Universitetet i Innlandet
Abstract: The project "Work first - supported by reliable management" had the intention of strengthening NAV supervisors' competence in reliable management in the follow-up and guidance of applicants and recipients of work assessment allowance (WAA) by carrying out several competence activities. The purpose of the evaluation was to explain the effect of competence activities on the NAV supervisors' experience of their competence and empowerment in managing WAA. The aim was to contribute with knowledge that can guide the design of competence activities that can support reliable management of the scheme with work clarification money. The evaluation was carried out in two phases. In Phase 1, the aim was to gain knowledge about the connections between topics that were taken up in the competence activities and how users, NAV supervisors, and managers experienced the quality of administration of the scheme with WAA. Supervisors at 10 NAV offices in Inland County participated. Reflexive thematic analysis was used for exploration of observations of competence activities and follow-up interviews with users. Participants in these were interviewed about their experiences. The analysis resulted in a deepening of the themes 1) language, use and attitudes, 2) case investigations, assessments, and decisions, 3) work orientation and guidance, 4) the activity plan, 5) communication and interaction, and 6) competence activities as the learning arena. In Phase 2, the aim was to explore whether there were systematic differences between NAV supervisors' subjective experience of the relevance of the competence activities for reliable management in the follow-up and guidance of applicants and recipients of AAP. Q-method was used to find patterns in variations between NAV supervisors' subjective experience of their own competence and authority in follow-up and guidance of applicants and recipients of WAA. 25 NAV supervisors contributed to the Q methodological survey. The data basis for this survey was statements from the thematic analysis in Phase 1 that were relevant to experiences with managing the WAA scheme. The researchers constructed 36 statements that were representative of NAV supervisors' way of talking about their experiences. Each participant sorted the statements compared to each other in a matrix based on the meaning the statement had for them. Factor analysis was carried out on the relative importance of each statement for each sorting and between all sortings. The calculations resulted in four factors. These show a pattern in variation of NAV supervisors' subjective experience of their own competence and authority. Factor 1 is called "Personal responsibility for the user". A prominent feature is that the supervisor's sense of personal responsibility for the user is a framework for the guidance. Factor 2 is called "User contact and working conditions". The supervisors feel a personal responsibility for the user, while at the same time they have users who need outreach follow-up. Users have a mental health condition that means they rarely follow up with an activity plan for active treatment and/or work-oriented measures. The supervisors feel that they have working conditions that make this follow-up difficult. Factor 3 is called "Number of users limits time for follow-up". This factor highlights that the number of users that each supervisor follows up can affect the follow-up that the users receive and thus the management of the scheme with AAP. Factor 4 is called "Alternative future prospects for being able to work". Here, a way of thinking and a procedure for work-oriented guidance come to the fore. The analysis of subjective experience of own competence and empowerment varies between four patterns that alternate in the foreground and background, influenced by the supervisor's conceptions of themselves, the other person, and their working conditions. Therefore, the effects of competence activities on the reliability of the supervisor's management of the scheme with WAA are conditioned by the activity's relevance to the supervisor's experience of their work situation. The report elaborates on the relevance of competence activities for the psychosocial work environment (personal responsibility for the user), work organization (user contact and working conditions), efficient work methods (following up many users) and ways of thinking and working in supervision (alternative prospects).
