NAV-reformen 2014. En oppfølgingsstudie av lokalkontorenes organisering etter innholdsreformen.

Hvorfor lykkes ikke NAV-kontorene med å jobbe mer arbeidsrettet?

“…Et sentralt omdreiningspunkt for diskusjonene lokalt har vaert hva som fremmer god oppgaveløsning og saks-og oppgaveflyt i organisasjonen (Fossestøl, Breit & Borg 2014). Diskusjonene handler om fordeling av mengde og type arbeidsoppgaver mellom ansatte -i saerlig grad mellom mottaks-og oppfølgingsavde-lingen, men også mellom ulike enheter i hver av avdelingene.…”

Supporting Self-Employed Cancer Survivors to Continue Working: Experiences of Social Welfare Counsellors and Survivors

“…The counsellors also focused their own working situation: many clients, time/high job demands, low competence, and lack of means relevant for the self-employed and how that impacts the support they provide. Others have also shown that the NAV counsellors have a high work load [ 37 , 51 ] and have to set their own priorities in terms of which clients they support [ 33 ]. It was noteworthy that the counsellors reported both that they deliberately left self-employed cancer survivors in peace due to the challenging nature of cancer but, at the same time, they considered that it was more important to assist and guide other NAV client groups (e.g., those with mental health or addiction problems) back to work.…”

“…It was noteworthy that the counsellors reported both that they deliberately left self-employed cancer survivors in peace due to the challenging nature of cancer but, at the same time, they considered that it was more important to assist and guide other NAV client groups (e.g., those with mental health or addiction problems) back to work. In a review of accountability and delegated discretion in activation work in NAV Andreassen [ 33 ] concluded that NAV’s standards for follow-up which are more focused on the needs of the system rather than those of the clients may result in inadequate prioritisation of activities and clients [ 37 , 51 ]. Our findings indicate that self-employed cancer survivors are a group who are not prioritized.…”

“…Despite the best intentions, studies have shown that the NAV reform has not been very successful since the rate of work retention/return to work among clients has been rather low [ 35 ]. Suggested reasons for this are, among others, heavy workloads among counsellors due to large portfolios of clients [ 37 ], medical declarations without relevant information about the work capacity of clients [ 38 ], poor training in work capacity assessment and activation work [ 33 ] and poor training in use of information and communication technology tools in this work [ 37 ]. Overall, Andreassen [ 33 ] claims that there is a need to improve NAV counsellors’ knowledge base for professional discretionary reasoning.…”

Regulating Inflow or Outflow: A Comparison of the Work Capability Assessments in the UK and Norway

“…Several reviews and research reports have critiqued the use of the WCA. They claim that advisors rely too heavily on the WCA for determining benefit eligibility and consequently pay too much attention to the claimants' barriers to work rather than their resources and their needs for support in order to achieve labour market integration (Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, 2015;Fosstestøl et al, 2014;Galaasen and Lima, 2014;Mandal et al, 2015;Office of the Auditor General of Norway, 2014;Proba, 2012). Overall, claimants are considered not to be sufficiently involved in the assessments (Aasback et al, 2013).…”