By Heidi Enehaug & Øystein Spjelkavik
Nordic welfare states are grappling with rising unemployment among the most vulnerable citizens (Andersen et al., 2017; Berkel et al., 2017; Bredgaard & Halkjær, 2016). Neither supply-oriented nor demand-oriented labor market measures have been successful in improving employment inclusion. Hence, research highlights the need for support-oriented strategies involving collaboration between the support system and workplaces (Enehaug et al., 2021; Frøyland et al., 2019).
However, frontline workers within the support system frequently possess only a limited understanding of the daily procedures entailed in workplace inclusion initiatives. As a result, they are often unaware of how they can contribute to the development of a beneficial person-environment fit. Additionally, employers’ lack of understanding of the assistance needs of new, challenged candidates can hinder successful employment relationships.
Research shows that when frontline workers take on more engaged and proactive roles, outcomes are improved. Enehaug et al. (2021) describe vital competencies when doing so as a blend of social, health, and pedagogical knowledge about clients’ support needs, coupled with an understanding of how conventional workplaces can be engaged in work inclusion efforts. Crafting personalized support demands a contextual understanding of the candidate’s needs and the capabilities and opportunities available in the work organization. Ultimately, research has underscored the need for supports that emerge organically within the work organization during work inclusion processes (Villotti et al., 2017; Williams et al., 2016).
This article presents a research and development project aimed at fostering innovation in collaborative practices between Public Employment Services (PES) and employers. The project’s primary objective was to bolster ‘natural supports’ in the work inclusion of vulnerable candidates, with a distinct emphasis on amplifying the role of a dedicated workplace mentor (Spjelkavik et al., 2020). Spanning three years, the project engaged 30 frontline workers from two local PES offices and involved 45 mentors from a diverse range of 39 workplaces. The research design underlined the importance of knowledge exchange and experiential learning among the participants. Data were collected through 42 interviews with mentors, supplemented by 32 interviews with PES frontline workers and leaders.
The involved frontline worker
Frontline workers, typically overseeing 40-120 clients, partnered with company mentors to boost the work inclusion of their unemployed vulnerable clients. in some few of their cases, they adopted a more proactive, flexible, and outward-focused approach, diverging from the standard “treat everyone equally” practice.
Among PES frontline workers, there was much discussion about the possibility to prioritize certain clients over others: “I actually think it has gone well, because no matter what, when you’re dealing with a large portfolio, you have to prioritize (…) I can’t continue like this with too many, but that you choose some cases; I think that is entirely manageable.”
Frontline workers proactively prioritized the client’s interests, identifying suitable workplaces and potential mentors, rather than waiting for an employer’s initiative. This shifted the focus from traditional standardized evaluation meetings with employers to consistent follow-up with the actual mentor. While this approach was acknowledged as more labor-intensive, frontline workers found value in it: “The experience of creating good processes in the workplace makes one want to work in that way more often (…) it doesn’t always go well, but then you also learn a lot from it, and become more confident in the role.”
While the previous practice was described as “vague” and characterized by “firefighting“, the new approach was described as “fire prevention” and with a focus on developing a good job match: “It’s much easier to make demands on the employer when you know it’s a good job match (…), it’s well-thought-out.”
The new approach enhanced frontline workers’ competency in job-oriented follow-up. They gained insight into the challenges, limitations, and opportunities in various workplaces, understanding better the support mentors needed and how they could contribute to the development. They appreciated the active involvement this model demanded: “What I like about this model is that the frontline worker is involved all the way and participates in the development.”
Frontline workers experienced increased acknowledgment from mentors and employers for their contributions. They understood the importance of their knowledge about clients’ support needs in facilitating accommodation and progress. As one PES leader noted: “Previously, I was a bit unsure about how conscious some frontline workers were in following up on the company side. They might have followed up the client, but not so much the mentor or employer.”
The dedicated mentor
Mentors, spread across various industries, companies, and locations, were often colleagues of the candidate or, in smaller businesses, the employers themselves. Our analysis indicates that being close to the candidate, rather than holding a formal position, is crucial for effective mentorship. Many mentors had prior experience with PES candidates, but this was their first conscious engagement in a mentoring role. Notably, none had received any formal mentorship training.
Having a dedicated mentor role in the workplace facilitated one-on-one time with the candidate. As one mentor stated, without a dedicated role, “it becomes more like they’re going into the usual routine…as a mentor, I have to commit myself.” This role offered mentors flexibility in terms of presence and responsibility, positively influencing the psychosocial work environment. Despite the demanding nature of the role, balancing facilitation and motivation, mentors saw progress over time. One mentor shared: “In the beginning he maybe worked two hours a week. We started there…And then, slowly but surely, he climbed up. And today he works full time, follows a full shift list (…).”
The mentors highlight the importance of relational support, understanding and empathy. Patience and time are key words for mentoring in the workplace. The mentor contributes to safety by being available and by including the candidate socially among other employees. The onboarding is much more individually adapted than with regular recruitment. The mentor strives to achieve a development in the quality of the candidate’s work achievements, in the scope and variety of the tasks, and in the social work environment.
Mentoring experience is more challenging when problems in the workplace become too large and support from PES or their own manager too small. Mentors and employers clearly support the idea that the workplace is the right place to train, learn and develop, but they call for more long-term plans to achieve this, and they call for more support from the support system, including financial support.
Collaboration
The mentors usually identified the collaboration with PES frontline workers as a vital factor in tackling the candidate’s challenges. They observed that their involvement fostered development and job retention. Importantly, it also provided an added layer of risk reduction for the company when investing time and resources in work inclusion. One says: “I need that frontline worker when things get tough for the candidate. My main job in all of this has been to be there socially. I feel like I’ve been more of a psychologist than a technical advisor.”. Another says: “I find it very interesting to work with people in that way (…), and it’s easier to say yes when you have a support system around, like PES.”
The collaboration is based on adjustments of the existing PES bureaucracy to better succeed in work participation for clients with more complex and comprehensive assistance needs than can be handled within the framework of the traditional case manager model.
In short, in this new approach, PES frontline workers in some cases work more “employment specialist-like”. These are cases where a bureaucratic, standardized approach is considered inadequate. This means that in some cases, frontline workers are given increased authority to assess for themselves how and to what extent they may follow up the client and identify relevant workplaces and collaborate with a mentor. The follow-up is not standardized, but individually adapted to the client and the mentor. The flexibility allows the frontline worker to quickly identify needs and address challenges that arise.
In PES, such a “hybrid model” requires organizational measures that ensure competence acquisition and in-practice learning. The model can function as a bridge between the traditional case manager model and the employment specialist model of supported employment. The model seems to have a great learning effect both in PES and in the work organization.
This approach can hardly be standardized in terms of follow-up efforts, but the division of work and responsibilities goes in the direction of the mentor taking care of follow-up regarding tasks and social inclusion in the workplace, while the PES frontline worker takes care of follow-up that is not directly workplace-related, such as the formalities associated with regulations, arranging and keeping in touch with the GP, psychologist, family and leisure conditions. At the same time, the examples show that mentors often rely on professional input and assessments from the frontline worker. The trusted relationship between the PES frontline worker and mentor in the workplace is therefore of crucial importance.
References
Andersen, N. A., Caswell, D., & Larsen, F. (2017). A new approach to helping the hard-to-place unemployed: The promise of developing new knowledge in an interactive and collaborative process. European Journal of Social Security, 19(4), 335-352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1388262717745193
Berkel, R. v., Caswell, D., Kupka, P., & Larsen, F. (2017). Frontline delivery of welfare-to-work policies in Europe : activating the unemployed. Routledge.
Bredgaard, T., & Halkjær, J. L. (2016). Employers and the Implementation of Active Labor Market Policies. Nordic Journal of working life studies, 6(1). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.19154/njwls.v6i1.4909
Enehaug, H., Spjelkavik, Ø., Falkum, E., & Frøyland, K. (2021). Workplace inclusion competence and employer engagement. Nordic Journal of working life studies. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18291/njwls.128260
Frøyland, K., Schafft, A., & Spjelkavik, Ø. (2019). Tackling increasing marginalization: can support-side approaches contribute to work inclusion? In H. Hvid & E. Falkum (Eds.), Work and Wellbeing in the Nordic Countries : Critical Perspectives on the World’s Best Working Life. Routledge.
Spjelkavik, Ø., Enehaug, H., Klethagen, P., & Schafft, A. (2020). Arbeidsinkludering og mentor. Inkluderingskompetanse gjennom samskaping (Work inclusion and mentor. Inclusion competence through co-creation) (Vol. 2020:1). Work Research Institute, Oslo Metropolitan University. https://hdl.handle.net/10642/8925
Villotti, P., Corbière, M., Fossey, E., Fraccaroli, F., Lecomte, T., & Harvey, C. (2017). Work Accommodations and Natural Supports for Employees with Severe Mental Illness in Social Businesses: An International Comparison. Community Mental Health Journal, 53(7), 864-870. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-016-0068-5
Williams, A. E., Fossey, E., Corbière, M., Paluch, T., & Harvey, C. (2016). Work participation for people with severe mental illnesses: An integrative review of factors impacting job tenure. Aust Occup Ther J, 63(2), 65-85. https://doi.org/10.1111/1440-1630.12237
