Untitled
Untitled
Dennis Reid, Marsha Parsons, and Carolyn Green each has over
40 years of experience supervising provision of services for people
with intellectual and developmental disabilities. They have supervised
services in residential centers, schools, adult day-support services,
vocational programs, and community settings. They have also pub-
lished over 140 applied research articles and book chapters in the
human services. Their research has appeared in over 20 peer-re-
viewed journals including the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
Behavior Analysis in Practice, Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage-
ment, American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, and
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. Dennis, Marsha, and Carolyn
have received numerous awards for their respective services from
organizations such as the Association for Behavior Analysis Interna-
tional, American Association on Intellectual and Developmental
Disabilities, Organization for Autism Research, and the Office of the
Governor of North Carolina. They are currently affiliated with the
Carolina Behavior Analysis and Support Center in Morganton, North
Carolina. Additional information about the authors and their work
can be obtained at www.dennishreidau.com.
Published and Distributed Throughout the World by
vii
viii The Supervisor’s Guidebook
tried and tested means of promoting diligent and proficient staff perfor-
mance and to do so in a way that maximizes staff enjoyment with their work.
It is sincerely hoped the book fulfills this purpose for the reader.
D.R.
M.P.
C.G.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
N umerous people have helped us learn about supervision, far too many
to recognize individually. However, we have learned most from the ded-
icated and sincere staff we have been fortunate to supervise over the years.
They have greatly facilitated our jobs as supervisors and significantly en-
hanced our work enjoyment.
ix
CONTENTS
Page
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
Section I
INTRODUCTION TO SUPERVISION
Section II
xi
xii The Supervisor’s Guidebook
Section III
Section IV
Section V
SELECTED READINGS
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
THE SUPERVISOR’S GUIDEBOOK
Section I
INTRODUCTION TO SUPERVISION
Chapter 1
5
6 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
WHAT IS SUPERVISION?
EVIDENCE-BASED SUPERVISION
2. To be successful over the long run, supervision must occur in ways that
are acceptable to staff and promote staff work enjoyment.
12
An Evidence-Based Protocol for Supervising Staff Performance 13
STEPS CONSTITUTING AN
EVIDENCE-BASED APPROACH TO SUPERVISION
4. The multi-varied jobs of supervisors and direct support staff can present
practical limits to applying the evidence-based supervision protocol for
all performance expectations of staff; when such is the case supervisors
should focus their use of the protocol for effectively supervising staff per-
formance that: (1) relates most directly to assisting clients in attaining
desired outcomes and if applicable, (2) is clearly interfering with clients
attaining the outcomes.
Section II
25
26 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
priate for adults. In turn, supervisors are charged with ensuring staff
interact with adult clients in a dignified manner. However, what it
means—or what staff should actually do—to treat adult clients with dig-
nity is not always specified.
To some staff, treating older clients with dignity means that be-
cause of their adult age, clients should be allowed to spend leisure
time doing whatever they want even if some clients engage in behav-
ior likely to be detrimental to their well being. For other staff, treating
with dignity means they should treat agency clients the same way they
treat their own family members. However, how staff interact with their
family at times may be considered inappropriate when interacting
with adult clients who have disabilities.
Similar concerns sometimes exist when specification is not pro-
vided regarding what should not be done by staff to avoid interacting
with clients in ways that are not dignified. For example, some staff
refer to adult clients as “their kids,” even though the clients are not
children. Relatedly, some staff interact with adults in ways appropri-
ate for children but not for adults, which can cast the adult clients in
an undignified light. Although these ways of interacting with adults
who have disabilities may seem rather natural for some staff, they are
often inappropriate. Staff need to be clearly informed when these
ways of interacting are not acceptable.
In short, if an agency and its supervisors value staff interacting
with older clients with dignity, then they must make it clear specifi-
cally what it means to interact in dignified versus undignified ways. It
may be specified, for example, that staff should refer to adult clients
as adults and not children, and staff should not actively encourage
child-like activities among adult clients. The point is that dignity and
interacting with dignity mean different things to different people.
What an agency means by dignity should be clearly specified for staff
in terms of interactive behaviors they should and should not engage
in while at work.
The purpose of this chapter is to describe how supervisors can
specify performance responsibilities in a clear manner for staff. Again,
without such specification, staff are often uncertain regarding precise-
ly what they should and should not do during the daily work routine.
Lack of clear performance expectations also makes it highly unlikely
that supervisors will be successful in promoting quality staff perfor-
mance on a day-to-day basis.
Specifying Staff Work Responsibilities 27
times, believes that even though staff reliably report to work they do
not show initiative because they rarely begin certain duties unless
specifically requested to do so by the supervisor. In this case, the two
supervisors will have differing opinions about staff initiative with
work, and will go about supervisory duties (e.g., attempting to support
or correct the performance) in differing and possibly conflicting ways.
To avoid the situation just illustrated, a rather general performance
expectation such as “showing initiative” must be specified as work
behavior. Supervisors must exert the effort in their particular work set-
ting to specify the types of work behavior that reflect initiative and at
times, a lack of initiative. For something as general as “work initiative,”
supervisors usually must identify for staff a variety of work behaviors
such as beginning duties without being instructed to do so, asking
supervisors questions about a duty when they are not sure what to do,
reporting problems to a supervisor as soon as they become aware of
the problems, and persisting with a job duty beyond expected time
periods if more time is needed to complete the duty.
Specifying performance responsibilities as work behavior is also
important when supervisors are concerned about job-related prob-
lems staff may be experiencing that interfere with quality work. To
illustrate, many supervisors have been concerned at times that certain
staff have a bad attitude about work. Everyone has an idea regarding
what constitutes a bad attitude, but everyone’s idea may not be the
same. Some supervisors may believe staff have a bad attitude because
they frequently complain about work assignments. Other supervisors
may believe staff have a bad attitude because they rarely interact with
a supervisor unless specifically addressed by the supervisor.
In the situations just summarized, staff are likely to be given dif-
ferent directions about their attitude, and what should be done to
change or improve it. Staff themselves also may have conflicting views
regarding what constitutes a bad attitude about work and believe their
attitude is just fine. Such differences result in confusion for both super-
visors and staff and impede the likelihood that any supervisor action
to improve the bad attitude will be successful. Again though, if super-
visors specify what is meant by a good or bad attitude as work-related
behavior when there are concerns about staff attitude, the occasion is
set for supervisors to help staff improve their attitude.
Specifying general performance responsibilities like work initiative
and a good attitude as work behavior takes time and effort by super-
Specifying Staff Work Responsibilities 29
visors. Like doing many things, however, it becomes easier with prac-
tice. Some general performance areas that supervisors have delineat-
ed as specific work behavior are presented in the following table. The
examples are not hard and fast rules regarding behaviors that repre-
sent each performance responsibility, only some illustrations that have
proven helpful in certain situations. Each supervisor, perhaps with the
assistance of upper management, must decide what specific work
behaviors are most relevant for given situations and staff.
Specification of performance responsibilities as work behavior is
also important for job duties that are more discrete or circumscribed
than general performance expectations such as showing initiative or a
good attitude. To illustrate, in residential centers many supervisors
spend considerable time arranging staff work schedules to ensure re-
quired numbers of staff are on duty across a 24-hour day. If a staff per-
son unexpectedly fails to report to work, the supervisor must spend
extra time re-arranging the work schedule. In such situations it is usu-
ally critical that staff notify the supervisor prior to when they will not
be reporting to work (due to illness, lack of transportation to get to work,
etc.). Generally, however, simply informing staff that they should noti-
fy the supervisor prior to an absence is not sufficient. Instead, the su-
pervisor should specify that such notification must occur, for example,
at least two hours before the beginning of a staff person’s work shift.
observe staff ask a client what type of condiment was desired and then
see no corresponding response by the client (due perhaps to the client
lacking the skills to respond meaningfully to what staff asked). The
supervisor is likely to be in a quandary over whether that represented
a choice opportunity presented by staff, even if staff believed a choice
opportunity was provided. In contrast, in the former situation that
specified staff behaviors for providing client choices, there would be
no difficulty determining whether a choice opportunity was presented.
are also more specific strategies supervisors can use to accomplish this
key component of evidence-based supervision. Two of the most help-
ful are developing performance checklists and work activity schedules.
Performance Checklists
A performance checklist is a written listing of all the key actions
or staff behaviors necessary to perform a certain duty. A performance
checklist is analogous to a task analysis often used when teaching a
learner with a severe disability how to complete a task that has a num-
ber of steps. In this case the list refers to staff actions necessary to per-
form a work duty.
An example of a performance checklist is provided in the follow-
ing illustration. This particular checklist specifies necessary steps for
cleaning the front porch of a group home in a residential neighbor-
hood. This type of checklist was developed because an agency’s man-
agement was receiving complaints from the home’s neighbors that the
porch was often in disarray and detracted from the neighborhood’s
appearance. The process for cleaning the porch as indicated by the
sequence of actions to be completed by staff does not represent a uni-
versally accepted means of cleaning a porch. It is simply how one
home’s supervisors decided that their porch could be adequately
cleaned. In this regard, performance checklists are almost always sit-
uation specific; each supervisor will have to determine what type of
checklist is most helpful for a given responsibility of staff.
4. Sweep porch.
staff input into every decision the supervisor has to make regarding
delineation of performance responsibilities. The same guidelines dis-
cussed earlier regarding specification of performance responsibilities
in general are also relevant for determining when to involve staff in
the specification process. Specifically, supervisors should strive to
involve staff in specifying performance responsibilities that relate most
directly to client outcome attainment and responsibilities that relate to
problem areas that interfere with client outcome attainment.
Another priority for staff involvement in the process of specifying
performance responsibilities pertains to those aspects of the work rou-
tine that are most important to staff. In every job situation there are cer-
tain things that are very important to staff. When a supervisor address-
es those aspects of the job as part of the performance specification
process, it is especially beneficial to actively solicit staff input. What is
particularly important to staff will vary from agency to agency, but
there are several areas that are almost always among the most impor-
tant for staff. Provided below are some of these areas.
Mandatory overtime
Whenever a supervisor must alter any of the job aspects just illus-
trated, staff acceptance of the supervisory action is likely to be signif-
icantly enhanced if the supervisor involves staff in the process.
Correspondingly, work enjoyment is less likely to be negatively
impacted by the supervisor’s actions if the supervisor involves staff in
the process. To illustrate, many agencies experience staffing issues
from time to time such that it is necessary to require someone to work
overtime. Staff will usually be more accepting about working overtime
if they have been involved in developing the process of how it will be
determined which staff will be required for overtime when needed.
In contrast to the participative process just summarized, if a super-
visor decides how overtime assignments will be determined without
staff input, some staff are more likely to be displeased when they are
unexpectedly assigned to work overtime. In the latter situation, staff
may believe, for example, that the supervisor is “picking on them” or
showing favoritism to certain staff. Conversely, other staff are likely to
be displeased that they were not afforded opportunities to earn over-
time pay. These types of negative reactions are much less likely if staff
had input into determining the process the supervisor uses to decide
who will work overtime.
42
Training Work Skills to Staff 43
behavioral skills training or BST. The steps constituting BST have been
used in research and application to train a wide variety of important
job skills to support staff, including how to teach people with disabil-
ities, provide choices, lift and transfer individuals who are nonambu-
latory, carry out behavior support plans, and adapt electronic devices
for use by people with physical challenges, to name just a few. The
training steps constituting BST represent a very valuable tool for
supervisors when needing to train job skills to staff.
is to document that the staff generalize what they learned during train-
ing to the actual job situation in which they are expected to apply the
skills. Such on-the-job observation should also be followed by feed-
back as just described. Likewise, Step 4 of BST should be repeated in
the routine work site until staff demonstrate competence. It is only
when the supervisor observes staff perform the target skills proficient-
ly during their regular work situation that the training can be consid-
ered complete.
There are two main formats for training staff in specified work
skills. One format, which is more formal in nature, pertains to train-
ing a group of staff. The second format, which is more informal,
involves training an individual staff member. Supervisors should be
well skilled in using each of these two training formats.
garding the new job duty (refer to Chapter 3 regarding work activity
schedules). The supervisor should also inform staff that their perfor-
mance of the target skills will be observed as they apply the skills on
the job. It should be explained that the observations are a continua-
tion of the training process. As discussed in the next chapter, inform-
ing staff that their performance will be observed and why it will be
observed helps reduce apprehension among staff that often occurs
when a supervisor formally observes their work performance on the
job.
In addition to following the BST protocol when conducting a
group training session with staff, there are some special considerations
to enhance effectiveness of the training. One consideration is for the
supervisor to solicit the assistance of someone to help conduct the
training. This is especially relevant if training focuses on work duties
designed by someone other than the supervisor.
To illustrate, again considering the example in which staff are
being trained to teach supported-work skills to a client, the teaching
program that the staff are expected to carry out was developed by a
clinician. Because the clinician is the most informed person regarding
the teaching program, it would be helpful if the clinician assisted the
supervisor in conducting the training session. It such situations, the
supervisor should also be assertive in soliciting the clinician’s partici-
pation in the preparatory activities described earlier prior to the train-
ing session with staff.
Another consideration with group training sessions pertains to
ensuring that the training focuses on performing the target skills. There
is a tendency among staff trainers (including supervisors) to spend too
much time talking during a training session and not enough time
demonstrating target skills and having staff practice the skills. Trainers
must remember that the key to effective skill training stems from the
performance aspects: staff seeing how the work duty is performed and
then practicing it themselves (followed by receiving feedback). There-
fore, the majority of the staff training session should be spent on the
trainer demonstrations and trainee practice activities with the role
plays.
When trainers spend more time talking to staff relative to demon-
strating and staff practicing, there is a detrimental effect on training
effectiveness beyond staff not having sufficient opportunities to actu-
ally see and practice the target skill. Specifically, when trainers spend
56 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
where the training occurs, the supervisor should go through the five
steps of BST in a systematic manner.
Another variation pertains to the demonstration and trainee prac-
tice steps of BST. Often, the supervisor can ask the staff person to play
a certain role, such as that of a client if the target skill involves inter-
acting with a client, while the supervisor demonstrates the skill. Next,
the supervisor and staff person should exchange roles so that the staff
person can demonstrate the skill. In some cases though, and particu-
larly with complex work skills that involve a number of behavioral
steps to complete, it is more effective and efficient if a supervisor solic-
its the help of someone else to assist with the role-play demonstration
(e.g., another supervisor, a clinician, an experienced staff person).
Subsequent to the staff person’s correct demonstration in a role-play
situation, the demonstration can then be conducted with a client if rel-
evant.
Training within a staff person’s routine work setting is usually the
most efficient way to train staff on an individual basis. Once the staff
person demonstrates the target skill correctly, the training is complet-
ed. The supervisor does not have to go to the staff person’s work site
at a later time, as when training occurs in a different location, to
ensure the staff person can perform the skill in the regular job setting
(i.e., because the training is conducted in the actual job site). However,
if the skill being trained involves interacting with clients, then the
supervisor has to be sufficiently familiar with the clients to accurately
demonstrate the target skill with the clients. This is not always the case
when a supervisor works with a large number of staff who in turn
work with a large number of clients. In the latter case the initial de-
monstration should probably be conducted in a role-play manner.
ified work skills. If BST also serves another purpose such as that just
illustrated, that purpose should be considered secondary.
Ensure Staff Competence During Role-Play Activities. One
means for a supervisor to minimize the amount of time to conduct
BST pertains to the trainee practice activities, and particularly when
training a group of staff. As previously described, trainee practice of
the target skills (accompanied by trainer feedback) should first occur
during the group training session and then individually with staff in
their work setting. One aspect of this approach that often involves a
considerable amount of supervisor time is when various staff do not
perform the target skills competently on the job. When this occurs,
the supervisor has to conduct repeated on-the-job training interactions
with a staff person that can entail going to the person’s work site
repeatedly to complete the training.
One way to reduce a supervisor’s time due to a staff person not
demonstrating competence on the job is to ensure each staff member
attending the group training session demonstrates competence during
the role-play practice. When possible, it is helpful to have each staff
person perform the target skills competently at least twice during sep-
arate role plays within the group session. Typically, the better the com-
petence displayed by staff during role plays, the better they will per-
form the target skills later on the job.
Sometimes trainers become rushed and hurry through a group
training session such that they do not sufficiently observe all staff
members perform the target skills correctly. When this occurs, there is
increased likelihood that certain staff will have difficulty performing
the skills competently on the job (which then requires additional time
by the supervisor to complete the training). In short, the more time
spent ensuring staff are competent during the initial role plays, the less
time will usually be needed to ensure their competence on the job.
mented. However, the behavior analyst did not have to meet with the
group of staff to initiate the training process because this was accom-
plished by staff viewing the video.
Use of the video reduced the behavior analyst’s time to train staff rel-
ative to the usual process of conducting a group training session followed
by individual staff training on the job. One reason the video component
reduced trainer time was because when conducting group training with
staff, it is common that several sessions are required to make sure all staff
receive the training. Often supervisors and other trainers have to sched-
ule several group training sessions because not all staff can attend a given
session due to different work schedules or absences from work. By using
a video for the group training component, the trainer’s presence is not
required for repeated training sessions with different groups of staff.
However, when considering using visual media in such a manner, the
amount of time to develop the video must also be taken into account.
Another approach to using media that can provide the practice-
with-feedback component of BST is through videoconferencing appli-
cations. Videoconferencing allows for real-time observation and inter-
action between a trainer and trainee from different locations. Use of vid-
eoconferencing and related applications of what is considered telehealth
services for working with caregivers has recently become an area of
growing interest in the human services. Telehealth services are dis-
cussed in detail in Chapter 14 in regard to providing remote or dis-
tance supervision (including staff training). The point here is that use
of visual media to reduce time to train staff warrants consideration as
long as staff are still required and observed to demonstrate compe-
tence in performing the target work skills on the job. As emphasized pre-
viously, training should never be considered complete—regardless of
whether media-based procedures are used or not—until staff trainees
are observed to perform the target work skills competently on the job.
enjoyment with the role plays. Otherwise, the role plays can actually
decrease staff enjoyment.
More specifically, some staff are likely to feel awkward or uncom-
fortable when initially requested to participate in role-play activities.
Supervisors can help staff avoid the latter experiences by informing
them prior to role plays that they may be a little uneasy when first par-
ticipating in the role plays. Supervisors should likewise inform staff
that such feelings are common and they should not be surprised or
bothered by feeling awkward or uncomfortable.
Supervisors should further explain that as the role plays continue,
staff are more likely to feel comfortable with the activities. This is one
reason supervisors should always follow staff practice activities with
feedback that includes letting them know what they performed well.
Receiving positive feedback from the supervisor helps staff enjoy the
role-play activities and be more comfortable during subsequent role
plays.
monitoring also represents the basis for Step 7 of the supervisory pro-
tocol, that of evaluating staff performance.
As with monitoring, evaluating staff performance should be an
ongoing activity of supervisors. Evaluating staff performance involves
reviewing the results of monitoring to assess the quality of staff per-
formance and whether supervisor actions have had the desired impact
on staff fulfillment of their duties. Evaluating is listed as the final step
in the protocol only to indicate that it should follow every action a
supervisor takes to affect staff work performance.
FORMAL MONITORING
at all times, ensuring the VOCA was operative (i.e., the batteries were
charged), prompting the client to use the VOCA when the client
attempted to communicate through gestures, and praising the client’s
use of the VOCA.
Subsequently, the supervisor had trained staff how to provide the
VOCA, check the batteries, and prompt and praise the client’s VOCA
use. The supervisor could then periodically enter the adult activity site
and observe staff behavior to monitor how well they performed the
specified duties necessary to promote the client’s use of the VOCA. If
respective staff were appropriately completing the targeted duties,
then the supervisor could actively support their behavior. In contrast,
if certain staff were not adequately performing the designated work
behaviors, the supervisor could take corrective action to improve their
performance. Specifically how the supervisor might support or correct
work behavior will be described in subsequent chapters. The point of
concern here is that the supervisor must formally monitor staff per-
formance to know how well they are performing and consequently,
what further action should be taken.
Before discussing the intricacies of formally monitoring staff per-
formance, a qualification is warranted regarding how results of formal
monitoring should and should not be used. One outcome of formally
monitoring staff performance is the collection of data regarding the
quality of the observed performance. Many human service agencies
have formal monitoring systems in place for use by supervisors. Some
larger agencies also have certain personnel other than supervisors
whose primary job is to monitor staff performance, such as individu-
als working within the agencies’ quality assurance or improvement
departments. The availability of data obtained through such monitor-
ing is a highly useful resource for supervisors—if used appropriately.
The qualification warranting attention is that data collected on the
quality of staff work activities must be used by supervisors to either
support or correct staff performance. Often what happens is that col-
lection of data on staff performance becomes basically institutional-
ized within an agency and over time, the obtained information is not
used for its intended purpose. The information is stored in a central
location, and perhaps summarized periodically for various personnel,
but then essentially ignored or discarded.
When this situation occurs, the monitoring serves no useful pur-
pose for the supervisor. Additionally, as will be discussed later, such a
Monitoring Staff Performance 71
sistent and often conflicting information about the quality of staff per-
formance.
When formal monitoring is conducted objectively on focused
areas of staff work performance, it is more likely that the monitoring
will occur in a consistent manner. Formally monitoring staff perfor-
mance must be conducted using a consistent method to obtain accu-
rate information on the quality of staff performance over time. If
supervisors conduct monitoring inconsistently across monitoring ses-
sions, the information resulting from the monitoring will be of little
use to supervisors.
When monitoring is done inconsistently, supervisors tend to look
at different aspects of what staff are doing during various monitoring
sessions. Consequently, supervisors will have inconsistent information
about the quality of staff work because the supervisors are not looking
at the same work behavior over time. Supervisors also will not be able
to objectively determine if their efforts to support or correct an area
of staff performance are effective; the monitoring will not be consis-
tently focused on the area of concern.
Date: ______________________________________________
____________________________________________________
74 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
_____________________________________________________
Monitoring Summary:
INFORMAL MONITORING
1. Monitor frequently.
performance.
When other agency personnel assist a supervisor in formally mon-
itoring staff performance, those personnel should follow the same
guidelines discussed to this point regarding the supervisor’s own mon-
itoring of staff performance. This is particularly the case in regard to
how a formal monitoring session should be conducted. Again, those
guidelines involve informing staff about upcoming monitoring prior to
the monitoring, greeting staff upon entering and departing the staff
workplace, discontinuing monitoring if a situation arises in which
someone could be harmed or embarrassed, and providing at least
some positive feedback soon after the monitoring is completed.
Agency personnel who formally monitor staff performance should
monitor in a way that is acceptable to staff for the same reasons that
supervisors need to be concerned about staff acceptance of monitor-
ing. Additionally, when someone other than the supervisor monitors
staff performance, that person’s actions are often viewed by staff as an
extension of the supervisor. Staff are aware that the monitoring is
occurring with the supervisor’s knowledge and the supervisor will be
aware of results of the monitoring. If the monitoring is conducted in
a way that is not acceptable to staff, then staff will likely view the mon-
itor in a less than approving nature. Such a view will also be extend-
ed to the supervisor who usually is considered to be at least partially
responsible for the actions of the monitor.
5. Formal monitoring should occur most frequently when: (1) staff are
expected to perform recently trained work skills, (2) corrective action has
recently been taken with a specified area of work performance, (3) a
supervisor has concerns over insufficient work quality and, (4) staff per-
form duties most directly related to client attainment of desired outcomes
or engage in activities interfering with completion of those duties.
SUPPORTING PROFICIENT
WORK PERFORMANCE:
POSITIVE FEEDBACK
91
92 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
AN EVIDENCE-BASED PROTOCOL
FOR PROVIDING FEEDBACK
lets the staff person know exactly what was performed appropriately
and how the staff person should continue to perform specified aspects
of a task. To effectively serve these purposes, the feedback must be
very specific in terms of describing appropriate work behavior of the
staff person.
Often supervisors tend to be more general when providing feed-
back to staff about their appropriate work performance. For example,
when giving feedback to a staff person regarding carrying out a client’s
teaching program, a supervisor may say something like “You did a
nice job with the teaching program.” or “Awesome teaching!”. These
types of rather broad statements can be helpful in certain situations as
will be discussed later. For the purposes of this step of the feedback
protocol, however, such statements are too general.
Information related to the staff person’s teaching should be much
more specific about the staff person’s actual teaching behavior. More
specific information would be represented by a statement such as
“When the client did not respond to your first prompt you always pro-
vided more assistance on the next prompt—that is exactly how least-
to-most assistive prompting is supposed to be done.” The specificity of
the latter statement is much more helpful for ensuring the staff person
knows precisely what was performed correctly, and what should be
continued.
ensure the staff person knows exactly what was not performed cor-
rectly.
ing with a staff person for a formal feedback session. Over time, the
supervisor will no longer need such a review because following the
steps will essentially become routine for the supervisor.
sented. Conversely, other staff will attend to and remember only the
negative information. A concern has also been expressed that if a
supervisor is going to present any type of negative information about
a staff person’s performance, most staff prefer the supervisor to get
straight to the problem issue. The latter concern is based on the view
that when the negative information is embedded between positive
comments, staff will perceive that the supervisor is essentially “sugar-
coating” the problem issue and discredit the supervisor for not being
more forthright.
Despite these concerns with the perceived “sandwich” format of
the feedback protocol, it is still generally recommended that supervi-
sors rely on the protocol when presenting formal feedback. There are
several key reasons for the recommendation. First, because investiga-
tions repeatedly have demonstrated the effectiveness of the protocol
for both reinforcing proficient performance of human service staff and
improving nonproficient performance, the protocol has a strong evi-
dence base to support its use. Second, research has also indicated that
use of the protocol in its entirety is typically well received by staff.
Additionally, when the feedback protocol is used in conjunction
with the other steps of outcome management, problems with staff per-
formance tend to be minimized. Most applications of the protocol will
therefore pertain only to supporting proficient staff performance such
that corrective feedback will not need to be included within most feed-
back presentations (i.e., Steps 3 and 4 of the protocol are not applica-
ble). Negative information therefore is not interspersed between posi-
tive information which negates concerns with the reported “sand-
wiching” of information. Relatedly, because presentation of positive
information is not routinely followed by negative information to a staff
person, presentation of the former information it is not likely to signal
to the individual that negative information is forthcoming.
Nonetheless, the potential “sandwich effect” is noted here because
of reported concerns in this regard. Additional research is needed to
better validate the concerns. Such research may also determine spe-
cific types of situations in which the concerns do and do not apply.
Informal Feedback
As discussed in Chapter 5, an ongoing responsibility of supervi-
sors is to monitor staff performance on an informal basis. As also
stressed, a primary reason for supervisors to informally monitor staff
performance is to be able to provide frequent positive feedback for
work performed appropriately. When positive feedback is presented
after informally monitoring staff work, it is usually of an informal
nature.
Informal positive feedback involves a supervisor simply telling a
staff person about one or more aspects involved in completing a task
that were performed proficiently. In essence, informal feedback
involves carrying out Step 2 of the evidence-based feedback protocol
as just noted for at least one specific area of staff performance. Again,
frequently informing staff about work behavior they have performed
proficiently is the most readily available and effective means for a
supervisor to support proficient work and enhance staff enjoyment
with their work.
Supervisors should be continuously looking for good work perfor-
mance of staff for which they can provide positive feedback on an
Supporting Proficient Work Performance 111
steps to ensure they find the time to provide frequent positive feed-
back to staff.
Making sure positive feedback is presented frequently to staff can
be particularly difficult for supervisors who work with large numbers
of staff or with staff in different workplaces. In these cases, supervisors
should attempt to include informal feedback within interactions they
have with staff for other purposes. For example, when interacting with
a staff person to provide a duty assignment or related information, the
supervisor can take an extra minute or two and express commenda-
tion for an aspect of the staff member’s recently observed performance.
It can also be helpful in some cases for supervisors to maintain a
table or chart on which they record when positive feedback has been
provided to respective staff. Supervisors can review their recordings
on a weekly basis to ensure each staff person has been provided with
at least some feedback. If supervisors notice that they did not provide
positive feedback to certain staff during the week, they can then make
special attempts to interact with those staff as soon as reasonable for
the purpose of providing feedback.
Written Feedback
Throughout the previous discussion on feedback, the focus has
been on supervisors speaking to staff about their work performance.
Feedback can also be provided using a variety of written formats.
Some ways to provide written feedback are quite formal, such as with
a form specifically prepared to provide information on the quality of
a designated area of staff performance. To illustrate, a form may be
prepared that lists each expected behavior of a staff member’s as-
signed teaching task with a client. The supervisor then writes in infor-
mation or scores check-boxes regarding how well, for example, the
staff member provided prompts in the designated manner, and rein-
forced client responses. The form that summarizes how well the staff
Supporting Proficient Work Performance 113
sors who work with many staff in different locations. Supervisors can
prepare written feedback for several staff persons and then send the
information through interagency mail or e-mail to each individual.
This process is much quicker relative to supervisors going to each staff
person’s workplace to speak with staff individually to present the feed-
back.
Disadvantages of Written Feedback. There is one primary dis-
advantage of written feedback: it does not involve face-to-face inter-
actions between a supervisor and a staff person as does feedback pro-
vided vocally. As noted earlier, face-to-face interactions are important
for evaluating how a staff person responds to a supervisor’s feedback.
Providing feedback in written form also does not allow a supervisor
an immediate opportunity to solicit information from the staff person
about the feedback that was provided, or for the staff person to seek
clarification if necessary.
Because of the noted disadvantage of written feedback, it is rec-
ommended that supervisors not rely solely or even predominantly on
this means of providing feedback to staff. Written feedback should be
a periodic supplement to feedback presented vocally to staff in face-
to-face interactions. Vocal feedback, and particularly informally pre-
sented vocal feedback, should be the primary means for supervisors
to provide information to staff about their work quality and to support
proficient performance overall.
One way to capitalize on the advantages of both vocal and written
feedback is to provide feedback both ways for a given aspect of staff
performance. This means of providing feedback pertains primarily to
more formal feedback presentations. The supervisor meets with a staff
person, provides vocal feedback in accordance with the feedback pro-
tocol, and then gives the staff person a written summary of what was
just described. The inclusion of the written summary in this manner
often makes the feedback more appreciated by the staff person rela-
tive to just listening to the supervisor’s presentation of the feedback.
The only drawback to combining vocal and written feedback is the
extra time and effort required of supervisors relative to presenting the
feedback in just one of the two ways. Therefore, supervisors will need
to be somewhat judicious in their use of combined vocal and written
feedback. A helpful guideline for when to provide feedback in both
spoken and written formats is to reserve this approach for the most
important aspects of staff performance and those aspects that have
Supporting Proficient Work Performance 115
the performance during the year and provided written feedback, the
resulting evaluation is usually incomplete and not representative of
the individual’s overall performance; the supervisor simply cannot
remember all aspects of how the staff person has performed.
In contrast to the scenario just described, if a supervisor has pro-
vided written feedback frequently during the year, then the supervisor
will be in a much better position to provide an accurate annual eval-
uation. The supervisor can review copies of the written feedback and
use that information to provide a detailed summary of the perfor-
mance covering the entire year. In this manner, frequent written feed-
back serves two important functions. First, it can support the staff per-
son’s performance and work enjoyment when it is provided. Second,
the availability of the written information facilitates the supervisor’s
job of providing an accurate annual evaluation.
back to staff in a way that makes other staff aware of the feedback.
Therefore, information about staff performance that was problematic
or otherwise not proficient generally should not be publicly posted.
Even when publicly posting commendation for staff performance
with positive feedback, special care should be taken. Reasons for con-
cerns with positive feedback presented vocally in a nonprivate man-
ner as discussed earlier are also relevant with public posting. A relat-
ed concern pertains to one of the advantages of publicly posted feed-
back—that of other staff seeing the positive comments about the per-
formance of certain staff and then offering their own commendation
to the latter staff.
The concern with positive feedback that is publicly posted is a
supervisor has no control over what other staff say to the staff whose
performance is addressed with public posting. Although the intent is
for other staff to provide additional commendation, such staff may
provide negative comments to the staff whose performance was
addressed with public posting. The negative nature of the comments
is due to features also discussed previously with presentation of feed-
back in a nonprivate manner (e.g., the staff may be jealous of the staff
whose performance was publicly commended or believe that the lat-
ter staff have been trying to gain special favor with the supervisor in
inappropriate ways).
Outcome-Based Feedback
To this point discussion has focused on providing feedback based
on observed staff performance. Feedback can also be presented based
on the outcome of staff work activities. Instead of using the evidence-
based protocol to deliver feedback about how staff have performed a
given work task, the feedback is provided regarding the outcome or
effect of performing the task.
Outcome-based feedback is generally used with two types of staff
work responsibilities. One type pertains to staff duties that result in an
observable change in some aspect of client welfare. The other type
involves staff performance that results in a change in the physical envi-
ronment of the workplace or completion of an observable product.
A common example of providing feedback based on improvement
in client welfare that results from proficient staff performance relates
to client skill development. Staff may be assigned, for example, to
teach certain types of daily living skills to clients with severe intellec-
tual disabilities, such as how to set the table for supper. After desig-
nated staff have been carrying out the teaching program for setting the
table for a week or so, a supervisor may observe that the client is now
setting the table independently at suppertime. The supervisor could
then provide feedback to staff about how well the client is setting the
table. In this situation all feedback steps usually would not be neces-
sary, just a variation of Step 2 in which the appropriate table-setting
activities of the client are described for the responsible staff accom-
panied by commendation for their success in teaching the client.
There are numerous other examples of staff work activities that di-
rectly affect client welfare for which outcome-based, positive feedback
could be provided to staff. Some of the most common include reduc-
tions in a client’s challenging behavior following staff implementation
of the client’s behavior support plan, apparent increases in a client’s
Supporting Proficient Work Performance 123
come of staff interacting in dignified ways with adult clients that super-
visors could observe at a later time in order to provide outcome-based
feedback. Nonetheless, there are many performance responsibilities
of staff that do result in clear outcomes and for those, outcome-based
feedback can be an advantageous way for supervisors to support qual-
ity staff performance and work enjoyment.
SUPPORTING PROFICIENT
WORK PERFORMANCE:
SPECIAL RECOGNITION PROCEDURES
127
128 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
that has nothing to do with quality performance (e.g., the award recip-
ient has a social or familial relationship with the supervisor). When
the latter situation occurs, presentation of the award can have delete-
rious effects on staff whose performance seems more deserving rela-
tive to the work accomplishments of the award recipient. The former
staff tend to view the supervisor’s actions as representing concern for
the supervisor’s relationship with the award recipient and not for qual-
ity work behavior of staff. The end result is the award can actually
diminish staff motivation to perform their duties proficiently.
Peer Awards
One type of special recognition award that warrants additional
consideration by supervisors to ensure a supportive effect on staff per-
formance is peer awards. Peer awards involve a group of staff deter-
mining, usually through a voting process, which of their peers should
receive a special performance award. When a staff person receives a
special award based on the opinion of the person’s peers, the sup-
portive effect of the award can be particularly powerful for the staff
person. Many people are especially appreciative of being recognized
by their peers for work accomplishments.
The specific consideration warranting attention by supervisors
with peer awards is that supervisors cannot control what influences
the peer basis of the award. Although the intent is for staff to recog-
nize a peer for work accomplishments, staff may base their recom-
mendation on other factors such as social popularity. Therefore, super-
visors must take care in setting up the award process to require staff
to nominate a peer for a special award with a clear indication of why
the peer’s work accomplishments are deserving of the award.
132 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
respect when it is clear that all staff have contributed something worth-
while to a particular service component within an agency.
Formal appreciation events for staff should be considered in light
of their benefits and potential detriments for supporting staff perfor-
mance and enjoyment. An additional consideration pertains to the
amount of time and effort (and potential financial cost) for supervisors
to sponsor the events. Typically, a significant amount of supervisor
time and effort, as well as that of other agency personnel, is necessary
to sponsor an event for which staff are truly appreciative. This is
another reason formal appreciation events should be a supplement to
more routine means of supporting staff performance and work enjoy-
ment, and should be provided only occasionally.
Performance Lotteries
A rather unique way to provide special recognition awards is
through performance lotteries. A performance lottery involves the fol-
lowing basic process. A criterion of acceptable performance initially is
established in regard to completing a certain work task. Next, staff
performance of the task is formally monitored on a regular basis. On
a set schedule, such as monthly, the monitoring results are reviewed
and a determination is made regarding the staff whose performance
met the established criterion. The names of the latter staff subsequent-
ly are placed into the lottery and one or more names are randomly
drawn to represent the lottery winners. Finally, the lottery winners are
provided with a preferred item, activity, or privilege. To illustrate, var-
ious agencies have provided winners of performance lotteries with gift
certificates for local stores or restaurants, opportunities to be relieved
of a chosen work task for a period of time (usually to be performed by
the supervisor for the staff person), and desired work schedules or pre-
ferred parking places for a specified time period.
134 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
that the supervisor has concerns about some aspect of their work. This
typically occurs in those agencies characterized by a negative man-
agement style.
As indicated previously, when agencies are operated in a predom-
inantly negative manner, management attention usually focuses on
problematic staff performance and good performance receives mini-
mal recognition. Therefore, when informed that a supervisor needs to
meet with staff, the staff suspect that something is wrong and criticism
is forthcoming. When staff subsequently become aware that the pur-
pose of the meeting is not to discuss problematic issues but to ac-
knowledge good performance, however, two beneficial effects result.
First, staff are relieved that their work is not being criticized. Second,
staff tend to feel good about their performance that is commended,
and appreciate their supervisor’s expression of commendation.
An alternative and more efficient way to conduct a special recog-
nition meeting is for the meeting to take place in conjunction with a
regularly scheduled meeting that occurs for another purpose. For
example, a supervisor may hold a meeting to inform staff of an up-
coming agency event and at the end of the meeting, request a staff per-
son to meet a few extra minutes with the supervisor. The supervisor
then indicates that the purpose of meeting privately with the staff per-
son is to express appreciation or commendation for some aspect of
the person’s performance. Positive feedback is then presented that
specifies precisely what the staff person has done that warrants special
commendation.
ly strive to increase the good aspects of staffs’ work situation and de-
crease the bad aspects. In essence, the more positive events a super-
visor can make happen for staff in lieu of negative events, the more
enjoyable the work environment becomes for staff. Additionally, when
positive events provided by a supervisor occur in response to good
work performance, the supervisor’s actions can support staff in con-
tinuing to perform their work duties in a proficient manner.
A means of turning negative aspects of the staff work routine into
positive events in addition to special recognition meetings involves what
is referred to as taking home the goods. There is a rather common view
in the human services that staff should not take work home with them.
This actually means that staff should not let negative or unpleasant
events at work impede their quality of life when not at work—staff
should not take home the bad aspects of a job. A typical example is
when staff have an unpleasant experience at work and then tend to
focus on the bad work experience while at home. Staff may worry
about what happened at work, or experience frustration or anger
about something that happened. The more staff think about the neg-
ative job experience, the worse it makes them feel.
Thinking about the bad aspects of work while at home, or “taking
home the bad” as referred to here, is usually not a pleasant situation
for staff. Supervisors can turn the situation around by helping staff
take home the good aspects of a job. Specifically, an opportune time
for a supervisor to meet with a staff person to provide positive feed-
back about work performance is immediately before the staff person
leaves work for the day. When the last thing that happens for a staff
person before leaving work is that the supervisor sought out the staff
person for the sole purpose of commending the person’s work perfor-
mance, the person’s workday ends on an upbeat or pleasant note.
In the situation just described, if a staff person does think about
work when at home, it is likely the staff person will focus at least in
part on the last event that happened at work—the positive things the
supervisor made a special effort to say about the individual’s work.
This process can help the staff person feel good about the job. Again,
it represents a means of turning a potentially negative experience of
being discontented about work while at home into a pleasant experi-
ence associated with thinking about the supervisor’s positive feedback.
Supporting Proficient Work Performance 139
When staff receive a contact from work that provides good news
or is otherwise positive in nature, the contact usually represents an un-
expectedly pleasant event for staff that is associated with their job. Re-
ceiving good news in this manner is often appreciated by staff. Staff
are also frequently appreciative of the supervisor’s actions in this re-
gard, which can help staff feel good about working for the supervisor
and about the job in general.
Contacting staff at home to commend performance or present
good news of some type should be done carefully and on an infre-
quent basis. Although the contact usually represents an unexpectedly
pleasant event for staff, it can still disrupt the home or personal rou-
tine of staff, albeit only briefly. This process should generally be done
only when there is particularly good news to present. It can also be
beneficial in situations when a supervisor desired to provide special
commendation for noteworthy performance that the supervisor
observed, but did not have time to meet with the staff person before
the individual left work. The supervisor can apologize for contacting
the person at home but indicate that the person’s actions at work were
sincerely appreciated and the supervisor did not want to let the
actions go unrecognized.
Stand-up Supervision
A means of supporting proficient performance that is related to say-
ing good things about a staff person’s work to executives when the staff
person is not present is stand-up supervision. In many agencies executive
personnel receive negative information about a staff member’s work that
is inaccurate. The information may be inaccurate due to any number of
reasons. To illustrate, the information may be exchanged through sev-
eral individuals before reaching an executive and in the process become
distorted. Additionally, someone may not be knowledgeable about what
a staff person is doing and inaccurately judge the activity to be prob-
lematic. In other cases, someone may simply have malicious intent due
to personal differences with the staff person and want to present the per-
son in an unfavorable light to upper management.
When a supervisor becomes aware that an executive has received
inaccurate information and formed a negative impression of a staff
person’s performance, the supervisor must act to correct the impres-
sion. Supervisors can act to correct an executive’s inaccurate percep-
tion of a staff member’s work proficiency by “standing up” for the staff
person. Supervisors should clearly express to the executive that the
impression is inaccurate or not representative of the staff person’s typ-
ical work behavior. The intent is to prevent the executive from giving
inaccurate, negative feedback to the staff person or otherwise impos-
ing negative sanctions that are unwarranted.
By standing up for a staff person’s work performance, the supervi-
sor can prevent a negative event from occurring with the staff person.
Specifically, the supervisor prevents the person from unwarranted neg-
ative actions that the executive may initiate. This process does not
directly support the staff person’s proficient performance in terms of
promoting continuation of the performance, but it does prevent action
that could diminish proficient work. When staff receive negative feed-
back or related sanctions for work that is proficient, the ultimate effect
is to diminish their overall motivation to work proficiently. It does not
matter if the staff person is unaware of the supervisor standing up for
the staff person’s performance and preventing the negative sanctions.
What matters is that the staff person’s good work performance is not
erroneously criticized by management.
Stand-up supervision as just described is an important responsibil-
ity of supervisors. However, it can be a difficult responsibility for
supervisors to fulfill in some situations. Some executives are not
Supporting Proficient Work Performance 143
Relief of Duty
One of the nicest ways supervisors can take action to specially rec-
ognize noteworthy staff performance is through relief of duty. This pro-
cess involves a supervisor providing a staff person with temporary
relief from performing an especially demanding task that the staff per-
son has persisted in performing proficiently. The supervisor acknowl-
edges the staff person’s efforts and indicates that because of the spe-
cial efforts, the supervisor has found a way for the task to be com-
pleted by someone else to give the staff person a temporary break.
An illustration of how relief of duty can occur pertains to when a
staff person is working with a client who is having a noticeably diffi-
cult time. The client may be engaging in a high rate of disruptive
behavior, for example, that requires considerable effort by the staff
person to remediate. The supervisor, upon becoming aware of the
staff person’s extra work effort, indicates that such effort is seriously
appreciated and the staff person deserves a break from the routine.
The supervisor then provides relief by assigning another staff person
to work with the client, or the supervisor works with the client for a
period of time while the staff person works on a less demanding task.
Providing relief of duty in a manner as just indicated obviously
requires some planning and time on the part of the supervisor and is
Supporting Proficient Work Performance 145
Frequently, the only time supervisors have any control over pay
raises for staff is on an annual basis as part of formal performance
reviews. In these cases, supervisors may be able to provide pay raises
to deserving staff or at least recommend to agency executives who
should receive the raises. Even the availability of annual pay raises is
not very consistent in many agencies, though, due to factors beyond
supervisor control such as the agency’s current financial status. In
short, supervisors generally should not count on the availability of
monetary compensation to provide special recognition for proficient
staff performance on a regular basis.
In those relatively infrequent cases when supervisors have access
to providing extra compensation for staff, then all the guidelines for
providing special recognition awards as described earlier should be
followed. Most importantly, supervisors should have good records of
the quality of each staff person’s work performance based on frequent
monitoring of the performance. The extra compensation should then
be provided based on quality performance that has been objectively
observed and documented.
3. Some special recognition awards such as peer awards and staff appreci-
ation events can support staff work proficiency and enjoyment for a cir-
cumscribed period of time but generally do little to impact routine, day-
to-day work activities of staff.
CORRECTING NONPROFICIENT
WORK PERFORMANCE
Workplace withdrawal refers to staff avoiding their jobs. The most spe-
cific and serious examples are frequent absenteeism among staff and
high rates of staff turnover.
The research underlying evidence-based supervision was initiated
in large part due to recognition of problems with supervisory styles
that focus on punishing unacceptable performance. The research has
resulted in effective strategies for supervisors to correct nonproficient
performance without the serious problems associated with predomi-
nantly negative supervisory approaches. Again, the first consideration
in this regard is to ensure the other steps of evidence-based supervi-
sion are routinely practiced.
the effort to complete the duties (see later chapter section on “Lack of
Staff Motivation”).
Having an awareness of when duties are not performed due to a
reported lack of time versus insufficient staff motivation is another rea-
son supervisors should carefully specify work duties and routinely
monitor their fulfillment. When supervisors have specified how to per-
form a given job task and routinely monitored staff performance asso-
ciated with the task, they will usually know whether sufficient time
exists to complete the task. Such awareness can then facilitate correc-
tion of the problem by either adjusting the work activity schedule or
acting to better motivate staff, respectively.
or eliminate the physical demands that the staff cannot perform through
various workplace accommodations. In some cases, staff have to be
reassigned to another job within the agency, such as one that involves
working with clients who do not require the types of physical de-
mands that the staff cannot perform.
The second corrective action is to remove the staff person from the
agency’s work force, which usually requires the involvement of upper
management. Such action is typically the only recourse when there
are no jobs in an agency to which a staff person could be reassigned
that do not involve the physical demands that pose problems for the
individual. Removing a staff person from the workforce can be diffi-
cult for supervisors because it means they must discontinue an indi-
vidual’s employment. Nonetheless, it is a task supervisors must be
willing to perform when necessary.
In some cases, supervisors avoid actions that result in discontinuing
a staff person’s employment in an agency because of their concern for
the individual’s welfare. However, there are serious detriments of not tak-
ing necessary action in this regard. In particular, if a staff person cannot
physically perform aspects of the job, then those aspects will be unful-
filled and client services will not be provided appropriately. Maintaining
the staff person also can place the individual at risk of personal harm and
potentially place clients at risk as well (e.g., when a staff person cannot
safely lift or transfer a nonambulatory client). Therefore, all reasonable
attempts should be made to alter the job demands or make other accom-
modations to overcome the physical challenges or find another job for
the staff person within the agency. When such attempts fail, though, a
supervisor is left with no choice but to act to terminate the individual’s
employment in accordance with relevant agency policies.
Incapability to perform a job can also be due to mental issues in
addition to physical limitations. For example, some staff may not be
able to read proficiently to perform some tasks. Other staff may not
be able to acquire certain job skills despite repeated training efforts of
supervisors. Ideally, these limitations of staff would become apparent
during the initial screening process when they apply for a direct sup-
port position such that they would not be hired within the agency.
However, experienced supervisors are usually aware that the initial
screening process does not always function in this manner.
When it becomes apparent that staff lack certain skills that are crit-
ical to the job (e.g., adequate reading skills in some cases), or fail to
156 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
Lack of Motivation
The reasons for nonproficient staff performance discussed to this
point are relevant in almost every human service agency from time to
time. However, by far the most common reason for problematic per-
formance is due to one primary factor: lack of sufficient staff motivation
to exert the time and effort to perform their work proficiently. In the lat-
ter situations, staff have the necessary work skills as well as the time,
resources, and capability to engage in quality work but are essentially
unmotivated to do so on a consistent basis. Every supervisor will likely
face periodic problems with lack of work motivation among some staff.
A considerable amount of attention has been devoted to reasons
for insufficient work motivation among direct support staff in the
human services. Lack of appropriate motivation has been considered,
for example, as a result of a restricted labor pool in some situations
for finding motivated workers to employ, lack of an acceptable work
ethic among some staff, low wages for direct support positions, and
the working conditions within certain agencies. Sometimes these ex-
planations are relevant and accurate and sometimes they are not. Re-
gardless of the relative appropriateness of the explanations, it is still a
supervisor’s job to find ways to motivate staff to perform their job
duties appropriately.
Correcting Nonproficient Work Performance 157
mance of concern does not improve after three or four feedback ses-
sions, then a supervisor must take more significant steps to improve
the performance. Such steps usually involve disciplinary action.
Disciplinary Action for Improving Nonproficient Staff Per-
formance Due to Lack of Motivation. Disciplinary action repre-
sents one of the most unpleasant duties of a supervisor. It involves
imposing punitive sanctions with staff and, as such, usually has a neg-
ative effect on staff quality of work life. Nevertheless, if unacceptable
staff performance exists despite repeated feedback sessions (as well as
implementation of the other components of evidence-based supervi-
sion), it is a supervisor’s responsibility to take more severe action to
solve the performance problems.
Essentially every human service agency has a policy regarding
when and how to use disciplinary action. Usually the policies follow a
less-to-more severe continuum. Disciplinary action is first implement-
ed because of a staff person’s problematic performance with a rela-
tively mild punitive sanction, such as a formal counseling session that
is documented in the staff member’s personnel file. If the problemat-
ic work behavior does not improve, then more severe action is taken
with, for example, a written warning. This process continues if neces-
sary, with the final, most severe action of terminating the staff person’s
employment with the agency.
Most disciplinary action policies also have a provision for taking
punitive action with staff on a one- or two-time basis. This process
occurs for highly unacceptable work behavior such as sleeping on the
job, client abuse, use of illegal drugs or alcohol on the job, or stealing
agency property. In these cases, disciplinary action involves an imme-
diate suspension from employment, followed by job termination if the
behavior occurs again, or immediate job termination.
Supervisors typically must be prepared to use disciplinary action in
the less-to-more severe nature and the one- or two-step manner. The pri-
mary concern here is with the former process, as that is what is usually
required with performance problems due to lack of sufficient motivation
among staff. However, the issues to be discussed for effectively using dis-
ciplinary action generally apply to both ways of invoking such action.
The importance of using disciplinary action to suspend or fire a
staff person for highly unacceptable behavior in the workplace is gen-
erally well acknowledged within human service agencies. In contrast,
using disciplinary action to improve nonproficient performance of a
Correcting Nonproficient Work Performance 161
sponse because executives have not taken the time to obtain all rele-
vant information. More specifically, the executives only consider infor-
mation presented by staff recipients of the action, and not the perfor-
mance problems observed by supervisors regarding why disciplinary
action is needed. Nevertheless, the situation occurs in many agencies
and the problems with disciplinary action being overturned as dis-
cussed previously are likely to result.
a given staff person and if need be, remove the staff person from the
agency’s employment. The respect staff develop represents the long-
term effect of appropriate use of disciplinary action by a supervisor.
Such respect occurs in part because when a staff person is not per-
forming job duties appropriately, it makes the job of the remaining
staff more difficult. The latter staff essentially have to work extra to
perform the work that their peer is not completing. As a result, many
staff actually want supervisors to take action with a staff member who
is repeatedly performing inappropriately. Most staff also understand
that it is a supervisor’s job to remediate problematic performance is-
sues and expect supervisors to fulfill this supervisory responsibility.
In contrast, when supervisors do not act to improve recurrent per-
formance problems of a given staff person, other staff have to contin-
ue working more effortfully due to incomplete or unsatisfactory work
of their peer. In addition, staff hold supervisors responsible for their
extra work efforts. Staff are aware that supervisors are not doing their
jobs in terms of correcting inappropriate work activities. The end re-
sult in such a situation is staff lose respect for their supervisor.
The essential point is supervisors should be aware that many staff
may be displeased when disciplinary action is initially taken. Super-
visors should likewise be aware that such displeasure will be short-
lived if they routinely support proficient work and use disciplinary
action only when all other actions have failed to resolve recurring per-
formance problems. Using disciplinary action in this manner can en-
hance staff respect for supervisors.
The final consideration for using disciplinary action to resolve
recurring performance problems due to lack of staff motivation has
been referred to with the previously noted considerations: disciplinary
action should be considered a default supervisory strategy. Disciplinary
action is considered as a default strategy because it is relied on only
when all other, evidence-based supervisory procedures have failed to
correct the performance problems. It is the last thing a supervisor
should do to resolve problematic performance unless the problem is
extremely severe as referred to earlier (e.g., egregious behavior in the
workplace warranting immediate job termination).
As a default supervisory strategy, disciplinary action should not be
a routine supervisor activity. If supervisors are using disciplinary
action frequently, then something is wrong with their overall supervi-
sory approach. Usually this means that one or more of the other com-
166 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
thy for affected staff. Supervisors may be aware, for example, that cer-
tain staff want to do their jobs well but the personal issues present
challenges that make it exceedingly difficult to perform their work
appropriately. Nevertheless, supervisors are responsible for ensuring
proficient staff performance on the job so that clients receive the qual-
ity supports and services they deserve; supervisors must still act to
improve nonproficient work performance.
When performance problems appear to be due to staff issues
beyond the workplace, the generally recommended supervisory
action is to focus on what happens on the job. Supervisors should use
the steps of evidence-based supervision, including disciplinary action
if needed, to correct whatever problems occur on the job. Issues that
staff face separate from the job basically are beyond the responsibili-
ty of the supervisor to address. This can be a difficult approach for
supervisors who have sincere concern for the welfare of their staff but
is typically the most advisable course of action. Supervisors can
acknowledge their concerns with staff about personal issues affecting
work performance but should also acknowledge that they have the pri-
mary responsibility to ensure the job gets done and agency clients are
well served.
169
170 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
needed. If not, staff should be informed that the duties associated with
the recordkeeping are no longer necessary. Staff are often very appre-
ciative of supervisors who stay knowledgeable about their job duties
and relieve them of duties that become unnecessary. This situation is
particularly relevant when staff are aware that nobody is really attend-
ing to their documentation and their recordkeeping appears to be
serving no functional purpose in terms of agency supports and ser-
vices.
A related consideration for making work tasks more enjoyable to
perform pertains to the time and effort required of staff to complete
certain job duties. Sometimes supervisors can make work tasks more
desirable for staff by reducing the time and effort involved in per-
forming the tasks yet maintaining the proficiency with which the
duties are completed. It is general human nature to dislike tasks that
are more effortful and time consuming to complete relative to tasks
that are less effortful and time consuming.
A relatively common example of work tasks that can be altered to
reduce staff time and effort also involves recordkeeping or documen-
tation duties. Again, direct support staff frequently have to complete
various types of documentation, such as collecting data on challeng-
ing behavior of clients, describing events surrounding client accidents
or unusual incidents, and summarizing progress on teaching programs.
For every documentation duty required of staff, supervisors should
review how the documentation is expected to be completed. Such
review should focus on how the documentation can be streamlined for
staff such that the amount of actual writing or typing required is as
minimal as possible, while still providing the necessary information.
The most apparent way to minimize staff time and effort to pro-
vide a necessary type of documentation is to use prepared forms or
digital tools that involve staff checking specified boxes or spaces to
provide answers to questions. Providing areas on the forms or tools to
answer questions by simply providing a checkmark should be used in
lieu of requiring staff to write or type narrative responses to the ques-
tions whenever possible. For example, instead of a general question
pertaining to an unusual incident such as “What time and place did
the incident occur?”, the form could have prepared times and places
such that the staff person only has to check or mark the time and
place. The latter process takes less time for the staff person than the
former.
174 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
The staff person indicated that interruptions were eliminated and sig-
nificantly less time was required to complete the progress notes each
month relative to the previous arrangement. The staff person also
reported that completing the progress notes was no longer her most
disliked task and was now even more liked than a number of her other
routine duties.
The example just illustrated indicates how the TEMP process has
been used to have a significant, albeit somewhat circumscribed, effect
on one aspect of a staff member’s work enjoyment: the staff member’s
enjoyment with completing one routine work duty was enhanced. In
considering the example, it should not be interpreted that the same
exact procedures should be used to make progress note writing more
desirable for staff in general (nor that writing progress notes is neces-
sarily a highly disliked work task for all staff). However, the same
process for making a specific work task more desirable to perform can
be used with other job duties that are highly disliked by direct support
staff. In this regard, one of the beneficial features of the TEMP
approach is that by its nature, it is individualized across staff and work
tasks.
injured by the client or are worried about being hurt by the client’s
aggressive behavior. Staff apprehension, and in the most serious cases
actual fear, about working with a given client is not always officially
recognized in human service agencies; it is essentially expected that
part of the job of direct support staff is to work with some clients who
have problem behavior. Nonetheless, staff concerns in this type of sit-
uation must be addressed by supervisors because otherwise, staff qual-
ity of work life and overall well-being on the job can be seriously com-
promised.
Staff dislike of working with certain clients who engage in harmful
behavior should be addressed by supervisors on a case-by-case basis
because each situation is different. In many cases though, the best
action involves ensuring there is an effective treatment plan to prevent
or reduce the challenging behavior, and staff have the skills and
resources to carry out the plan. It is beyond the scope of this text to
describe what constitutes appropriate treatment plans for challenging
behavior. Generally, however, it is the supervisor’s responsibility to be
aware of staff concerns about being hurt by a client and to take action
to secure an effective intervention by the appropriate clinician. It is
also the supervisor’s responsibility to inform agency executives about
the situation, as resolving the issue often requires the support of man-
agement (e.g., to obtain additional staff resources, secure more clini-
cian involvement with a client’s treatment plan). Most importantly,
supervisors should never let situations continue in which staff are
harmed or are fearful of being harmed; supervisors must work imme-
diately and actively to find some way to resolve the situations.
complete the task on a frequent basis. For example, a work task that
can be disliked by a number of staff pertains to cleaning wheelchairs
of clients who are nonambulatory and do not have the physical capac-
ity to clean their wheelchairs themselves. Often with this type of task,
staff are expected to do a relatively cursory cleaning on a daily basis
and a more involved cleaning once or twice per week. The more
involved cleaning, which typically represents the most disliked aspect
of the task, could be rotated among all staff such that no individual
staff person would have to conduct the detailed cleaning every week.
When considering rotating certain disliked tasks among staff, it is
most helpful if a participative management process is used as dis-
cussed in Chapter 3. Upon acknowledging that a given work task must
be completed as it currently exists (e.g., wheelchairs must be cleaned),
a supervisor could meet with staff and discuss whether it would be
more desirable if the task assignment was rotated across staff at dif-
ferent times. With the wheelchair-cleaning task, the intense cleaning
requirement potentially could be rotated among staff such that, for ex-
ample, each staff person had to perform the task only once per month
even if they would have to do the intensive cleaning on more wheel-
chairs on a monthly basis (i.e., to intensively clean wheelchairs that
otherwise would have been cleaned by other staff during the given
week). As discussed previously, involving staff in decisions affecting
their job assignments not only takes advantage of their knowledge
about performing various duties, but the participative process also
itself is usually appreciated by staff.
1. General considerations for making work tasks more enjoyable for staff to
perform include: (1) ensuring quality work is still promoted while mak-
ing the tasks more enjoyable for staff, (2) ensuring staff are well trained
to perform the tasks and feel confident performing them, (3) discontinu-
ing disliked tasks required of staff if the tasks are not really necessary to
complete, (4) streamlining tasks where possible to make the tasks less
time consuming and effortful to perform and, (5) ensuring staff know the
reason each task needs to be performed.
184 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
3. When staff dislike a task because they are worried about being harmed
by a client while performing the task, supervisors must be especially
active in working to make changes to resolve the concerns.
4. Due to the time and effort often required of a supervisor to use the TEMP
approach to make a disliked task more enjoyable for staff to perform, the
process should primarily be used with a task that is most disliked by sev-
eral staff.
RESOLVING COMMON
PERFORMANCE PROBLEMS
Chapter 10
RESOLVING COMMON
PERFORMANCE PROBLEMS:
OVERVIEW
EVIDENCE-BASED SUPERVISORY
PROTOCOL: A REVIEW
187
188 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
Supervisor Self-Motivation
The importance of supervisors working actively to motivate staff to
perform their jobs proficiently and enjoy their work has been stressed
repeatedly. To be consistently successful in fulfilling this critical super-
visory function, supervisors themselves must be well motivated.
Supervisor self-motivation is especially important when difficult situa-
tions arise within an agency. If supervisors are not able to maintain
their own motivation during these times, their supervisory effective-
Resolving Common Performance Problems: Overview 197
ness will be limited and the quality of staff performance will likely
deteriorate.
What a supervisor does to maintain self-motivation will vary across
supervisors and particular work situations. However, there is one strat-
egy that can be helpful for maintaining supervisor self-motivation in
general, regardless of ongoing events in an agency. The strategy in-
volves a three-step process: (1) establishing a supervisory work goal,
(2) performing necessary duties to achieve the goal, and (3) reinforc-
ing the work accomplishment.
Establish a Work Goal. The first step of supervisor self-motiva-
tion is for supervisors to regularly establish goals to attain on the job.
The goals should pertain directly to carrying out specific actions
designed to promote quality staff performance or work enjoyment. For
example, a supervisor could set a goal to provide face-to-face, positive
feedback to every staff person regarding some aspect of each individ-
ual’s job performance at least once during a given week. Another goal
may be to implement a special recognition procedure for deserving
staff members by the end of the week. Still another goal may be to
meet with every staff person during the week to begin the process of
making a highly disliked work task more enjoyable for staff to perform
(refer to Chapter 9).
Goals that supervisors establish to help maintain their motivation
to carry out supervisory duties should be short-term in nature.
Generally, the goals should relate to something a supervisor desires to
achieve on a daily or weekly basis, though on occasion a supervisory
goal may involve a monthly time frame. Selecting goals that can be
met relatively quickly (i.e., versus long-term goals involving several
months or a year to achieve) can help supervisors stay focused on
what should be done each day to meet the goal.
Achieve the Goal. The second step of self-motivation is for super-
visors to do whatever is necessary to actually achieve the goal. Once a
goal is established, specific action steps must be clearly specified. The
action steps are usually straightforward when the goal pertains to
actively working to promote quality staff performance or work enjoy-
ment. The supervisor simply follows through with the designated
work activities, such as giving positive feedback to each individual
staff person.
Reinforce the Accomplishment. The third step is for supervisors
to reinforce their goal achievement; supervisors should do something they
198 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
consistently motivate them on the job; they take charge of their own
motivation to ensure they work diligently and experience enjoyment
with their work. If other people also provide work motivation for su-
pervisors, the supervisors should be appreciative but again, not rely
solely on someone else to be responsible for their own work effort and
enjoyment.
REDUCING ABSENTEEISM
I n the most basic sense, absenteeism refers to staff not being present
at work when they are scheduled to be working. Because of its per-
vasive effects on client services, frequent absenteeism among direct
support staff is arguably the most serious performance problem in
human service agencies. Problems with absenteeism are most preva-
lent in residential agencies, including public and private residential
centers as well as community living arrangements of a congregate
nature.
The most apparent effect of staff absenteeism is a reduction in the
quantity of services provided to agency clients. When the number of
staff who are at work is below the number scheduled to be working,
the amount of client services provided is almost always less than what
is intended to be provided. For every staff person unexpectedly absent
on a given day, reductions in client services become more significant.
Frequent absenteeism likewise reduces the quality of client ser-
vices. When there are inconsistent numbers of staff at work due to
unexpected absences, services tend to become inconsistent in their
delivery. Duties usually performed by staff who are absent typically
have to be assigned to other staff who are present. The latter staff are
likely to perform the duties somewhat differently than the former staff.
Relatedly, staff who are re-assigned to perform client-related duties
that otherwise would be performed by absent staff typically are at least
somewhat unfamiliar with such duties, as well as the clients. The unfa-
miliarity with certain duties, such as carrying out a given client’s teach-
ing programs, often results in the duties being completed less profi-
ciently than usual.
200
Reducing Absenteeism 201
Again, the degree to which common reasons offered for high lev-
els of absenteeism among direct support staff are accurate is unclear.
In this respect, certainly many direct support staff do have good work
histories prior to being employed in a direct support capacity, and
many are the primary wage earner for their families. Even if purport-
ed reasons for frequent absenteeism are accurate in some cases, super-
visors of direct support staff have essentially no control over these
potential causes of absenteeism. As with other areas of staff perfor-
mance problems, supervisors should focus their efforts on what they
can control to prevent and reduce high levels of absenteeism.
One factor affecting frequent absenteeism over which supervisors
can have control pertains to prevailing attitudes in some agencies
regarding acceptable absenteeism. As will be discussed later, agencies
typically have established policies regarding use of sick leave and
other absent time. Often these policies allow for more frequent absent
time, and particularly in publicly operated organizations such as state
agencies, relative to nonhuman service jobs. There is an underlying
attitude in many such agencies, though not always officially acknowl-
edged, that staff should be allowed to take as much sick time as a pol-
icy allows over a designated time period whether they are sick or not.
Such an attitude can increase absenteeism.
Supervisors should not espouse an attitude that staff should be
allowed to use as many sick days as a policy grants whether they are
sick or not. Sick leave is intended for use only when a staff person is
truly sick (or a family member is sick that requires staff time away
from work if agency policy provides for sick time to care for a family
member). Supervisors should actively support appropriate use of
absent time and correct inappropriate use. To successfully function in
this manner, supervisors first have to clearly delineate what constitutes
acceptable versus unacceptable absenteeism.
High-Frequency Absenteeism
The most common type of absenteeism problem in many agencies
is high frequency absenteeism. This type of absenteeism refers to a staff
person being absent from work much more frequently relative to the
average level of absences among an agency’s entire workforce. The
staff person also is usually absent on more days than the number of
days allotted by agency policy. The staff person typically uses the
allotted number of paid sick days within a given time period and then
continues to be absent despite not being paid for the absent days.
High frequency absenteeism is further characterized by a staff person
not being absent for extended time periods but instead, being absent
for a day or two every few weeks or several times per month.
Predictable Absenteeism
In contrast to high frequency absenteeism, predictable absenteeism
often does not involve a staff person being absent from work on more
days than what is allotted by agency policy. In many cases, staff fail to
report to work for the exact number of days that a policy allots over a
given period of time (e.g., for use of sick time). However, the fact that
absences are predictable usually means the absenteeism should be
considered unacceptable.
Predictable absenteeism means that the likelihood of a staff person
being absent on a given day is significantly greater than what would
be expected by chance. The most common example involves a staff
person who frequently fails to report to work on the day immediately
preceding or following scheduled days off, such as just before or after
a weekend or holiday. Other examples of predictable absenteeism
supervisors have experienced with certain staff include increased ab-
senteeism the day after pay day, on days when local public schools are
not in session, and during summer months.
Predictable absenteeism usually warrants a supervisor’s attention
for reduction, even when staff are not using more sick time than allot-
ted by agency policy. Again, legitimate use of sick time for absences
means a staff person (or designated family member) is sick. Sickness
usually does not occur on a predicable basis, such as immediately
before or after a holiday. Therefore, when a staff person is predictably
absent, it typically means the individual is abusing use of sick time.
Because any unscheduled absence has the deleterious effects of absen-
206 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
ABSENTEE-REDUCTION STRATEGIES
inability to hire new staff often results in excessive workloads for exist-
ing staff. The extra work may result in significant fatigue or physical
discomfort for certain staff, and especially older staff or those with pre-
existing medical conditions that are exacerbated by the increased
workload. It would be inappropriate to consider the increased absen-
teeism in such situations as a staff problem (i.e., it is an overall agency
problem) and impose negative sanctions with those staff.
In other cases, flexibility is needed because what initially appears
to be an abuse of absent time based on existing attendance criteria is
really not a misuse of leave time. To illustrate, a staff member may
have satisfactory attendance except for a certain time of the year. Such
a pattern of absences might meet the criteria for predicable absen-
teeism. However, on closer evaluation it may be determined that the
absences during the designated period are due to medical issues such
as severe allergies that tend to be seasonal in nature. It would be inap-
propriate to consider absences during the predictable time period as
unacceptable if the staff person was experiencing physical problems.
The need for flexibility in carrying out absenteeism-reduction
strategies is most relevant when dealing with individual staff absences.
This is one reason that the first step in implementing a strategy with
a staff person to reduce absenteeism is to meet with the individual to
review the pattern of absences that reflect a problem. The meeting
allows the staff person an opportunity to discuss the reasons for the
noted absences. In turn, such information can assist the supervisor in
determining whether what initially appeared to be an abuse of leave
time truly represents unacceptable absenteeism. The supervisor would
then need to be appropriately flexible in determining whether to carry
out the corrective action part of the strategy and especially the disci-
plinary action component.
An illustration of how supervisors need to be flexible in imple-
menting absenteeism-reduction strategies with individual staff is rep-
resented by issues with absenteeism that accompanied the onset of the
COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020. As the pandemic began, many
agencies and especially those providing residential services experi-
enced a serious increase in staff absences. The reasons for the
increased absences were varied, including staff fear of contracting the
virus from other staff or clients if they showed up for work, having to
stay home with children due to school closings, and actually becom-
ing ill with the virus.
216 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
2. Supervisors must clearly specify for staff what constitutes acceptable ver-
sus unacceptable absenteeism.
219
220 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
plans for each client being taught. Generally, a reasonable goal for
staff teaching proficiency is that across all teaching opportunities, the
staff correctly implement at least 80% of specified teaching procedures
(e.g., prompting, correcting learner errors, reinforcing correct learner
responses) during each teaching session.
Sometimes supervisors expect staff to teach at a 100% level of pro-
ficiency. However, such a goal is usually unrealistic. Essentially no one
teaches perfectly; even the most experienced and motivated teachers
make some mistakes while working with different learners. In this re-
gard, research has indicated that perfect teaching usually is not nec-
essary (though desired). As long as staff carry out teaching procedures
at a level of at least 80% proficiency, learners with even the most se-
vere disabilities usually acquire the skills targeted in teaching plans.
Monitoring a staff person’s teaching session with a client should be
followed by supportive feedback for teaching procedures implemented
correctly (Chapter 6). Considering the importance of formal teaching
sessions—in this case helping clients learn functional skills to maxi-
mize their independence—it is also advantageous if special recognition
procedures (Chapter 7) are used periodically by supervisors to support
proficient teaching. One particularly effective way to specially recog-
nize quality teaching of staff is to focus on the skill development ob-
served among clients whom the staff teach.
Specially recognizing staff teaching efforts by emphasizing skill
gains of the clients they teach has several advantages. Most staff are
aware of the importance of clients acquiring skills and displaying in-
creased independence in daily functioning. Recognizing that specific
staff are responsible for client success in this regard can help staff feel
quite good about their teaching accomplishments. Such recognition
heightens staff awareness that they are having a significant influence
on client quality of life.
Providing special recognition for client skill attainment based on staff
teaching performance can also have a somewhat unique effect on staff
motivation and work enjoyment. As discussed previously, one charac-
teristic of the job of providing direct support that decreases work moti-
vation is that staff sometimes feel they are simply doing the same thing
everyday. In turn, staff feel they are not really accomplishing anything
significant but instead, simply “putting in their time” in a repetitive man-
ner. In contrast, when clients learn how to do something as a result of
staff teaching performance, there is a clear outcome to staff work efforts.
Resolving Problems with Staff Provision 227
When clients acquire skills being taught by staff, staff can experi-
ence a feeling of having completed something important. Once a
client meets a pre-specified degree of independence in performing a
skill targeted by a teaching plan, staff work associated with formally
carrying out the plan is concluded. Having a clear end to a work task
in this manner can negate a feeling of simply doing the same thing
everyday without finishing anything. It can be very motivating to staff
to realize they have successfully finished an important work task.
When staff perform a task for clients instead of teaching the clients
how to do the task for themselves, staff are in essence depriving clients
of learning important skills. Staff completion of activities for clients is
usually well intended in that staff are attempting to help support the
clients. Nonetheless, the end result is clients develop dependence on
staff in contrast to acquiring independence in meeting their own needs.
In other cases, staff attempt to embed teaching trials within their
ongoing interactions with clients but do so ineffectively. A common
example is when a staff person observes a client having difficulty do-
ing something and instructs the client how to perform the task. How-
ever, the client does not have the skills to respond to the instruction.
The staff person then repeats the instruction, again without an accu-
rate response by the client. Subsequently, because the task needs to be
completed, the staff person ends up doing the task for the client. In
this type of situation, the attempted teaching of the client is ineffective
and the client does not acquire any new skills.
The examples just described illustrate two main problems that pro-
hibit an agency from providing a high-quality learning environment
for clients: staff either do not embed teaching within their interactions
with clients (i.e., they do things for clients) or when they attempt to
teach naturalistically, they do so ineffectively. Consequently, to maxi-
mize the amount of teaching services provided within an agency, staff
must be trained in naturalistic teaching skills and then use those skills
Resolving Problems with Staff Provision 233
If problems with staff data collection occur even though staff are
involved in decision-making based on the data, then their perfor-
mance issues should be addressed with the same supervisory correc-
tive procedures discussed in this and preceding chapters. There is one
special situation though for which the usual supervisory process will
need to be altered. That situation is when staff are clearly fabricating
data as referred to earlier.
When staff deliberately falsify data, it represents a serious perfor-
mance issue. In essence, falsified data can lead to erroneous decisions
regarding how teaching sessions should be conducted and client learn-
ing can be compromised. Therefore, fabrication of data by staff rep-
resents one of those areas of problematic staff performance discussed
in Chapter 8 that usually should result in immediate disciplinary action.
In this respect, many agencies consider deliberate falsification of data
by staff to be a performance problem warranting job termination.
The importance of staff responsibilities with data collection should
be explained when those responsibilities are initially assigned in
accordance with conducting formal teaching sessions. Such impor-
tance can be highlighted further if it is made apparent to staff at that
point that falsification of data is not tolerated within the agency and
represents grounds for dismissal. In this regard, it is a generally ex-
pected responsibility of supervisors to inform staff beforehand regard-
ing the serious consequences for falsifying data. It would be profes-
Resolving Problems with Staff Provision 239
242
Reducing Frequent Nonwork Behavior 243
The activity schedule just illustrated specifies job duties for each of
two staff who would typically be working in the residence in the after-
noon. One set of duties could be assigned to one staff person and the
other set to the other staff member. Alternatively, the staff themselves
could decide who will perform each set of duties.
For activity schedules to effectively promote desired work behav-
ior, staff of course must be well familiar with the schedules. Such
familiarity is best accomplished by the training step of the superviso-
ry protocol, usually in an informal manner (Chapter 4). The supervi-
sor should meet briefly with staff to describe their expected duties in
accordance with the schedule, provide a written copy of the schedule
to each staff person, and then quickly demonstrate how each duty
should be performed. Subsequently, staff should carry out each duty
during the regular job routine while the supervisor observes and pro-
vides supportive and corrective feedback as needed.
246 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
259
260 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
The other way remote monitoring can occur is covertly. With covert
monitoring staff are not aware when their performance is being mon-
itored via the video device. An example of covert monitoring is when
staff are not informed when existing video equipment is activated to
allow a supervisor to monitor their performance.
Covert monitoring can also occur when a video device is continu-
ously activated (e.g., as with security cameras in convenience stores)
and staff do not know when a supervisor is actually using the device
to monitor their performance. In this situation an argument could be
made that the monitoring is not covert because staff are aware of the
video device and that it will be used at times to monitor their work
performance. However, experience suggests that such an argument is
not likely to be accepted by staff. Because staff do not know when
their performance is actually being monitored, at least some staff are
likely to consider that the supervisor is covertly or secretly monitoring
their performance.
Staff Acceptability Issues with Distance Monitoring. It has been
noted repeatedly in this text that monitoring of staff performance is a
component of evidence-based supervision that can be seriously dis-
liked by staff. Correspondingly, an emphasis in discussing in-person
monitoring procedures has been how supervisors can effectively mon-
itor staff performance in ways acceptable to staff. Potential staff dislike
of monitoring and how to prevent such a reaction also warrant serious
attention when monitoring is conducted from a distance.
Staff dislike of monitoring, whether conducted in-person or
remotely, is usually most significant when the monitoring is conduct-
ed covertly (and staff subsequently become aware that their perfor-
mance was covertly monitored). Chapter 5 discussed the reasons for
particular dislike of (in-person) covert monitoring among staff and rec-
ommended avoiding covert monitoring except in special circum-
stances. Experience suggests that covert monitoring from a distance is
also likely to be received quite poorly by staff.
The reasons for staff dislike of remote, covert monitoring are the
same as those described when covert monitoring is conducted in-per-
son. In essence, staff tend to believe they are not trusted by their
supervisor (or upper management) and their professionalism in per-
forming their work is discredited. Such beliefs can seriously erode staff
enjoyment in working for a supervisor who covertly monitors their
performance.
274 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
ponent step within BST). The other way has been providing positive
feedback to staff in written form using email correspondence (also
referred to as electronic feedback).
In light of the critical nature of supervisors actively supporting staff
performance to promote quality work as well as work enjoyment,
increased attention seems warranted on how this aspect of supervision
can occur in a distance format. Because of the relative lack of research
though, recommendations involving evidence-based strategies for effec-
tively supporting staff performance via telehealth are not readily forth-
coming (with the possible exception of the two specific ways just
noted). However, based on the considerable body of research on tra-
ditional, in-person ways of supporting staff performance and work
enjoyment, one general recommendation may warrant consideration.
Chapters 6 and 7 stressed that supervisors should routinely pro-
vide positive feedback on an informal basis in face-to-face interactions
with staff to promote staffs’ proficient work performance. It was fur-
ther emphasized that frequent vocal feedback presented in this man-
ner can be periodically supplemented with other ways of providing
positive feedback (refer to Chapters 6 and 7 for elaboration). The rec-
ommendation of concern here is that positive feedback provided from
a distance via telehealth can be considered as one means to supplement
informal feedback provided during regularly occurring interactions a
supervisor has with staff.
The rationale for recommending that positive feedback provided
via telehealth be supplemental to regularly occurring, in-person feed-
back is based in large part on practical considerations. Chapter 6 dis-
cussed how supervisors should routinely look for staff performance to
immediately commend on an impromptu basis whenever the super-
visors are present in staff work sites for varying reasons. It is difficult
to consider how feedback could be provided in this manner through
telehealth.
To illustrate, even if a supervisor could monitor staff performance
at any time through cameras in staffs’ work sites, it would be difficult
for the supervisor to immediately and privately commend an aspect
of a staff member’s performance that was just observed. Technically,
immediate feedback could conceivably be provided in this way such
as if staff had headphones or earplugs linked to a supervisor’s com-
puter through which the supervisor could communicate privately with
staff at any time. However, arranging for this type of interaction to be
Supervising from a Distance with Telehealth 277
9. Although research is also limited on using corrective action with staff per-
formance via telehealth, reports from experienced supervisors and staff
suggest that corrective action is best received if provided directly by the
supervisor in a face-to-face manner in contrast to indirectly such as
through email correspondence.
Section V
SELECTED READINGS
SELECTED READINGS
283
284 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
Vonderen, A.V., Duker, P., & Didden, R. (2010). Instruction and video
feedback to improve staff’s trainer behaviour and response prompt-
ing during one-to-one training with young children with severe
intellectual disability. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 31,
1481–1490.
Page, T. J., Christian, J. G., Iwata, B. A., Reid, D. H., Crow, R. E., &
Dorsey, M. F. (1981). Evaluating and training interdisciplinary
teams in writing IPP goals and objectives. Mental Retardation, 19,
25–27.
Page, T. J., Iwata, B. A., & Reid, D. H. (1982). Pyramidal training: A
large-scale application with institutional staff. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 15, 335–351.
Pangborn, M. M., Borrero, C. S. W., & Borreo, J. C. (2013). Sequential
application of caregiver training to implement pediatric feeding
protocols. Behavioral Interventions, 28, 107–130.
Panyan, M. C., & Patterson, E. T. (1974). Teaching attendants the
applied aspects of behavior modification. Mental Retardation, 12,
30–32.
Parsons, M. B., McCarn, J. E., & Reid, D. H. (1993). Evaluating and
increasing meal-related choices throughout a service setting for
people with severe disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons
with Severe Handicaps, 18, 253–260.
Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H. (1995). Training residential supervisors
to provide feedback for maintaining staff teaching skills with peo-
ple who have severe disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
28, 317–322.
Parsons, M. B., Rollyson, J. H., & Reid, D. H. (2012). Evidence-based
staff training: A guide for practitioners. Behavior Analysis in Practice,
5, 2–11.
Pence, S. T., St. Peter, C. C., &Tetreault, A. S. (2012). Increasing accu-
rate preference assessment implementation through pyramidal
training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 345–359.
Pritchard, D., Hoerger, M., Penney, H., Eiri, L., Hellawell, L.,
Fothergill, S., & Mace, F. C. (2017). Training staff to avoid problem
behavior related to restricting access to preferred activities.
Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10, 92–95.
Quilitch, H. R., Miller, S. M., McConnell, M. A., & Bryant, S. (1975).
Teaching personnel to implement behavioral programs.
Educational Technology, 27–31.
Realon, R. E., Wheeler, A. J., Spring, B., & Springer, M. (1986).
Evaluating the quality of training delivered by direct-care staff in a
state mental retardation center. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 1,
199–212.
Selected Readings 293
Wishnowski, A., Yu, C. T., Pear, J., Chand, C., & Saltel, L. (2018).
Effects of computer-aided instruction on the implementation of the
MSWO stimulus preference assessment. Behavioral Interventions, 33,
56–68.
Ziarnik, J. P., & Bernstein, G. S. (1982). A critical examination of the
effect of inservice training on staff performance. Mental Retardation,
20, 109–114.
Zlomke, L. C., & Benjamin, V. A., Jr. (1983). Staff in-service:
Measuring effectiveness through client behavior change. Education
and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 18, 125–130.
Marshall, B. D., Jr., Banzett, L., Keuhnel, T., & Moore, J. (1983).
Maintaining nursing staff performance on an intensive behavior
therapy unit. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 3,
193–204.
McGimsey, J. F., Greene, B. F., & Lutzker, J. R. (1995). Competence in
aspects of behavioral treatment and consultation: Implications for
service delivery and graduate training. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 28, 301–315.
Methot, L. L., Williams, W. L., Cummings, A., & Bradshaw, B. (1996).
Measuring the effects of a manager-supervisor training program
through the generalized performance of managers, supervisors,
front-line staff, and clients in a human service setting. Journal of
Organizational Behavior Management, 16(2), 3–34.
Minor, L., DuBard, M., & Luiselli, J. K. (2014). Improving interven-
tion integrity of direct-service practitioners through performance
feedback and problem solving consulting. Behavioral Interventions,
29, 145–156.
Mouzakitis, A., Codding, R. S., & Tryon, G. (2015). The effects of self-
monitoring and performance feedback on the treatment integrity
of behavior intervention plan implementation and generalization.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 17, 223–234.
Neef, N. A., Shafer, M. S., Egel, A. L., Cataldo, M. R., & Parrish, J. M.
(1983). The class specific effects of compliance training with “do”
and “don’t” requests: Analogue analysis and classroom applica-
tion. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 16, 81–99.
Newcomb, E. T., Camblin, J. G., Jones, F. D., & Wine, B. (2019). On
the implementation of a gamified professional development sys-
tem for direct care staff. Journal of Organizational Behavior
Management, 39, 293–307.
Ng, Y. Y., Fischer, D., & Witts, B. N. (2019). Task clarification and feed-
back improves room tidiness and safety in a training center.
Behavior Analysis in Practice, 12, 418–422.
O’Reilly, M. F., Renzaglia, A., Hutchins, M., Koterba-Buss, L.,
Clayton, M., Halle, J. W., & Izen, C. (1992). Teaching systematic
instruction competencies to special education student teachers: An
applied behavioral supervision model. Journal of the Association for
Persons with Severe Handicaps, 17, 104–111.
302 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
Prue, D. M., Krapfl, J. E., Noah, J. C., Cannon, S., & Maley, R. F.
(1980). Managing the treatment activities of state hospital staff.
Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 2(3), 165–181.
Quilitch, H. R. (1975). A comparison of three staff-management pro-
cedures. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 59–66.
Quilitch, H. R., de Longchamps, G. D., Warden, R. A., &
Szczepaniak, C. J. (1977). The effects of announced health inspec-
tions upon employee cleaning performance. Journal of Organiza-
tional Behavior Management, 1(1), 79–88.
Realon, R. E., Lewallen, J. D., & Wheeler, A. J. (1983). Verbal feed-
back vs. verbal feedback plus praise: The effects on direct care
staff’s training behaviors. Mental Retardation, 21, 209–212.
Reid, D. H., Green, C. W., & Parsons, M. B. (2003). An outcome man-
agement program for extending advances in choice research into
choice opportunities for supported workers with severe multiple
disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 575–578.
Reid, D. H., Parsons, M. B., Lattimore, L. P., Towery, D. L., & Reade,
K. K. (2005). Improving staff performance through clinician appli-
cation of outcome management. Research in Developmental
Disabilities, 26, 101–116.
Reid, D. H., Parsons, M. B., McCarn, J. E., Green, C. W., Phillips, J.
F., & Schepis, M. M. (1985). Providing a more appropriate educa-
tion for severely handicapped persons: Increasing and validating
functional classroom tasks. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18,
289–301.
Reinoehl, R. B., & Halle, J. W. (1994). Increasing the assessment
probe performance of teacher aides through written prompts.
Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 32–42.
Repp, A. C., & Barton, L. E. (1980). Naturalistic observations of insti-
tutionalized retarded persons: A comparison of licensure decisions
and behavioral observations. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13,
333–341.
Repp, A. C., Barton, L. E., & Brulle, A. R. (1981). Correspondence
between effectiveness and staff use of instructions for severely
retarded persons. Applied Research in Mental Retardation, 2, 237–245.
Richman, G. S., Riordan, M. R., Reiss, M. L., Pyles, D. A. M., &
Bailey, J. S. (1988). The effects of self-monitoring and supervisor
feedback on staff performance in a residential setting. Journal of
Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 401–409.
304 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
Lee, J. F., Schieltz, K. M., Suess, A. N., Wacker, D. P., Romani, P. W.,
Lindgren, S. D. . . . Dalmau, Y. C. P. (2015). Guidelines for devel-
oping telehealth services and troubleshooting problems with tele-
health technology when coaching parents to conduct functional
analyses and functional communication training in their homes.
Behavior Analysis in Practice, 8, 190–200.
Lerman, D. C., O’Brien, M. J., Neely, L, Call, N. A., Loukia, T.,
Schieltz, K. M., . . . Cooper-Brown, L. J. (2020). Remote coaching
of caregivers via telehealth: Challenges and potential solutions.
Journal of Behavioral Education, 29, 195–221.
Neely, L., Rispoli, M., Boles, M., Morin, K., Gregori, E., Ninci, J., &
Hagan-Burke, S. (2019). Interventionist acquisition of incidental
teaching using pyramidal training via telehealth. Behavior Modi-
fication, 43, 711–733.
O’Flaherty, C., Barton, E. E., Winchester, C., & Domingo, M. (2019).
Coaching teachers to promote social interactions with toddlers.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 21, 199–212.
Rathel, J. M., Drasgow, E., Brown, W. H., & Marshall, K. J. (2014).
Increasing induction-level teachers’ positive-to-negative communi-
cation ratio and use of behavior-specific praise through e-mailed
performance feedback and its effect on students’ task engagement.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 16, 219–233.
Rispoli, M., & Machalicek, W. (2020). Advances in telehealth and
behavioral assessment and intervention in education: Introduction
to the special issue. Journal of Behavioral Education, 29, 189–194.
Suess, A. N., Wacker, D. P., Schwartz, J. E., Lustig, N., & Detrick, J.
(2016). Preliminary evidence on the use of telehealth in an outpa-
tient behavior clinic. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49, 686–
692.
Tomlinson, S. R. L., Gore, N., & McGill, P. (2018). Training individu-
als to implement applied behavior analytic procedures via tele-
health: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Behavioral
Education, 27, 172–222.
Unholz-Bowden, E., McComas, J. J., McMaster, K. L., Girtler, S. N.,
Kolb, R. L., & Alefyah, S. (2020). Caregiver training via telehealth
on behavioral procedures: A systematic review. Journal of
Behavioral Education, 29, 246–281.
316 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
Courtney, W. T., Hartley, B. K., LaMarca, V. J., Rosswurm, M., & Reid,
D. H. (2017). The training curriculum for supervisors of ABA technicians
in autism programs. Cornwall on Hudson, NW: Sloan Publishing.
Reid, D. H., Parsons, M. B., & Green, C. W. (2011). The supervisor train-
ing curriculum: Evidence-based ways to promote work quality and enjoy-
ment among support staff. Washington, DC: American Association
on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.
INDEX
A D
323
324 The Supervisor’s Guidebook
J P
T V
WHEN PARENTS HA
W AVE PROBLEMS THE HANDBOOK OF CHIL
T LD LIFE
( rdd Edition)
(3r (
(2nd Edition)
b Susan B. Miller
by b Richard H. Thompson
by
130 pp.. (7 x 10) 6 pp.. (7 x 10) • 7 illustration
642 ns • 14 tables
$
$19.95 (paper) • $19.95 (ebook) $
$59.95 (paper) • $59.95 (eboook)
CASE MANAGEME
C ENT EMIGRA
E ATTING FROM CHIN NA
I SOCIAL WORK
IN K TO THE UNITED ST TA
ATES
(
(2nd Edition) (
(2nd Edition)
b Julius R. Ballew and
by a Georrgge Mink b Yu
by Yushi (Boni) Li
3 pp.. (7 x 10) • 23 illustrations
334 2 pp.. (7 x 10) • 36 illustratio
270 ons
$
$53.95 (p
(paper)
p ) • $53.95 ((ebook)) $
$34.95 (paper) • $34.95 (eboook)
IINTRODUCTION TO T HUMAN
CHILD ABUSE INVESTIGA
C ATIONS
R ATIONS STUD
RELAT DIES
b Donald A. Hayden
by
b Georrgge Henderrsso
by on and We
Wesley C. Long
3 pp.. (7 x 10) • 25 illustratio
368 ons • 6 tables
3 pp.. (7 x 10)
364
$
$49.95 (paper) • $49.95 (eboo ok)
$
$62.95 (paper) • $62..95 (ebook)
BEHA
B AV
VIORAL GUIDE TO THE SOCIOLOGY OF DEVIANCE
T
P
PERSONALITY DIS
SORDERS (DSM-5) (
(2nd Edition)
b Douglas H. Ruben
by b Robert J. Franzese
by
2 pp.. (7 x 10) • 31 illustrations • 1 table
272 3 pp.. (7 x 10) • 21 illustratio
398 ons • 6 tables
$
$42.95 (paper)
(p p ) • $42..95 ((ebook)) $
$64.95 (paper) • $64.95 (eboook)
PAARENT TA
AL ALIEN NAT ATION
CHILD LIFE IN HOSPIT
C TALS
b Demosthenes Lorrandos,
by
b Richard H. Thompson and
by d Gene Stanford
W
William Bernet and S. Richard Sauber
2 pp.. (6 x 9) • 1 table
284
5 pp.. (7 x 10) • 2 illustrations
550
$
$45.95 (paper) • $45.95 (eboo
ok)
$
$89.95 (hard) • $89.995 (ebook)
F
FREE DOMESTIC SHIPPING ON RETTA
AIL ORDERS THROUGH OU
UR WEBSITE!*
*
*Available on retail purchases through our website
w only
y to domestic shipping addresses in
i the United States