Organizational Professionalism: Social Workers Negotiating Tools of NPM

Abstract

This article examines how social workers and managers perceive meaningful work and expertise in six care and treatment facilities in Denmark. Based on 29 interviews with social workers (n=22) and managers (n=7), the article shows how New Public Management-inspired tools such as scoring schemas align with social work values such as “client-centeredness” and working with the individual welfare recipient face-to-face. The article finds that fitting social work into organizational schemas changes the work practices of social workers and also the way members of this profession define meaningful work and expertise. In addition, the article also finds that scoring schemas cause conflicts among social workers regarding the character of expertise when values of social work (to meet a welfare recipient’s need) must be aligned with NPM-inspired values of organizations (to meet managers’ demand for documentation).

The contribution of professions to the governance of integrated care: Towards a conceptual framework based on case studies from Denmark

“…11,[14][15][16] Within the literature on professions and organizations, there is a rich body of micro-level studies concerned with working across sectors, organizations and professions. [17][18][19][20][21] However, such studies focus on individual professionals and fail to acknowledge the specific resources of professions as collective actors. Studies analyse individual professions and their particular roles in integrated care.…”

Is measuring results in social services possible? The lived experiences of professionals in key positions

“…According to Van Berkel and Knies (2016), there is a risk that values and factors that are highly valuable to the organization are not measured, such as qualitative aspects ( Van Berkel and Knies 2016). When what professionals define as satisfactory results loses importance and the focus is too much on indicators, numbers, and costs, there is a risk that measurements will control the social services to a greater extent than the actual needs of welfare recipients (Lindgren 2014;Mik-Meyer 2018). The introduction of NPM into social work has clearly led to social work being mixed with economic and more industrial premises.…”

“…An interview study by Mik-Meyer (2018), in which interviews were conducted with 29 social workers and managers, revealed that social workers are expected to simultaneously balance between working for the client and being co-responsible for the organization's efficiency and results. The findings further revealed that social work today requires a certain amount of documentation while, at the same time, it involves relational work with the welfare recipients.…”

“…However, the experience is that the relational work no longer obtains the same space, significantly due to the NPM accounting requirements. The subjectivity of social work can be a factor that makes it difficult to relate to measurements and facts, since what gives a sense of meaning and context for the social worker is unequivocally the relational work (Mik-Meyer 2018).…”

“…To summarize, Mik-Meyer (2018) argues that it is important to identify and discuss problems, thus maintaining the curiosity about professionals´experiences working in paradoxical circumstances; that is to say, maintaining relationships for change, on the one hand, while, on the other, addressing the organization´s need to justify its existence based on results and efficiency. Only those who have experienced NPM in practice in the social reality of everyday work, such as professionals in key positions, can express what has taken place and is taking place (Mapp 2008).…”