There are "significant shortfalls" in the West Midlands probation service, inspectors have found.
HM Inspectorate of Probation undertook a review of public protection measures across the region, inspecting 84 cases.
Martin Jones, chief inspector of probation, said: "Despite strong leadership commitment and clear strategic priorities to improve public protection, the delivery of work to keep people safe was not yet meeting the required standard. Staff understood its importance however, worryingly, this was not reflected consistently in the quality of assessment, planning, and delivery."
A report by the inspectorate said its findings revealed significant shortfalls in practice across the region, with effective work to keep people safe being evident in 49% of the assignments inspected. Of the cases they inspected, most involved white men, aged 36-55, with violence and sexual offending the most frequent offence types, with concerns about domestic abuse and risk to children also prevalent across the sample.
According to the inspectorate, child safeguarding practice in the service was found to be "underdeveloped and an area for urgent attention". However, inspectors found that domestic abuse information sharing had improved as a result of joint efforts by probation and police leaders.
'Systemic barriers'
The report added that managers were not consistently identifying practice deficits and opportunities to protect the public were missed.
Recruitment was also hampered by excessive vetting delays, while pay and workloads were frequently cited as retention concerns. While staffing challenges were less acute than in other areas of the country, resourcing was found to have remained a challenge for rural areas in the region such as Herefordshire, which had acute recruitment difficulties and resulted in high workloads.
Jones said: "Systemic barriers, including resourcing, organisational complexity and insufficient multi-agency communication remained significant challenges for the West Midlands region to overcome. Strengthening the skills and improving the confidence of practitioners will be essential in ensuring the region can consistently meet its public protection responsibilities."
The report made seven recommendations, with four for the West Midlands region, including to develop practitioners' confidence and skills in the use of professional curiosity, and using challenging conversations to identify and respond to indicators of risk effectively.
There are a further three recommendations for the HM Prison and Probation Service, including to develop a national strategic approach to information sharing with police and children's services.
HM Inspectorate of Probation undertook a review of public protection measures across the region, inspecting 84 cases.
Martin Jones, chief inspector of probation, said: "Despite strong leadership commitment and clear strategic priorities to improve public protection, the delivery of work to keep people safe was not yet meeting the required standard. Staff understood its importance however, worryingly, this was not reflected consistently in the quality of assessment, planning, and delivery."
A report by the inspectorate said its findings revealed significant shortfalls in practice across the region, with effective work to keep people safe being evident in 49% of the assignments inspected. Of the cases they inspected, most involved white men, aged 36-55, with violence and sexual offending the most frequent offence types, with concerns about domestic abuse and risk to children also prevalent across the sample.
According to the inspectorate, child safeguarding practice in the service was found to be "underdeveloped and an area for urgent attention". However, inspectors found that domestic abuse information sharing had improved as a result of joint efforts by probation and police leaders.
'Systemic barriers'
The report added that managers were not consistently identifying practice deficits and opportunities to protect the public were missed.
Recruitment was also hampered by excessive vetting delays, while pay and workloads were frequently cited as retention concerns. While staffing challenges were less acute than in other areas of the country, resourcing was found to have remained a challenge for rural areas in the region such as Herefordshire, which had acute recruitment difficulties and resulted in high workloads.
Jones said: "Systemic barriers, including resourcing, organisational complexity and insufficient multi-agency communication remained significant challenges for the West Midlands region to overcome. Strengthening the skills and improving the confidence of practitioners will be essential in ensuring the region can consistently meet its public protection responsibilities."
The report made seven recommendations, with four for the West Midlands region, including to develop practitioners' confidence and skills in the use of professional curiosity, and using challenging conversations to identify and respond to indicators of risk effectively.
There are a further three recommendations for the HM Prison and Probation Service, including to develop a national strategic approach to information sharing with police and children's services.
--oo00oo--
What does AI make of this intractable paradox?
Reconciling "strong leadership" with "poor delivery" requires recognizing that a leader can be charismatic, visionary, and authoritative (strong) while lacking the operational, supportive, or strategic skills needed for successful execution (poor delivery). This paradox is frequently caused by a misalignment between high-level ambition and ground-level execution, often leading to a "leadership death spiral" where increased efforts by the leader actually hinder performance.
Here is how this misalignment can be reconciled and addressed within an organization:
1. Identifying the Root Causes
Here is how this misalignment can be reconciled and addressed within an organization:
1. Identifying the Root Causes
"Ideation Infatuation" vs. Follow-Through: The leader excels at dreaming up new ideas but lacks the discipline to execute them, moving on to the next "flavor of the month" before the first is completed.
Micromanagement: Strong, controlling leaders may feel they need to handle everything themselves. This stifles team autonomy, creates bottlenecks, and limits organizational growth.
Lack of Psychological Safety: Strong, dominant leaders can create a fear-based culture where employees are afraid to report mistakes or voice concerns, leading to hidden failures.
"Cement Mindset": The leader believes they know everything and stops seeking growth, training, or feedback, while ignoring the operational realities of their team.
Disproportionate Focus on Strategy over Execution: The leader focuses on high-level vision but fails to provide the "execution-level" detail needed by their teams.
2. Reconciliation Strategies
Shift from "Push" to "Pull" Leadership: Instead of pushing for results through micromanagement, the leader should focus on creating a "pull" environment—inspiring and motivating teams by fostering a, vision-aligned culture.
Implement 360-Degree Feedback: Utilize 360-degree feedback to bring awareness to the leader about how their strong, dominant behaviors are limiting, rather than enabling, team performance.
Formalize Accountability Structures: Reconcile the gap by setting clear, measurable goals and holding regular, structured check-ins that focus on "lead indicators" (progress) rather than just "lag measures" (final results).
Encourage "Respectful Dissent": Foster a culture where team members can safely challenge the leader's decisions, preventing costly mistakes.
3. Structural & Cultural Changes
Focus on Development: Provide coaching to help the leader transition from a "doer" to a "multiplier" who empowers others to deliver.
Align Incentives with Delivery: Ensure that the leader's incentives are tied to successful delivery, not just the articulation of a vision.
In summary, this scenario is reconciled by recognizing that "strong leadership" is often just "passionate direction," and it must be coupled with "systemic discipline" to deliver results. If the leader is unwilling to change, they may need to be moved to a role more suited to their skills, or "forced" to adopt better operational habits.
Micromanagement: Strong, controlling leaders may feel they need to handle everything themselves. This stifles team autonomy, creates bottlenecks, and limits organizational growth.
Lack of Psychological Safety: Strong, dominant leaders can create a fear-based culture where employees are afraid to report mistakes or voice concerns, leading to hidden failures.
"Cement Mindset": The leader believes they know everything and stops seeking growth, training, or feedback, while ignoring the operational realities of their team.
Disproportionate Focus on Strategy over Execution: The leader focuses on high-level vision but fails to provide the "execution-level" detail needed by their teams.
2. Reconciliation Strategies
Bridge the Gap with "Operational" Leadership: Pair the visionary, strong leader with a "doer" (e.g., COO, Project Manager) who excels at implementation, structure, and accountability.
Shift from "Push" to "Pull" Leadership: Instead of pushing for results through micromanagement, the leader should focus on creating a "pull" environment—inspiring and motivating teams by fostering a, vision-aligned culture.
Implement 360-Degree Feedback: Utilize 360-degree feedback to bring awareness to the leader about how their strong, dominant behaviors are limiting, rather than enabling, team performance.
Formalize Accountability Structures: Reconcile the gap by setting clear, measurable goals and holding regular, structured check-ins that focus on "lead indicators" (progress) rather than just "lag measures" (final results).
Encourage "Respectful Dissent": Foster a culture where team members can safely challenge the leader's decisions, preventing costly mistakes.
3. Structural & Cultural Changes
Redefine "Strong": Shift the definition of strong leadership from simply being "commanding" to being "supportive and empowering".
Focus on Development: Provide coaching to help the leader transition from a "doer" to a "multiplier" who empowers others to deliver.
Align Incentives with Delivery: Ensure that the leader's incentives are tied to successful delivery, not just the articulation of a vision.
In summary, this scenario is reconciled by recognizing that "strong leadership" is often just "passionate direction," and it must be coupled with "systemic discipline" to deliver results. If the leader is unwilling to change, they may need to be moved to a role more suited to their skills, or "forced" to adopt better operational habits.
--oo00oo--
Key Stages and Causes of the Leadership Death Spiral
Initial Overwhelm & Mismanagement: The cycle often begins with new or stressed managers trying to "do it all," leading to broken processes, lack of prioritization, and micromanagement.
Loss of Trust and Credibility: Leaders stop acting as mentors and focus on theory rather than practice, creating a disconnect with their team.
"Half-Delegation" Trap: Leaders assign tasks but fail to provide necessary context or authority, leading to inevitable failure and frustration.
Cultural Decay: A "blame culture" emerges, where negative feedback becomes self-perpetuating, resulting in low morale and disengagement.
The "Firefighting" Mode: Instead of fixing root causes, leaders focus on desperate, short-term fixes, which causes further, deeper, dysfunction.
How to Break the Cycle
Prioritize Ruthlessly: Stop trying to fix everything at once and focus on core, high-impact tasks.
True Delegation: Empower employees by providing them with both tasks and the context required to succeed.
Focus on Communication and Empathy: Actively listen to the team and rebuild trust by being consistent and transparent.
Address Root Causes: Shift from "firefighting" to addressing the underlying issues, rather than just treating symptoms.
Bravo! Please send this to McEwen so he can have a reason to start getting rid of all these excellent leaders starting with Kim and working his way swiftly down to the regional Heads
ReplyDelete