ABSTRACT

During the process of observing practitioners at work, whether in one-to-one interviews or group-based programmes, the fact that some are more effective than others in communicating, engaging, enthusing and motivating is as easily recognisable as an elephant would be if it walked into the interview room. That recognition, however, begs two pressing questions: the first concerns the actual elements of that effectiveness, and the second the relationship between that effectiveness and success in promoting desistance from offending. Responding to the second question is relatively straightforward (though not simple), involving as it does the application of well-tested evaluation methods; engaging with the first is altogether more difficult. Although the performance of the effective practitioner is not magical but rather made up of observable behaviours and actions (see, for example, Andrews and Kiessling 1980), identifying them is a challenging task for any observer. This might explain in part why implementation was ignored for so long in corrections literature (Gendreau et al. 1999), and in particular why there is a need for more research that endeavours to clarify what particular characteristics of practice are effective in helping to change behaviour (Dowden and Andrews 2004).