Embracing trauma response from the EAP perspective.

At the 1989 annual conference of the Employee Assistance Professionals Association, a subject matter expert presented a workshop titled "Critical Incident Stress and Trauma Response in the Workplace: The Role of the EAR" Of the 1,500-plus conference attendees in Baltimore that year, fewer than 100 attended that particular workshop. The only real trauma facing EA professionals that day was the challenge of keeping the workshop participants in the room without using force.

Nearly 20 years later, the world of employee assistance--indeed, the world itself has changed significantly For evidence of the change, one need look no further than at the rising number of EAPA conference presentations on workplace trauma, critical incident stress management, and the EAP'S specific role and response capability These workshops and trainings have been augmented by the incorporation of trauma response elements into the EAPA standards and glossary of terminology, the formation of a specific EAPA subcommittee on workplace disaster preparedness, and training and educational programs offered by other workplace-focused organizations. Given the growing availability of such resources, it would be unacceptable for today's EA professional to lack a working knowledge of trauma response issues or fail to appreciate the nuances of an EAP's response to, and management of, a traumatic incident in the workplace.

As experience has taught us, however, the theory and practice of trauma response and management are continuing to evolve, challenging the ability of EA professionals and EAPs to stay on the cutting edge of this field. But we must keep current if we are to be of real value to employers, labor organizations, managers, employees, and union brothers and sisters when trauma disrupts and changes the workplace and the workforce.

So, what have we learned over the past 20-plus years? More importantly, what are the related implications for the "best practice" of our profession?

MORE THAN "DEBRIEFING"

As critical incident stress (CIS) response methodologies and protocols have emerged over the years, so, too, have the EA field's application and execution of those methodologies in the workplace. CIS was developed primarily in the emergency services arena, and much of the early trauma response work focused on traditionally homogeneous and intact workgroups (e.g., firefighters, law enforcement personnel, and emergency medical technicians). The EAP field quickly confronted the fact that corporate, labor-based, and global workplaces presented challenges for the application of these strategies and methodologies across more heterogeneous groups-groups lacking the common threads of a culture rooted in tradition and a shared discipline of training, knowledge, and experience.

For many an EA practitioner, the expansion of the EAP's service continuum or the EA vendor's book of business into the world of workplace trauma response translated into nothing more than "debriefing" any person or group that had been through a trauma or critical incident in the workplace. We soon learned that the proverbial "one size fits all" approach fell far short of meeting the demands of diverse groups of employees operating within unique organizational cultures and reacting to varied workplace traumas.

As a result, best practice demanded that EA professionals embrace trauma response from the EAP perspective--that is, as a spectrum of services comprising a cafeteria of potential responses enabling the EAP and the organization to respond to needs specific to a particular incident, trauma, or disaster. It was no longer adequate simply to debrief someone when the situation warranted a more comprehensive response or when another, less formal protocol would have sufficed.

As the EA profession expanded its view of trauma response from a singular focus on debriefings to a broader compendium of protocols, the field began to embrace the concept of critical incident stress management (CISM) services. This expansive view of trauma response brought with it a paradigm shift, as more and more EAPs and EA professionals began looking at the needs of the individual employee within the context of the immediate workgroup or business unit, the larger organization, the prevailing management culture of the company, and even the surrounding community In a way, this expansive view of workplace trauma response represented a natural evolution for the EA field and one that resonated with the very core of the EA profession--a reliance on the consultative services of the EAP.

As has been evident in the EA field's experiences with workplace traumas in recent decades, the EA professional who leads with a consultative approach is in the best position to demonstrate both immediate and long-term value to the organization and the workforce. Long before a debriefing is appropriate, management and labor officials may need guidance, support, and even facilitation to help think through the individual and organizational services necessitated by the incident.

Witness, for example, the response of the New Jersey State Police EAP at the World Trade Center on 9/11, or of the Arlington County (Va.) EAP at the Pentagon on that same fateful day, or of EAPs in Madrid and London responding to terrorist attacks on their local transportation systems, or of EAPs responding in the aftermath of the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes. In all these cases, our field witnessed the delivery of EAP-driven trauma response services--services delivered within a consultative framework by professionals with the flexibility to apply the right approach to the right need at the right time. These services provided immediate, short-term, and long-range value to employees, their managers and supervisors, and the companies and labor organizations where they worked.

THE FUTURE OF EAP TRAUMA RESPONSE

As business becomes more diverse and global in nature, the workforce becomes equally divergent and dispersed around the world. This trend demands that the EA profession's delivery of CISM and other trauma response methodologies to workplaces around the globe be both culturally sensitive and transportable. Partnerships and communication strategies within organizations, throughout workplaces, and across workforces need to be identified, developed, and fostered now.

The best time to respond to a traumatic incident is long before it occurs and affects an organization. An EAP's best practice for trauma response begins with planning, both within the program itself and in partnership with the organization or organizations it serves. It is no longer sufficient to rely on trauma response protocols and CISM methodologies alone to respond to the demands of a traumatic incident in the workplace. Best practice necessitates that the EA professional "sit at the table" as the organization plans, develops, and tests its responses to varied traumas.

Trauma response in the workplace and the EAP's role in it will continue to focus on the "continuity of business operations" or "disaster preparedness" perspective. The EAP that integrates itself into the fabric of the organization will no doubt finds its EA professionals well positioned to "bring something to the table."

Additional information on workplace trauma response is available on the EAPA Website by linking to the work of EAPAs Workplace Disaster Preparedness Subcommittee. As always, we are interested in hearing how you are developing and delivering your trauma response best practices. Feel free to contact us at [e-mail] and/or [e-mail] and let us know how you and your EAP are managing workplace trauma.

Bernard E. Beidel, M.Ed., CEAP and Kristine N. Brennan, CEAP, LPC 

Bern Beidel and Kris Brennan are co-chairs of the Standards Subcommittee of the EAPA Professional Practices Committee.