This article was downloaded by: [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] On: 21 December 2014, At: 19:16 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/webs20
The Role of Relationships in Connecting Social Work Research and EvidenceBased Practice a
Johnny M. Jones & Michael E. Sherr a
b
School of Social Work, Baylor University , Waco , Texas , USA
b
Social Work Department , University of Tennessee Chattanooga , Chattanooga , Tennessee , USA Published online: 09 Jan 2014.
Click for updates To cite this article: Johnny M. Jones & Michael E. Sherr (2014) The Role of Relationships in Connecting Social Work Research and Evidence-Based Practice, Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 11:1-2, 139-147, DOI: 10.1080/15433714.2013.845028 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15433714.2013.845028
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 11:139–147, 2014 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1543-3714 print/1543-3722 online DOI: 10.1080/15433714.2013.845028
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
The Role of Relationships in Connecting Social Work Research and Evidence-Based Practice Johnny M. Jones School of Social Work, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA
Michael E. Sherr Social Work Department, University of Tennessee Chattanooga, Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
Critics of evidence-based practice (EBP) often challenge the efficacy of applying social work research in practice. Such skepticism underscores the historic chasm that still exists between social work researchers and practitioners. If taught and implemented consistently, the EBP model can mend the connection between researchers and practitioners by merging their roles. Merging their roles, however, requires a renewed emphasis on relationships in the research process. This article explores the role of relationships in social work research. Using a researcher/practitioner continuum, we assess the types of interactions faculty have with stakeholders. We then offer strategies for cultivating relationships with stakeholders that lead to community-derived and implemented research that is critical to advancing the widespread use of EBP in social work. Keywords: Relationships, social work, research, evidence, practice
In almost every field of study, scholars interact with people who have the potential to influence their research. The research process involves scientists engaging in relationships with potential funders, compliance committees, subjects recruited for data collection, and peers reviewing their manuscripts. Even in the hard sciences, where projects do not involve collecting data from human subjects, scientists interact with people who provide them with the materials and space they need to conduct their experiments. In every area of inquiry moreover, relationships with potential consumers often determine the efficacy of the findings. For social work research, the efficacy of the findings could influence the extent to which practice truly becomes evidenced-based. Placed in historical context, evidence-based practice (EBP) in social work is a progressive step toward bridging the chasm that still exists between researchers and practitioners. The beginning of just about any social work research book describes a strained and tenuous connection (e.g., Rubin & Babbie, 2010; Yegidis, Weinbach, & Myers, 2011). Researchers claim practitioners shun using empirical studies, instead relying on humanitarian impulses, authoritative guidance from consultants and supervisors, and anecdotal practices to make decisions. Practitioners assert that researchers conduct studies that are too obscure, present findings that are hard to understand, and do not apply to their work. If taught and implemented consistently, the EBP model can mend Address correspondence to Johnny M. Jones, School of Social Work, Baylor University, One Bear Place, #97320, Waco, TX 76798-7320. USA. E-mail: [email protected]
139
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
140
J. M. JONES AND M. E. SHERR
the connection between researchers and practitioners by merging their roles. EBP is a twofold process in which social workers combine practice expertise and unique circumstances with the best scientific evidence available to base their practice decisions. EBP also applies to examining outcomes of interventions and determining how to assess the findings when contemplating future practice decisions (Rubin, 2007). Similar to previous efforts to encourage social workers to “engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research” (Council on Social Work Education [CSWE], 2008, p. 5), we posit that giving deliberate attention to the role of relationships with stakeholders is imperative in determining the widespread use of EBP. The purpose of this article is to re-emphasize the primary role of relationships when conducting social work research and implementing findings in practice. We begin by identifying the stakeholders involved in social work research. Then we set forth a researcher/practitioner continuum to examine the role of relationships in the research process. We conclude by offering strategies for cultivating genuine relationships with stakeholders that are critical to the use of EBP in social work. THE STAKEHOLDERS OF SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH Identifying the stakeholders of social work research is, at once, a simple but daunting task. In simple terms, stakeholders are all the people involved in or potentially benefiting from the research. Describing all the specific people involved in the research process, however, is complex and cumbersome. Although an exhaustive list is beyond the scope of the article, we think it is important to consider at least some of the relationships that influence the efficacy of research in social work practice. Researchers engage in relationships with stakeholders at three stages of projects—planning, carrying out the methodology, and disseminating and implementing the findings. The initial stages of a research study often involve several people. Investigators may begin meeting with staff from different social service agencies, schools, federal, state, or local public officials, students, and researchers from social work and other disciplines. Investigators also need to interact with people representing funding agencies, sponsored program offices, and institutional review boards. Carrying out the methodology, stakeholders can include the study participants as well as students or staff helping collect, process, and analyze data. Dissemination and implementation of social work research then depends on relationships with editors and reviewers of journals, persons from the media, and additional interactions with agency staff, public officials, and practitioners. THE RESEARCHER/PRACTITIONER CONTINUUM The level of involvement between scholars and stakeholders strongly influences the implementation of social work research with practitioners. Indeed, a small but growing body of literature identifies interactions between researchers and practitioners as important to EBP (Allen-Mears, 2008; Barbera, 2008, Palinkas et al., 2009; Proctor et al., 2009). We suggest conceptualizing the level of involvement on a continuum. The researcher/practitioner continuum (see Figure 1) consists of four types of interactions that can influence the implementation of findings. Moving from left to right, we posit that the interactions to the right are more conducive to producing research findings that practitioners will implement in practice. Stakeholders as Subject It is possible for scholars to conduct research by approaching their relationships with people as subjects. From interactions with colleagues to making presentations at workshops, researchers can
RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH AND EBP
141
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
FIGURE 1 The research/practitioner continuum.
view all of their interactions as a means to develop, carryout, and share their research. The purpose of relationships is to simply expedite the process from concept to manuscript. Communication, if it exists at all, flows one-way from researchers to practitioners. Researchers determine what is important to study, formulate research questions and hypotheses, develop research designs, and collect and analyze data without input from people making decisions about the efficacy of implementing the findings. Then they share their work assuming practitioners, if interested, will find, read, and use their research to improve practice. Approaching community stakeholders as subjects is a common paradigm for research in social work. It is also the paradigm that is consistent with the culture of academia. At mid-level and research intensive universities, expectations of securing funding and multiple publications every year, encourages social work faculty to allocate their time carefully, making sure they produce research focused on specific areas of inquiry. There is little incentive for faculty to spend significant portions of time developing genuine relationships with stakeholders or investing time helping practitioners use the findings from their research. In fact, one of the critiques of EBP is that researchers working in schools of social work do not effectively help incorporate evidence-based information into everyday practice (Applebaum & Rahman, 2010; Grady, 2010). Acknowledging this critique, scholars are focusing their efforts on implementation research. For example, Mullen, Bledsoe, and Bellamy (2008) describe five broad strategies for implementing EBP. Their laudable suggestions, however, still avoid addressing the level of interactions needed between researchers and practitioners to actually use the strategies. Up until a few years ago, in a sober assessment of our own careers, we too treated or interacted with stakeholders as subjects connected to our research. As we look back at projects, the fruits of our labor have mostly benefitted ourselves, via tenure, job promotion, pay raises, and further funding for additional projects. Once in a while, we received e-mails from practitioners sharing how they used our work but such exchanges were rare. Even more telling, such interactions occurred passively; we did not put time or effort into developing genuine relationships with stakeholders or making sure that practitioners could use our research in practice. We simply ignored the importance of relationships in research. Recently, concerned about the gap that remains between researchers and practitioners, we began emphasizing the relationships that are critical to the widespread use of EBP. Relationships characterized by high levels of involvement and partnership with the community, not simply as subjects of research projects. The rest of the continuum stresses progressively deeper levels of partnership. Stakeholder Engaged Research Moving closer to a partnership, stakeholder engaged research involves faculty purposively interacting with community members to develop ideas for studies. Whereas faculty approaching stakeholders as subject may tend to rely too much on the literature to conceptualize projects, here, faculty recognize the importance of synthesizing past research within the actual context of practice. The primary aim of their interactions, therefore, is to glean expertise and knowledge
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
142
J. M. JONES AND M. E. SHERR
from people who can articulate community needs. Once faculty grasp the context, the flow of communication again becomes one-way as they use the information to develop their research. Deliberately seeking and acquiring an understanding of the context can significantly improve the efficacy of findings. From the outset, faculty conducting stakeholder engaged research seeks to have their work translate into actual improvement of the community’s well-being. Stated differently, faculty members are less interested in research for the sake of discovery or theoretical knowledge development. Instead, they are concerned about engaging in projects with potential to improve how people function in their environments. Their intentions are to produce knowledge that is actually implemented and used by the community. Faculty interactions with practitioners at the point of dissemination and implementation of findings, however, remain passive. They still assume practitioners, if interested, will find, read, and use their research to improve practice. Faculty members do not seek to actively assist practitioners to translate their work into EBPs. Stakeholder Involved Research The last two stages of the continuum emphasize a shift toward reciprocal communication patterns between researchers and stakeholders. From the outset of any project, faculty members intend to involve stakeholders as active participants. The purpose of inviting active participation is to create a feedback loop that benefits researchers and community members. Faculty benefit by receiving ongoing input that can improve the fidelity of research designs, which can enhance the reliability, and validity of findings. Subsequently, when faculty members seek to disseminate their research, they then benefit by increasing the probability of their work being accepted in respected peerreviewed journals. Stakeholders benefit by having an opportunity to make sure the research is useful. The depth of relationships necessary for active participation suggests that faculty members invested enough time with stakeholders to cultivate the level of trust and credibility needed for reciprocal interactions. As active partners in the research process, stakeholders, often representing integral segments of the community, can ensure the research adequately addresses pragmatic concerns and issues. Participant research methods (PRMs), commonly referred to as critical action research or participatory action research in the literature, incorporate high levels of reciprocal communication patterns. In social work, these methods are viewed as a way to merge the importance of social justice, research, and practice. Instead of working toward finite and reducible outcomes, PRMs use partnerships to carry out research projects that provide stakeholders with information they can use to take action toward addressing social problems. As Barbera (2008) described, the use of PRMs are consistent with the values of social work practice. She stated, “This research contributes to the dismantling of structures of injustice and oppression, building relationships of partnership that contribute to social transformation” (p. 143). The critical action research model posited by DePoy, Hartman, and Hastlett (1999) is an example of the in-depth interactions needed for stakeholder involvement. In their seminal article, they suggest using a steering committee of researchers and stakeholders working together to plan the study and disseminate findings to all community groups connected by the targeted social problem. Program evaluations can also involve stakeholder involvement. In fact, Taut (2008) suggests that negotiating the specifics of stakeholder involvement is a critical step in carrying out evaluative research. She stated, “Ownership and use are more likely to occur if intended users have been actively involved in the evaluation” (p. 226). Active involvement between researchers and stakeholders occurs during three phases of evaluations: negotiating the needs of everyone involved, planning the designs, and interpreting the findings. Similar to working with clients in clinical social work practice, building rapport and trust is crucial for each phase of the evaluations. Specifically, creating collaborative partnerships for evaluations requires researchers to use active listening skills to negotiate needs, to empathize with stakeholders as individuals and as a group when planning
RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH AND EBP
143
the designs, and to spend time interpreting findings together so that stakeholders can use the information to improve their programs (O’Sullivan & D’Agostino, 2002; Poth & Shulha, 2008; Preskill & Torres, 1999).
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
Community-Derived and Implemented Research In the context of the researcher/practitioner continuum, a void still exists between stakeholder involved research and the use of findings incorporated into evidenced-based social work. Although in-depth reciprocal relationships may exist, the span of commitment ends after interpreting findings together. Community-derived and implemented research, however, is based on the premise that relationships continue after interpreting findings to carrying out follow-up studies focused on translating and implementing results into practice. Here the term community is used to convey a broad group of people that coalesce around a given topic. It encompasses the needs, desires, and preferences of all those affected by a similar social problem. From the outset, researchers’ seek to address issues that are foremost on the minds of the community. Although dissemination remains important, this approach subtly shifts the emphasis of projects to remaining engaged in relationships and studying the outcomes of implementing the findings. Developing and maintaining relationships with people in the community are perhaps more important for faculty than the knowledge gained from the research. It is within the context of genuine relationships, that researchers are seen to have integrity and are afforded the respect and credibility necessary for community-derived research (Gonzales, Ringeisen, & Chambers, 2002; Rubenstein and Pugh, 2006). Stated differently, community members become willing to invest time and energy in the research because they trust that faculty members are their friends, are genuinely engaged in the community, and are committed to seeing the project through to implementation in practice. The presentations and peer-reviewed journal publications emerge from the important work done in partnership to address social issues all the way down to implementation in practice, rather than being the primary objective of faculty seeking to work with the community.
STRATEGIES FOR CULTIVATING GENUINE RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH Social work faculty, more so than faculty from other fields of inquiry, should find developing genuine relationships a natural part of the research process. Building trusting relationships is a central part of effective practice with clients. A primary emphasis of the social work curriculum focuses on helping students develop and demonstrate competence using relationship building skills. On one hand, it seems ironic to include strategies to build relationships in social work research. On the other hand, we believe the emphasis placed on relationships in practice, by and large, has not transferred to research. Looking back at many of the studies we conducted, building the kinds of relationships needed for community-derived and implemented research was simply not a priority. Instead, producing peer-reviewed journal articles and presentations were our priority. We wonder to what extent other social work faculty members feel the same way about their own work. Given the chasm that still exists between practitioners and researchers, the chasm that must be addressed if the profession is to truly implement EBP, we suspect the lack of attention on relationships is at least part of what contributes to practitioners assertion that researchers conduct studies that are too obscure, present findings that are hard to understand, and do not apply to their work. We offer the following five strategies to cultivate genuine relationships in the research process—three strategies are for individual faculty, the last two strategies are ways the profession can advance the kinds of changes in social work research needed for EBP.
144
J. M. JONES AND M. E. SHERR
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
Diplomacy Precedes Methodology Unless faculty members conduct research with secondary datasets, there is a lot of preliminary work needed between researchers and stakeholders before beginning any study. Part of the early work involves using relationship skills to build trust so that faculty can learn of the needs of different stakeholders. The purpose of early interactions is to emphasize reciprocal working relationships as the cornerstone of whatever work emerges. Several core relationship skills are important. In the context of building reciprocal relationships, social work faculty need to model appropriate self-disclosure and use assertiveness skills to articulate their intentions. They also need to use active listening skills to understand the expectations of stakeholders. Deliberate use of paraphrasing and empathetic responses can then help faculty negotiate deliverables (tangible outcomes), the time line of the work, and the level of participation of everyone involved in the project. Attending to termination is also an important relationship skill for faculty. From the outset, faculty need to negotiate when the current work will stop, how different stakeholders will determine the extent to which the research was useful, and their role in implementing the findings in practice (Hepworth, Rooney, Rooney, Strom-Gottfried, & Larson, 2009). Use Stakeholder-Centered Language A unique attribute of our profession is the need for social workers to communicate with a broad spectrum of people. Although social work education prepares students with knowledge of research methods, complex theories, and practice skills, a significant part of preparing students involves helping them use what they learn in practice. As students complete field internships, perhaps the most important learning experiences in the curriculum occurs when they incorporate classroom knowledge into their verbal and nonverbal communication skills with clients, be they individuals, groups, or community organizations. CSWE acknowledges the significance of this learning experience by incorporating Education Policy 2.3 into the Education Policy and Accreditation Standards, which states, “In social work, the signature pedagogy is field education” (2008, p. 8). Similar to practice, we posit that communicating research methods and findings to different audiences is an important skill for social work researchers. In the process of creating reciprocal relationships for community-derived and implemented research, researchers need to assess the comfort level of different stakeholders with research jargon. Then, as they cultivate trusting relationships, researchers need to deliberately tailor their communication so that the broadest spectrum of stakeholders can benefit from the findings. Translating technical jargon into useful information is perhaps most important when researchers interact with front-line staff in human service agencies. Front-line staff workers make the day-to-day decisions about client care. They are often the stakeholders who will determine the extent to which the best available evidence is considered when making practice decisions. In the same way, when researchers work with community agencies to develop and validate new evidence supported interventions, front-line staff will ultimately determine the treatment fidelity of the interventions and the reliability of the data collection. Embrace the Naturalistic Process There is an inherent tension that exists for social work researchers. Community-derived and implemented research requires researchers skilled in navigating the competing interests of community partnerships with the expertise in developing well-designed methods for data collection. From our experiences, rigidly emphasizing conformity to research protocols without attending to the naturalistic dimensions of practice will not produce the kinds of findings useful for EBP. Instead, researchers need to recognize that method selection is an emerging process that occurs
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH AND EBP
145
through relationships with stakeholders to match appropriate research designs with the unique contexts of specific settings. Acknowledging and choosing to embrace this emerging process is a deliberate strategy for cultivating genuine relationships and carrying out rigorous communityderived research. Researchers need two important skills to embrace the emergent process as a deliberate strategy— joining with stakeholders and relinquishing some control. Similar to the way social workers join with clients in clinical treatment, researchers must observe and carefully listen to how stakeholders define the issues and use terminology to describe things in their particular settings. In their interactions with stakeholders, they can then use similar words and expressions when making decisions about research designs. When they guide stakeholders toward choosing appropriate designs, however, it is imperative to the emerging process that researchers are willing to share control over those decisions. Case in point, we believe practitioners and researchers alike want to use the most rigorous research methods possible to demonstrate programmatic effectiveness or infer causality. Although double-blind, randomized control trials are the best option to assess the efficacy of evidence-supported interventions, stakeholders, including researchers, may find such designs cost-prohibitive, inefficient and/or too intrusive. The key to the emergent process in this situation is that decisions about methodology are made mutually. From our perspective, the overriding principle of community-derived research has to be a sense of ownership and commitment by everyone involved to the agreed design. Include Content on Relationships in Peer-Reviewed Journals National Association of Social Workers (NASW), CSWE, Society for Social Work and Research (SSWR), and other social work organizations play a central role in the widespread use of EBP. The promulgation of their role in EBP is vital to bridging the historical chasm between researchers and practitioners. The laudable efforts of these organizations have already created a substantial platform for open discourse on EBP in social work. In the last several years, state, national, and international conferences of different organizations have had at least some focus on EBP. In the same way, the peer-reviewed journals of these organizations and other publishers brought EBP to the forefront of the profession. In just 10 years, social work journals have published 116 articles with the words EBP in the title (NASW, 2010). The next step of advancing EBP is to encourage faculty to disseminate research conducive to practitioners incorporating the findings in their search for the best available evidence. To do so, social work organizations and other publishers should consider requiring content on relationships in the research process of all empirical manuscripts submitted for peer-review in their respective journals. Information on relationships seems necessary in methodology and discussion sections of empirical manuscripts. Either as a separate category of the method section or synthesized within the traditional subsections, submission guidelines should encourage faculty to articulate the relationship processes with stakeholders contributed to choosing research designs, gaining access to and selecting samples, defining and operationalizing variables, and selecting and administering data collection procedures. Too often authors describe the methodological decisions of their research void of any context in social work journals. Instead of simply listing the methods, infusing content on relationships will inform readers of how authors made decisions. Did researchers convene a partnership of stakeholders to define the social problem that led to the research questions and/or hypotheses? To what extent did agency staff help select and measure variables? How did the authors arrive at the reported sample size? In other words, what role did relationships play in each area of the research design? Readers need this information as they critically evaluate which findings to implement in their unique practice settings. Discussion sections also need to include how relationships influenced the use of the findings. In addition to the theoretical and scientific contributions to the literature, researchers should
146
J. M. JONES AND M. E. SHERR
demonstrate the implementation of findings with local stakeholders. Readers need authors to connect if and how their research influenced practice as much as learning about abstract potential for implications and/or areas for future research. Stated differently, social workers selecting the best available evidence need to know if and how stakeholders were able to use the findings to improve their practice. In cases where the research ended with dissemination, researchers should mention the absence of implementation as a limitation.
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
Relationships as Scholarship Administrators and senior faculty play a crucial role in determining the widespread use of EBP in social work. The level of interaction with stakeholders needed for community-derived and implemented research requires a substantial commitment of time. Research in academia, however, discourages faculty from investing the time needed to cultivate relationships and continue their work beyond publication into practice. Currently, faculty members investing in relationships beyond dissemination do so at their own risk. They may be doing important work? They may be serving the social work profession by continuing the research process onto helping practitioners implement findings? Nevertheless, they better not do so at the expense of reaching the threshold for publications and grant funding needed for earning tenure in their respective universities. The policies for evaluating faculty for tenure and promotion in social work encourage faculty to separate building and maintaining relationships from the rest of the research process. Up to this point, administrators and senior faculty assess relationships as part of service instead of scholarship. We believe arbitrarily dichotomizing the research process into service and scholarship is detrimental to the advancement of EBP in social work. Writing for publication in peer-reviewed journals and securing external funding to support research are essential expectations for evaluating faculty. Those in position to evaluate faculty, however, need to also credit the relationship work that occurs before, during, and after dissemination when assessing the contributions faculty made to the profession.
CONCLUSION Critics of EBP often challenge the efficacy of social work research, whether it is a question of methodological rigor or implementation practicality. Such skepticism underscores the historic chasm that still exists between social work researchers and practitioners. If taught and implemented consistently, the EBP model can mend the connection between researchers and practitioners by merging their roles. Merging of roles requires a renewed emphasis on relationships in the research process. Faculty need to build and maintain relationships with stakeholders to make sure they engage in relevant community-derived research. Their commitment to relationships and the research process also needs to continue past dissemination onto studying the outcomes of implementing their findings. Given the time needed for the kind of research needed for EBP, administrators and senior faculty play a key role in advancing EBP by cultivating an academic culture that considers relationship building and maintenance as scholarship when considering faculty for tenure and promotion.
REFERENCES Allen-Meares, P. (2008). Schools of social work contribution to community partnerships: The renewal of the social compact in higher education. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 18(2), 79–100.
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH AND EBP
147
Applebaum, R., & Rahman, A. (2010). What’s all this about evidence-based practice? The roots, controversies, and why it matters. Generations, 34, 6–12. Barbera, R. A. (2008). Relationships and the research process: Participatory action research and social work. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 19, 140–159. Council on Social Work Education. (2008). Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards. Washington DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cswe.org/File.aspx?idD13780 DePoy, E., Hartman, A., & Haslett, D. (1999). Critical action research: A model for social work knowing. Social Work, 44, 560–569. Gonzales, J. J., Ringeisen, H. L., & Chambers. D. A. (2002). The tangled and thorny path of science to practice: Tensions in interpreting and applying “evidence.” Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 9, 204–209. Grady, M. D. (2010). The missing link: The role of schools of social work and evidence-based practice. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 7, 400–411. Hepworth, D. H., Rooney, R. H., Rooney, G. D., Strom-Gottfried, K., & Larson, J. A. (2009). Direct social work practice: Theories and skills. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole. Mullen, E. J., Bledsoe, S. E., & Bellamy, J. L. (2008). Implementing evidence-based social work practice. Research on Social Work Practice, 18, 325–338. National Association of Social Workers. (2010). Social work abstracts. Washington, DC: Author. O’Sullivan, R. G., & D’Agostino, A. (2002). Promoting evaluation through collaboration. Evaluation, 8, 372–388. Palinkas, L. A., Aarons, G. A., Chorpita, B. F., Hoagwood, K., Landsverk, J., & Weisz, J. R. (2009). Cultural exchange and the implementation of evidence-based practices. Research on Social Work Practice, 19, 602–612. Poth, C., & Shulha, L. (2008). Encouraging stakeholder engagement: A case study of evaluator behaviour. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 34, 218–223. Preskill, H. S., & Torres, R. T. (1999). Building capacity for organizational learning through evaluative inquiry. Evaluation, 5, 42–61. Proctor, E. K., Landsverk, J., Aarons, G., Chambers, D., Glisson, C., & Mittman, B. (2009). Implementation research in mental health services: An emerging science with conceptual, methodological, and training challenges. Administration Policy in Mental Health, 36, 24–34. Rubenstein, L. V., & Pugh, J. (2006). Strategies for promoting organizational and practice change by advancing implementation research. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(S2), S58–S64. Rubin, A. (2007). Practitioner’s guide for using research in evidence-based practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons. Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. R. (2010). Research methods for social work (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole. Taut, S. (2008). What have we learned about stakeholder involvement in program evaluation? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 34, 224–230. Yegidis, B. L., Weinbach, R. W., & Myers, L. L. (2011). Research methods for wocial workers (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Allyn & Bacon.
Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/webs20
The Role of Relationships in Connecting Social Work Research and EvidenceBased Practice a
Johnny M. Jones & Michael E. Sherr a
b
School of Social Work, Baylor University , Waco , Texas , USA
b
Social Work Department , University of Tennessee Chattanooga , Chattanooga , Tennessee , USA Published online: 09 Jan 2014.
Click for updates To cite this article: Johnny M. Jones & Michael E. Sherr (2014) The Role of Relationships in Connecting Social Work Research and Evidence-Based Practice, Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 11:1-2, 139-147, DOI: 10.1080/15433714.2013.845028 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15433714.2013.845028
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 11:139–147, 2014 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1543-3714 print/1543-3722 online DOI: 10.1080/15433714.2013.845028
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
The Role of Relationships in Connecting Social Work Research and Evidence-Based Practice Johnny M. Jones School of Social Work, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA
Michael E. Sherr Social Work Department, University of Tennessee Chattanooga, Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
Critics of evidence-based practice (EBP) often challenge the efficacy of applying social work research in practice. Such skepticism underscores the historic chasm that still exists between social work researchers and practitioners. If taught and implemented consistently, the EBP model can mend the connection between researchers and practitioners by merging their roles. Merging their roles, however, requires a renewed emphasis on relationships in the research process. This article explores the role of relationships in social work research. Using a researcher/practitioner continuum, we assess the types of interactions faculty have with stakeholders. We then offer strategies for cultivating relationships with stakeholders that lead to community-derived and implemented research that is critical to advancing the widespread use of EBP in social work. Keywords: Relationships, social work, research, evidence, practice
In almost every field of study, scholars interact with people who have the potential to influence their research. The research process involves scientists engaging in relationships with potential funders, compliance committees, subjects recruited for data collection, and peers reviewing their manuscripts. Even in the hard sciences, where projects do not involve collecting data from human subjects, scientists interact with people who provide them with the materials and space they need to conduct their experiments. In every area of inquiry moreover, relationships with potential consumers often determine the efficacy of the findings. For social work research, the efficacy of the findings could influence the extent to which practice truly becomes evidenced-based. Placed in historical context, evidence-based practice (EBP) in social work is a progressive step toward bridging the chasm that still exists between researchers and practitioners. The beginning of just about any social work research book describes a strained and tenuous connection (e.g., Rubin & Babbie, 2010; Yegidis, Weinbach, & Myers, 2011). Researchers claim practitioners shun using empirical studies, instead relying on humanitarian impulses, authoritative guidance from consultants and supervisors, and anecdotal practices to make decisions. Practitioners assert that researchers conduct studies that are too obscure, present findings that are hard to understand, and do not apply to their work. If taught and implemented consistently, the EBP model can mend Address correspondence to Johnny M. Jones, School of Social Work, Baylor University, One Bear Place, #97320, Waco, TX 76798-7320. USA. E-mail: [email protected]
139
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
140
J. M. JONES AND M. E. SHERR
the connection between researchers and practitioners by merging their roles. EBP is a twofold process in which social workers combine practice expertise and unique circumstances with the best scientific evidence available to base their practice decisions. EBP also applies to examining outcomes of interventions and determining how to assess the findings when contemplating future practice decisions (Rubin, 2007). Similar to previous efforts to encourage social workers to “engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research” (Council on Social Work Education [CSWE], 2008, p. 5), we posit that giving deliberate attention to the role of relationships with stakeholders is imperative in determining the widespread use of EBP. The purpose of this article is to re-emphasize the primary role of relationships when conducting social work research and implementing findings in practice. We begin by identifying the stakeholders involved in social work research. Then we set forth a researcher/practitioner continuum to examine the role of relationships in the research process. We conclude by offering strategies for cultivating genuine relationships with stakeholders that are critical to the use of EBP in social work. THE STAKEHOLDERS OF SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH Identifying the stakeholders of social work research is, at once, a simple but daunting task. In simple terms, stakeholders are all the people involved in or potentially benefiting from the research. Describing all the specific people involved in the research process, however, is complex and cumbersome. Although an exhaustive list is beyond the scope of the article, we think it is important to consider at least some of the relationships that influence the efficacy of research in social work practice. Researchers engage in relationships with stakeholders at three stages of projects—planning, carrying out the methodology, and disseminating and implementing the findings. The initial stages of a research study often involve several people. Investigators may begin meeting with staff from different social service agencies, schools, federal, state, or local public officials, students, and researchers from social work and other disciplines. Investigators also need to interact with people representing funding agencies, sponsored program offices, and institutional review boards. Carrying out the methodology, stakeholders can include the study participants as well as students or staff helping collect, process, and analyze data. Dissemination and implementation of social work research then depends on relationships with editors and reviewers of journals, persons from the media, and additional interactions with agency staff, public officials, and practitioners. THE RESEARCHER/PRACTITIONER CONTINUUM The level of involvement between scholars and stakeholders strongly influences the implementation of social work research with practitioners. Indeed, a small but growing body of literature identifies interactions between researchers and practitioners as important to EBP (Allen-Mears, 2008; Barbera, 2008, Palinkas et al., 2009; Proctor et al., 2009). We suggest conceptualizing the level of involvement on a continuum. The researcher/practitioner continuum (see Figure 1) consists of four types of interactions that can influence the implementation of findings. Moving from left to right, we posit that the interactions to the right are more conducive to producing research findings that practitioners will implement in practice. Stakeholders as Subject It is possible for scholars to conduct research by approaching their relationships with people as subjects. From interactions with colleagues to making presentations at workshops, researchers can
RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH AND EBP
141
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
FIGURE 1 The research/practitioner continuum.
view all of their interactions as a means to develop, carryout, and share their research. The purpose of relationships is to simply expedite the process from concept to manuscript. Communication, if it exists at all, flows one-way from researchers to practitioners. Researchers determine what is important to study, formulate research questions and hypotheses, develop research designs, and collect and analyze data without input from people making decisions about the efficacy of implementing the findings. Then they share their work assuming practitioners, if interested, will find, read, and use their research to improve practice. Approaching community stakeholders as subjects is a common paradigm for research in social work. It is also the paradigm that is consistent with the culture of academia. At mid-level and research intensive universities, expectations of securing funding and multiple publications every year, encourages social work faculty to allocate their time carefully, making sure they produce research focused on specific areas of inquiry. There is little incentive for faculty to spend significant portions of time developing genuine relationships with stakeholders or investing time helping practitioners use the findings from their research. In fact, one of the critiques of EBP is that researchers working in schools of social work do not effectively help incorporate evidence-based information into everyday practice (Applebaum & Rahman, 2010; Grady, 2010). Acknowledging this critique, scholars are focusing their efforts on implementation research. For example, Mullen, Bledsoe, and Bellamy (2008) describe five broad strategies for implementing EBP. Their laudable suggestions, however, still avoid addressing the level of interactions needed between researchers and practitioners to actually use the strategies. Up until a few years ago, in a sober assessment of our own careers, we too treated or interacted with stakeholders as subjects connected to our research. As we look back at projects, the fruits of our labor have mostly benefitted ourselves, via tenure, job promotion, pay raises, and further funding for additional projects. Once in a while, we received e-mails from practitioners sharing how they used our work but such exchanges were rare. Even more telling, such interactions occurred passively; we did not put time or effort into developing genuine relationships with stakeholders or making sure that practitioners could use our research in practice. We simply ignored the importance of relationships in research. Recently, concerned about the gap that remains between researchers and practitioners, we began emphasizing the relationships that are critical to the widespread use of EBP. Relationships characterized by high levels of involvement and partnership with the community, not simply as subjects of research projects. The rest of the continuum stresses progressively deeper levels of partnership. Stakeholder Engaged Research Moving closer to a partnership, stakeholder engaged research involves faculty purposively interacting with community members to develop ideas for studies. Whereas faculty approaching stakeholders as subject may tend to rely too much on the literature to conceptualize projects, here, faculty recognize the importance of synthesizing past research within the actual context of practice. The primary aim of their interactions, therefore, is to glean expertise and knowledge
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
142
J. M. JONES AND M. E. SHERR
from people who can articulate community needs. Once faculty grasp the context, the flow of communication again becomes one-way as they use the information to develop their research. Deliberately seeking and acquiring an understanding of the context can significantly improve the efficacy of findings. From the outset, faculty conducting stakeholder engaged research seeks to have their work translate into actual improvement of the community’s well-being. Stated differently, faculty members are less interested in research for the sake of discovery or theoretical knowledge development. Instead, they are concerned about engaging in projects with potential to improve how people function in their environments. Their intentions are to produce knowledge that is actually implemented and used by the community. Faculty interactions with practitioners at the point of dissemination and implementation of findings, however, remain passive. They still assume practitioners, if interested, will find, read, and use their research to improve practice. Faculty members do not seek to actively assist practitioners to translate their work into EBPs. Stakeholder Involved Research The last two stages of the continuum emphasize a shift toward reciprocal communication patterns between researchers and stakeholders. From the outset of any project, faculty members intend to involve stakeholders as active participants. The purpose of inviting active participation is to create a feedback loop that benefits researchers and community members. Faculty benefit by receiving ongoing input that can improve the fidelity of research designs, which can enhance the reliability, and validity of findings. Subsequently, when faculty members seek to disseminate their research, they then benefit by increasing the probability of their work being accepted in respected peerreviewed journals. Stakeholders benefit by having an opportunity to make sure the research is useful. The depth of relationships necessary for active participation suggests that faculty members invested enough time with stakeholders to cultivate the level of trust and credibility needed for reciprocal interactions. As active partners in the research process, stakeholders, often representing integral segments of the community, can ensure the research adequately addresses pragmatic concerns and issues. Participant research methods (PRMs), commonly referred to as critical action research or participatory action research in the literature, incorporate high levels of reciprocal communication patterns. In social work, these methods are viewed as a way to merge the importance of social justice, research, and practice. Instead of working toward finite and reducible outcomes, PRMs use partnerships to carry out research projects that provide stakeholders with information they can use to take action toward addressing social problems. As Barbera (2008) described, the use of PRMs are consistent with the values of social work practice. She stated, “This research contributes to the dismantling of structures of injustice and oppression, building relationships of partnership that contribute to social transformation” (p. 143). The critical action research model posited by DePoy, Hartman, and Hastlett (1999) is an example of the in-depth interactions needed for stakeholder involvement. In their seminal article, they suggest using a steering committee of researchers and stakeholders working together to plan the study and disseminate findings to all community groups connected by the targeted social problem. Program evaluations can also involve stakeholder involvement. In fact, Taut (2008) suggests that negotiating the specifics of stakeholder involvement is a critical step in carrying out evaluative research. She stated, “Ownership and use are more likely to occur if intended users have been actively involved in the evaluation” (p. 226). Active involvement between researchers and stakeholders occurs during three phases of evaluations: negotiating the needs of everyone involved, planning the designs, and interpreting the findings. Similar to working with clients in clinical social work practice, building rapport and trust is crucial for each phase of the evaluations. Specifically, creating collaborative partnerships for evaluations requires researchers to use active listening skills to negotiate needs, to empathize with stakeholders as individuals and as a group when planning
RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH AND EBP
143
the designs, and to spend time interpreting findings together so that stakeholders can use the information to improve their programs (O’Sullivan & D’Agostino, 2002; Poth & Shulha, 2008; Preskill & Torres, 1999).
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
Community-Derived and Implemented Research In the context of the researcher/practitioner continuum, a void still exists between stakeholder involved research and the use of findings incorporated into evidenced-based social work. Although in-depth reciprocal relationships may exist, the span of commitment ends after interpreting findings together. Community-derived and implemented research, however, is based on the premise that relationships continue after interpreting findings to carrying out follow-up studies focused on translating and implementing results into practice. Here the term community is used to convey a broad group of people that coalesce around a given topic. It encompasses the needs, desires, and preferences of all those affected by a similar social problem. From the outset, researchers’ seek to address issues that are foremost on the minds of the community. Although dissemination remains important, this approach subtly shifts the emphasis of projects to remaining engaged in relationships and studying the outcomes of implementing the findings. Developing and maintaining relationships with people in the community are perhaps more important for faculty than the knowledge gained from the research. It is within the context of genuine relationships, that researchers are seen to have integrity and are afforded the respect and credibility necessary for community-derived research (Gonzales, Ringeisen, & Chambers, 2002; Rubenstein and Pugh, 2006). Stated differently, community members become willing to invest time and energy in the research because they trust that faculty members are their friends, are genuinely engaged in the community, and are committed to seeing the project through to implementation in practice. The presentations and peer-reviewed journal publications emerge from the important work done in partnership to address social issues all the way down to implementation in practice, rather than being the primary objective of faculty seeking to work with the community.
STRATEGIES FOR CULTIVATING GENUINE RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH Social work faculty, more so than faculty from other fields of inquiry, should find developing genuine relationships a natural part of the research process. Building trusting relationships is a central part of effective practice with clients. A primary emphasis of the social work curriculum focuses on helping students develop and demonstrate competence using relationship building skills. On one hand, it seems ironic to include strategies to build relationships in social work research. On the other hand, we believe the emphasis placed on relationships in practice, by and large, has not transferred to research. Looking back at many of the studies we conducted, building the kinds of relationships needed for community-derived and implemented research was simply not a priority. Instead, producing peer-reviewed journal articles and presentations were our priority. We wonder to what extent other social work faculty members feel the same way about their own work. Given the chasm that still exists between practitioners and researchers, the chasm that must be addressed if the profession is to truly implement EBP, we suspect the lack of attention on relationships is at least part of what contributes to practitioners assertion that researchers conduct studies that are too obscure, present findings that are hard to understand, and do not apply to their work. We offer the following five strategies to cultivate genuine relationships in the research process—three strategies are for individual faculty, the last two strategies are ways the profession can advance the kinds of changes in social work research needed for EBP.
144
J. M. JONES AND M. E. SHERR
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
Diplomacy Precedes Methodology Unless faculty members conduct research with secondary datasets, there is a lot of preliminary work needed between researchers and stakeholders before beginning any study. Part of the early work involves using relationship skills to build trust so that faculty can learn of the needs of different stakeholders. The purpose of early interactions is to emphasize reciprocal working relationships as the cornerstone of whatever work emerges. Several core relationship skills are important. In the context of building reciprocal relationships, social work faculty need to model appropriate self-disclosure and use assertiveness skills to articulate their intentions. They also need to use active listening skills to understand the expectations of stakeholders. Deliberate use of paraphrasing and empathetic responses can then help faculty negotiate deliverables (tangible outcomes), the time line of the work, and the level of participation of everyone involved in the project. Attending to termination is also an important relationship skill for faculty. From the outset, faculty need to negotiate when the current work will stop, how different stakeholders will determine the extent to which the research was useful, and their role in implementing the findings in practice (Hepworth, Rooney, Rooney, Strom-Gottfried, & Larson, 2009). Use Stakeholder-Centered Language A unique attribute of our profession is the need for social workers to communicate with a broad spectrum of people. Although social work education prepares students with knowledge of research methods, complex theories, and practice skills, a significant part of preparing students involves helping them use what they learn in practice. As students complete field internships, perhaps the most important learning experiences in the curriculum occurs when they incorporate classroom knowledge into their verbal and nonverbal communication skills with clients, be they individuals, groups, or community organizations. CSWE acknowledges the significance of this learning experience by incorporating Education Policy 2.3 into the Education Policy and Accreditation Standards, which states, “In social work, the signature pedagogy is field education” (2008, p. 8). Similar to practice, we posit that communicating research methods and findings to different audiences is an important skill for social work researchers. In the process of creating reciprocal relationships for community-derived and implemented research, researchers need to assess the comfort level of different stakeholders with research jargon. Then, as they cultivate trusting relationships, researchers need to deliberately tailor their communication so that the broadest spectrum of stakeholders can benefit from the findings. Translating technical jargon into useful information is perhaps most important when researchers interact with front-line staff in human service agencies. Front-line staff workers make the day-to-day decisions about client care. They are often the stakeholders who will determine the extent to which the best available evidence is considered when making practice decisions. In the same way, when researchers work with community agencies to develop and validate new evidence supported interventions, front-line staff will ultimately determine the treatment fidelity of the interventions and the reliability of the data collection. Embrace the Naturalistic Process There is an inherent tension that exists for social work researchers. Community-derived and implemented research requires researchers skilled in navigating the competing interests of community partnerships with the expertise in developing well-designed methods for data collection. From our experiences, rigidly emphasizing conformity to research protocols without attending to the naturalistic dimensions of practice will not produce the kinds of findings useful for EBP. Instead, researchers need to recognize that method selection is an emerging process that occurs
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH AND EBP
145
through relationships with stakeholders to match appropriate research designs with the unique contexts of specific settings. Acknowledging and choosing to embrace this emerging process is a deliberate strategy for cultivating genuine relationships and carrying out rigorous communityderived research. Researchers need two important skills to embrace the emergent process as a deliberate strategy— joining with stakeholders and relinquishing some control. Similar to the way social workers join with clients in clinical treatment, researchers must observe and carefully listen to how stakeholders define the issues and use terminology to describe things in their particular settings. In their interactions with stakeholders, they can then use similar words and expressions when making decisions about research designs. When they guide stakeholders toward choosing appropriate designs, however, it is imperative to the emerging process that researchers are willing to share control over those decisions. Case in point, we believe practitioners and researchers alike want to use the most rigorous research methods possible to demonstrate programmatic effectiveness or infer causality. Although double-blind, randomized control trials are the best option to assess the efficacy of evidence-supported interventions, stakeholders, including researchers, may find such designs cost-prohibitive, inefficient and/or too intrusive. The key to the emergent process in this situation is that decisions about methodology are made mutually. From our perspective, the overriding principle of community-derived research has to be a sense of ownership and commitment by everyone involved to the agreed design. Include Content on Relationships in Peer-Reviewed Journals National Association of Social Workers (NASW), CSWE, Society for Social Work and Research (SSWR), and other social work organizations play a central role in the widespread use of EBP. The promulgation of their role in EBP is vital to bridging the historical chasm between researchers and practitioners. The laudable efforts of these organizations have already created a substantial platform for open discourse on EBP in social work. In the last several years, state, national, and international conferences of different organizations have had at least some focus on EBP. In the same way, the peer-reviewed journals of these organizations and other publishers brought EBP to the forefront of the profession. In just 10 years, social work journals have published 116 articles with the words EBP in the title (NASW, 2010). The next step of advancing EBP is to encourage faculty to disseminate research conducive to practitioners incorporating the findings in their search for the best available evidence. To do so, social work organizations and other publishers should consider requiring content on relationships in the research process of all empirical manuscripts submitted for peer-review in their respective journals. Information on relationships seems necessary in methodology and discussion sections of empirical manuscripts. Either as a separate category of the method section or synthesized within the traditional subsections, submission guidelines should encourage faculty to articulate the relationship processes with stakeholders contributed to choosing research designs, gaining access to and selecting samples, defining and operationalizing variables, and selecting and administering data collection procedures. Too often authors describe the methodological decisions of their research void of any context in social work journals. Instead of simply listing the methods, infusing content on relationships will inform readers of how authors made decisions. Did researchers convene a partnership of stakeholders to define the social problem that led to the research questions and/or hypotheses? To what extent did agency staff help select and measure variables? How did the authors arrive at the reported sample size? In other words, what role did relationships play in each area of the research design? Readers need this information as they critically evaluate which findings to implement in their unique practice settings. Discussion sections also need to include how relationships influenced the use of the findings. In addition to the theoretical and scientific contributions to the literature, researchers should
146
J. M. JONES AND M. E. SHERR
demonstrate the implementation of findings with local stakeholders. Readers need authors to connect if and how their research influenced practice as much as learning about abstract potential for implications and/or areas for future research. Stated differently, social workers selecting the best available evidence need to know if and how stakeholders were able to use the findings to improve their practice. In cases where the research ended with dissemination, researchers should mention the absence of implementation as a limitation.
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
Relationships as Scholarship Administrators and senior faculty play a crucial role in determining the widespread use of EBP in social work. The level of interaction with stakeholders needed for community-derived and implemented research requires a substantial commitment of time. Research in academia, however, discourages faculty from investing the time needed to cultivate relationships and continue their work beyond publication into practice. Currently, faculty members investing in relationships beyond dissemination do so at their own risk. They may be doing important work? They may be serving the social work profession by continuing the research process onto helping practitioners implement findings? Nevertheless, they better not do so at the expense of reaching the threshold for publications and grant funding needed for earning tenure in their respective universities. The policies for evaluating faculty for tenure and promotion in social work encourage faculty to separate building and maintaining relationships from the rest of the research process. Up to this point, administrators and senior faculty assess relationships as part of service instead of scholarship. We believe arbitrarily dichotomizing the research process into service and scholarship is detrimental to the advancement of EBP in social work. Writing for publication in peer-reviewed journals and securing external funding to support research are essential expectations for evaluating faculty. Those in position to evaluate faculty, however, need to also credit the relationship work that occurs before, during, and after dissemination when assessing the contributions faculty made to the profession.
CONCLUSION Critics of EBP often challenge the efficacy of social work research, whether it is a question of methodological rigor or implementation practicality. Such skepticism underscores the historic chasm that still exists between social work researchers and practitioners. If taught and implemented consistently, the EBP model can mend the connection between researchers and practitioners by merging their roles. Merging of roles requires a renewed emphasis on relationships in the research process. Faculty need to build and maintain relationships with stakeholders to make sure they engage in relevant community-derived research. Their commitment to relationships and the research process also needs to continue past dissemination onto studying the outcomes of implementing their findings. Given the time needed for the kind of research needed for EBP, administrators and senior faculty play a key role in advancing EBP by cultivating an academic culture that considers relationship building and maintenance as scholarship when considering faculty for tenure and promotion.
REFERENCES Allen-Meares, P. (2008). Schools of social work contribution to community partnerships: The renewal of the social compact in higher education. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 18(2), 79–100.
Downloaded by [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ] at 19:16 21 December 2014
RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH AND EBP
147
Applebaum, R., & Rahman, A. (2010). What’s all this about evidence-based practice? The roots, controversies, and why it matters. Generations, 34, 6–12. Barbera, R. A. (2008). Relationships and the research process: Participatory action research and social work. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 19, 140–159. Council on Social Work Education. (2008). Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards. Washington DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cswe.org/File.aspx?idD13780 DePoy, E., Hartman, A., & Haslett, D. (1999). Critical action research: A model for social work knowing. Social Work, 44, 560–569. Gonzales, J. J., Ringeisen, H. L., & Chambers. D. A. (2002). The tangled and thorny path of science to practice: Tensions in interpreting and applying “evidence.” Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 9, 204–209. Grady, M. D. (2010). The missing link: The role of schools of social work and evidence-based practice. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 7, 400–411. Hepworth, D. H., Rooney, R. H., Rooney, G. D., Strom-Gottfried, K., & Larson, J. A. (2009). Direct social work practice: Theories and skills. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole. Mullen, E. J., Bledsoe, S. E., & Bellamy, J. L. (2008). Implementing evidence-based social work practice. Research on Social Work Practice, 18, 325–338. National Association of Social Workers. (2010). Social work abstracts. Washington, DC: Author. O’Sullivan, R. G., & D’Agostino, A. (2002). Promoting evaluation through collaboration. Evaluation, 8, 372–388. Palinkas, L. A., Aarons, G. A., Chorpita, B. F., Hoagwood, K., Landsverk, J., & Weisz, J. R. (2009). Cultural exchange and the implementation of evidence-based practices. Research on Social Work Practice, 19, 602–612. Poth, C., & Shulha, L. (2008). Encouraging stakeholder engagement: A case study of evaluator behaviour. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 34, 218–223. Preskill, H. S., & Torres, R. T. (1999). Building capacity for organizational learning through evaluative inquiry. Evaluation, 5, 42–61. Proctor, E. K., Landsverk, J., Aarons, G., Chambers, D., Glisson, C., & Mittman, B. (2009). Implementation research in mental health services: An emerging science with conceptual, methodological, and training challenges. Administration Policy in Mental Health, 36, 24–34. Rubenstein, L. V., & Pugh, J. (2006). Strategies for promoting organizational and practice change by advancing implementation research. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(S2), S58–S64. Rubin, A. (2007). Practitioner’s guide for using research in evidence-based practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons. Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. R. (2010). Research methods for social work (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole. Taut, S. (2008). What have we learned about stakeholder involvement in program evaluation? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 34, 224–230. Yegidis, B. L., Weinbach, R. W., & Myers, L. L. (2011). Research methods for wocial workers (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Allyn & Bacon.
