The Center for Creative Community

Building Work That Satisfies:
The Need Overlap Analysis In Helping -- Noah III

&

Needs Overlap Analysis in the Helping Process
First Step of Decision Making

 @ -- permission for use-with-acknowledgment
 

Building Work That Satisfies:
The Need Overlap Analysis In Helping -- Noah III

By Ivan Scheier

Prepared for use by the Voluntas Institute for Consultants and Trainers, April 12-16, 1992, Ghost Ranch, New Mexico. Sponsored by the Center for Creative Community, Santa Fe, New Mexico

The purpose of NOAH is to find a best match between the willing and glad offerings of the community and the needs and dreams of an organization. The organization may be represented by staff, board, service volunteers, and consumers of services (clients, members, etc.)

The primary responsibility for operation of the NOAH process belongs to the individual or small committee/task force which deals with volunteer programs and/or community resource development for the organization seeking help. Here we might encounter names like 'Director of Volunteer Services', 'Coordinator of Community Resources' 'Social Concerns Committee' etc.

Participation in the NOAH process should be as wide and deep as possible by principal players such as (paid) staff, board, current and potential service volunteers, and consumers of services.

The following process outline is a framework not a formula. It is your responsibility and opportunity to adapt it flexibly to your organization, situation, and community. We do assume prior familiarity with the principal components in the process: Job Factoring, Titles of Caring, The Window of Work, and Task Enrichment. (all described elsewhere in this module).

Prepare the Asking (Needs and Dreams)
The raw material for this is drawn from the JOB FACTORS of staff, and/or leadership volunteers--whoever is asking for assistance. The ingredients of the ASKING are spinoffs, teams, dreams and quests (yes, volunteers can help staff with learning and growth, if staff can accept such help). If the TITLES OF CARING process has also occurred, add here, TITLES-we-haven't-tried-yet, (the outer reaches of the radiant or the spiral and usually similar to dreams from the job factor).

Scan or check the raw material of asking in these ways:

a-The Pattern Check. Insofar as a greater number of people share a dream, team, spinoff etc., there's likely to be broader organizational support for involving the community in the activity. On the other hand, relatively rare and even idiosyncratic askings may be especially important creatively and politically.

b-The Authority Check. Are community people permitted to undertake these activities? Is there an organizational policy and/or legal and/or Union Contract barrier, to anyone but staff being responsible for this work?

c-The Consumer Check. I strongly recommend review by consumers of services, at this point. The consumer committee might look first at dreams and titles of caring, with these questions in mind: how high on our list of priorities is this now service or resource? What other services or resources not mentioned here seem more urgent to us? The consumer committee might also review spinoffs (maybe this activity isn't needed at all), and teams (maybe we could be the ones to team with staff on this activity).

Prepare the Community Offering
The raw material for this is based on windows of work for present volunteers (who might seek additional or simply different involvements), prospective volunteers, and possibly consumers of services.

We look first of all at volunteer values ("wise why's'). Are they consonant with organizational values (indeed, maybe they 'can refresh organizational memory on that, or even teach us a thing or two)?

Given value resonance, we look at glad gifts and quests and ask two questions. How much TIME does the person have available for these contributions? What is the person's actual level of competency in the glad gift activity (people may honestly overestimate or underestimate this, for themselves)? There is, of course, a practical limit to how thoroughly we can check these things, but a real effort is usually well worth it.

As for 'no-no's", representing what is definitely not offered, a composite list is sometimes surprising. That is because one person's no-no can be another's gift of quest.

A combined window of work for, say, fifty potential community contributors is enormously impressive. This composite will of course indicate patterns, e.g. how many times a particular glad gift or quest is offered. Individual windows should also be preserved and presented for their special dramatic and human value.

Seeking Between Askings and Offerings
Flexibility and creativity is particularly valuable in determining how this process is best accomplished. As a general rule, however, the wider the participation in the process, the better it will be. And wherever possible, this participation should include face-to-face interaction, along with exchange of written material. One possibility here would be a community resource development committee representing prospective volunteers, staff, board and consumers of service, supported by written records of askings and offerings, and facilitated by the individual(s) primarily responsible for conduct of the process.

The process can go in three directions: 1) "Sell" organizational needs and dreams to prospective volunteers, 2) Market community offerings to the organization, and 3) Go both ways at once, (my strong preference)

1-The initiative is taken by and through the organization's ASKING which is then checked against the community offering for positive matches. Where 'natural' matches are difficult, the asking can be re-designed ('massaged’) for increased motivational attractiveness via the task enrichment techniques discussed elsewhere in this module.

2-Typically, organized volunteerism tries to "Sell" work to volunteers, as above. Yet, in the relatively rare instances where the other direction has been tried—selling volunteer work to organizations--it has shown great promise. Here, the initiative is taken by the prospective community contributors in terms of their offerings, which the organization responds to in terms of its needs and dreams, also allowing itself to be 'pleasantly surprised' by some creative offers it never before thought it could use.

3-Both ways at once is the best way. Thus, while composite and individual work windows are being studied by staff, prospective volunteers and consumers might be reviewing the needs and dreams staff is asking help with.

  Needs Overlap Analysis in the Helping Process
First Step of Decision Making

(Adapted from Need Overlap Analysis, A technique for Job Development by Dr. Ivan H. Scheier, Synergist, Winter 1975, the journal of ACTION's National Student Volunteer Program (NSVP). Adaptation by Judith Berlowitz, DECA-DHD

NOAH - - its full name is Needs Overlap Analysis in the Helping Process - - is a practical technique for arriving at some common needs, a necessary first step in both the decision making and planning processes. NOAH is a useful planning tool for any agency, group - or even household.

Through NOAH, we determine the needs of individuals or groups who will be affected by a particular decision or involved in a particular program.

Then we seek an area of overlap. Overlap occurs where the involved parties agree on what needs to be done.

This overlap or consensus area forms a basis for sound decision making and solid program planning.

USING NOAH IN VOLUNTEER PROGRAMS

1.NOAH can help you decide whether or not to begin a volunteer program at all
2.NOAH can help you decide whether or not to expand a volunteer program you already have.
3.NOAH can help you design more meaningful volunteer jobs.

HOW TO USE NOAH IN DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT'TO BEGIN A VOLUNTEER PROGRAM
In deciding whether or not to begin a volunteer program, you will seek common needs among:

The Object of this activity is to find a needs overlap area among staff, "volunteer community" representatives and representatives of the community at large. If these three groups do not share some common needs, the chances of having a successful program will be substantially lessened.

Allow plenty of time for this activity - at least two hours. You, as facilitator, conduct a meeting of:
- agency staff members who will be affected by the volunteer program;
- representatives of the community's existing volunteer programs - for example, program managers and experienced volunteers;
-civic minded members of the community at large - people who serve on boards or advisory committees of significant community organizations and, perhaps, some public officials.

You explain the volunteer program under consideration and the necessity of getting their needs and feelings about the program in order to make a decision whether or not to go ahead with it.

Then have the groups meet separately. Each group selects a recorder who writes down the needs and feeling expressed by the group and reports them when the group rejoin.

At that time, list the points made by each group on a flip chart or chalkboard, discuss them and seek overlap - needs that are expressed by all three groups.

 

If the three groups express a substantial number of common needs - or even one very strong common need for the program under consideration, you will have taken the first step in your decision making process, i.e. the program is needed.

If there are not enough common needs expressed by the three groups to justify a volunteer program, you should not begin one at this time.

HOW TO USE NOAH IN DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT TO EXPAND AN EXISTING VOLUNTEER PROGRAM

In deciding whether or not to expand a volunteer program you already have, you will seek common needs among:

The object of this activity is to find a needs overlap area among the three groups. Unless they share some needs, any expansion at this time is unwise.

Just as in the first example, you, as facilitator, conduct a meeting of the involved groups or representatives from each of them.

You explain how the volunteer program could be expanded and the importance of its meeting some common needs of all three groups before making the decision to expand.

As before, you have the groups meet separately to express their needs for and feelings about an expanded program. You explain that this is a necessary step in making the decision. Each group selects a recorder to write down the group's responses and report them when the groups rejoin.

When the total group reconvenes, list each group's identified needs and seek overlap or consensus through discussion.

If the number of common needs expressed justified volunteer program expansion, you can move on through the decision making process.

If there are not enough common needs expressed by the three groups, go no further through the decision making process. Program expansion is inadvisable at-this time.

NEEDS OVERLAP ANALYSIS
A Technique for Job Development

NEEDS OVERLAP ANALYSIS (NOAH) is a process through which meaningful volunteer jobs can be developed.

The process involves the three groups affected by a volunteer program:
- staff who work with volunteers, directly or indirectly;
- volunteers themselves;
- clients served by the agency.

They all must receive a 'payoff'; i.e. they must benefit in some way from a volunteer job. For example:
- staff may be relieved of some tasks which will permit more of their time to be devoted to clients;
- volunteers may feel more useful and fulfilled in their work;
- clients may receive more and better services.

NOAH gets out the needs of all three groups and finds the consensus, or overlap area, among them.

Where the needs overlap we find out what volunteers want to do that staff wants them to do and that the clients need to have done.

Here is a diagram of the process.

 

The non overlap areas marked X are:

1.Staff needs for volunteer jobs that volunteers don't want to do; for example, "volunteers could keep the snack room clean."
2.Jobs that volunteers want to do that staff will not accept;' for example, "we want to evaluate the agency".
3.Client needs that neither volunteers nor staff will accept; for example, "we want volunteers to be available during evening hours from 5 to 8 p.m.

SUMMARY OF STEPS IN THE NOAH PROCESS:

1.Staff and volunteers meet separately, usually but not necessarily at the same time to develop needs lists.
2.Staff and volunteers meet together to find out if any of their listed needs overlap.
3.Clients meet to work up their list of needs - usually, but not necessarily before the staff and volunteers have met.
4.A meeting is held for the clients to respond to the common needs of staff and volunteers and then to seek overlap among all three groups.
5.Representatives of the three groups meet at a later time to develop specifics based-on the overlap area from which meaningful volunteer jobs can be designed.

SUGGESTED PARTICIPANTS FOR THE NOAH PROCESS:

1.Agency staff - if staff is large, a committee is preferable.
2.Volunteers - several volunteers who are experienced and respected in the agency, also two or three people who know the community and what volunteers can do, have done or want to do in it.
3.Clients - a representative group of clients who are served by the agency. (If it is not possible for the clients to serve in this capacity, as in the case of retarded children, seek a group that can represent them as advocates.)

Usually, but not necessarily prior to Phase 1, a representative group of eight to ten clients meets, not on the topic or volunteers but on the topic, "What are our needs?" A staff member and a volunteer may meet with them to act as facilitators.

PHASE 1: STAFF-AND VOLUNTEERS SEEK NEEDS OVERLAP AREA

Allow at least two hours for this phase. Its object is to establish needs overlap between staff and volunteers - not involving the clients at this time.
Staff and volunteers meet in separate groups first

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE VOLUNTEER GROUP:

1.Make a "shopping list" of volunteer jobs that they think are needed.
2.Base their list on what they know about the actual and potential capability of volunteers as well as their knowledge of the agency ...

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE STAFF GROUP:
The task for staff is to analyze their actual work.

1.Select an experienced group leader for the process - a staff member, or even better, an outsider skilled in group process.
2.Make an activity list writing down all the things they have done the last three days.
3.Make a dream list, writing down all the things they wish they'd had time to do.
4. Check every task on the activity list that they do because there is no one else to do it -- they feel better equipped for and would rather do other tasks.
5. Note that every checked item on the activity list is a possible job for a volunteer. Each job filled by a volunteer frees staff to do more of the things they want to do -- perhaps some of the activities on their dream list.
6. Note that every idea will be 'reality-tested" by the volunteer group to determine if they are practical and possible.

Then bring in the volunteer committee which has been making its 'Shopping list of volunteer job ideas.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE VOLUNTEER AND STAFF GROUPS TOGETHER:

1.Staff presents the checked activity list items and their total dream list as possible volunteer jobs.
2. Ask the volunteers to respond in these ways:

a. Unconditional yes. "We think volunteers can and will want to do that."
b. Unconditional no. "We do not think volunteers can or will want to do that."
c. Conditional yes. "We might know of a volunteer who would do that, but you need to be more specific about hours, qualifications and the kind of training support you would give in return".

Meaningful job specifics come from this kind of give and take between staff and volunteers.

PHASE II: SEEKING NEEDS OVERLAP CONSENSUS AMONG STAFF, VOLUNTEERS AND CLIENTS

The ideas from the Phase I Staff/Volunteer overlap or consensus area are presented to the representative client group (probably at a later date, but Phases I and 11 may take place on the same day).

Ask the client group to indicate:
1.Volunteer jobs they feel will lead to better and/or increased services.
2.Volunteer jobs which are unneeded or objectionable.
3. Needs from their "Shopping list" which they want to add.
Consensus, or overlap of the needs, is now possible.

The common needs of staff/volunteers, which have also been identified as client needs, form the basis for volunteer Job development.

PHASE III:

At a later date, two or three representatives from each of the three groups meet To discuss the overlap area that came out of Phases I and 11. The purpose of this discussion is to turn the identified common needs into specific jobs.

The NOAH process is lengthy, to be sure, but its payoff for volunteer programs is that it identified needs which can be realistically met because they have been agreed upon by staff, volunteers and clients.

The steps of NOAH outlined here are essential, but they can be adapted and adjusted to fit any agency's particular situation.