Further Detail

Programme Participation Rates (numbers are rounded up)

YLM Phase 2 commenced in April 2023 and runs through to November 2024. The programme is being delivered across three groups of participants as detailed in the report:

• Completed: Senior Leader refresh c 200 invited – 90% completed a YLM event in April.
• Completed: Mid -Level Leaders c515 invited – participation across summits ranged from 80% - 86% and was delivered between April and August.
• In progress: First Level Leaders c 3800 invited to attend between September and November 2024 (across 4 rotations with approx. 1000 participants in each rotation which includes capacity for any MLL or SL who were unable to attend their programme) – to date Summit 1 has been completed for the first rotation with 31% of the total FLL population booked to attend i.e., exceeding the target of 25%.

Evaluation and Feedback To Date

The aim of the evaluation strategy is to successfully measure YLM core programme outcomes and development growth of leadership behaviours, through various methods of quantifiable data. This will inform on-going improvements to any elements of the programme and aid decision-making about future courses of action. Evaluation will be conducted and analysed throughout the YLM core programme. The methods are:

• Pre / Post programme confidence and capability measures
• Series on in-programme surveys, asking specific questions in relation to the leadership behaviour content and satisfaction with the delivery of the programme.
• Focus Groups & deep dive interviews

The criteria to successfully evaluate the YLM core programme, interlinks and is a key enabler of the Policing Together Strategy and delivers actions following the most recent Your Voice Matters survey.

The report at Appendix A provides detailed feedback and evaluation however some key highlights are:

• Senior Leaders Refresh – 83% said they feel more confident in supporting the success of YLM; 84% said they feel the refresh helped them to understand the YLM behaviours and how to embed them.

• Mid-Level Leaders Programme reaction – 80% rated the summits as good or above; 79% said they can apply what they learned; 81% say they will be able to role model what they learned; 74% said that overall their leadership skills have improved.

• Mid-level Leaders capability uplift – immediately after the programme there was a self-rated increase of capability by 4% overall – this included a 10% increase in leading and learning inclusively leadership; a 12% increase in collaborate for growth however a 11% decrease in having the courage to do the right thing. It will be important to re-measure this following a period of consolidation and to gain feedback from the line managers of attendees and their direct reports as this was a self-rate immediately post learning.

• First Level Leaders (accurate at time of report noting more summit 1 sessions to be completed) – 77% rated the summit as good or above; 81% said they can apply what they learned; 87% said they know what is now expected of them when role modelling the behaviours.

Some themes/ feedback that have required a review of content, design, methodology and resulted in continuous improvements to date are:

• A review of duration – this has become a consistent theme against challenging workforce numbers and workload. Some sessions have been reduced slightly as a result; start times altered and the programme is included in the training ‘halt’ over December and January.

• Content – ensuring the material is pitched at the correct level and reviewing Summit 3 which received less favourable feedback. The cross- organisation stakeholder content feedback/design group has been reinstated and summit 3 was re-designed. Additional or more thought-provoking participant questions have been created; more focused examples/case studies have been sought from stakeholders group and the content has been revisited when organisation events occur e.g. the CC statement; recruitment ‘halt’; workload challenges highlighted.

• Methodology – several participants indicated they would have preferred face to face delivery. This was explored and it was finalised that a hybrid approach was most appropriate to ensure the delivery to high volume, on time and achieved to budget. The formal knowledge content continues to be delivered virtually in groups however a new consolidation session is delivered locally and wherever feasible face to face i.e. driven by local Divisions/Departments.

• Lack of obvious rationale why some evaluation data was emerging – e.g. why some females were less positive than males about some content; why were some self-rated capability uplift score indicating a decrease rather than increase. To gain deeper insight and to identify statistical validity and rationale for evaluation/feedback data, the Strategy and Insights Team were asked to conduct some ‘deep dive’ analysis and bespoke focus groups. To date these have been useful to identify any drivers or correlations across data.

Whilst the formal evaluation strategy is being well implemented and the formal evaluation reports are largely indicating a positive roll out of the YLM behaviours (as noted in Appendix A) there has been some more anecdotal feedback from Scottish Police Federation (SPF); some YLM Steering Group Members and some leaders that the formal evaluation reports are not 100% reflective of all views, citing the following themes as areas to highlight for consideration:

• Content could be more Police Officer specific (acknowledging the challenge of having content that meets the mixed audience of Officers and Staff)
• Content pitch – is it at the right level for the more experienced leaders who have completed other leadership programmes.
• Duration of sessions – could it be delivered differently to minimise the duration.
• Method – is there an opportunity for more face-to-face delivery.
• Environment – is it conducive to MS Teams delivery when in operational environments.
• Impact – measuring whether the programme is having the desired impact (it is recognised that impact is not immediate i.e. consolidation and time is required).
• Evaluation/feedback volume – how to ensure that evaluation data is reflective of all participants i.e. how to encourage full responses from the majority who complete.