How Professionals Experience Complexity: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis

Abstract

This paper reports on doctoral research carried out in the UK into the experience of complexity in child protection work. The study explored what complexity meant for practitioners, and examined its significance for interprofessional working. A qualitative, case‐based approach was adopted, drawing on the experiences of 17 practitioners working on two separate child protection cases. Participants were from a range of agencies, including children's social care, education, youth offending and child/adolescent mental health. Two rounds of semi‐structured interviews were carried out over a period of four months. Interview transcripts were analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis, a research methodology derived from qualitative psychology. The findings revealed complexity to be a multifaceted phenomenon, driven by the dynamics of cause and effect in open social systems. Practitioners' perception of unpredictability and volatility in these cases fed into various aspects of collaborative work: the experience of relationships, the process of assessment, efforts at intervention and concerns about risk. The paper concludes by exploring some implications for policy and practice in terms of how interprofessional networks are set up to manage the needs of vulnerable children and families. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. ‘A qualitative, case‐based approach was adopted’ Key Practitioner Messages Complexity makes it hard for practitioners to understand cause and effect, predict outcomes and control the course of events. To manage complexity, the team around the child may need to operate as a strategic unit rather than a collection of tactical interventions. When complex cases become ‘stuck’, professional networks may need additional support and consultation from specialist agencies. ‘Complexity makes it hard for practitioners to understand cause and effect, predict outcomes and control the course of events’

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 30 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.