Introduction: The importance of supporting the mental health and wellbeing of NHS staff is not a novel concept, yet it has not been universally prioritised previously. Staff Support appears to be an emerging specialism, yet the landscape of Staff Support Services continues to evolve as some are developing, and others closing. The literature relating to Staff Support Services is limited and is predominantly focused on COVID and evaluations of services. The experience of staff working in Staff Support Services could impact the support they offer to NHS staff, and consequently service users. However, there is limited research exploring the experiences of those who offer support to NHS staff, particularly within a Staff Support Service. Staff Support Services tend to employ Clinical Psychologists. Therefore, the current research aims to explore the experiences of Clinical Psychologists working within Staff Support Services.
Method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted online with eight Clinical Psychologists currently working for NHS Staff Support Services. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was used, and Personal Experiential Themes (PETs) were developed for each participant. Following this, connections across the group of participants were clustered and Group Experiential Themes (GETs) were developed.
Results: Participants’ journeys in Staff Support Services were shaped by a sense of uncertainty and discovery. Relating to staff as clients and colleagues pulled participants into positions of appreciation and protection. Participants felt pushed and positioned by organisational demands and expectations, which at times conflicted with participants’ values, and what they thought staff needed. Navigating the duality to the role, in relation to staff and the wider system, left participants feeling stuck in the middle and exposed. However, the duality also offered a needed balance to the work and participants used their professional power to increase their sphere of influence. Navigating the complexity of relating to staff, and the system, had a personal impact including moral distress. A salient finding for clinical practice is the need for sufficient support in the role such as through supervision and connections with colleagues.
Discussion: The key findings were contextualised within existing literature, and conceptualised using the Safe Uncertainty Model (Mason, 1993) and Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Model adapted to Clinical Psychologists (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Greaves, 2021). The novelty of the current study is a strength. The individual focus, aligned with IPA, captured the depth and complexity of participants’ experiences. However, the small sample focused on individual experiences could limit the potential transferability of the findings. Therefore, larger sample sizes in future research could highlight whether the experiences identified in this research are shared by, or different, to others.
