Katja Koski, Kaisa Martikainen, Katja Burakoff, Hannu Vesala and Kaisa Launonen
This paper aims to evaluate the role of the supervisor's support on the effectiveness of a communication training program targeted at staff members who work with individuals who…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to evaluate the role of the supervisor's support on the effectiveness of a communication training program targeted at staff members who work with individuals who have profound and multiple learning disabilities.
Design/methodology/approach
The aim was to explore which aspects of supervisory support influenced the staff members to participate in the programme and the results for the on-going effects of the training.
Findings
Staff members reported a need for more supervisory support to maintain the results of the training and to disseminate the new practices to non-trained staff.
Originality/value
Although supervisory support seems to benefit staff members during their participation in training programmes, even careful planning and execution of this support cannot ensure its continuation after the training is finished.
Details
Keywords
– The purpose of this paper is to reflect on the findings from Koski et al.'s (2014) research around training staff to communicate effectively.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to reflect on the findings from Koski et al.'s (2014) research around training staff to communicate effectively.
Design/methodology/approach
This commentary reflects on the needs of people with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD). It uses the Five Good Communication Standards (Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists, 2013) as a framework for thinking about good communication.
Findings
Ongoing support is certainly important in enabling staff to develop and maintain good communication partnerships with the people they are working with. This first requires agreement from all involved regarding what good communication partnerships look like and how they can be measured.
Originality/value
This paper focuses on the Five Good Communication Standards and how these might be interpreted with people with PIMD. It uses information from Goldbart and Caton's (2010) review of communication and people with the most complex needs to reflect on what is known from research and practice about each of these five standards. It concludes that more research is needed and greater implementation is needed where evidence is strong. We need to know what “good” could look like with people with PIMD so services support staff can then be facilitated to build successful communication partnerships and maintain these over time.