Embedding Safeguarding Together in Child Welfare: Leadership, Culture, and Sustainable Change.

Organizational change to implement SGS as a practice requires a cultural shift in child welfare organizations. Before accepting a SafeGuarding Solutions implementation, leaders must understand what they are obligating themselves and the organization to do and precisely what depth of responsibility and commitment is required to embed, act, and sustain SGS fully. SGS is more than just a procedural change to how organizations interact with families, assess risk and enhance child safety and well-being. SGS embeds a rigorous, sophisticated, safety-focused approach to child protection that turns the old child protection paradigm upside down. SGS requires the right organizational environment to succeed fully in all aspects of its service delivery.  

The SafeGuarding Solutions (SGS) framework was specifically designed to address the limitations of traditional child protection approaches. Unlike these approaches, which often focus heavily on risk assessment and adversarial interactions with families, SGS shifts the paradigm towards a collaborative, safety-focused, and sophisticated model (Turnell & Edwards, 1999). This unique approach emphasizes rigorous, balanced assessments of risks and strengths within a family unit (Munro, 2008). The key to SGS’s success is involving families in developing safety plans and fostering greater engagement and ownership of the outcomes (Turnell & Murphy, 2017). SGS moves away from the traditional risk-focused and investigatory approach, which often alienates families, towards one that recognizes the complexities of family systems and their histories and works within these realities (Senge, 2006). Leaders must fully understand that adopting SGS is not merely about implementing a new tool or method but committing to a fundamental shift in how child protection work is conducted. This involves transforming organizational paradigms, processes, and cultures to align with SGS principles (Heifetz et al., 2009).

Leadership Responsibility in Adopting SGS

Leaders are the most vital part of any child welfare organization regarding organizational cultural change. Child welfare organizations must commit to making informed decisions that should be questioned, scrutinized, and better understood before engaging in a full-fledged embedment of SGS. As such, leaders must develop a deep understanding of the framework and the changes necessary to align the organization, culturally and structurally, to adopt the framework (Kotter, 2012). This begins with leaders of the organization comprehending the technical underpinnings of the SGS model not just from an awareness standpoint but from the perspective of developing the cultural and leadership capacity to assist in the technical alignment (Schein, 2010). Leaders need to determine how an organization will bring a disciplined, rigorous, sophisticated, and collaborative approach to assessment and safety planning in a dramatically different way. A cultural shift to a mindset from one-to-one leadership and case-level responsibility to a partnership based on the ability to facilitate collaborative social inquiry and shared accountability to achieve better outcomes for children and families (Heifetz et al., 2009). The SGS model is built on an explicitly collaborative, rigorous, sophisticated assessment and safety planning approach. This shift to a children-at-the-centre, family-driven practice demands significant changes to most child welfare agencies' cultural and structural dimensions (Turnell & Murphy, 2017). Therefore, the technical alignment between SGS and the organization is a strategic approach to implementing the framework. Organizations must alter their service delivery model from a centralized corporate hierarchy to a distributed leadership structure, allowing collaborative work (Spillane, 2006).

Organizations must work to prioritize a cultural shift that demands a mindset that aligns with the discipline and principles of SGS. This cultural shift ensures that every process, structure, methodology, discipline, principle, and mindset aligns with the framework and its operation. Organizations must fund ongoing alignment processes to anchor SGS theory, principles, and practices across all job levels to ensure this occurs. Furthermore, a commitment to continuous learning and development will further reassure staff of their ability to implement SGS effectively. By adopting SGS approaches in family-led services, child- and family-centred practice, and authentic collaboration with families experiencing complex psychosocial vulnerabilities, leaders and their staff can demonstrate how to operationalize the core disciplines and principles of SGS.

Holistic Organisational Leadership and Staff Development in SGS

Adoption of SGS requires a whole-person/whole organization perspective that emphasizes the importance of staff development in emotional/social and psychological intelligence to train staff in the technical proficiencies that are necessary for SGS and how to develop their intellectual, social and emotional selves and their capacity to function in the workplace and community (Sinek, 2014). This whole-person/whole-organization approach emphasizes the importance of not only accounting for the technical skills of the workforce but also the embodied intelligence of staff and how they develop relational skills to manage complex human emotional states in the context of helping, supporting, intervening, and collaborating in problem-solving practice with families, children, and youth. Leaders who embody emotional/social intelligence serve as role models for other staff, and modelling a curious, inquisitive practice will resonate across all levels of staff in the organization. To further support this approach, leaders should transition to asking questions rather than dictating solutions or relying on primarily directing their staff; it sends a message to frontline staff about the value of curiosity in practice, empathy in decision-making, and the organization's receptiveness to learn from their decisions and actions (Spillane, 2006). Thus, emotional and social intelligence are essential in daily decision-making in child protection work, where many decisions get resolved in high-stakes environments, such as whether children will be removed (Goleman, 2006). As Kotter (2012) asserts, leaders have an essential role in establishing an organizational culture that leaves ‘the door open,’ that is, the exploration and discussion of ideas, the organization’s policies and procedures, and the roles and responsibilities of every staff member. SGS values the voicing of ideas that others can hear and the opportunity for staff and leadership to learn from mistakes, manage errors, and build trust with people so they do not make the same errors twice.

Leadership Commitment and Modelling in SGS

Commitment to SGS goes beyond cultural change. Organizations must also develop holistic leadership and staff development approaches that embed SGS within their operations, practices, and structure. This commitment is crucial in adopting SGS approaches in family-led services, child—and family-centred practice, or authentic collaboration with families. Organizational leaders must become adept at and consistently model the proper use of their positional authority and how they will participate in and direct professional responses that will make a positive difference for practitioners.

Leaders model the disciplines and principles of SGS by demonstrating to other staff and management ‘what good looks like’ in practice.

1. Cultural Alignment

Organizational culture refers to shared assumptions, values, beliefs, and behaviours that drive how work is done and decisions are made. Child welfare organizations are traditionally risk-focused on compliance and have hierarchical cultures inconsistent with the SGS disciplines and principles conducive to collaboration, transparency, and family empowerment. These inconsistencies can hinder SGS implementation and long-term sustainability (Schein, 2010; Sopow, 2022). Leaders must ensure that before undertaking the SGS implementation, there is alignment between their strategic vision and that the organizational culture is fully aligned to support every facet of SGS (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). They must play a role in enhancing and aligning organizational culture, using workshops, focus, and discussion groups to invite staff to think about existing paradigms, consider where these might conflict with SGS principles, redesign and implement aligned mindsets and guide staff in articulating areas of personal practice that they want to move away from with a shared vision of a more SGS-consistent culture (Kotter, 2012). This type of dialogue inspires and generates authentic buy-in. It also helps those in risk-focused systems acknowledge, reflect, and feel free to share deeply held beliefs they might have previously been uncomfortable discussing (Heifetz et al., 2009).

Supporting a process of co-creating a new culture with a shared understanding of the purpose of practice helps reduce resistance to new approaches. Finally, ensuring all organizational processes, including risk assessment procedures and supervision models, are aligned with SGS culture is also crucial. Risk-averse practices in child welfare can be longstanding, reactive, crisis-driven and have profound historical legacies.   Leaders must engage in these critical processes by modelling decision-making and supervision whenever possible and appropriate so staff can learn from these insights and enhance their practice. Cultural alignment is the primary and most critical step in the implementation process (Sopow, 2022).

2. Building Internal Capacity

Another critical responsibility for implementing organizations in the transformation process is to support building an internal capacity team to sustain the SGS framework over time (long after the consultant has ended their relationship with the organization). Developing internal capacity means equipping staff at all levels with the skills, knowledge, and confidence to practice SGS effectively. Leaders must ensure that sufficient resources are dedicated to training, coaching, and professional development. This includes the initial training to introduce SGS and ongoing learning opportunities that reinforce and deepen the staff’s understanding of the framework (Turnell & Murphy, 2017).  An effective way to build capacity is to develop a cadre of internal SGS trainers who can carry the framework forward long after external consultants and trainers have left. These internal champions are crucial in embedding SGS into the organization's day-to-day practice. Leaders foster a learning organization that continuously reflects on and improves its practices by creating a network of practitioners and trainers. This network of internal trainers also ensures that new staff are effectively inducted into the SGS approach, maintaining the framework's integrity over time.

Furthermore, building capacity extends beyond individual staff members to hiring practices, organizational structures, and systems. Organizations must ensure that recruitment and hiring practices are adjusted to attract candidates who align with the collaborative disciplines, principles and values of SGS. This involves prioritizing candidates demonstrating vital emotional intelligence, empathy, and a commitment to family-centered practices. Hiring processes should include thorough assessments of candidates' abilities to work within the SGS framework, emphasizing collaboration, balanced risk assessments, and family empowerment (Spillane, 2006). Supervision practices, performance management systems, and data collection methods must also be aligned with SGS principles. This includes creating mechanisms for ongoing reflective supervision, where staff are supported in applying SGS principles to complex cases and ensuring that performance metrics reflect the collaborative, family-centred outcomes that SGS aims to achieve. Organizations can ensure a more cohesive and sustainable framework implementation by aligning hiring practices and organizational systems with the SGS model.

3. Accountability to Government, Not Service Users

A unique challenge in the child welfare sector is that service users, children, and families do not pay for services they experience and receive (primarily unwillingly), as customers might in corporate settings. In businesses that sell products or services, the feedback from paying clients is critical to refining and improving service delivery. However, in child welfare, service users often do not provide feedback, or when they do, their feedback may not directly contribute to service improvements in the same way. Instead, child welfare organizations are accountable primarily to government bodies that set the standards, fund the services, and evaluate organizational performance (Munro, 2008).  Unfortunately, the system creates a dynamic in which organizations must prioritize meeting governmental expectations over directly responding to service users’ needs. The government's role as the primary stakeholder shapes organizational priorities, which may sometimes limit service users' ability to influence changes in practice. As a result, child welfare organizations can be slow to adapt to evolving client needs because their accountability is focused on regulatory compliance and achieving targets set by government bodies (Hiatt, 2006). To address this challenge, organizations must advocate for mechanisms that allow for greater inclusion of service user perspectives in shaping the organization’s approach. Although the government remains the primary payer and regulator, leaders should create effective feedback loops where the voices of children and families are heard and considered to improve service delivery continuously. Integrating service user feedback into practice development aligns with the SGS principles of collaboration and transparency. It ensures that the framework is responsive to the lived realities of children and families (Turnell & Murphy, 2017). While this does not negate the organization's accountability to the government, it allows for a more balanced approach that prioritizes regulatory requirements and service user outcomes.

4. Sustaining Change

The SGS framework relies on ongoing organizational commitment beyond the implementation phase. Organizations must continually support leaders’ abilities, willingness and capacities to model SGS disciplines and principles in their daily decision-making and interactions. By consistently demonstrating SGS disciplines, methodology, principles and values through leadership behaviours and practices, leaders signal what matters to them and shape a continuous organizational learning and development culture. Another organizational imperative is to mitigate the inevitable resistance to change that comes with implementing a new framework such as SGS. Change is often met with a sense of anxiety and discomfort, mainly where staff have spent many years adopting more traditional, risk-averse approaches to their work. Organizations must be prepared to manage resistance with sympathy and challenge by supporting staff to adapt to new working methods. This involves understanding, addressing, and allaying staff concerns, clarifying misunderstandings, and providing clear, honest, and consistent communication about the rationale and appeal of SGS (Hiatt, 2006).

Sustaining change requires organizations to manage resistance and ensure that systems and structures are continually aligned with SGS principles. This includes regularly reviewing and updating policies, procedures, and workflows to reflect evolving best practices and organizational needs. Leaders should also implement feedback mechanisms to assess SGS's ongoing effectiveness, allowing for iterative improvements and adaptations. By embedding continuous learning and feedback into the organization's operations, leaders ensure that SGS remains a dynamic, living framework that evolves alongside the organization’s needs.

Challenges and Risks of Implementing SafeGuarding Solutions (SGS)

Adopting the SGS working framework requires careful management of perceived and potential risks of using this alternative practice (from traditional practice and approaches to child welfare) to guide decisions and overcome various forms of institutional resistance. The key challenges and risks primarily flow from organizational culture and entrenched practices that must be efficiently channelled into the new direction. They also stem from the complexity of organizational change (Kotter, 2012). One of the most significant challenges is the possibility of resistance from staff who prefer to adhere to their traditional and comfortable, intuitive working methods, particularly where they are entrenched and based on risk-focused and compliance-driven practices (Kahneman, 2011; Senge, 2006). SGS represents a fundamentally different way of working compared to the perceived risk-led and risk-assessed practices traditionally associated with child welfare. Within an institutional context where risk avoidance in practice is considered ‘child-safeguarding,’ introducing a new, collaborative, and balanced risk-assessment model can feel counterproductive (Heifetz et al., 2009). Staff resistance can be exhibited in various ways, from reluctance to engage with the frames and concepts of SGS to disbelief that SGS can effectively yield better outcomes for children and families than adopting a risk-aversion model, with many staff clinging to known and familiar ways of working.

Organizations must ensure that the purpose and benefits of SGS are well communicated (comprehensive communication strategy) to staff to make a compelling case for this change in direction by clearly articulating how SGS enhances the safety and well-being of children and families, reduces organizational risk, and improves organizational and workplace cultures (Cameron & Quinn, 2011; Sopow, 2022). It must also be clear that SGS supports staff in working in more empowering and reflective ways and that following the tenets of SGS poses no additional risk to children or families. Rigorous development programs, including high-quality training and coaching, must support and inform staff using this new framework and provide ongoing support structures such as coaching, mentoring, and supervision (Turnell & Murphy, 2017). These forms of support will enable staff to practice SGS in a supportive and safe environment.  Moreover, leaders must actively listen to staff concerns, creating an open dialogue where fears and uncertainties can be expressed without fear of judgment. As Kotter (2012) suggests, creating short-term wins through pilot projects or smaller-scale implementations can help reduce resistance by demonstrating the framework's effectiveness in a controlled environment, gradually building trust and buy-in across the organization. To address staff resistance, organizations must recognize their responsibility to ensure that all employees can embrace the SafeGuarding Solutions (SGS) framework. It is not a matter of simply dismissing or firing those who are slower to adopt the new approach, as this would be a simplistic and ultimately harmful solution (loss of tacit knowledge, increased onboarding and training costs). Firing staff who need help with change is the easiest yet most cruel method and should not be the norm. Instead, organizations must create the conditions that allow staff to thrive and practice without fear.

As Fowler (2014) argues, the key to inspiring individuals lies in fostering an environment that supports their autonomy, mastery, and sense of purpose. Leaders should focus on inspiring intrinsic motivation and helping staff find meaning in their work within the SGS framework rather than relying on external rewards or threats. By offering clear communication, robust support structures, and encouraging a culture where learning and adaptation are embraced, organizations can inspire their staff to adopt and champion the change (Schein, 2010). The onus is on leadership to ensure that all staff have the resources, time, and psychological safety to develop their skills without the threat of punitive measures for those who may take longer to adjust (Heifetz et al., 2009).

Misalignment with Organizational Culture

Another critical risk in implementing SGS is the potential need for alignment between the new framework and the organization's existing culture, structures, and processes. SGS fundamentally differs from traditional child protection practices, emphasizing collaboration, family empowerment, balanced risk assessments, and safety planning approaches. If the organization’s policies, procedures, and workflows are not adapted to align with these principles, there is a risk that SGS will be perceived as an ‘add-on’ rather than an integral part of practice (Turnell & Murphy, 2017). When staff view SGS as a separate or peripheral initiative, it will likely be deprioritized and pushed aside during high-pressure situations. For example, existing risk assessment procedures may be rigidly focused on compliance and legal mandates rather than incorporating collaborative assessments involving families in decision-making.

When implementations fail, organizations often blame staff for the failure without recognizing the organization’s responsibility to create an environment that allows staff to thrive. This failure to appreciate the organization's role in ensuring that staff can perform at their best can lead to destructive and harmful impacts on staff members. They may experience feelings of shame, blame, and guilt, believing they are personally responsible for the failure (Kotter, 2012). When organizations do not align their structures, policies, and culture with new frameworks like SGS, staff are left in an environment where success is difficult to achieve, resulting in frustration and disengagement (Heifetz et al., 2009). Organizations sabotage the framework and harm their workforce by failing to create the conditions necessary for successful implementation, fostering a toxic culture that undermines morale and effectiveness (Schein, 2010). Aligning organizational structures and offering the proper support is essential to avoid these damaging outcomes and ensure long-term success.

To address this challenge, leaders must ensure that all aspects of the organization’s operations are aligned with the SGS framework, including revising policies to reflect the collaborative nature of SGS, adjusting workflows to encourage teamwork and reflective practice, and creating a performance management system that reinforces the desired behaviours and outcomes associated with the framework (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). Organizational alignment must also involve incorporating and investing in change and strategic management initiatives that address change's psychological and emotional dimensions, helping staff transition from old practices to new ones with confidence and clarity (Cameron & Green, 2019).

Sustainability and Organizational Commitment

Organizations may face another challenge in sustaining the implementation of SGS, particularly if leadership and staff view the framework as a temporary or isolated initiative. Without a long-term commitment from leadership and a clear plan for sustaining the change, there is a risk that SGS may not take root within the organizational culture. As Kotter (2012) points out, change efforts often fail when leaders declare victory too early, neglecting to embed the new approach into the organization's DNA. Leaders must develop a long-term strategy to ensure sustainability beyond the initial implementation phase. This involves continuously reinforcing the disciplines and principles of SGS through comprehensive organizational implementation and embedding, embracing, enhancing and practicing learning processes, reflective supervision, and leadership modelling for sustainability. Leadership should also establish feedback loops to assess the framework's effectiveness over time and make necessary adjustments to ensure its relevance and impact (Schein, 2010). Furthermore, allocating resources to support the continued development of staff and the framework’s integration into practice is essential for long-term success (Spillane, 2006).

Conclusion 

Leaders in child welfare organizations need to accept that implementing the SafeGuarding Solutions framework is not just learning a new set of tools or procedures. It is fundamentally about transforming the organization's culture, re-aligning its structures and processes with the collaborative, sophisticated approach SGS promotes, and supporting staff to develop the skills and mindsets needed to make the framework work. If leaders adopt a whole-of-organization approach to implementing SGS, build in-house capacity and are prepared to model the behaviours and attitudes required to make SGS work. They are more likely to ensure the framework will be adopted and sustained over time, with improved outcomes for children and families.

References

Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2019). Making sense of change management: A complete guide to organizational change models, tools and techniques (5th ed.). Kogan Page.

Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (2011). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing values framework (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Edmondson, A. (2018). The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the workplace for learning, innovation, and growth. Wiley.

Fowler, S. (2014). Why motivating people does not work... And what does: The new science of leading, energizing, and engaging. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Goleman, D. (2006). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. Bantam Books.

Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Harvard Business Press.

Hiatt, J. M. (2006). ADKAR: A model for change in business, government, and our community. Prosci.

Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.

Munro, E. (2008). Adequate child protection (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Sinek, S. (2014). Leaders eat last: Why some teams pull together, and others don't. Portfolio.

Sopow, E. (2022). Transforming organizational culture for sustainability. Oxford University Press.

Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. Jossey-Bass.

Turnell, A., & Edwards, S. (1999). Signs of safety: A solution and safety oriented approach to child protection casework. W.W. Norton & Company.

Turnell, A., & Murphy, T. (2017). Signs of Safety: Comprehensive briefing paper (3rd ed.). Resolutions Consultancy.