On a Wing and a Prayer

In between the desperate recruitment appeals and naff management foodie pics, I continue to find my probation Twitter feed full of excited upbeat guff about digital this and that, "hugely rewarding" team building days and most recently, a lavish London conference on modernising the criminal justice system where the minister Victoria Atkins didn't even mention probation at all! 

By way of contrast, I see Matt Tidmarsh, an academic at the University of Leeds, has published via Twitter some interim findings of his latest research:-  

1/ For the last few months, I’ve been researching prof. identity, culture and practice in probation after TR. I’ve interviewed 35 staff so far, with just three more to go. Since data analysis is not as fun as I remember, here are some procrastinatory preliminary findings:

2/ Feelings are mostly mixed on reunification: staff are happy that TR has come to an end but frustrated that so much money was wasted on ideological indulgences. Some have spoken of TR through the lens of grief

3/ There is a sense that the ‘two-tier’ nature of TR, with CRCs and their staff viewed as inferior, persists. However, lots have also commented on how reunification has restored a sense of professional identity, as ‘we’re all one service now’

4/ Probation is not a good fit with the Civil Service. With TR, there was an obvious ‘bogeyman’ (Grayling) on whom to pin frustrations. In the absence of such a figure since unification, a grey, faceless ‘Civil Service bureaucracy’ has come to (partially) occupy this role

5/ Skills/attributes required to be good at probation can be split into the interpersonal (e.g. empathy, emotional intelligence), organisational (e.g. report-writing), ability to cope (e.g. resilience) and personal factors (e.g. values)

6/ I should say skills/attributes is arguably the most ‘preliminary’ of these findings, and I need to do much more work/thinking on these categories – so any feedback appreciated

7/ Quite a few staff (mainly men) want to see more men recruited. Often, this has been tied into calls for a greater diversity of life experience in the service. This includes hiring people with lived experience of the CJS, as well as more people from minority ethnic backgrounds

8/ The feminisation of probation is interesting and, in my view, has been underexplored. On why, responses can be separated into three: pay, the demography of (social science) courses from which many are recruited, and the ‘caring’ nature of the role

9/ Feminisation is difficult to write about as you’re never too far from gender tropes. To be clear, I’m not saying that women are prepared to work for less than men, that they’re more suited to probation because ‘caring is a woman’s work’, nor that fem. is necessarily a problem

10/ Rather, the need to have an ‘appropriate’ degree for the PQiP has meant a pipeline has been established between it and social sciences courses (like criminology) dominated by women. This, added to poor pay in the service (more below), has meant far more women enter than men

11/ Again, I’m not saying this a problem, but most staff are glad that the need to have an ‘appropriate’ degree has been scrapped. Hopefully, this will help attract a much broader range of individuals into probation work

12/ While those on the PQiP speak highly of it, general prof. development is not fit for purpose. Mandatory e-learning does not adequately reflect the different learning styles of staff – ironically, something the service prides itself on in its work with people on probation

13/ The main barrier to entry, though, is pay. There is a strong sense that pay/caseloads simply do not correspond to the level of responsibility practitioners have. An obvious point, perhaps, but this has been the most common lament

14/ Working conditions generally are not good. Staff are overworked; many have expressed the view that it is bad for clients and dangerous for the public. Senior management are aware and are working to fill vacancies, but ‘we can’t magic probation officers out of thin air’

15/ Consequently, the (voluntary, private and statutory) services that orbit probation have never been more important. More work should be done to collaborate/share resources so that these dots are better connected - see me and @iancriminology

on this: https://mmuperu.co.uk/bjcj/articles/beyond-marketisation-towards-a-relational-future-of-professionalism-in-probation-after-transforming-rehabilitation/

16/ ‘Probation values’ persist. This is not a particularly original finding given the weight of research in this area. Yes, some argue that they have been ‘lost’ (again, hardly original); but beneath that, staff still enter the profession for the same reason - to help people.

17/ The last point should give hope for the future. Many of these issues will take time to fix – one senior manager suggested 3-5 years. The points mostly relate to practice/experiences of change, and I've yet to do much of the heavy lifting on identity and culture

18/ I hope some of these (very preliminary) findings find resonance with people working in/on probation; and, if not, then they at least find them somewhat interesting! ENDS

Matt Tidmarsh is a lecturer in Criminal Justice at the School of Law, University of Leeds. He completed his PhD on staff experiences of the Transforming Rehabilitation reforms to probation services in England and Wales, at the School of Law, University of Leeds, in November 2019. His research interests are interdisciplinary, drawing from criminology, sociology, and penology – with a particular focus identity, culture, and practice in probation.