Evidence-Based War Stories Frank Domurad Vice-President The Carey Group, Inc.

The recent leaks of the classified National Intelligence Estimate on Global Terrorism have made one thing clear about the war in Iraq. Those who control the war stories in essence control the war. For three years now the Bush Administration has been avidly seeking to create a narrative concerning the war that makes sense to both the American public and moderate Muslims around the world. For the most part it has failed in its efforts. At home it has come to rely on a message without content, namely “staying the course.” Abroad it has advocated the spread of democracy and freedom in an Islamic world that still sees the United States as a modern-day Crusader. The result, in the words of the Estimate, has been a conflict in Iraq that has “become the ‘cause celebre’ for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement.”

While the war on terrorism might seem remote from efforts to implement evidence-based practices and management in public, private and not-for-profit organizations on Main Street, its lesson about war stories should not be taken lightly. Any effort to bring about organizational change will be a struggle over discourse and narrative, over the stories that get told around the water cooler, at social events, and to one’s friends and family. Karl Weick in his book Sensemaking¹ emphasizes the pivotal role of storytelling in dealing with the complexity and confusion engendered by any disruption of established behavioral patterns. He argues that appropriate stories reduce the pressure experienced by individuals involved in a process of organizational change, simplify and make manageable the task at hand, and reduce the element of surprise by anticipating the future in comprehensible terms. In effect, they allow us to make sense of what is happening.

In the field of criminal justice and corrections the dominant narrative contradicts what research over the last thirty years has shown to be evidence-based. If the goal is to change juvenile delinquent and adult offender behavior and reduce recidivism, then we know that traditional punishment does not work, and in many instances even makes matters worse. What is an effective public safety intervention is treating those individual and environment factors that are “criminogenic” in nature, such as anti-social values and beliefs, anti-social peers, and dysfunctional families. By focusing on these so-called criminogenic needs and using cognitive-behavioral and behavioral techniques, correctional agencies are achieving average reductions in recidivism of thirty percent and more. Yet this country continues to lock up juveniles and adult offenders without treatment by the hundreds of thousands as its primary solution to crime.

The war stories in criminal justice that are told to justify such seemingly irrational actions rest upon a distorted notion of harm. Supposedly the reason that we have so much crime, that sex offenders run rampant on our streets, and that our children are placed at risk on the way to school is that we do not punish enough. Whenever a particularly heinous incident occurs, the political hue and cry arises for tougher accountability, longer incarcerative sentences, and an abolishment of parole. But if evidence-based research is any indicator, true harm in terms of public safety does not come from a failure to punish enough; it comes from implementing punitive sanctions that actually increase rather than reduce recidivism.

One successful example where correctional professionals took charge of their own narrative and created war stories based on evidence and not prejudice is occurring in the Giddings State School in Texas² . In a state not known for coddling juvenile delinquents, the Giddings School works with the worst of the worst—young men and women convicted of attempted murder, rape and aggravated assault. Over the course of two or more years it surrounds these youth in a therapeutic community based on behavioral accountability and cognitive-behavioral treatment. The officials who run Giddings have paid particular attention to changing the language that defines an evidence-based environment. All staff, whatever their level from psychiatrists with PhDs to kitchen staff with a high school education, refer to the clients as “students,” “boys and girls,” or even “kids.” In turn, the juveniles call each other “students” and “peers.” Here harm is not seen as the lack of punishment, but the absence of effective treatment. In the words of a former State School Superintendent, “the bottom line is public safety, and I can tell you, I’d much rather have a kid who has been through the program at Giddings move in next to me than I would a kid who was just released from prison and is coming out meaner, angrier, and dumber than when he went in.” Apparently he knows of what he speaks because the rearrest rate for Giddings “kids” is only ten percent, compared to national youth authority averages of over 60 percent.

So be it the war on terror or the war on crime, the bottom line is that in order to do evidence-based practices, we must also craft evidence-based war stories. It is simply a pathway to disaster to let the jihadists define for us the nature of victory and defeat. It is equally dangerous for the common weal to rest the edifice of public safety upon stories that justify the efficacy of punishment in the face of research-based treatment that actually works.
 

Notes:

1. Weick, Karl E. Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 1995.

2. Hubner, John. Last Change in Texas. The Redemption of Criminal Youth. New York: Random House, 2005.

References:

Domurad, Frank. Doing Evidence-Based Practices Ain't for Sissies . Community Corrections Report, 12:4, May/June 2005, pp. 49-50; 61-63.

Domurad, Frank. Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil: The Ethical Imperative of Evidence-Based Practices . Community Corrections Report, 13:1, November/December 2005, pp. 1-2; 9-12.
 

Posted on October 2, 2006

Comments on this column?  You are welcome to create a post on the EBM Blog.