scholarly journals Social Workers in a Modernising Welfare State: Professionals or Street-Level Bureaucrats?

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (6) ◽  
pp. 1669-1687 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margo Trappenburg ◽  
Thomas Kampen ◽  
Evelien Tonkens
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Clear Distinction ◽  
Ethical Code ◽  
Street Level ◽  
Policy Measures ◽  
Street Level Bureaucrats ◽  
New Policies

Abstract Social workers are often depicted as street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) or professionals interchangeably. However, to find out how social workers relate to new policy measures, a clear distinction between SLBs and professionals is helpful. Ideal–typical SLBs subscribe to new policies although they may diverge from them in practice, to accommodate clients. Ideal–typical professionals weigh new policies against their ethical code. If the new policy goes against their professional principles, they protest on behalf of their clients. In this article, we study Dutch social workers who have to implement a new policy that (i) obliges their clients to actively participate in society and (ii) obliges them to rely on family and friends when they need help. The data for this article are derived from two projects: interviews with twenty-nine experienced social workers and interviews with social workers in neighbourhood teams and observations of their interactions with clients in six municipalities. We found that Dutch social workers think as professionals: they weigh the new policy against their ethical code and have serious doubts about the second part of the new policy. Hence, they find ways to avoid implementation. However, they behave as SLBs, bending the rules in practice. They rarely confront policymakers or higher management.

scholarly journals Street-level bureaucrats under new managerialism: a comparative study of agency cultures and caseworker role identities in two welfare state bureaucracies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Jacobsson ◽  
Ylva Wallinder ◽  
Ida Seing
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Public Management ◽  
Social Insurance ◽  
Professional Training ◽  
Professional Autonomy ◽  
Occupational Training ◽  
Role Identities ◽  
Street Level ◽  
Organizational Demands ◽  
Street Level Bureaucrats

Abstract Officials in welfare state bureaucracies face the challenge of negotiating their role identities in the context of changeable organizational priorities and managerial styles. Previous studies have found that the professional values may mediate top-down demands and enable the preservation of professional autonomy also under public management reforms. But how do street-level bureaucrats who lack a common professional or occupational training respond to shifting organizational demands? Based on comparative ethnography, the present article investigates how caseworkers’ role identities are conceived and practised in two of the largest state bureaucracies in Sweden, the Social Insurance Agency (SIA) and the Public Employment Service (PES). The article identifies two radically different agency cultures, resulting in rather opposite caseworker role identities. These role identities affect how front-line staff respond to organizational demands, either by focusing externally on client-related outcomes (PES) or internally on organizational output (SIA). The analysis suggests that agency culture may shape caseworker responses to governance in patterned ways, also in the absence of joint professional training or strong occupational communities.

Which Clients Inspire or Reduce the Trust of Street-Level Bureaucrats?

2021 ◽  
pp. 009539972110616
Author(s):  
Maayan Davidovitz ◽  
Nissim Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Social Service ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Social Service Providers ◽  
Street Level ◽  
Street Level Bureaucrats

Which types of clients increase or decrease the trust of street-level bureaucrats (SLBs)? Using interviews and focus groups with two groups of Israeli social service providers—teachers and social workers—and comparing them, —we develop a theoretical framework for determining the types of clients who evoke and reduce the trust of SLBs. Our findings indicate that there are seven types of clients who inspire or diminish this trust: —cooperative, honest, familiar, benevolent, aggressive, open, and manipulative. We discuss the significance of our findings for the implementation and outcome of public policy and suggest several avenues for future research.

Social workers’ perceptions of the causes of poverty in the Nordic countries

2013 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena Blomberg ◽  
Christian Kroll ◽  
Johanna Kallio ◽  
Jani Erola
Keyword(s):  
Social Workers ◽  
Survey Data ◽  
Nordic Countries ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Street Level ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Street Level Bureaucrats ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Municipal Level ◽  
Causes Of Poverty

Street-level bureaucrats have been given an increasing role in the implementation of policies aimed at the poor. The article analyses: (1) how social workers in the Nordic countries explain the causes of poverty and whether there are variations between countries in social workers’ perceptions; and (2) the nature of the impact, if any, of various individual- and municipal-level factors on social workers’ perceptions of the causes of poverty. Survey data gathered from social workers in four countries are analysed and combined with data from the municipalities in which the respondents work. The results illustrate that social workers display a surprisingly large variation in perceptions: there are differences between countries and also differences related to individual-level factors, while municipality-level factors do not appear to influence the perceptions of social workers in an obvious way.

Top-Down Policy Implementation and Social Workers as Institutional Entrepreneurs: The Case of an Electronic Information System in Belgium

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 1317-1332
Author(s):  
Joris De Corte ◽  
Jochen Devlieghere ◽  
Griet Roets ◽  
Rudi Roose
Keyword(s):  
Information System ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Electronic Information ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Institutional Entrepreneurs ◽  
Street Level ◽  
Gradual Process ◽  
Street Level Bureaucrats ◽  
Electronic Information System

Abstract In this article, we focus on how social workers use their agency when implementing top-down policy measures as street-level bureaucrats. We report on findings of a case study that was conducted in Flanders, the Dutch-speaking region of Belgium, about the top-down introduction of an electronic information system (IS) in the field of Child Welfare and Protection (CWP). Starting from insights derived from neo-institutional theory, we explore how social workers perform a role as so-called ‘institutional entrepreneurs’ by initiating critical reflections about policy rationales. In our contribution, we show that, despite social workers’ awareness of being embedded in their own field or service area, they use their field-level expertise and day-to-day experiences to disengage from this context as well. Besides unravelling the lack of coherence informing the IS’s initial ambitions of transparency and efficiency, they constantly (re)frame their views and explain their alternative ideas with the aim of convincing other social workers and managers. In this vein, we conclude by highlighting the importance of ‘distributed’ forms of agency that involve a gradual process, which is co-produced by social workers as street-level bureaucrats in close collaboration with service users, other professionals, other organisations and policy makers.

scholarly journals Policymaking Opportunities for Direct Practice Social Workers in Mental Health and Addiction Services

10.18060/2227 ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 367-378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Powell ◽  
Eve Garrow ◽  
Michael R. Woodford ◽  
Brian Perron
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Direct Practice ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
Street Level ◽  
Addiction Services ◽  
Street Level Bureaucrats

Direct practice social workers have potentially significant policymaking opportunities as mediators of top-down policy and as creators of policy where none exists. The power they possess stems from their ‘on the ground’ expertise and the discretion available to them in making practice decisions. By understanding their power as “street-level bureaucrats” they can significantly improve policy. Drawing on policy issues in mental health and addictions services, this article illustrates how social workers can use their power in an ethically sensitive manner to enhance policy outcomes for clients.

scholarly journals Politicians’ involvement in street-level policy implementation: Implications for social equity

2021 ◽  
pp. 095207672110240
Author(s):  
Maayan Davidovitz ◽  
Nissim Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Social Equity ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Elected Officials ◽  
Street Level ◽  
Provision Of Services ◽  
Street Level Bureaucrats

The study explores whether elected officials’ involvement in the way street-level bureaucrats implement policy affects social equity. This question is addressed empirically through interviews and focus groups with 84 Israeli educators and social workers. Findings indicate that elected officials involve themselves directly and indirectly in street-level bureaucrats’ policy implementation and their involvement reduces social equity in the provision of services. The study contributes to the literature on policy implementation by enabling a deeper understanding of the factors that shape the decision-making process of street-level bureaucrats when providing services and their ultimate impact on policy outcomes.

Policy Refiners and Street-Level Lesson Learners

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alastair Stark
Keyword(s):  
Policy Evaluation ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Street Level ◽  
Street Level Bureaucrats ◽  
Central Level ◽  
Government Level ◽  
Inquiry Lesson

This chapter explores agents who are influential in terms of inquiry lesson-learning but have not been examined before in inquiry literature. The key argument is that two types of agent—policy refiners and street-level bureaucrats—are important when it comes to the effectiveness of post-crisis lesson-learning. As they travel down from the central government level, street-level actors champion, reinterpret, and reject inquiry lessons, often because those lessons do not consider local capacities. Policy refiners, however, operate at the central level in the form of taskforces, implementation reviews, and policy evaluation processes. These refiners examine potentially problematic inquiry lessons in greater detail in order to determine whether and how they should be implemented. In doing so, these ‘mini-inquiries’ can reformulate or even abandon inquiry recommendations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document