No abstract

Decision-making tools, particularly risk-assessment tools, have been implemented by governments around the world, perhaps most notably in the field of child protection, though little attention has been paid to how practitioners use them. This article presents the findings from ethnographic research that explored how child protection practitioners in the Department of Child Safety, Queensland, Australia, used four Structured Decision Making tools developed by the Children's Research Centre in Wisconsin in their daily practice in the intake and investigation stages of a case. The findings that the tools were not being used as intended by their designers and, in fact, tended to undermine the development of expertise by child protection workers has profound implications for the future development of technological approaches to child protection and, more broadly, human services practice.

A B S T R AC TConcern about the decision-making abilities of practitioners in child protection has led to the development and implementation of increasingly structured assessment tools, many based on forms of risk assessment. The positive and negative effects of such tools on practice have been widely researched and debated. This paper presents the findings from ethnographic research about the use of a particular set of decision-making tools that provide insights into how tools might affect the professional development of practitioners. The overall finding that the use of decision-making tools may impair professional development draws attention to the importance of the process of implementation, in particular how tools are regarded within an organization in relation to practitioner expertise.

No abstract