JRF Social Work Internship | Shaping a Role: How Professional Staff Develop in a Legal Advocacy Organization

(1) Research Topic: Developing Professional Staff in a Legal Advocacy Organization - A Case Study of the Judicial Reform Foundation

(2) Research Objectives

JRF staff use many different tools in legal-issue advocacy. Beyond using legal expertise in litigation to advance positions on legal reform, staff work with other organizations on joint statements, hold press conferences, manage online media, organize physical exhibitions on wrongful-conviction cases, conduct workshops, and participate in issue-based marches. JRF's advocacy also spans a broad range of subjects, including wrongful convictions, human rights, and democratic movements.

Lo (2013), in "A Study of Strategic Development and Volunteer Use in Advocacy Nonprofit Organizations," notes that contemporary advocacy nonprofits are less centered on street protest and demonstrations than in the past and do not necessarily rely on strategic alliances. Instead, many increasingly use reasoned public communication and mass media to build support. That description is consistent with JRF's use of exhibitions, workshops, and other diverse forms of advocacy. It also suggests that advocacy staff need skills beyond substantive issue knowledge, including project planning and implementation, marketing, and digital communications.

Sun (2004), in "Building a Strategic Human Resource Management System for Nonprofit Organizations," explains that strategic human-resource planning begins with analyzing the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics that current volunteers and staff possess, identifying what the organization will need to achieve future goals, and then assessing the gap between the two in light of internal and external conditions. Human-resource development therefore depends on the organization's actual work and should use education and training to help staff acquire the competencies required by different roles.

Different JRF issues are handled by different staff members, who bring different strengths. Some are particularly skilled at policy research; others at marketing or public communication. That division of strengths helps JRF's legal advocacy function effectively. At the same time, staff differ in their familiarity with judicial-reform issues, advocacy methods, and the organization itself. Helping people become familiar with their work and develop into effective advocates is therefore a central internal training challenge.

This study explores how professional staff develop within a legal advocacy organization, the channels through which members acquire work-related knowledge and skills, and-by examining JRF-what broader patterns can be identified in the development of advocacy personnel.

(3) Research Design

1. Research Subjects and Sample: The study examines how professional capacity develops among JRF employees, focusing on how staff acquire work-related skills and abilities during their time at JRF and how training and development affect the way work is performed.
2. Interview Outline: Interviews focused on the development of professional capacity among JRF staff. The principal questions were:
   • (1) What work are you currently responsible for at JRF?
   • (2) What professional skills or abilities do you use in that work?
   • (3) How did those skills develop? When did you realize that you possessed-or needed to develop-the professional abilities required for the work?
   • (4) How did you develop them? Through interaction with colleagues, resources you found independently, or other channels?

To make the interviews flow more naturally, these themes were organized into three parts: work responsibilities; changes and adjustments in those responsibilities; and the process of adapting to those changes.

(4) Data Collection

Data were collected through one-time interviews designed to understand each participant's personal experience.

(5) Research Method

This qualitative study used in-depth interviews. The interview guide was based on the research questions and objectives and focused on how professional capacity develops among JRF staff. It covered three areas: basic information; the process of professional development at JRF; and the ways that development affected participants' work. Interviews were conducted in December 2020, lasted approximately 30 minutes each, and took place face-to-face at locations convenient for the participants. All interviews were audio-recorded, with field notes used to supplement the record.

(6) Findings

The findings can be summarized in three areas:

1. Professional capacity at JRF develops through:
   • (1) Using one's own abilities to work through difficulties and learn from them;
   • (2) Seeking outside information independently when questions arise;
   • (3) Asking colleagues for advice or direct guidance; and
   • (4) Referring to past internal practices and gradually turning them into personal decision-making standards.
2. JRF adjusts work responsibilities through:
   • (1) Coordination by the Office Director when staff are reallocated across departments; and
   • (2) Direct communication among colleagues when responsibilities need to be shared or redistributed.
3. The advantages and disadvantages of flexible, adjustable responsibilities include:
   • (1) Flexibility can improve internal efficiency and create opportunities for mutual learning;
   • (2) As departmental structures shape how work is organized, cooperation within departments becomes increasingly important.

All interviewees identified both legal expertise and the ability to communicate and collaborate with others as important professional competencies. The following observations describe how those abilities developed.

The interviewees had all encountered legal knowledge during their education before joining JRF. Most other professional abilities, however, were developed through doing the work itself. Volunteer experience can also help future staff understand JRF's work more quickly.

All three interviewees emphasized the importance of collaborating with different people. Their work requires ongoing coordination and communication with people outside the organization, so building cooperative relationships, coordinating shared tasks, and maintaining communication are all essential skills.

The interviewees believed that work experience helps develop collaborative ability, but some also noted that communication and teamwork can be cultivated outside the workplace-for example, through university activities and student organizations.

Views on JRF's flexible organizational structure varied. One interviewee from the Taichung Office noted that being able to allocate one's own time helps with scheduling, but it also has limits: busy periods may require weekend work or overtime. Another interviewee observed that as JRF becomes more hierarchical and departmentalized, maintaining relationships within a department has become more important than in the past.

(7) Reflections

1. JRF's internal training places considerable emphasis on relationships among members and on organizational culture. That environment can strengthen staff members' sense of belonging to the group. JRF is also in a period of transition, however, and future changes in internal relationships may reveal more about how the organization itself is changing.
   
2. Using past internal decisions as a basis for staff judgment can help an organization maintain consistent external standards and identity. At the same time, it may reduce opportunities to question earlier decisions or identify their weaknesses. The approach therefore has both advantages and risks.
   
3. Strong relationships among members can build cohesion, allow people to use their different strengths, and improve effectiveness through mutual learning. As staffing expands, however, it becomes harder to sustain that model informally. How a growing organization should respond is a question deserving further study.
   
4. This study interviewed only three JRF members and therefore reflects the views of a limited set of staff on internal allocation and reassignment of work. Interviews with members of different departments would provide a more complete picture.
   
5. The staff interviewed for this study worked primarily in roles requiring legal expertise. JRF also employs people specializing in graphic design, marketing, public relations, and other fields whose work differs substantially from that of legal staff. Interviewing advocates in those roles would provide a fuller understanding of how professional capacity develops among people using different advocacy methods.
   
6. Advocacy organizations use many different strategies and work on many different issues. This study reflects only the experience of a legal-issue advocacy organization. Organizations working on other causes may use different methods and have different patterns of internal interaction. The findings here may therefore provide a point of reference, but should not be assumed to apply fully to other advocacy groups.