

documented by Barnardos, there was little systematic sharing of learning about and

between services, about the effectiveness of different service models and no systematic

measurement of outcomes. Service managers describe individual services at that time as

‘independent republics’ where managers, project leaders and even frontline staff were

more or less free to ‘do your own thing’, often informed by a passionate, individual vision

about the needs of children and the best ways of addressing these.

A number of changes occurred together between 2000 and 2005 which created the

opportunity to think about bigger changes in the organisation. Barnardos Ireland had

separated, legally, financially and formally, from Barnardos UK with reduced funding coming

to an end in 2006. The development allowed and required Barnardos in Ireland to be more


Page 7 of 48

independent. Over time, it had to develop its own identity, its own policies and practices

and clarify and to assert a particular model of service. This resulted in a strong

organisational identity, with staff feeling a strong affiliation to the organisation and its

‘brand’. The identity and motivation of staff is seen as an important strength.

The CEO of many years standing planned to leave the organisation, and the appointment of

a new CEO created a further transition point for the organisation. At this time also, two

significant funders engaged with the organisation to explore the ways in which the

organisation could transform the lives of children living in poverty and disadvantage.

2.4 Openness to change

With the support of external consultancy, senior management and the Board explored the

strategic future of the organisation. This led to a key capacity – an openness to questioning

the assumption that Barnardos was already an ‘outcomes focused’ organisation. This

capacity allowed early questioning about how – precisely – the services were ‘good’ and

how good the services were. There was a recognition that these judgements were based on

impressions, on reactions and on anecdote, not on reliable evidence. Being able to tolerate

the discomfort of ‘not knowing’ was a powerful and difficult capacity to develop and use.

This capacity continued to be influential throughout the significant change over the years of

the strategic plan and managers and staff developed and used this capacity to tolerate ‘not

knowing’ in different ways at different times, depending on the person, the issue and the

supports available.

Ideas about forms and measurement of success and failure were developed during this time

and continued throughout the process. Staff had to begin to consider new measures of

success. This could be threatening for staff who had worked for a long time in one way and

could see the change as a criticism of the way they had been working.

2.5 Securing funder support

Securing funder support was central to the opportunity to embark on the major change

process. Two significant funders engaged with the organisation to explore the scope for

transformational change. The foundational strategic planning process, undertaken by

McKinsey, was co-funded by the Atlantic Philanthropies and the One Foundation.

The Atlantic Philanthropies describe a range of reasons for their decision to engage with

Barnardos. A key factor was the perception of strong capacity already in place in Barnardos.

The Barnardos brand was already established. It was seen as a leader in the field, or at least

a large player in a field with very few large players. It had a record of starting things. From

the Atlantic Philanthropies’ perspective, Barnardos knew how to think about change and

how to plan and deliver it. In a field that was completely focused on settings, they were

already talking and thinking more about children than parents or settings, which was

revolutionary at the time. The previous CEO had demonstrated a capacity for

thoughtfulness: the new CEO demonstrated a capacity to listen. The Atlantic Philanthropies

itself was on a journey and open to new ways of looking at service design and delivery.


Page 8 of 48

There was a synergy between this openness and the opportunity to make a big investment

in Barnardos. This organisation wanted to know how ambitious they could be and they

challenged AP to back them in some very ambitious thinking. This complex combination

convinced AP to invest in Barnardos in transforming the organisation.

The willingness to address questions about effectiveness and the support and

encouragement of funders to do this was a critical element in shaping the content of grant

proposals, the scale and extent of the grants from both funders and the later capacity of the

organisation to learn and to change in response to learning. AP Programme Executives

commented on how open Barnardos was in discussions with funders. This is a positive

commentary on the capacity of senior and middle managers to explore differences and

difficulties and their confidence in being able to engage with funders:

over the years I’ve sat in with them where they have been around the table

themselves discussing stuff which most people wouldn’t let a funder near … I

just think they were quite relaxed ... That was good. I liked that.

This capacity for openness, robustness and courage in exploring implications and

considering organisational upheavals is described as already present in the organisation and

also actively developed and grown through the strategic change process. Other strengths

are also seen as evident before significant early grants.

there was always a sense that… if this was agreed it would happen …also quite

a strong ethic on delivery … an organisation which … understood delivery and

understood the parameters of it. Now … it didn’t have necessarily sophisticated

systems at the IT level at that point but developed them.

Funders recognised that Barnardos was not a start-up organisation but had already

significant capacities that could be developed. The evidence of these organisational

capacities led funders to be confident that:

if you invested in them that you could get a return.

2. 6 The vision for change: decisions about where to begin

Barnardos was coming from a context where it delivered a number of different services,

with a range of standards. There were issues of consistency and standardisation. So when

the organisation started to question what business it was in and how you would know what

made a difference, it was clear that issues to do with order, structure and consistency

needed to be addressed.

The strategic plan set out to achieve outcomes for children in two key domains:

• Increased capacity to learn and develop

• Improved emotional well-being

The clarity and simplicity of these domains allowed outcomes to be communicated

effectively throughout the organisation and allowed it to be a meaningful test of the value

of any model or proposed intervention. In later reflection, people throughout the

organisation identified the clarity, simplicity and persistence of outcomes in these domains


Page 9 of 48

as a core influence on building the organisational capacity to achieve it. Managers recognise

that there was significant work and time involved in achieving clarity about this objective

but that this had led to better ways of communicating it. The focus on better outcomes for

children led to an openness to the ideas of evidence based practice and eventually to a

Needs Led Outcomes Focused model of work. This meant a commitment to undertaking

systematic needs analysis and developing service responses to identified needs which were

based on high-quality evidence of effectiveness in producing relevant positive outcomes for

children.

Chapter3: Designing and managing the strategic development

Page 10 of 48

Chapter 3: Designing and managing the strategic development

3.1 Introduction

In 2005, Barnardos embarked on a path to implementing an evidence-based design,

development and service implementation process that required the organisation to put new

internal capacities in place, secure a range of external supports and manage a complex and

multifaceted change process to secure better outcomes for children.

This chapter describes the key elements of that service design and implementation process,

and the approach to aligning and managing the capacities that were needed for the project.

The chapter looks specifically at the key relationship of Barnardos as a grantee organisation

with Atlantic Philanthropies as funder. It also examines Barnardos approach to positioning

itself within the wider field of Children’s Services.

3.2 Overview of the service design and development processes

The process of envisaging what services would look like in Barnardos began from mid- 2005.

The core service design and development structures were the Service Design and

Development Team (SDDT - Head of Service Design and facilitators), working closely with

the Children’s Services Management Team, supported by a Best Practice Advisory

Committee established in 2007. (See Appendix 5 for overview of SDDT and process).

The basis for all development was a comprehensive analysis of needs. Processes included

the development of quality standards and a Quality Framework (see below and Appendix 4),

a Best Practice Framework (see Appendix 3) and a research and evaluation strategy, all

driven by a focus on outcomes (Needs Led Outcomes Focused) geared to achieving improved

outcomes for children and children’s wellbeing. Every staff member working with children

was supported in developing the knowledge and practice skills needed through information,

management, coaching and mentoring.

The process of Service Design was used to address inconsistencies and

differences across services, the need for a shared language around needs-led

services and outcomes, and the need for a consistent organisation-wide

approach to records and case management systems.

Consistency in approach is supported by the case management system, the assessment

framework, practice standards and practice framework. Staff are supported in learning and

using these standardised approaches by core training and technical assistance from the

Service Design and Development Team. Auditing and monitoring of systems ensures quality

of practice. The development of new approaches for standardised filing and record-keeping

is on-going.

Translating outcomes into practice - the Quality Framework

Integration across streams of activity was achieved by developing and using the Quality

Framework. The Framework applied across all services. Together with Shared Language( a

framework of common language developed to facilitate discourse among staff about the


Page 11 of 48

practice model), this had positive benefits for everyone and created common tools for

design, development, dialogue and measurement (See Appendix 4).

Figure 2: The Quality Framework

Barnardos Best Practice Framework was published in 2009. Every member of staff who has

contact with children and families has received a copy of the Framework, has been trained

to use it and it is reinforced in practice by peer support, line management and coaching (see

Appendix 3).

A structured continuum of service development and implementation was followed for each

of the new services, in which each service was designed, based on its own logic model, and

then tested in pilot demonstration sites. The learning from the pilot sites was used to

finalise design, leading to implementation, following negotiation of funding for

implementation. The development/implementation continuum was supported by both

process evaluation (which generated an outcomes framework for the service), and by

outcome evaluation.

Staff commenting on the work note that rigour and coherence were key features of the

strategic approach; design was translated into practice systematically, resources were well


Page 12 of 48

used, people stuck to the task, and evaluations helped to ensure rigour in the way the work

was described and discussed.

The service design function and its alignment to service management

The Service Design function and process was central to achieving the planned changes in

service. The Service Design Team Manager, and six Regional Service Design and

Development Facilitators were put in place in each of the six regions to support the Regional

Managers who make up the Children’s Services Management Team, along with the Research

Manager, under the leadership of the Director of Children’s Services. (see Appendix 2).

Facilitators reported to the Service Design Team Manager, thus helping to ensure co-

ordination of national and local change processes.

The Director of Children’s Services functioned as an integrating influence, ensuring that

developments on separate fronts were aligned – facilitating and promoting effective

communication between different functions and operating as an important bridge between

the Children’s Services Management Team (including all Regional Managers) and the Senior

Management team.

All of the Service Design team came from a practice background. The Service Design Team

was a strongly skilled and experienced team with the team characteristics of practice

understanding and knowledge embedded in the team, openness and curiosity, and

consistency of key personnel and consistency of practice within the team. The key

resources used in the Service Design process were the experience of members of the team,

the skill mix in the team and the capacity to exploit differences and gaps in perspective

within team.

Team engagement in service design

The design process for each individual programme involved several iterations, with

consultation with and involvement of operational managers a central part of each cycle. This

meant that the design process was enriched and validated through rigorous scrutiny and

contribution of Regional Managers and that Regional Managers were aware of and

influencing the emerging design. For instance, the Friendship Group design went through

many stages from concept to implementation. The Children’s Services Management Team

was involved throughout, critiquing and questioning the rationale, framing ways of

strengthening the early design, thinking together about ways of anticipating implementation

including identifying good sites for the first roll-out. This engagement meant that Regional

Managers were familiar with and felt ownership of the process and the product and that the

Service Design team were supported and integrated in the shared focus on outcomes for

children.

it’s not that we get presented with the service design,... It comes in here and we

work it

This way of working is seen as requiring a lot of time, effort, skilled management and

commitment on the part of team members. The Director of Children’s Services is described


Page 13 of 48

as having ‘unique ability’ to work with her team in a most facilitative and yet highly results-

orientated approach.

She’s not directive …but gets things done and her team …have a tremendous

loyalty to her She walks the walk and doesn’t [just] talk it

Laying the foundations - developing shared language

A firm of consultants (Dartington) were early advocates of outcomes-focused services and

had a strong reputation in relation to the development of children’s services. Dartington

worked with Barnardos in 2005 and 2006 on needs analysis and delivering Common

Language Training. This was later adapted and developed by Barnardos into ‘shared

language’ to make it more accessible to the Barnardos staff group. This was a core part of

the model and a central resource to implementation and managing change. The importance

of shared language is emphasised by all stakeholders. Language was important as a

foundational piece of work with practitioners and influenced the work of the Children’s

Services Management Team, the Service Development team and regional and local teams.

The use of shared language strengthened the capacity of members of the Children’s Services

Management Team to be a resource to each other. Shared language allows a discourse

about the model, the practice, the requirement to change, the values, systems and

processes. The development and use of shared language allowed all staff to understand the

changes being proposed, acted as important tools for thinking about and exploring what

was required and reinforced and strengthened the shared goals and focus of all parts of the

organisation.

The actual words and the use of the products made it real For an entire organisation to change the language is incredible Understanding the language in practice… talking about needs instead of

services and embedding this in everything we do allowed us to being this to

external audiences

Communicating the change

The internal communication around the strategic change was a core part of the change

strategy and is seen as very effective. Internal and external commentators observe that the

Change Manager displayed significant expertise in planning and implementing a good

communications strategy. A high premium was placed on meeting staff and on creating

opportunities for staff to meet together, to provide information and provide a range of

support and training linked to the change. Internal communications are seen as very well

aligned with the change strategy. The Children’s Services Managers Team structure, led by

the Director of Children’s Services, was a key structure in communicating change to and

with front line services.

Implementing and embedding the new model of service

There was a coherent approach to implementation and mainstreaming new programmes

and initiatives. The design process led to pilot programmes, generating learning which


Page 14 of 48

shaped the technical and organisational resources used to roll programmes out more widely

in the organisation. Training for staff in new approaches, systems and programmes were

followed by coaching as a key support to changes in practice and fidelity to the

programmes. Coaching support continued as line managers integrated scrutiny and support

for changed practice into routine supervision and management. Over time, coaching by

service design facilitators in relation to specific approaches was phased out as these models

were mainstreamed and fully integrated into everyday practice for staff. As staff integrated

a Needs Led Outcomes Focused approach into their work, critically grounded in Shared

Language, it was increasingly maintained not only by frameworks, monitoring and

management but by peer feedback.

This move from additional supports for the ‘new’ to routine supports for the ‘now’, reflects

a thoughtful attention to developing capacities, caution about creating dependency and

good practice around integrated systems for day to day management. Managers note that

even ‘after’ the change, the organisation can’t become complacent and recognises the

importance of the ongoing need to monitor . High standards have been achieved, but in

terms of sustainability, the requirement to maintain these never stops.

3. 3 Developing capacities to support change

The strategy made use of a rich mix of internal capacities at multiple levels in the

organisation, and of external capacities. One of the overarching capacities has been the

ability to identify, put in place and manage this mix of capacities working across a complex

set of activities operating at several organisational levels.

Strengthening head office capacity

The strategic plan of 2005-2009 had a strong focus on the professional infrastructure, with

the development of several new functions and the strengthening of others, all in head

office. Several new posts were established in the national head office, to strengthen the

senior management team. Posts were created to establish or enhance capacity in IT, HR,

Fundraising, Advocacy, Research, and Service Design.

The Head of Service Design, the Outcomes Evaluation Coordinator and four Service Design

and Development Facilitators were recruited in 2005. These appointments are seen as

providing a valuable input in developing the Assessment Framework, driving quality

standards, and helping to shift the organisation from a service-led to a needs-led approach.

The person appointed as Change Manager had strong change management skills and this

was influential in the capacity of the SMT but also as a resource in the approach to change

throughout the organisation. Bringing this substantial experience and expertise to the

change process early on is seen as very significant. Other new resources were based on

existing expertise and capacity within the organisation: the head of Service Design was a

service manager, grounded in the practice of childcare and managing practitioners. This

meant that Service Design was strongly influenced by the practice perspective


Page 15 of 48

Managers as champions for change

Initially, the senior managers were the champions of the Needs Led Outcome Focused

approach, this was something that was held by managers and promoted and focused on

primarily by them. At this early stage, frontline staff were the recipients of inputs on the

change. Over time and through the process of bringing staff along the journey in multiple

ways, this changed, so that a tipping point was reached. Staff integrated the Needs Led

Outcomes Focused approach into their work and issues are addressed by their manager if

this is not embedded in practice. Managers report that when the programmes were rolled

out, staff could see the benefit and could see how common goals and Shared Language

would allow them to learn from each other.

You … see an incredible shift in the practice. This way of working allows staff to

really understand the individual needs of the child. Staff have gone through the whole change and now have a lot of pride in what

they have achieved and what they are doing, because they can see the change

in the children. Once they start to see that, the difficulty and the resistance

reduces.

In terms of capacity for achieving the organisational transformation, managers identify key

elements:

1. Very strong leadership focused on achievement

2. Strong line management involvement

3. Clear roles, so that everyone is clear about what belongs where and to whom

4. Technical resources: the dedicated service design and research capacity is a

significant resource and very unusual in the context of services for children

5. Time: although the process was always under pressure of time, the clear focus

and important boundaries were strongly held, so that there was enough time

to do the work well, even if this was a much longer time than was planned for

at the start of the work

Empowering the Children’s Services Management Team

The significant work with the Children’s Services Management Team aimed to develop the

capacity of the team in terms of team interaction. The management and on-going work of

the team as well as a range of explicit tools and exercises were used to strengthen the

capacity of team members to:

• Pay attention to themselves and others

• Develop insight and awareness of resistance to learning and change

• Develop language for acknowledging and exploring the experience of change

• Practice having difficult conversations

• Develop and retain the capacity to think under stress

• Engage in a joint journey of personal, professional and role change

• Clarify and rehearse communication with the wider organisation and the

external world


Page 16 of 48

• Capture learning, document change within the team and pay attention to the

development and changing needs of the team

This work not only strengthened the team but also provided managers with a model of ways

of working with their own teams and with the individual skills and capacities to do this. The

habits and practice of ‘learning as we went along’ were important throughout the work.

Members of the team comment on the development of the team and its capacity to work

over the life of the strategy. Members drew attention to the renaming of the team from

Children’s Services Managers Group to the Children’s Services Managers Team. The title of

team was seen as real and significant.

We went from being a group to a team

3.4 Managing time

Early, optimistic estimates of the time required for the change process failed to recognise

the compound effects of the simultaneous demands of learning the process of Service

Design and applying this to a new service, in a new context, with different professional

orientations, requiring significant and complex negotiations involving new relationships. The

realities of the time required for such an enterprise were quickly learned and subsequently

applied to later programmes and initiatives, so that estimates became more accurate over

time. It seems that the pace of change was managed well in line with the evidence about

what it takes for longer term sustainability of change, and this led to good outcomes. At the

same time, the accurate prediction of how long change takes continues to present

challenges and managers express concern and frustration at the difficulties involved.

Time and progress were also routinely perceived differently by different stakeholders. In

this case, Programme Executives observed that progress was slow and wondered what was

taking so long. From within Barnardos, managers experienced the interval between one

progress report and the next as too short and observe that ‘not much can happen’ in six

months. This tension between the ‘inside’ and ‘outside’ view of time requires ongoing

management and attention.

Managers saw the need for a ‘timing’ map of the change process that would locate

proposed changes in the landscape of the project and enable people to see where practice

developments are located at any given time. There was a need to be mindful of staff and the

impact of change on them, for managers to put themselves in the shoes of staff and to see

the process from their perspective. Managers needed to attend to a complex and changing

set of variables including the current context, training and other supports, time, pace and

sequencing.

3.5 External resources and supports

Both before the 2005 strategy and throughout the course of the work, Barnardos made

extensive use of external resources and supports. Access to this range of supports was made

possible through the funding from the Atlantic Philanthropies. The expertise on which

Barnardos drew included individual consultants and consulting teams with expertise in


Page 17 of 48

strategy development, consultancy firms specialising in outcome focused service design,

coaching and mentoring expertise, evaluation, and opportunities for site visits in the US to

see evidence informed service design in practice. In addition to these supports, Barnardos

also set up structures to avail of on-going independent advice and guidance to the change

process and to the implementation of individual programmes.

AP suggested the use of an experienced independent organisation consultant, Eddie Molloy,

to work with Barnardos on the development of strategy. He used specific strategic tools

which led to very divergent thinking, which excited and energised the organisation. Further

work was undertaken with McKinsey, which built on the divergent work and started the

convergent process of narrowing, making concrete and specific, developing a plan,

discarding some elements and firming up others. This led to the development of the

ambitious 2005-2009 strategic plan and the significant commitment to funding this work by

AP.

Barnardos already had a relationship with a UK based firm of consultants (Dartington) who

were early advocates of outcomes-focused services and had a strong reputation in relation

to service development for children’s services. They had influence on early design decisions.

Their focus on common language was developed and adapted by Barnardos and reframed

as Shared Language This was a central integrating tool with far-reaching effects in

implementation. Dartington was the wellspring for the journey in Barnardos in many ways

The relationship with Dartington ended at the end of 2006, primarily as a result of

differences of principle regarding approaches to managing change. The work with

Dartington was a huge learning experience and coincided with very rapid and extensive

upheaval in questioning the service model. The challenges of this upheaval were conflated

with and enacted, in part, through a relationship with Dartington that was experienced as

conflictual, problematic and difficult to resolve. The approach to managing the ending of the

relationship, while difficult, was indicative of growing confidence in Barnardos in its own

philosophy of change, and served to strengthen confidence and self-belief within the

organisation.

Exposure to other models

A field trip to the US with AP grantees in Ireland in early 2005 and development of a link

with Penn State University in November 2006 was very influential. Penn provided

knowledge that Barnardos did not have, along with a willingness to transfer that knowledge;

they provided access to a structured and methodical approach to outcome measurement

and needs assessment, supported by strong project management inputs.

The intensive visits to projects had the effect of stimulating interest. Key people had time

together with very rich resources and could see evidence-based work in practice. This

coincided with a process within Barnardos which was asking ‘what is the research telling us

about children in poverty?’. People saw the major beneficial anti-poverty effects of

improved literacy and staying in school. The visit to Experience Corps in Philadelphia in


Page 18 of 48

particular was very influential. This is a model that recruits older adults as volunteers to

tutor and mentor children in literacy, homework, with a focus on the well-being of the

volunteers as well as children. This led directly to the commitment to develop the Wizard of

Words programme.

The link with the US based Mathematica Policy Research Inc also came about in November

2006. This organisation offers expertise and advice in relation to collecting information,

conducting research and evaluation (see http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/About_Us/ ). A

senior fellow of Mathematica was appointed as Atlantic’s representative on the Best

Practice Advisory Group.

The Best Practice Advisory Group

The Best Practice Advisory Group, set up in 2007, brought external expertise to bear and

was an important influence. The Group had a range of expertise including representatives of

the funders. It was/is a good combination of people with a range of relevant expertise who

also represented a range of important constituencies (academia and research, funders and

children specialists). It is seen as a supportive, hard working group that offers helpful

technical expertise as well as giving weight, status and ‘clout’ to the work, because the

members are ‘heavy hitters’. The Advisory Group is seen as made up of knowledgeable and

considered people who don’t have vested interests in approaching the work, nor are the

individuals ‘strong egos’ , so the focus is the work. The Advisory Group and the Evaluation

sub-committee helped to clarify thinking, have asked ‘outside the box’ questions,

challenged and in turn helped people to challenge themselves and each other.

The process of working with the Advisory Group has been an important

mechanism for developing our capacity. The atmosphere is supportive: you

always feel that they are on your side. The model of high expectations, hard

work, challenging, critical and questioning has been valuable and has taught us

to use this approach ourselves. They are generous with their time and expertise,

but they expect to see evidence that they are being used. We do serious

preparation for Advisory Group meetings and we are often apprehensive in

advance, because we know they will scrutinise everything – nothing will be

allowed through on a nod.

3.6 Capturing and using organisational learning

The capacity to capture and use organisational learning as a key contribution to managing

strategic change is well evidenced in the Barnardos process. The organisation made use of

multiple mechanisms to support learning, both formal and informal. While some elements

of the work were identified in advance as a focus for learning and there were explicit tools

for capturing and examining these, other experiences only emerged in the course of the

work and it was the quality of attention – by individual and teams – and the range of

structures for communicating about them that allowed and supported learning from these:

The Needs Led Outcomes Focused approach is kept ‘live’ in both structured,

formal spaces – team and management meetings, supervision and coaching –


Page 19 of 48

and in informal spaces – conversations in and around the work,

communications within and between teams, communication with the external

environment, induction of new staff – on an ongoing basis.

The main mechanisms in use include:

• Using the formal learning from the systematic programme of research and

evaluation to inform ongoing work of design, development and

implementation

• The strategy of using demonstration pilots to inform implementation

• Formal and informal consultations with stakeholders across the design and

implementation phases

• The use of teams as places for supporting the culture and practice of capturing

and using organisational learning

As part of the Children’s Services strategy, a five year evaluation plan was developed

covering all of the service design choices and addressing both process and outcome

evaluation. Progress reports (see Bibliography) describe in detail how the findings from

various evaluations, and also from research, were used proactively to inform decision-

making and development, to prompt a change in direction if required, and to guide the on-

going management of change, as evidenced in the following reference to a specific

evaluation:

Learning from this pilot would suggest that managerial involvement, the

interest, understanding and commitment of all staff in the project and the

emotional awareness of the coaches are important factors in programme

success. The environment in which the group takes place is also important, and

in particular that the room in which the programme is delivered provides

minimum distractions. Staff continue to be coached and supported in the

implementation of the programme by a service design and development

facilitator and their project manager. (May 2009 progress report)

and

Research evidence is currently being considered as part of the service design of

our work with parents… Evidence and expertise in terms of ‘what works’ arising

from the design and implementation of WoW, Friendship Group and Tús Máith

are being used to inform our new designs.(May 2009 progress report)

Developing the capacity of the Children’s Services Managers Team (CSMT) for team learning

was a significant part of the transformation strategy. Senior managers comment on the

value of the CMST as a space for learning in which managers can expose their own thinking

to others and be exposed to the thinking of others. Growing levels of trust in the CSMT

allowed differences to be examined. A safe space for thinking and exploration was seen as

fundamental to learning.

The Children’s Services Management Team was experienced as a containing space for

learning, providing stability of leadership, especially at a time of change in the Senior

Management Team. There was a focus on learning which challenged people, sometimes


Page 20 of 48

painfully, about whether they wanted to learn. The team was a safe place for differences to

be explored and worked with; it offered a balance of perspectives and modelled ways of

engaging which Regional Managers could take back to their own teams. Members of the

Children’s Services Management Team comment on the tone and culture of the team being

one of valuing learning and reflection and of admitting difficulties and working with them as

a group. External commentators note the ‘sense of unity’ of the Children’s Services

Management Team.

The need to continue learning and development is emphasised by managers:

Over time and with how we’ve focused on learning and on bringing staff with

us, there’s a much sharper understanding of what Needs Led Outcomes

Focused means in practice. It’s possible to use these words but really not

understand what difference it makes to how to think about the work, how to do

the work, how to measure the work, how it informs not only the overall

direction and focus, but the daily work of every member of staff and how they

understand what they are doing and why.

Managers commented on the value of celebrating change, taking time to recognise the

achievements of individuals, teams and services and creating opportunities to notice and

learn from difficulties and solutions:

Learning from the challenge of change

Inevitably, in a large-scale organisational change, there are difficulties, barriers and

unplanned and unanticipated problems. A challenge for Barnardos was how to manage

perceived ‘failure’. The experience is that ‘failure’ is dealt with formally. There is a process

of review, aimed at identifying the learning from an approach that has not worked. There is

an awareness of the need to reflect such learning in the organisational systems, although

this does not always happen:

It is difficult to think and talk about problems or failure. The concept and

language of ‘failure’ is very emotionally loaded. We tend to focus on things that

haven’t worked only in order to change them, not often to learn from the

experience. If things aren’t going well, the practice is to find a way to present it

positively, which reinforces the sensitivity to the idea of ‘failure’.

The experience was that both front line staff and senior managers can be defensive

about their own practice, at whatever level, and this can reduce the openness about

exploring and understanding the influences on what is done, day to day:

These habits of seeing functions and practice as ‘mine’, means that we don’t

see the whole organisation, or any part of it, as a shared and common

enterprise and responsibility, but as an enterprise divided into different parts

which ‘belong’ to different teams or individuals. The experience is that we have

not been great at encouraging each other across functions – support is not

heartfelt. It’s not always clear that we have a stake in the

job/success/achievement of others


Page 21 of 48

Some managers identify as the ‘real’ failures the small number of staff leaving the

organisation because they can’t or won’t adopt the Needs Led Outcomes Focused approach.

Other managers identify this as a success - the insistence on the adoption of this approach

by everyone, without exception.

3.7 Stakeholder partnerships

In any change process, the effective involvement of stakeholders is one of the keys to

success. The ways in which staff teams and management participated in design and

development processes have already been described in terms of the involvement in teams.

Staff also have a position as stakeholders as well as providers, which was understood and

managed. As part of the communications strategy, a number of day-long meetings were

held with project leaders from throughout the country to discuss the new Children’s

Services Strategy in detail, and to secure staff buy-in for the changes that were needed.

These are reported as having been very positive meetings, with good feedback and support

from everyone involved. A key factor in this process of engagement was recognised as giving

time to listening to people’s concerns:

Understanding the dynamics of change is crucial to introducing new

programmes. We have recognised the importance of giving time to bring

people with us on the journey. We are aware of the emotional impact of

change and recognise the space that staff need to be able to express their

concerns and discuss issues. This opportunity to be listened to assists staff to

overcome any barriers which may exist and reinforces their commitment to the

programme.

Funders and policy makers are key stakeholders, and those critical relationships were

recognised. Meetings took place and continue with other stakeholders, including in

particular with the Office of the Minister for Children and a variety of meetings with the

HSE, to secure support for the change process involved.

As the users of services, the involvement of children and parents in service decisions that

affect them is particularly significant. Progress reports give accounts of various consultations

with children and parents, mainly as part of evaluations, but also in relation to service

design and development. Learning from the WoW evaluation highlighted difficulties in

engaging parents.

A key programme for the involvement of children was the Building and Amplifying the

Voices of Children and Young People project – a four year project funded by Atlantic

Philanthropies, that arose out of a broader conversation about social change. It is seen as a

means of developing sustainable capacity in Barnardos and more widely in children’s

services.

Barnardos’ direct contact with children and families through its services at

community level provides a unique opportunity to strengthen and deepen their

voice on the issues that affect them. In turn, this would strengthen the


Page 22 of 48

credibility of Barnardos national advocacy capacity, as well as the quality and

focus of its services.

The programme seeks to produce learning that can be transferred into Barnardos and other

local mainstream practice after the four years without the need for ongoing specialist staff.

It is expected that the investment will ultimately improve organisation effectiveness and

impact by deepening the quality and value of Barnardos engagement with children’s and

young people’s voices.

Funding for the Amplifying Voices project was seen by Atlantic as a good strategic fit for its

own social justice objectives, while also providing Barnardos with the scope to deepen the

capacity of children, advance the Barnardos advocacy agenda, and strengthen its

effectiveness.

3.8 The Atlantic Philanthropies role and relationship

The Atlantic Philanthropies investment in Barnardos had many facets. Clearly, the major

financial investment in the organisation’s strategic development was at the heart of that

investment, but was nonetheless only one of the aspects of AP’s role and contribution

identified by the organisation. The main contributions included:

• The funds for strategic development over several years

• Linkages, access to and funding for external supports, expertise and networks

• Opportunities to be part of the AP investment in the wider network of AP

grantees

• Funding for specific innovations

• Advice, encouragement and belief in the organisation.

Atlantic funding for Barnardos strategic review in 1999/2000 covering children’s services,

internal support functions and management functions laid the foundations for the major

strategic initiative that began in 2005. Barnardos is clear that later work would not have

happened without the earlier development of that Barnardos Review and the support of

Atlantic in funding its implementation.

The main outcome from that investment was a radical acceleration of Barnardo’s

organisational development over the time period resulting in the development of the 2005-

2009 Strategic Plan. Progress on the original three key objectives of enhancing the quality

and effectiveness of services, enhancing the quality of management and enhancing the

quality of equipment of facilities acted as a launching platform from which Barnardos

developed a new vision and mission and developed the five year strategy for Children’s

Services with the focus on two primary outcomes for children:

• Increased capacity to learn and develop

• Improved emotional wellbeing

The AP funding allowed Barnardos to develop capacity it simply would not have had

otherwise. It also, significantly in the view of Barnardos, provided a framework which set up

a range of things for specific attention:


Page 23 of 48

• Specifying the Logic Model was a helpful grounding

• A Needs-Led, Outcomes-Focused orientation as a consistent and common

focus for the work

• An Assessment Framework, with materials and documentation and training

• Evaluation processes and ways of maintaining that focus post-evaluation

• A focus on outcomes in relation to design and measurement

AP enabled Barnardos to make the valuable links with Penn State University, which provided

critical guidance and support for the service design and implementation processes on an on-

going basis. Links with other consultants were utilised over the period of the strategy,

supporting specific stages of development.

The working relationship

There was a general view that the external funders were supportive in helping to create and

maintain a focus on getting things done, on moving things on and on making changes in

practice, not just on paper. Managers did not experience a pressure to demonstrate the

benefit of Atlantic Philanthropies investment, but they did see the need to show what

Needs Led Outcomes Focused meant in practice, as a way of encouraging or putting

pressure on the wider sector and field to adopt this way of working. In general, managers

thought that Atlantic funding changed other peoples’ perception of Barnardos, that they

were seen as special, different and well-resourced. Sometimes this can be a disadvantage,

as others see what Barnardos is doing as a result of the investment and not as an approach

that they could adopt in their own organisation. There was a view that there was some

suspicion of the ‘Atlantic agenda’ in the wider environment. At the same time, being a big

‘AP grantee’ created a high profile and endorsed the work of the organisation.

Accountability

Throughout the process, the service design and research team were very aware of the

funder in the landscape, that the funder was meeting with Barnardos and wanting to know

why something wasn’t happening. The progress report and quarterly summary were a very

short time scale and not always a good fit for a very big change. Different reporting

requirements from Atlantic and from One Foundation created additional administration and

technical work without any additional benefit for learning. Given their differing focuses, a

single reporting format did not meet their needs and drove additional reporting work.

More generally, managers were confident that the relationship with funders was well

managed by senior managers and that they could focus on implementation. They were

working to understand the differences between different settings and contexts in terms of

the ease or difficulty of implementation. Most managers were isolated from any reporting

role in relation to AP and their impression was that AP offered flexibility around time and

delivery:

We did not have a sense that the funder was breathing down our necks, but we

all understood that there was accountability for the investment. Over time, the

contact and relationship meant that there was increased trust on both sides:

we were able to give feedback on progress – even outside the formal reporting


Page 24 of 48

– and to be truthful about obstacles; the funder knew that the work was

ongoing and understood that the work was complex and difficult to predict in

precise timescales.

Senior managers consider that they have an excellent relationship with the Atlantic

Philanthropies. They experience the relationship as ‘mutually challenging’, with Atlantic

pushing, encouraging and stimulating without being directive and Barnardos challenging

Atlantic to use its influence in a political way to drive progress and insist on sustainable

development in the field. Barnardos considers that it is well-met in terms of passion and

commitment and that the key influence of Atlantic on Barnardos is to move towards Needs

Led Outcomes Focused services.

Now everything we do is aimed at a result The legacy of the relationship with Atlantic is a focus on outcomes, along with

all sorts of other legacies any objective observer would notice a radical transformation in our internal

operations, our capacity to deliver service in a highly accountable way, our

public profile and our ability to influence public policy and to contribute to the

development of our sector. This transformation would simply not have

happened without [Atlantic’s] original commitment and ongoing support

(Progress Report, 2006)

3.9 Barnardos and the field

The positioning of Barnardos in the field of children’s services is complex, and its capacity

for field level work has many facets. It envisages or has already taken up a range of roles: as

provider of services into the field as market; as a collaborator with other agencies, sharing

learning and expertise, especially at local level, and as a leader of innovation in policy and

practice, nationally and internationally.

The decision to invest in a dedicated Advocacy function in the 2005-9 Strategy has had a

significant influence on the context of rights to and services for children in Ireland. While

this part of the strategy was not specifically funded by AP it has been a significant

contributor to the field.

Barnardos has long been engaged in interagency co-operation and joint planning and work

at local levels. In terms of the field, Barnardos works hard to ensure that other organisations

also take on leadership roles in the field (e.g. advocacy work with EPIC, an advocacy

organisation for children and young people in the care of the state). Barnardos recognises

that it has a lot to offer to and in the field and sees itself as being generous in sharing a

range of resources with other organisations in the field. However, this generosity has to be

managed, particularly in the light of Atlantic and One Foundation spend down and

significant cuts in public funding.


Page 25 of 48

Field building work has been an explicit part of the Barnardos strategy since 2005, and the

organisation has been actively exploring the scope for offering products and services in

specific areas of expertise, such as service design and development. The organisation has

opened dialogue with other community sites with a view to establishing areas of cross

fertilisation and collaboration for innovative work and services. This field level work has a

strong economic dimension, in which Barnardos sees potential to secure government

funding that will help to sustain its capacity for innovative work into the future. As a

potential provider of service into the field, Barnardos is interested in co-ordination of its

work with the role of the Centre for Effective Services, with potential synergies in relation to

effective implementation of research findings into practice, especially, but not exclusively, in

relation to the childcare sector.

A leadership role in innovation has brought the challenge of developing capacity to manage

that role, and to ‘hold’ the commitment to new thinking. One of the challenges is the need

to build support for and understanding of new conceptual models and approaches.

Barnardos notes that during the time when the organisation was promoting a strong focus

on outcomes, many of the people with whom they were working, including important public

funders, were still focused on inputs and at best outputs. So there was a complex process of

building understanding of the difference between inputs and outcomes at a time when

funding systems were still measuring inputs. In practice, this meant that there were no

external drivers for the change Barnardos was proposing and making and there may even

have been barriers:

There were times and concrete examples when being ahead of the posse

proved a problem for [Barnardos]

As a sector, children’s service have bought into ‘evidence’ but to some extent

the debate that we have been able to have in Barnardos has been missed.

There has been little exploration of the differences between ‘evidence-based’,

‘evidence-informed’ and ‘outcomes-focused’ models and ways of working:

sometimes they are used interchangeably. In terms of research and evidence, there’s RCTs versus ‘if it works, use it’

approach. There is limited awareness of the work involved, that there’s an

implementation and a process evaluation before outcomes. In some ways,

Ireland has been a huge laboratory for testing models of practice and

approaches to evaluation.

There is already significant interest in the Barnardos framework for supporting the

development of quality services. For example, the quality standards and the assessment

framework have been distributed to HSE national senior managers and their advisors, and

HSE has been considering incorporating elements of the framework into the national HSE

framework. There has been an expression of interest from at least one Children’s Services

Committee in the Shared Language Training,

The work of Service Design was very internally focused. However, the extent of

resources and the ambitious nature of the development did attract notice


Page 26 of 48

within the field of children’s services. Sometimes this took the form of envy but

the expertise was also recognised and this led to requests for advice and input

in other organisations and in the wider field

One of the areas where Barnardos believes it can make a particular contribution is in the

development of models of genuine bottom up participation of children, building on the

Amplifying Voices project. Barnardos believes it is well placed to lead on development of

models in that regard, given the organisation’s reach and credibility and its skill mix in areas

such as youth work and community development. The links with Atlantic offer particular

scope to utilise these capacities, through linking this Barnardos programme with similar

planned Atlantic investments in youth civic action.

The role of Barnardos in field building is also influenced by how others in the field view the

organisation, and how they position themselves. Atlantic Philanthropies observe occasional

confusion between brand or market leadership and field leadership. They also identify a risk

of conflating the issues of leadership and delivery. Both Barnardos and other participants in

the field should address this, to avoid creating barriers through confusion.

the stronger the organisation maybe the less porous it is in terms of its ability

to collaborate locally the better you are at doing something … the less people are likely to want to do

it with you. As Barnardos again has got stronger I think its capacity to be genuinely

collaborative has weakened. …and yet what they’re doing and the way they are

thinking, the outcomes focus, actually puts them much more in the space of

working with others. So is it possible for them to be doing both at the one time?

I guess so. Again maybe it’s the big C versus the little c

For the future, Barnardos sees a need to examine how to make field-building more explicit,

so that it is not an incidental by-product of being a large organisation in the field. Learning

from Communities of Practice and the influences on the field identified by CES could be

important. The advent of the DCYA, with its focus on interagency working in the children’s

services field, is seen as offering potential to optimise the use of Barnardos growing

capacities:

The new agency (CFSA) could be very important for Barnardos because it could

provide them with a ‘buyer’ for their work… create a more rational system of

buying and selling of services and avoid the situation where Barnardos is both

the broker and deliverer of their own programmes

The Strategic Plan for 2011-2016 includes specific goals in relation to communicating and

sharing impact/outcomes information with other providers, policy-makers and funders in

order to leverage Barnardos significant experience and expertise.


Page 27 of 48

Chapter 4: Developing sustainable capacity: The learning from the

Barnardos case study

4.1 The idea of sustainability

NGOs and philanthropic funders have a strong interest in the sustainability of organisational

capacity. In the capacity development literature, the thinking about sustainability overlaps

with theory and research about Organisation Development (OD) and with the literature

about effective change management. The literature on sustainable capacity development

reinforces similar features, while also highlighting the need to invest time in capacity

development, work in a structured way with all stakeholders, risk management, the

centrality of evaluation, and the need to pay particular attention to the change agent role.

Key ideas from this rich blend of thought resonate with the Barnardos strategic change

experience.

An Organisation Development focus on developing capacity recognises the organisation as a

contested space, and not a fixed entity; it foregrounds vision, empowerment of those with a

stake in the organisation, the need for a longer-term, planned approach, and the

importance of managing organisational learning.

The extensive literature on successful change management strategies emphasises the

importance of a clear view of the organisational and wider context of the change process,

the need for a vision, a compelling case for change and a sense of urgency; it underlines the

need for a clear view of the route to outcomes through carefully selected interventions,

willingness to persevere in the ‘miserable middle,’ recognition and removal of obstacles to

change, attention to the personal and organisational dynamics involved in complex change

processes, and embracing experiences of failure as routes to learning.

The account of the Barnardos strategic change process demonstrates that virtually all of the

ingredients of a sustainable capacity development process were in play at some level, by

being strongly present from the outset, or coming into focus and being addressed in the

course of the work, or being recognised as a challenge to be managed into the future. It

follows that Barnardos can confidently make use of its experience. It can optimise the value

of that experience through a formal process of naming and interrogating its own learning to

extract guidance for future change projects, support on-going review, and share learning

with others.

In the following sections, a number of key facets of the Barnardos experience are explored

in the context of the capacity development literature, with a view to pinpointing interesting

links and divergences between theory/research and the Barnardos experience.

4.2 Being ‘alive’ to context

Organisational change processes do not happen in a vacuum, but in the ‘stream’ of

organisational life. The literature highlights the importance of taking account of that context


Page 28 of 48

in order to maximise the likelihood of sustainable change. The case study points to an

alertness to context in the decisions taken by both Barnardos and Atlantic Philanthropies at

key stages in the process.

Barnardos demonstrated the capacity to read the environment and take advantage of

critical changes at key moments in the life of the organisation in order to embark on a

substantial change process. The changing context in the organisation created opportunity

for change, helped to make a compelling case for change and contributed to a sense of

urgency around the need for change – all key features noted in the literature as

requirements in the early stages of a successful change process.

Barnardos decision to parallel the service design and development work with investment in

a field building strategy linked to that work, also demonstrated a capacity to ‘read the field’;

the organisation actively planned to position itself as an innovation leader and as a provider

of expertise in anticipation of a future context where both state and philanthropic funding

are set to reduce.

The literature points to use of audits of various functions such as finances, human

resources, leadership, in use by funders as short term indicators of longer term

sustainability to identify a ‘good bet’ for investment. While such audits were no doubt part

of the process in their considerations about providing financial support for Barnardos, AP

also applied their own capacity to read the organisational context in support of their

decision to invest in Barnardos. Their assessment of and confidence in the capacities already

developed within Barnardos as a major player in the provision of children’s services were

key considerations in funding decisions; the openness to engage with organisational

upheaval and the evidence of a strong ethic of delivering on commitments, were among the

factors that shaped the scale and extent of early grants. These ‘hidden capacities’ are not

easy to read in ‘objective data’ and highlight the importance of a sustained funder/grantee

relationship as a way of getting beyond the reports to achieve an in-depth knowledge of the

organisational realities.

4.3 Understanding organisational capacity

The literature emphasises the need for clear understandings of organisational capacity in

any change process. These understandings shape the assessment of what capacities need

to be built and how to build them; capacity development is also driven by an analysis of

what is already in place and in use. In organisations, discussion around capacity can ensure a

shared view among those (internal or external to the organisation) charged with managing

organisational change. This common language is a powerful tool in a change process, in the

same way that a common language around service outcomes brought clarity and focus to

the service design process in Barnardos.

While at the outset of their change programme there may not have been a systematic

whole-organisation analysis of where capacity was needed, Barnardos demonstrated a

capacity to begin, to take a view about what had to be created and what was already in


Page 29 of 48

place, and the balance to be struck between internal resources and external supports for

change. In the evolving process, that analysis was refined and developed in response to

organisational learning - itself a significant capacity noted in the literature as an essential

feature of sustainable organisational change.

4.4 Capacities that mattered

The literature highlights the array of capacities needed in effective organisations who want

to build sustainability for the future. Organisations need capacity in specific ‘functionalities’

such as human resources, research, finance; ‘Hidden’ capacities such as culture, beliefs,

have a huge impact; future focused capacities enable the organisation to build good

strategy, to plan, and manage the external environment. The literature also highlights the

interplay between the different forms and levels of capacity, and suggests there may be a

hierarchy of inter-dependent capacities, in which the effectiveness of one kind of capacity is

dependent on development at another level, and an appropriate sequence in which capacity

may need to be developed, depending on capacities already available and in use.

The Barnardos experience resonates with the literature’s view about the need for a

complex mix of kinds and levels of capacity required in a large scale change process. A lot of

attention was paid not only to capacities needed but to where those capacities should be

located. At the outset, strengthened head office capacities were put in place early to lead

the change process. Key resources were located so as to ensure integration between

functions and across management levels; the aim of linking design to practice and

implementation was an explicit part of the change management plan, so as to create strong

ownership of change among service teams. The balance between external and internal

capacities reflected an analysis on the part of Barnardos and funders about what was

available and in use within the organisation, and how external expertise could support the

change process.

The sequencing of capacity development proved to be important in the Barnardos

experience. When the early investment in the development of support services ahead of

capacity on the ground led to a mismatch between capacity in head office functions and

service development, there was a recognition of the need to connect and integrate these

different elements of capacity and an effective response. New posts were created to

support and facilitate the involvement of local managers and staff in service design work .

This response is evidence of strong capacity for capturing and using organisational learning.

There was a then a high level of investment in team development alongside individual

expertise .

This learning about the importance of aligning and sequencing essential capacities prompts

key questions for organisational planning around capacity development. What are priority

capacities? How to optimise the connection between back room and front line operations?

It is important to get this sequencing right: enough head office capacity is needed to serve

and lead changes at frontline and enough frontline capacity to engage with and use head

office leadership and resources. There is never perfect alignment and some tension


Page 30 of 48

between different focuses and indeed different speed and pace of change is required to

drive change.

The Barnardos experience gives credence to the idea of a hierarchy of organisational

capacity (insofar as head office capacity was needed as a key starting point) and confirms

the view in the literature that capacity development is an iterative process, rather than

following a rigid sequence. It challenges any view of capacity at one level being more

important than, or capable of developing in isolation from, capacities at other levels; in an

organisation as system, the interplay of capacities must be kept in constant focus. What is

needed depends on where the organisation is at any given time or stage in a process.

4.5 The role of ‘hidden’ capacities

The literature on capacity development also draws attention to the impact and importance

of ‘hidden’ capacities, often described in terms of organisational culture.

A striking ‘hidden’ capacity noted in Barnardos was the way in which aspects of

organisational culture supported readiness for change and the change process; the

openness to questioning assumptions about the organisation’s effectiveness reflected a

capacity to challenge themselves which appears to have been a critical enabler of change;

the culture of valuing learning and reflection and of admitting difficulties and working as a

group prompted external comment on the sense of unity in the Children’s Services team.

These particular ‘hidden’ capacities do not feature explicitly in the capacity development

literature but were clearly essential elements of Barnardos process.

The leadership capacity within Barnardos is seen as a particular strength. In the context of

organisational transformation, the combination of quite different leadership styles in

different places in the organisation is regarded as important: the very diverse changes

implemented required different qualities and capacities at different times and for different

purposes. Managers identified a range of behaviours that they regarded as characteristic of

leadership in the organisation, including determination, resilience and tenacity, maturity

and expertise as a manager. The promotion and support of leadership in others was noted

as an important contribution to strengthening the organisation and building sustainability.

Behaviours contributing to this included being able to identify champions, supporting

collaboration through team-building and personal qualities of insight and ‘humanity’ –

responding to the person as well as the role. It is interesting that respondents commonly

identified personal/interpersonal strengths and skills when invited to comment on

leadership capacities, despite a significant organisational and service focus on creating

systems that support effective behaviours. Managers highlighted the relationship between

effective leadership and effective followership in the organisation.

4.6 Making use of organisational learning

The literature emphasises the role of knowledge management and organisational learning

as key aspects of developing and maintaining sustainable capacity in organisations.

Knowledge transfer and dissemination shape capacity development. In particular, the ease,


Page 31 of 48

benefits and risks of acquiring and using new knowledge have an impact of the scale and

pace of implementing change. One form of capacity – absorptive capacity – has a particular

significance as it refers to the core capacity to value, assimilate, and use knowledge. Clearly,

the absorptive capacity at different levels in an organisation can act as an enabler or

inhibitor for change. Tacit knowledge is about practice experience and learning while doing.

Tacit knowledge can be made explicit and the associated gains (and losses) are relevant for

sustainable capacity development.

When there is a recognition that the organisation is not a static entity, there will be a

parallel need to capture and use the learning from the on-going shifts that are inevitable

when an organisation is in a state of flux. Formal approaches such as action learning or

when staff work as Communities of Practice within an organisation can support the effective

use of organisational knowledge and learning.

In the Barnardos process, there were multiple opportunities to generate, capture and

manage organisational learning; these included formal processes such as evaluation, team

and management meetings, supervision and coaching – and in informal spaces –

conversations in and around the work, communications within and between teams,

communication with the external environment, induction of new staff – on an ongoing

basis.

What is significant about the organisational learning processes in Barnardos, along with

their existence, is the experience of how they served to generate and embed learning. In

the Barnardos experience, it seems that a key way of sharing knowledge and learning was

through the capacity to ‘surface’ tacit learning from practice. Team learning at senior

management team level and at practice level was made possible by growing levels of trust

which allowed those teams to serve as safe spaces for thinking and exploration. Other

organisational processes such as supervision and coaching also provided opportunities to

make tacit knowledge explicit and to share this knowledge. The multiple, sustained

opportunities for staff and managers to examine and share their own practice and their

experience of change and changing meant that practitioners got a lot of practice at making

tacit knowledge explicit. Repeated rehearsals increase ease and familiarity and reduce the

cognitive strain of using new skills: as participants feel more competent, they start to

recognise the benefits and to tolerate the difficulty; this, in turn, increases motivation and

commitment to the new approaches. Managers in Barnardos report trying different

approaches where an individual is ‘stuck’ or experiences difficulty in learning in one specific

way.

The organisation acknowledges that a weakness in making full use of learning has been the

relatively poor capacity to acknowledge performance that falls short of target as a rich

source of learning. Although strong trust has developed among staff, there is a sensitivity

and defensiveness that prompts people to find a way of presenting difficulties, delays,

disruption or interruption positively rather than mining the experiences for learning. Careful

judgement of timing and sequencing, along with the creation of safe spaces for

experimentation and models of effective behaviour are all important in reducing the risks


Page 32 of 48

associated with surfacing tacit knowledge, including that related to the experience of

failure.

Notwithstanding this sense of resistance to acknowledging failure, there are multiple

examples in this case study of situations where weaknesses in processes were identified,

and remedial action taken to rectify the situation. For example, action was taken to balance

the investment of support for practitioners with head office supports when the imbalance

was identified; systems were put in place to address gaps in building the capacity of service

users; difficulties in the relationship with an external consultant were addressed when they

became a barrier to the process. These examples point to an organisation that is good at

learning and making use of learning.

4.7 Change agent roles

The model of external expert as change agent is common to many models of capacity

development for both philanthropic funders and grantee organisations. The model has

many strengths; it is relatively accessible, it can be mobilised quickly, it is a dedicated

resource but does not give rise to on-going costs. The model also has disadvantages. The

model may create a dependency; it may replace or displace missing, weak or emergent

capacities. The literature refers to the risk of a ‘me too’ effect when the consultant is asked

to reproduce interventions that are successful in one setting in a very different setting.

Critically, unless the grantee and funder have a shared view about what capacity is to be

built, based on a commonly held theory of change, the external consultant work may be

disconnected from the context, reality, needs and expectations of the users.

The literature suggests that the competencies needed by the change agent should be

shaped by the change strategy being adopted; for example, using an Organisation

Development (OD) approach means the change agent must understand the developmental

needs of the organisation and respond in an effective way to those needs. Organisations

need the capacity to manage external consultants - they must be ‘knowledgeable and

sophisticated consumers’ of external change agents.

The Barnardos experience reinforces these findings. The organisation seems to have struck

an effective balance between internal change agent and external change agent roles. On-

going dependency was not created, and emergent internal capacities were able to develop.

The Barnardos experience also reinforces the importance for an organisation and funders of

the capacity to match the need at any point in a change process with the specific skill of an

external consultant. A wide range of external expertise was employed to match different

stages of the change process. External consultants used specific strategic tools to prompt

divergent thinking at a key early stage in the process and then helped the organisation to

narrow its focus; later, consultants with expertise on designing outcome-focused models

brought that expertise to bear.

The Barnardos case study also underscores the need to ensure coherence between the

consultant and the organisation’s core beliefs about the nature of organisational change.


Page 33 of 48

What is perhaps most significant about the Barnardos experience is not so much that

differences did ultimately emerge with an external agent about core beliefs about how

change needed to happen in the organisation – not a rare or unexpected occurrence - but

that the divergence was managed and that the organisation applied the learning in

negotiating and managing subsequent engagements with external consultants.

4.8 Time for change

The literature points to the fact that an Organisation Development (OD) approach to

capacity development – one that empowers participants and focuses on long term

sustainable development – needs time, and has to be done at an appropriate pace.

Capacity development does not happen instantaneously nor does it tend to happen as

planned. There are lags and delays. Some stakeholders take longer to come on board; an

unexpected event can divert resources and attention or make initial plans obsolete. The

initial assessment and diagnosis of what needs to be done or can be done may be found to

be unrealistic or incorrect and new opportunities may present. Time also refers to timing

and sequencing, in the sense that activities, progress, and outcomes can be early or late, on

time or premature. These organisation development realities require a model to accord with

stages in the change process, to help to evaluate and manage the pace of intervention and

implementation.

The literature suggests that the question of time is rarely addressed in capacity

development literature except at a ‘micro’ level in terms of time management strategies.

Although time and pace are not often examined as significant factors in the literature on

organisational change, Whittle (2012) has some useful and ‘timely’ observations about time,

timing and change. She observes that ‘Orchestrating and responding to the pace and tempo

of organisational change is a core competence for insider consultants and change leaders,

but this competence is difficult to learn by doing, as insiders are artefacts of their own

organisations’ (p1).

The Barnardos experience accords well with these findings about the role and impact of

time and timing in a significant change process. The classic challenge of change in a service

providing organisation - that of managing to continue with the current model of service

alongside planning the new – was especially difficult in what the literature refers to as ‘the

miserable middle’ of a lengthy change process, when the excitement of the ‘new’ has waned

but new practice has not yet been embedded. There was a sense of external pressure to

produce results, and at the same time the need to keeping changes aligned across the

organisation and among groups of stakeholders.

Within and beyond Barnardos, the issues of timing, momentum and pacing in managing

change are complex. Indeed, complexity science has much to say on the interconnections

between factors that are – relatively – knowable in advance and those that cannot be

anticipated or controlled. Apparently minor developments can generate significant impacts

on delivery of planned change: for example, in Barnardos, the maternity leave of key staff

members required significant changes to plans for and timing of, key project goals. OD


Page 34 of 48

literature notes the importance of an appropriate momentum in large-scale change

initiatives: too fast and the change doesn’t ‘stick’, is only superficial or is not sustained; too

slow and early adopters and enthusiasts lose motivation, leaders and champions are

criticised from inside and outside and there is increasing divergence and loss of fidelity in

implementation.

Barnardos has undertaken large scale change, involving multiple, repeated cycles of

development and implementation of new programmes. The capacity to learn meant that

early experience informed later cycles, knowledge from experience of time required shaped

subsequent design and implementation and the organisation became more skilled and

confident in responding to ‘outliers’ – staff who couldn’t or wouldn’t change.

The ‘right’ pace allows a project to keep going, even if progress is slow compared to initial

plans. In terms of managing that pace, the example of Barnardos is demonstrates two

important and related characteristics: very clear objectives and persistence. The clarity and

simplicity of the goals sought were a common focus for all parts of the organisation and

were used both to test the validity of plans and decisions at any stage of the change and to

support and refocus change efforts when these were interrupted, delayed or derailed by the

inevitable discrepancy between plans made in advance and real-time implementation of

plans.

4.9 The commitment to evidence-based practice

The literature on capacity development does not say much about evidence based practice

although it does foreground the role and significance of research and evaluation in the

development of sustainable capacity. Implementation science is more explicit about the

issues relevant to achieving change based on evidence and it points to three critical inter-

connected sets of focuses that give rise to ‘coherence’ between activities, design and

intended outcomes. These focuses, which can be readily identified in the approach adopted

by Barnardos, are:

• Building competency and confidence in those directly implementing the

innovation or policy;

• Changing organisations and systems;

• Providing the appropriate leadership that matches the challenge

(CES draft paper).

The interconnected relationship of the components of competency, organisation and

leadership is illustrated in the diagram below:


Page 35 of 48

Figure 3: Improved Fidelity and Outcomes

The use of research, needs analysis, evaluation, practice evidence, consultation and external

expertise were blended by Barnardos into a comprehensive framework of guidance and

support for an evidence based approach to design and development.

In terms of implementation, the US work on implementation science is familiar and

recognisable to AP and to Barnardos from their experience of the process of change they

have undertaken. Issues of diffusion of knowledge are complex. Critically, Barnardos

invested significant time and thought in these issues as well as in the service design. While

each element of the strategic development has been well planned and thoroughly

implemented, it is especially important to note the integration and persistence of the

approach to implementation: each element was understood in the context of the whole,

learning from one experience informed others, timing and sequencing were adjusted in

response to emerging learning, attention was given to alignment over time, across strategic

areas and within and between different parts of the organisation. The plan for

implementation was kept ‘live’ across many streams of activity, always in the context of the

outcomes being sought for children.


Page 36 of 48

4.10 Involving stakeholders

The importance of involving and empowering stakeholders is well flagged in the literature as

a key feature of effective change management processes, and is generally considered to be

a fundamental part of practice in service providing organisations.

There is a vast literature about meaningful ways of engaging stakeholders in decisions that

affect them. In planning a change strategy, the literature offers the idea of a stakeholder

map that seeks to analyse stakeholders in terms of their interest and their influence, and

which proposes that the strategy should match the interest/influence level of any

stakeholder group.

While Barnardos may not have begun with a formal stakeholder mapping process, linked to

a strategy for engagement with each stakeholder group, there was an explicit and implicit

commitment to the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders, both internal and external

to Barnardos. Staff and managers as stakeholders were recognised as people with a high

level of interest and influence, and the approach to change respected and reflected that

position. Consultation and engagement took place with the core funder, the HSE, and the

relationship with philanthropic funders was actively managed throughout the process.

Parents and children were involved in consultations as part of evaluations; one of the areas

of learning from the change process was the need to recognise that this particular

stakeholder group needs active support in order to participate in consultation or decision–

making or to give permission for children to engage. This experience underlines the

extensive literature about involvement of service users, and the impact of power

imbalances, especially in the case of vulnerable parents or children. Barnardos responded to

this experience and challenge by initiating a capacity development programme explicitly

aimed at strengthening the voice and influence of children, with the aim of building

sustainable capacity within this group, and, by extension, within the organisation and the

wider field.

4.11 The grantee/funder relationship

The capacity development literature examines the relationship between grantee and

funder, the role of funder as change agent and how funders exercise that role. The literature

focuses strongly on what happens when funders take up an active change management role

as organisation development professionals themselves – a role not taken up by the Atlantic

Philanthropies in this case. The literature points to the power imbalance between funder

and grantee, and the challenge this presents for engagement, in terms of openness, trust

and reciprocity when funders take up such a direct and active role in in capacity

development.

While the Atlantic Philanthropies did not adopt such a proactive position in the Barnardos

change process, and adopted a more ‘hands-off’ facilitative role, matters of trust and

openness were hugely important; the level of trust and openness between the parties

helped to create the conditions under which Atlantic Philanthropies could make a significant


Page 37 of 48

investment in Barnardos. The AP belief in the Barnardos organisation, based on a well-

developed relationship over a period of time contributed to the decision to invest. The

relationship went beyond funding to offering advice and support. AP, in the view of

Barnardos managers, appears to have struck a good balance between challenge and support

and between encouragement and a strongly articulated expectation of accountability and

results. The consistency of key personnel at meetings was particularly helpful.

Perhaps one of the significant features of the relationship, from the point of view of capacity

development, is that of time; the relationship developed and evolved over time, and it is

this commitment to giving time to enable change to develop at an appropriate pace that is

one of the most important features of an organisation development approach to building

sustainable capacity.

4.12 Barnardos and the field of children’s services

While there is an absence of a rigorous definition of ‘field’ in the capacity development

literature, field building occupies a unique place in the work of philanthropic funders who

want to bring about positive and lasting social change in some aspect of people’s lives. The

literature suggests that Foundations are uniquely positioned for a role in developing

capacity at field level as a change strategy that goes beyond the potential of working with

individual grantee organisations.

Barnardos focus on Advocacy as a key link between policy and practice has led to the

development of significant capacity in relation to advocacy. This focus has significant

influence inside the organisation and has also shaped the context of children’s services in

Ireland. The literature on capacity development in social and organisational fields explores

the complex interplay between individual organisations and social fields. Field building as a

process is described as one that involves working with an ecosystem of organisations,

emphasising work at the boundaries and the intersection of organisations. The funder

interested in field building must look not only at the individual organisation but at the web

of activity and relationships in the field. A network or field orientation may differ from an

organisation orientation in terms of mindset, strategy, behaviour and structure. For

example, a mindset of collaboration over competition will predominate in organisations

with a strong field identity and positioning; knowledge will be shared rather than protected;

collective skills will be prioritised over competitive advantage, players will be more likely to

act collectively than alone.

The literature also suggests that investment in the capacity of an individual organisation

requires an understanding and appreciation of the dynamic of relationships in that field, in

particular the power and influence dynamic among large and small organisations, or

organisations with stronger influence and resources compared to weaker organisations.

Barnardos has demonstrated a clear view of itself as having a role in field building, and sees

its work as part of a network of organisations or a field aiming to improve outcomes for

children. This view and understanding is evidenced by the fact that a programme of field

building is a core strand of the organisation’s strategy. The commitment to sharing


Page 38 of 48

knowledge and learning from new developments with smaller community organisations has

been part of the organisation’s effort to contribute to disseminating evidence-based

practice; collaboration with statutory authorities (HSE in particular) in order to maximise

and optimise the potential of tools such as the Barnardos Assessment Framework has been

a further dimension of contributing to the field. While most effort and attention was taken

up with the internal change, from 2011 onwards the Director of Children’s Services began a

conscious dissemination of information about both the Needs Led Outcomes Focused model

and also about the process of organisational change itself. This elicited strong interest,

suggesting that the experience of significant organisational change is also an important and

valued resource for this field.

The Atlantic Philanthropies recognises the difficulty for Barnardos or any organisation in

trying to maintain a stance of collaboration in an environment where diminishing resources

may promote competition rather than collaboration. The impact on collaboration of

inequalities of power is noted in the literature and Barnardos’ experience points to a similar

challenge from being perceived as having greater expertise:

the better you are at doing something … the less people are likely to

want to do it with you.

This has raised a fascinating question as to how Barnardos can or should position itself in

the field of children’s services, as it builds capacity and expertise in key areas of outcome

focused and evidence based services for children; can the organisation ‘market’ that

expertise and also collaborate?

As Barnardos again has got stronger I think its capacity to be genuinely

collaborative has weakened. …and yet what they’re doing and the way

they are thinking, the outcomes focus, actually puts them much more in

the space of working with others. So is it possible for them to be doing

both at the one time? I guess so.

This is a question for others in the field, and for funders as much as for Barnardos.

Questions about collaboration and integration around field-level resources (like service

development and advocacy) could be usefully explored between organisations in the field.

There may be value for the organisation, the funder, statutory authorities and others in the

field to explicitly map the field over the next number of critical years. This could generate a

strategy for the role of Barnardos as a ‘cornerstone’ organisation, and identify other

organisational roles, in order to optimise the capacity of Barnardos as well as seeing the

scope for developing other capacities within the field of children’s services in a planned way.

4.13 Summary and overview

The Barnardos case study fits with and reinforces the literature on capacity development,

and enriches it with insights from a particular case. It adds depth to the literature, and there

is useful learning to be gained from noticing where Barnardos experience is different from

or gives special emphasis to an aspect of the literature.


Page 39 of 48

The case study is of course context specific, and represents an experience of capacity

development as part of a significant and large scale organisational change process, as

distinct from on-going day to day investment in capacity, or short term projects dealing in a

focused way with building a specific capacity.

This case study reinforces the need for multiple capacities at every level in an organisation,

as well as cross-organisationally; the priorities to be assigned to particular capacities, and

the sequences in which they are developed matters, and can impact significantly on the

success of a change strategy.

It seems that a key success factor in a process of change involving the design and

development of new services is to blend capacities, to ensure that research, service design,

service management, communications and evaluation expertise are brought together in an

integrated way, and not allowed to operate in separate silos. This multi-disciplinary and

interdisciplinary mix of capacities located appropriately within an organisational system is

significant when designing the capacity to initiate and manage change.

Hidden capacities that form part of organisational culture clearly have the potential to make

or break an organisational change process; it goes without saying that a supportive culture

does not simply happen, but is the product and outcome of good leadership, effective

systems and processes, and the tone and culture of relationships within an organisation.

The skill in a capacity development process will be to recognise the importance of this

culture, assess its strengths and weaknesses, build it where necessary and utilise it where

possible.

The importance of securing and managing the appropriate mix of internal and external

supports is also evident from this case study as a critical feature of effective change process.

An essential focus in utilising external support is to match organisational need with external

expertise, to ensure, in the interests of sustainability, that internal capacity is built and

embedded for the future, and has the skills and capacity to direct and manage external

resources with confidence.

A key capacity emerging from this case study is the capacity for vision and clarity about both

the outcome expected from a change programme, and the technical or professional

approach to be used in the process. In this case study, the clarity of vision about the

outcomes served as a strong motivator throughout a challenging process. When people

throughout an organisation can identify strongly with the expected outcome, this can

strengthen the organisational capacity to achieve it. Although in this case there was

significant work and time involved in achieving clarity about the outcomes sought for

children, this investment led to better ways of communicating it, openness to the ideas of

evidence based practice and eventually to the new Needs Led Outcomes Focused model of

practice.

Capturing and managing organisational learning also emerges as a critical enabler of

effective change: organisations need to work out what systems and approaches will work


Page 40 of 48

and make sure that the time, opportunities, processes and most importantly the

management capacity to listen and apply learning, is in place.

The issue of time was interwoven with all other aspects of change. The capacity to manage

time is not just a skill of project management: in the extensive change described here,

managers had to develop understandings and models of time that were a good fit for

different purposes. Time, timing and sequencing interacted with expertise and experience,

communication and negotiation and evidence related to implementation and sustainability.

The differences in perceptions of time from the inside and outside had to be managed.

The quality of relationships with all stakeholders in a change process evidently matters

greatly: as the literature highlights, each stakeholder group needs to be involved in ways

that reflect and respect their role, the importance of this development to their lives, and

their capacity to engage. The relationship with the funder as stakeholder has a particular

significance, as a partner who can determine if and whether the work can happen, and can

offer unique inputs of support, challenge, advice, expectations of outcomes, and investment

of belief with constructive questioning.

In the course of this work Barnardos has amassed important practice knowledge about

service design, development and implementation, which it plans to share with the field of

children’s services as part of the strategy for the future. It has also learned a great deal

about managing a major programme and confirmed and challenged learning and knowledge

that was already in use the organisation. The challenge and opportunity for Barnardos and

for their funders is to continue to add this learning to the bank of organisational capacity by

capturing it in a systematic way, building it into organisational routines, making it available

for future change work and sharing it with the wider world.

References and bibliography

Page 41 of 48

References and bibliography

Barnardos Proposals, Reports and Evaluations

Progress report May 2011 on grant 14376 - to produce better outcomes for children by

supporting Barnardos to demonstrate and evaluate its new portfolio of services

Progress report May 2009 on grant 14376

Progress report May 2008 on grant 14376

Progress report March 2007 on grant 14376

December 2006 Progress Report Grant 8544 - to support implementation of the initiatives

identified in strategic review,

Final Report Grant 8544 - to support implementation of the initiatives identified in strategic

review (date?)

September 2005 - Progress Report Grant 13326 - Implementation of Strategic Plan

March 2010: The Friendship Group Programme Evaluation Report

March 2010: The Friendship Group Programme Evaluation Report Executive Summary

December 2010: Tús Máith Evaluation Report

December 2010: Tús Máith Evaluation Report Executive Summary

July 2009: WoW Process Study Evaluation year one

December 2010: WoW Process Study year two

Proposal to AP September 2010 - Building and Amplifying the Voices of Children and Young

People in Three Communities of Disadvantage in Ireland

October 2010 19050 Grant Summary Proposal - Amplifying the Voices of Children and Young

People

April 2011 - invitation to tender for evaluation of Barnardos national early years service

April 2011 - Barnardos Ireland Strategic Plan 2011-2016 Draft for Review

April 2011 - Barnardos Ireland Strategic Plan 2011-2016 Appendices

Materials and resources from Capacity Development Study

Whittle, S., Colgan, A., Rafferty, M. (2011) CAPACITY BUILDING: What the literature tells us

Colgan, A., Rafferty, M., Whittle, S. (2012) Capacity Building; Workbook for practitioners

Colgan, A., Rafferty, M. (2012) Capacity Building: Tools for evaluators

Other materials cited

Centre For Effective Services (2012) Draft Implementation Paper

Whittle, Susan Rosina (2012, (in Press) Quick, Quick, Slow: Time and Timing in Organisational

Change

Appendices

Page 42 of 48

Appendices

Appendix 1

Appendices

Page 43 of 48

Appendix 2

Appendices

Page 44 of 48

Appendix 3

Appendices

Page 45 of 48

Appendices

Page 46 of 48

Appendix 4

Appendices

Page 47 of 48

Appendix 5 Service Design and Development Team

Appendices

Page 48 of 48

www.effectiveservices.org/our-work/promoting-capacity-building-in-ireland For more information about this project, please visit

The Centre for Effective Services is anindependent, not-for-profit organisationfunded jointly by The Atlantic Philanthropies(AP), the Department of Children and YouthAffairs, and the Department of Environment,Community and Local Government.

www.effectiveservices.orgemail: [email protected]

organisational change in barnardos developing relevant ... · specifically, barnardos moved from...

Documents