Time and the probation practitioner

Introduction Perhaps most would agree that it is preferable to be a little too busy at work than to be bored. A sense of competence can arise from achieving a lot in a day whilst confidence can ebb when under-employed and time hangs heavily. Nevertheless, it might also be agreed that there are limits beyond which being busy, even very busy, spills over into something less productive and more disorientating. This balance regarding time, pace and quantity of tasks is difficult to achieve in the field of probation practice, an arena subject to strong political pressures and this article explores the forces which govern time in probation practice and the effects which the prevailing 'time culture' has on practitioners and the quality of their work. It is argued that time and pace in probation practice is currently governed by a performance culture which is characterised by the audit of cash-linked indicators and, whilst the importance of efficiency in practice is recognised, it is suggested that the unintended effect of too zealous a performance culture is an irrational haste and associated reductions in the effectiveness of practice. As Merrington and Stanley observe, performance management in probation has: placed particular emphasis on timeliness of activities, rather than content or quality (P453). Writing of the 'New National Probation Service,' Nellis (2002) drew attention to the importance of time in shaping probation practice commenting that: the amount of time that professionals perceive themselves to have--the deadlines they have to meet--significantly shapes the way in which they approach their task (p71). Taking an overview at the turn of the century he expressed concern regarding the pace of practice noting that: anecdotal evidence suggests that probation staff, managers and basic grade workers alike, already feel an acute sense of time pressure (pol). More recently, a number of research studies focussing on the experience of probation practitioners have indicated that the 'time pressure' which Nellis described has intensified significantly (Farrow 2004, Mair, Burke and Taylor 2006, Robinson and Burnett 2006, Petrillo 2007, Mehta 2008, Davies and Durrance 2008). Indeed, commentators warn that time scarcity and a sense of relentless haste threaten to displace other practice considerations. To give an example, Robinson and Burnett (2006) tracing the experience of probation staff in keeping abreast of the development of NOMS, found that a sense of time scarcity tended to relegate much updating of knowledge to the bottom (or, rather, off the end) of a very long list of things to do. Almost all interviewees made some comment along these lines: I'm always chasing my tail and I don't really have the time, you know (p322). In this instance, updating knowledge and maintaining an awareness of key changes in the governance of the agency are displaced by the pace of daily activity. A concern explored here is that other necessary aspects of effective practice are also eroded by haste. In order to place the discussion in context, a broad overview is taken of developments in the field of probation and the ways in which they have shaped how time is structured in practice. Following this, and focussing particularly on recent research findings, evidence is presented which illustrates the influence of these developments on time and practice but in more immediate and concrete ways. In conclusion, consideration is given to the implications of time scarcity for effective working relations, risk management, 'proper punishment' and the rehabilitation of offenders. Who Knows Where the Time Goes? (1) Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that! (Carroll L. 1970/1871 p210). …