Meeting held with HR Personnel Manager, August 2006
“The MS process has provided us with a focus for addressing stress as part of everyday working”
“ The MS process has helped to raise awareness of the need for well-being programmes and stress reduction initiatives”
“I have found that it has helped to broaden my knowledge”
“It has raised and improved relationships between managers and staff”
“ It has and will remain to be hard work, getting it done and getting it done well, but the benefits are there for the taking”
Education Leeds is a not for profit private company wholly owned by Leeds City Council providing Local Education Authority services to Leeds schools. The company was established in April 2001 and works in partnership with Leeds City Council in the provision of Children’s Services.
Initial meetings were held with the Chief Executive of Leeds City Council, the Chief Executive of Education Leeds, the then Chief Executive Officer, Education Leeds Regional HSE Inspector and Education Leeds Regional Stress Implementation Project (SIP) partner.
Meetings were also held with the executive management team of Education Leeds, the Leeds Governor Forum and Leeds Head teacher Forum.
The HSE stress partner visited our Schools Health and Safety Committee and also spoke at our local Workforce Agreement Monitoring Group (WAMG) meeting.
All of these initiatives helped inform senior management of the MS process and achieved their appropriate buy-in. Commitment has continued throughout the process.
The first tranche of schools that were included within the MS project were issued information via various newsletters. These were aimed at Head teachers, Governors and school based staff. Our Union colleagues also issued information in their newsletters to all staff members.
Prior to the circulation of the MS survey we held a number of open meetings for senior managers of the schools we were to survey. We also produced and circulated postcards and posters for each school to advertise the MS survey prior to its issue and to remind staff of the importance of completing the MS survey.
The only data we have used so far has been the information returned via the MS survey. However, we shall be reviewing other data, including sickness absence, to provide a more complete picture.
We have elected not to use focus groups per se, as there have been considerable difficulties gaining the release of staff from separate schools to discuss issues that may not even pertain to their school circumstances. We are therefore advising individual schools to establish groups of staff by role to discuss their issues. Some schools will be using their school ‘change teams’ and others will group together either teaching or classroom support staff. We shall review whether this engagement is appropriate at a later date.
We are planning to use repeat surveys to establish the impact of actions/action plans? We will also be using staff absence data to show potential reductions, as well as utilizing day-to-day personnel work in schools.
Wider impact is not known at this early stage. Focus groups actions have not as yet been implemented and therefore we cannot evaluate the impact of the process.
We probably would have reduced the total number of schools in each group and introduce them on a phased basis. The groupings we have used were designed to provide a reasonable degree of information about the potential overall position – this was to enable us to provide the required data for the MS project.
The number of schools in the groups we chose range from 55 – 75. It would have been more manageable to implement it in our ‘family groups’ of between 10 to 20 schools.
1. The MS process has provided us with a focus for addressing stress as part of everyday working.
2. The MS process has enabled us to require Head teachers to do something they would not necessarily want to be involved with.
1. We decided not to establish focus groups as outlined in the MS process.
2. We found the analysis tool to be restrictive – e.g. number of filters, question sets, reports.
Allocation of available time and resource to produce specific school orientated reports; ensuring individual school managers were able to implement the MS survey.
Being part of the MS project has enabled us to learn from our mistakes and be guided by our HSE stress partner. There has also been the benefit of knowing that HSE is fully aware of what we are trying to do, in regard to reducing stress in our schools. The MS process has raised the issues of well-being and stress reduction and tying it into worklife balance and workforce reform issues.
Costs for resources, including staff time, have been estimated to be around £40,000.
Workshops with both similar and disparate organisations, offer learning points and case studies available via HSE website and provide contact details of participating organisations to allow sharing/networking opportunities.
This has been very hard work, especially doing it at the same time as the rest of the day job. However, it has enabled me to gain access into the workplace and to staff groups that I would not necessarily have gained otherwise. It has also helped to raise the awareness of the need for well-being programmes and stress reduction initiatives. I have found that it has helped to broaden my knowledge of the workplaces I support and has raised and improved relationships with managers and staff.
It has and will remain to be hard work, getting it done and getting it done well, but the benefits are there for the taking.