Empowerment Enhancers

Järvelä & Laukkanen (2000) have reported experiences from nine projects that have sought to empower such groups as: immigrants, offenders, drug addicts, long-term unemployed people, criminals who have finished serving their sentences, and the marginalized. They claim that in the European empowerment debate (related to social services), the emphasis has been too much on the individual level. Therefore, they suggest that labour markets and societal structures should be changed to serve the marginalized better (2000, 3). This suggests, again, that empowerment is not a psychological phenomenon in an absolute sense, but that empowerment is related to contextual factors.

In their report, Järvelä and Laukkanen (2000, tiivistelmä/summary) have summarized the following as critical factors in the empowerment process (in relation to unemployment and marginalization):³⁰

• Proper recruitment

• Commitment to client advocacy with “unofficial” attitude

• Changes in political decision making processes

• Changes in the working cultures and attitudes of those in the public service

• Creating more flexible structures

• Innovative ideas for new ways of rehabilitation

• Cooperation (networking) between the numerous departments of social services involved in the rehabilitation process

30 Since some of their Järvelä & Laukkanen’s suggestions are so employment rehabilitation specific that they are not relevant for the purpose of this paper, we have included only such proposals that are deemed relevant.

• Integration of social entrepreneurship and rehabilitation

• Development of praxis oriented rehabilitation methods

A number of factors in their list related to empowerment should be interpreted in the light of motivation. Järvelä and Laukkanen consider motivation to be a core feature in empowering people. Flexible structures, unofficial attitude, innovative ideas, entrepreneurship, client advocacy, and so on are motivating factors. Through such structures, attitudes, and actions, the official departments and institutions send motivating signals to the individuals. In this way, they also create trust in the system, increase freedom of choice and challenge the customer to act on his or her own behalf.

Järvelä and Laukkanen have also included entrepreneurship as a part of empowerment practise. In their contexts of unemployment and marginalization, entrepreneurship might be the utter challenge for the clientele.

Kuokkanen (2005) has also discussed factors that she considers as empowering. She argues that common moral principles are important for empowerment. If the working unit shares a common philosophy of work and values, empowerment is catalyzed. A leadership that enables participation, delegates responsibility, and trusts the subordinates can create feelings of empowerment in the work force. Continuous training, sharing information, evaluation and team work are thought to be empowering elements since they enable development and improvement. The nurse’s feeling of influence can be added through participatory decision making. Reciprocal assistance in problematic situations creates a positive atmosphere at the work place. A positive atmosphere enables disclosing and solving problems. It also allows for experiments and creative freedom. (Kuokkanen 2005, 35–26.)

Argyris (1998) has noted a number of issues that need to be considered in empowerment efforts. The first step is to recognize that all organizations have elements of top-down controls and bottom-up empowerment efforts. This tension should be recognized and openly discussed. Otherwise, the tension will create confusion. He also suggests that it is important to recognize that there are limits to empowerment. Since empowerment is not easy and a cure for all, it should not be evoked unnecessarily. An empowerment effort in an organization should be realistic. Argyris also points out that in every organization there are tasks that do not require empowerment (tasks that

demand external commitment). If empowerment programs are implemented in the contexts of such tasks, it might result in confusion. Empowerment is a powerful concept that promises a lot. If these images related to empowerment are not realized, it will bring about cynicism, disillusionment, and inefficiencies. Therefore, it should be realized where empowerment efforts may be beneficial and where not. Argyris also suggests that self-reflection increases commitment and therefore contributes to empowerment. The leadership should be sincere about inconsistencies in the empowerment programmes and reinforce internal commitment by rewards. Finally, Argyris suggests that organizations should not fool themselves about the importance of morale, satisfaction, and the sense of empowerment. He argues that ultimately the most important thing for organizations is performance. The other factors listed are secondary. (Argyris 1998.)

Parsons (1998) sees an enabling environment and a creation of an empowerment friendly institutional culture to be crucial in empowerment practice. An enabling environment is characterised by safety, interaction, trust, mutual aid, interdependence, hope, and collaborative action. The relationships with peers and professionals are collaborative. People’s self-confidence should be fostered. People should also be challenged and confronted. From an educational point of view, an empowerment process should encourage people to try out new skills, raise their consciousness, teach conflict management, and point to resources that can be accessed. (Parsons 1998, 216–

217.)

Parsons, Gutiérrez and Cox (1998) have identified four dimensions in empowerment interventions. The first dimension concerns the establishment of a worker / client relationship. When the relationship is established, the needs and resources of the client can be assessed. At this stage, it is crucial that the worker is sensitive to clients’ views of the problem and their perceived capacity to manage the problem. The second dimension relates to education. The client is provided with the knowledge and skills to deal with the problems identified. The third dimension evolves around change or mediation in the client’s context. The client and the worker reflect on the impact of the environment on the problem at hand. The client learns to access organizational and institutional help. The fourth dimension has to do with the political aspects of the client’s problems. Instead of merely accessing the organizations and institutions that

might help clients in their problems (dimension 3), the client is supported in impacting key environmental forces influencing his or her situation. (Parsons, Gutiérrez & Cox 1998, 14–19.)

Okazawa-Ray³¹ (1998) has drawn attention to four principles that should be present in empowerment interventions. He suggests that an intervention should not focus only on the client and his or her immediate context, but should include the broader factors that contribute to the problem. Among these factors are social, economic, and cultural issues. The client’s cultural background and personal experiences should be honoured and used to catalyze the empowerment process. Okazawa-Ray mentions, for example, such a sensitive issue as prayer as a means of empowerment that should not be excluded. If it is a part of the clientele’s cultural background and their coping mechanism, it should not be dismissed lightly. The third principle deals with understanding the structural inequalities that affect the marginalized. Social structures may be stigmatizing and create a sense of powerlessness. Therefore, empowerment interventions should consider these issues and, if need be, address them. Finally, Okazawa-Ray sees that the promotion of collective support and action must be included in empowerment processes. Contributing to a common good, sharing emotions and knowledge, and having an experience of being understood, can be crucial to empowerment. It is quite easy to find common denominators with the views expressed by Parsons, Kuokkanen, Parsons and others, and Okazawa-Ray. (Okazawa-Ray 1998, 62–63.)

We have earlier referred to Fetterman’s (2001) view of empowerment evaluation as a means to empowerment. A similar notion that inquiry can be an effective agent of empowerment is suggested by Kincheloe (2003). Fetterman (2001, 109–112) sees empowerment evaluation contributory to empowerment since he sees it as emancipating, fostering self-determination, building capacity, and improving the skills for self-assessment.

31 Okazawa-Ray’s article deals with the communities of color, therefore, some of the suggestions are quite specific to such communities. However, to us, it seems that most of the principles apply to other marginalized groups as well.

Adams (1996) has discussed empowerment in the context of a social practice. It seems that he propagates a practise where different methodologies and views on social practise are used in a general context of empowerment. His examples on disempowering and empowering practices are particularly enlightening. Adams suggests that an empowering practitioner is holistic, integrated, ready to learn and assertive. The opposite of such a person is fragmented, segregated, trained, and acquiescent. An empowering relationship is described as reflective rather than technical. The empowering approach to a problematic situation is divergent, focused on the problematic, and descriptive. The disempowering approach is convergent, focused on the solution, and problem solving. In terms of assessment, an empowering social worker experiments in practice and in some ways becomes part of the evaluation.

(Adams 1996, 37–42.)

Dewettinck and others (2003) conducted a research to see if empowerment really contributes to work performance. They concluded that there is a correlation between employee empowerment and performance. In their discussion, they suggest some ways to facilitate empowerment. First, they agree that distribution of authority, information, knowledge, and rewards towards the lower-levels of organization can contribute to empowerment of employees. They are also in accord with other studies showing that participatory working climate is empowerment enabling. Such climate is inviting for the workers to play active, rather than passive, roles at work. In their study, Dewettnick and others found that the most significant factors contributing to empowerment are the perceived feelings of employee competence and impact. Therefore, these feelings should be enhanced. Feelings of competence do not always relate directly to the actual level of competence. However, those who feel competent usually perform better. A two-edged approach is needed. The leadership should offer avenues to develop competence and reinforce positive feelings of competence. Self-confidence can be enhanced by providing feedback and an atmosphere where it is safe to take risks and learn. The employees’ feeling of influence can be enhanced by involving them in decision making processes and making the workers more aware of their impact on others. (Dewettinck et al. 2003, 15–17.)

Avolio and others (2004) conducted a study among nurses that explored empowerment in the context of transformational leadership. They detected that transformational

leaders may evoke psychological empowerment by trusting the employees and their capacity. Such trust creates a sense of impact on their work. This, in turn, may lead to higher levels of identification with and commitment to the organization. Avolio and others (2004) also discuss a peculiarity worth mentioning. We have noted above that empowering leaders are usually described as approachable, informal, and not very hierarchy conscious. However, the issue might not be that self-evident and simplistic.

It might well be that structurally distant leadership can empower effectively. It could be easier to empower staff that is hierarchically distant rather than close. Being too close can make it more difficult for the leader to empower the immediate subordinates. The researchers also report another interesting curiosity. We have pointed out that empowerment is often linked to freedom, holistic approaches, and self-authorization.

Avolio and others offer a differing view. They suggest that specification of tasks, roles, and rewards contribute to feelings of empowerment, at least, in immediate supervisory relationships. They also emphasize the role of top leadership to offer a clear vision that should encourage employees to take up greater responsibility for their work at all levels.

(Avolio et al. 2004, 962–964.)

Saifullah (2001) has referred to a number of ways NGOs have attempted at empowerment in his dissertation on their capacity to manage development. He takes up examples of micro-credit, self-help groups, and human rights & legal education. Such activities have been considered empowering since they are supposed to breed responsibility, increase a sense of control, and raise awareness of issues that might underlie poverty or other types of conditions leading to marginalization. The micro-credit approach could be thought of containing a number of elements contributing to empowerment. The client is held responsible, must learn to save, and receive training.

Responsibility is often required through paying back the loan and being a member of a group that might be mutually responsible for the management of the loan scheme.

Saving, on the other hand, is an activity that demands consistency and goals. The future orientation of goals demands the client to develop plans that go beyond their immediate life situations teaching planning and goal setting in a way that directly relates to their lives. (Saifullah 2001, 161–218.)

Adams (1996) has drawn attention to principles that are particularly important for community empowerment processes. He points out that a person who works with and

for communities might him- or herself be part of the problem. This calls for humility.

As to the actual organization of a community effort, Adams warns of some phenomena that relate to professional involvement in a set up. If professionals are involved in the initiation of a community effort, care must be exercised that false hopes are not created.

In addition, if the community is given a notion that they may influence the services provided, this must be evidenced in the project set up. As to the organization of a community effort, it should be kept in mind that large institutions tend to be formal and bureaucratic. This might not be an inhibiting factor for their purposes. However, excessive formalism and organization might inhibit empowerment on a community level. Community empowerment efforts may be more informal and sensitive to individual demands. Adams also notes that leadership issues must be carefully thought through. Community initiatives can very often be traced back to strong individuals.

Yet, on the other hand, these founders can become the inhibiting factors for future success. Therefore leadership, crucial information, and knowledge should be shared as broadly as possible. In terms of the future development of a self-help group, Adams deems it important that they grow beyond addressing their own needs to helping others with similar problems. (Adams 1996, 116–135.)

Nayaran (2002) has explored the meaning, importance, and praxis of empowerment in poverty reduction. Four major factors that bring about empowerment are suggested:

access to information, inclusion/participation, accountability, and capacity building of local organizations. Access to information is considered important since it is considered a form of power. Empowering information should flow from the poor to the government and vice versa. Information enables the poor to take advantage of opportunities, access services, exercise rights, and hold institutions accountable.

Inclusion/participation recognizes the authority of the poor to influence actions and legislation that may bear on their lives. It can ensure that public resources are spent in light of the priorities of the poor and, therefore, facilitate commitment. Accountability refers to the crucial element of responsibility in empowerment. Accountability has three dimensions: political, administrative, and social/public. Political accountability is increasingly exercised through elections. Administrative accountability refers to internal accountability mechanisms of government institutions both horizontally and vertically. Social accountability holds institutions accountable to citizens. Capacity building of local organizations has to do with the abilities of people to work together,

organize themselves, and mobilize resources to solve common problems. Organized groups are more likely to get their voices heard than individual champions (Nayaran 2002, xix-xx.)

Nayaran has suggested a number of factors that contribute to empowerment. It is not necessary to repeat those factors that are similar to those explored earlier in this study, but a few nuances are worth of visiting. Good governance is important for empowerment. It has been shown that adherence to the rule of law enables financial growth through impartial justice and information as to how the legal system works.

Good governance eradicates corruption. Eradication of corruption creates a positive investment climate and motivates poor people towards entrepreneurship. In terms of the role of an institution, Nyaran suggests that in order to facilitate empowerment, an institution³² should support four areas of analysis/evaluation/advice, convening, enabling, and capacity building. Analysis/evaluation/advice is to be supported since external institutions are often in positions where they have gathered information from empowerment efforts and reforms. Analysis/evaluation/advice should ensure that the poor really benefit from reforms and that the reforms are mutually reinforcing. Nayaran also sees that an institution such as The World Bank can facilitate the establishment of strategic relations among government, legislature, civil society, civil organizations, research institutions, private sector, and donors. The aim of convening these players together is to stimulate debate, consensus, and coalition in order to bring about reform.

Enabling, in turn, refers to creation of space to support empowerment activities.

Enablement may take forms of disclosure of information and public accountability mechanisms, fostering of over-all accountability from institutions to the grass-root investments, opening space for local actors to participate in creating accountability, and to support the emerge of local organizations. Finally, capacity building can be understood as conscious efforts of an institution such as The World Bank to ensure that local organizations are capacitated to assume such responsibilities as assessment of poverty eradication related issues, monitoring of the advance of poverty reduction efforts, and reporting the same to poor people to create awareness and facilitate their inclusion into the crucial poverty reduction processes. (Nayaran 2002, 2–10.)

32 Nayaran refers specifically to the role of World Bank.

Strachan and Peters have recorded the story of Oxfam’s Kebkabiya project in Sudan.

To them, it is an example of successful empowerment effort. It seems that successful empowerment takes two fronts in their treatise: empowerment of the project and empowerment of the beneficiaries. The means of empowerment highlighted by Strachan and Peters are not novel in themselves. Rather, it seems that they seem to have been used in a proper way and at the right time. The key to success of the project seems to have been inclusion of the local communities at stages and levels of project implementation. The communities were consulted in the planning stage, involved in implementation, and consciously prepared for a hand-over. The opinion of the communities and other stakeholders were taken so seriously that Oxfam adjusted its project programming in line with the voices of the beneficiaries during the implementation stage. The aim of the project was to bring people as close to the resources of political and economic power as possible. Such an approach of involving and allowing people to significantly influence the project activities resulted in trust between Oxfam and the community. Special attention was given to the utterly marginalized in the community – in this case, women. Oxfam enabled, at least a segment of poor women, to unlearn the subordinate role they were conditioned to. In Oxfam’s case, empowerment can also be seen as a state where the local community owns the project and runs it independently. To secure this it must be planned from the inceptive stages of project planning and implementation. A key factor in the handing-over process seems to be a commitment to hand-handing-over from the part of the donor/implementing agency and a commitment to assume responsibility from the part of the local community and beneficiaries. (Strachan & Peters 1997, especially vii, 11–13,

To them, it is an example of successful empowerment effort. It seems that successful empowerment takes two fronts in their treatise: empowerment of the project and empowerment of the beneficiaries. The means of empowerment highlighted by Strachan and Peters are not novel in themselves. Rather, it seems that they seem to have been used in a proper way and at the right time. The key to success of the project seems to have been inclusion of the local communities at stages and levels of project implementation. The communities were consulted in the planning stage, involved in implementation, and consciously prepared for a hand-over. The opinion of the communities and other stakeholders were taken so seriously that Oxfam adjusted its project programming in line with the voices of the beneficiaries during the implementation stage. The aim of the project was to bring people as close to the resources of political and economic power as possible. Such an approach of involving and allowing people to significantly influence the project activities resulted in trust between Oxfam and the community. Special attention was given to the utterly marginalized in the community – in this case, women. Oxfam enabled, at least a segment of poor women, to unlearn the subordinate role they were conditioned to. In Oxfam’s case, empowerment can also be seen as a state where the local community owns the project and runs it independently. To secure this it must be planned from the inceptive stages of project planning and implementation. A key factor in the handing-over process seems to be a commitment to hand-handing-over from the part of the donor/implementing agency and a commitment to assume responsibility from the part of the local community and beneficiaries. (Strachan & Peters 1997, especially vii, 11–13,