Introduction

In this chapter, we examine the performance of emotional labour by probation practitioners to uncover the complex use of emotion that underpins the development of the officer–offender relationship inherent to effective probation practice. We begin by mapping the way in which the use of emotion has been marginalised from policy over the past 30 years, making links to the rise of managerialism and the ‘what works’ movement, as well as more recent developments such as the Offender Engagement Programme and the Skills for Effective Engagement and Development (SEED) programme, which sought to pilot a practice-based model based on evidence of what works to reduce reoffending (NOMS, 2011; see also Chapter Ten of this volume). We then use data that were generated through interviews with probation practitioners to analyse one aspect of SEED – the development of the relationship. We do this through the lens of emotional labour. In doing so, we focus on the way in which practitioners engage in both deep and surface acting to get to know and understand their clients as well as create clear boundaries. These are the two elements of practice that are seen to be crucial in the creation of effective professional relationships in the SEED model. We conclude by arguing that the development of the relationship with the client as described in the SEED model requires considerable emotional labour that has, hitherto, been unacknowledged in probation policy, and reflect on what might need to be done, in light of our findings, were probation providers to consider reintroducing SEED following the implementation of the government's Transforming Rehabilitation reforms, which privatised around 60% of probation work.

Emotions as effective practice

It is necessary to offer some context to understand how this research sits in terms of literature on both emotional labour and effective probation practice. The relative importance attached to, or marginalisation of, the use of emotion in one-to-one supervision can be mapped against the ‘disappearance and appearance of the relationship’ as discussed by Burnett and McNeill (2005, p 222). While this literature review aims to trace the ebb and flow of the prominence attached to the role of emotion in effective practice, Garland (2001, p 22) cautions that ‘talk should not be mistaken for action’.