Case study taken from:
Learning Labs - Evaluation of the Pilot Projects 
University College Northampton

The Neighbourhood Advice & Information Service (NAIS) was formed sixteen years ago. It was initially staffed by advisers recruited from specialist departments within the council and there was some tension between the new service and traditional departments which has not completely dissipated. It provides 'one stop' access, advice and information to citizens on all City Council services and welfare benefits with a focus on maximising knowledge of, and access to, individual and family entitlement including mediation between users and council departments.

The service is provided from forty district offices throughout the city through approximately three hundred and fifty staff. In addition to the office-based service, advice surgeries are held in local hospitals and warden managed sheltered accommodation. Each week a half-day is set aside for updating, training and personal development in every office. There is general agreement among management and staff that, in the past, the service has not been particularly strong on performance management. Some dissatisfaction has been expressed over the recording of case load information and statistics, the failure of which can undervalue the service and the contribution of individual members of staff, thereby understating the need for staffing resources. This is particularly evident when comparisons are being made in determining which services might be provided through the voluntary sector and those which need to be kept in house.

In August 2000 the senior manager responsible for developing a more robust performance management system asked each local office team to explore issues of concern linked to the general question of planning for performance management. Following the study six key areas were identified for further consideration, and thirty-four potential performance indicators, linked to service objectives, which could form a basis for further development.

Learning labs, which had similarities to group work they had used in the past, appeared to offer a creative means of re-vitalising the more routine team meetings. An email was sent to all offices canvassing interest in a learning lab to undertake an examination of the performance indicators. Thirteen individuals were invited to participate in the lab and met with a facilitator to begin the process, three meetings have taken place so far.

The senior manager saw the lab as "a short term workshop with a specific task within a particular time frame". He set terms of reference for the lab but left it to the participants to decide how to handle them. He wanted results from this process which would refine their performance management system within a reasonable time-scale but if the group decided another lab was needed to deal with issues arising from those discussions that was also acceptable.

The lab members brainstormed the list of performance indicators exploring the purpose or value of each indicator, considering the availability and accuracy of the data, the appropriateness of the measure or standard used and the meaningfulness and achievability of chosen targets. Fifteen performance indicators were chosen from the thirty-four for further detailed consideration by the lab. Two meetings tackled the fifteen performance indicators identifying action points for the purpose of creating an action plan for the group to implement and monitor. The third meeting was in two parts. The first part was self managed by the group to check the accuracy and attainability of the proposed action plan followed by a session with the manager who initiated the lab to explore how to achieve implementation of the plan.

After the first session one participant observed "we have made more progress in the past two hours than we have over the past two years". Another member found the sessions enjoyable and stimulating. "I really enjoyed it and I was enthused by the opportunity for discussing the strategic as well as operational side of the job. We had a lot of positive discussion and it has been valuable to me and I think we could do with more of this".

There is a problem of initiative fatigue and some cynicism. Some staff, "on hearing that a meeting is taking place, ask me which badge is it this week", observed one participant.

It was generally felt that if learning labs were to become a regular feature there would be some problems in obtaining release for participants given the fact that staffing resources are thinly spread.

Cynicism could emerge if staff generally were unaware of the value of the lab and some work would need to take place to publicise its work.

The participants in the lab, while generally pleased with its outcomes raised a number of important questions and issues related to lab structure, processes of communication and staff motivation.

Frontline advisers in the local offices were involved in identifying the issues concerned with ‘planning for performance management’ to be explored by the lab. They will also have responsibility for putting into effect any decisions implemented in line with the lab's recommendations, but only one of their number was actually involved in the lab. However, they will have a second opportunity to contribute to the labs conclusions when these are recycled to office teams in a final round of staff consultations.

It was observed by more than one participant that the participation of advisory staff would have been useful. "It might give greater ownership of our decisions and a willingness to implement them if more advisers had been involved in the lab. It might also help to change the culture if they were involved".

Another said that frontline staff need to be involved in the lab.

In considering the duration of the labs a number of participants felt that there could be short life labs for specific purposes but also a continuing process of monitoring service provision and procedures through "something like a lab". However there was a caveat: "There is a case for both but there has to be some control. We've had groups before which have trundled on and which met even when there was nothing to talk about and everybody got sick of it".

An action plan on 15 key performance indicators has been constructed and at the time of this report discussions are taking place with senior management in the service on how they might be implemented. Individual participants are enthusiastic about the process and want to see more of this kind of activity. The senior manager has indicated his willingness for further labs to occur.

Contacts for further information

Birmingham City Council web site

Tarik Chawdry Birmingham City Council

Steve Trivett Birmingham City Council

Last Updated: 05/2002