PEER SUPPORT!
Yeah, we tried that once, but it doesn't work.

This is a summary of a presentation by Michael Tunnecliffe to the NSW Dept of Corrections Peer Support Conference held in Sydney, November 1999.

This type of comment is not uncommon, as an increasing number of organisations use a range of approaches to meet the need to reduce the impact of occupational stress in their workplace.

Peer Support programs are being implemented in a wide range of organisations across Australia and New Zealand, although there was a time when peer support was seen as mainly having application within the Emergency Services.

Peer support is the use of volunteers from a work group, trained in appropriate methods of assisting colleagues, workmates or others in their industry, workplace or profession, when they have been affected by stress.

Peer supporters are trained in methods of providing support to others, either on a one-to-one basis, or in small groups. Support is often practical assistance, and making sure any immediate physical needs are met. It includes being a good listener, and providing current information which assists an individual's coping. As the name suggests, the peer supporter provides 'support' only and does not become a counsellor, or take on any other role for which they are not trained or qualified.

Many organisations tend to approach peer support as a means of assisting their employees to manage with both acute and cumulative work stress issues. Yet there seem to be as many program failures as successes. This raises the question... Why peer support programs fail? In my experience, there are five major fallacies which pervade organisations and impact on the success of many peer support programs.

Fallacy Number 1: Anyone would make a good Peer Supporter. Peer supporters need to be chosen carefully. In their book, Guidelines for Establishing and Maintaining Peer Support Programs in Emergency Services, Robyn Robinson and Pat Murdoch suggest a range of peer supporter qualities, which need to be assessed in the selection process.

Fallacy Number 2: If Peer Supporters are well-trained, they don't need guidance or support once their team is underway. To be effective, all programs need on-going guidance and advice on a wide range of issues. Overseeing the activities of peer supporters in the initial stages of a program, helps them to gain perspective, plus an understanding of their role. It also adds to the 'quality assurance' of the program and links in with other organisational support and welfare initiatives being used.

Fallacy Number 3: A Peer Support program should result in a immediate drop in workers compensation and EAP costs. Some organisations have envisaged a peer support program as a low-cost, "quick fix" to issues relating to stress-related workers compensation. A few have even cut EAP services once the peer support program has started. Peer support works within a narrow framework of employee assistance and support, and should not be confused with a counselling or EAP provider service.

Fallacy Number 4: Managers and supervisors don't need to know anything about Peer Support, as it's a Human Resources or OS&H program. While peer support may start out as a Human Resources or OS&H initiative, supervisors need to see the program as an additional support function, which they can use as part of their response to the 'duty of care' aspects of their role.

Fallacy Number 5: As Peer Supporters are volunteers they should have any additional training and meetings in their own time. All too often, managers fail to recognise the useful contributions made by peer supporters. When support is not readily observable and easily quantifiable, a common assumption is that it's not happening. On-going assistance for peer supporters in the way of training, and time-out for meetings, should be a consistent part of the program's maintenance. Expecting peer supporters to do their own job, assist colleagues, then attend training and meetings in their own time, only leads to a cynical view of organisational management.