The Advisory Function of ACAS—A Preliminary Appraisal of In‐depth Work

Published date01 April 1983
Date01 April 1983
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/eb055488
Pages26-36
AuthorE.G.A. Armstrong,R.E. Lucas
Subject MatterHR & organizational behaviour
The Advisory Function
of
AGAS
A Preliminary Appraisal
of
In-depth Work
by E.G.A. Armstrong, Emeritus Robens Professor
of
Industrial Relations
Manchester Business School
and R.E. Lucas, Research Assistant, Manchester Business School
Introduction
In carrying
out its
statutory advisory duties[1],
the Ad-
visory, Conciliation
and
Arbitration Service (ACAS)
makes
a
broad operational distinction between
the "ad-
visory visits"
and
"in-depth" work undertaken
by ad-
visers.
Typically,
an
advisory visit may entail
a
day's work
and consist
of
helping
a
small company
to
improve
its
pro-
cedures
or
particulars
of
employment.
By
contrast,
the
average number
of
man-days required
for a
piece
of in-
depth work (which might consist
of
helping with
the
reform
of
a
payment system) total approximately twelve.
In-depth work takes three main forms—advisory pro-
jects,
diagnostic surveys
and
training exercises.
The 1981
Annual Report
of
ACAS
states:
Advisory projects have normally taken
the
form either
of
a
series
of
visits over
a
period
of
time where,
although
a
problem
can be
identified,
an
impartial third
party with knowledge
of
the subject
is
required
to
assist
in reaching
the
best solution,
or
alternatively,
of
chair-
ing
or
advising
a
joint working party
of
management
and employee representatives.
A
description
of the
development
of
this second type
of
advisory project
is
given
in
Chapter 6. Another form
of
in-depth work,
the
diagnostic survey,
is
normally used where the symptoms
of
a
problem
are
evident
but the
root causes need
in-
vestigation. This involves
a
comprehensive examination
by ACAS advisers culminating
in a
confidential report
to
the
parties recommending areas
for
action. Some
problems
in
which ACAS advisers were engaged during
1981 involved
a
combination
of
these different
ap-
proaches. Occasionally,
an
adviser will provide
a
pro-
gramme
of
internal training
on
specific industrial rela-
tions matters. This type
of
exercise will often follow
from other in-depth work[2].
During
1981,
ACAS carried
out 114
surveys,
309 ad-
visory projects
and
45 extended training
exercises[3].
Such
in-depth activities accounted
for
nearly one-third
(32 per
cent)[4]
of
the total time spent
on
advisory work.
Was
that
time
well
spent? This article addresses itself
to
that ques-
tion.
ACAS itself seeks
to
build
up
information about
the
value
of
in-depth work
and
some
six
months after
a
piece
of in-depth work
has
been completed, advisers re-visit
the
locations concerned
and
talk over with managers
and
workers' representatives what
has or
has
not
taken place
as
a result
of the
advisory intervention.
The
region's evalua-
tion
of a
piece
of
in-depth work
is
subsequently recorded
on ACAS files.
Summaries
of
successful surveys
and
projects appear
in
the ACAS Annual Report,
but it
is
not
possible
to
say how
representative
a
sample these constitute
of the
body
of in-
depth work. Success stories
can
only be published with
the
consent
of
the interested parties. Other success stories may
go unreported because ACAS "clients" shun publicity.
Advisory "failures", however defined,
are
unlikely
to be
published
or
publicised.
It is
possible that some criticisms
of advisers
may be
softened, even muted, because
of the
good working relationships that have developed between
advisers
and
advised. Some criticism
may be
undeserved
because
the
advice
was
badly implemented.
The
industrial
relations advice might
be
thought
by the
client
to be
eminently sound,
but the
company still founders—for
commercial reasons. What then
was the
value
of the in-
dustrial relations project
in
question?
Despite
the
above,
and
other, unstated complications,
some form
of
self-evaluation
by
ACAS must obviously
be
attempted,
not
least
in the
interests
of the
effective
management
of the
advisory resource. However,
self-
evaluation,
by
whatever institution
or
group
of
people,
would seem
to
carry with
it
inevitable connotations
of self-
justification.
It
seems fair
to
claim that
an
independent
en-
quiry will
be
freer
of the
misgivings associated with
self-
interest and
in a
better position to ask the kind of questions
that
a
public agency would find difficult
to put to its
clients. While some
of
the methodological problems allud-
ed
to
above will remain, they may well
be
less pronounced
than where ACAS itself
is
directly involved
in
seeking
its
clients' opinions.
This article presents
the
opinions,
in
context,
of a
sam-
ple
of
ACAS clients about the value
of
in-depth work com-
pleted during
the
period
May 1981 -
April
1982 in one
English region. Similar exercises, over slightly different
time periods,
are
being carried
out in the
remaining
six
English regions,
in
Scotland
and in
Wales. This work,
together with
an
appraisal
of
advisory visits[5], forms part
of a wider research project which
is
concerned with the
ad-
visory function
of
ACAS[6]. Before presenting
the
results
of this pilot survey
of
in-depth work,
a
few methodological
points need
to
be mentioned.
ACAS client respondents
to our
questionnaire enquiries
came from
the
total population
of
clients
for
whom
in-
26
PR 12,4 1983

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT