BRENNER, PAUL FREDERICK; DSW
YESHIVA UNIVERSITY, 1980
SOCIAL WORK (0452)
The purpose of this research was to gain an increased understanding of the processes
by which
innovation is introduced, developed and managed. Because of the scope of this
task, the issue was
explored within the more manageable context of a single case illustration. The
example selected was
command consultation, an innovative service function mandated to practitioners
in the U.S. Army's
Mental Hygiene Consultation Service. Command consultation, as its name explicitly
states, is a
consultation service to commanders, rather than a treatment service to the individually
impaired soldier.
Command consultation was widely acclaimed to be worthwhile, and for the past
thirty years, has been
presented as a viable strategy for assisting commanders in dealing with dysfunctional
soldiers. However,
the successful implementation of the process never matched the widespread acclaim
that it received
from Army social workers, psychologists, and psychiatrists. This study dealt
with the incongruity of
command consultation's far reaching, stated appeal to practitioners and its
historical record of
unsuccessful implementation. Accordingly, the primary interest of this study
was exploring the adoption
and diffusion process of command consultation. The underlying objective was
to illustrate the more
widespread problem of how innovations in general may gain acceptance and spread
or how they may be
rejected and fade out of existence. The research methodology focused on the
history and events
surrounding the development of command consultation. A grounded theory approach
was utilized to
develop concepts and process information about command consultation directly
from those individuals
who had knowledge of its background and experience with its use. A literature
search was conducted
and a preliminary, exploratory study was undertaken consisting of informal inquiries,
phone calls,
correspondence, cassette tape recordings, personal interviews, and a pilot survey.
After assessing the
preliminary data, a full scale study was initiated. Screening procedures were
used to identify a sample of
Army social workers who were the early innovators and practitioners in the command
consultation
movement. The procedures yielded a sample of 163 informed witnesses who were
included in the full
scale study. Statistical procedures used to analyze the data included content
analysis, measures of
central tendency, frequency distributions, cross-tabulations, and factor analysis.
Among the major
findings, respondents reported high levels of individual involvement, success
and satisfaction with their
own use of command consultation; however, they perceived that the involvement
of their colleagues
was very limited. Respondents also agreed that the ways in which they learned
about command
consultation were largely informal, sporadic, and experiential in the absence
of a formal, systematic
approach. Additional findings dealt with factors which interfered most strongly
with the practice of
command consultation. These factors were (1) the limited experience of mental
health personnel, (2) the
lack of continuity of the process resulting from rotations of duty, reassignments,
etc., (3) ideological
commitment of mental health professionals to individuals rather than to the
organization or larger systems
of the Army, (4) the lack of compatibility between command consultation and
client needs, (5) the
complexity of command consultation processes per se, and (6) lack of consensus
about what command
consultation really was. Data also revealed that the extent to which command
consultation was formally
institutionalized as a mental hygiene function was quite limited. Its concepts
and operational procedures
were never well developed and commanders' support of the process was often lacking.
An important
finding which had significance for social work practice was that the diffusion
of command consultation
affected and was affected by the status of social work as a profession. In conclusion,
parallels were drawn
between the command consultation movement and the recently developed Organizational
Effectiveness program now currently practiced in the Army. A series of recommendations
and
suggestions were also presented.
Social
Systems Simulation Group
P.O. Box 6904 San Diego, CA 92166-0904 Roland Werner, Principal Phone/FAX (619) 660-1603 |