What's in a Frame? How Professionals Assess Clients in <scp>D</scp>utch Work Reintegration Practice

Eikenaar, Teun; Rijk, Angelique E. de; Meershoek, Agnes

doi:10.1111/spol.12151

Cited by 25 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As the literature on general public administration (Bryer ; Vigoda ), street‐level bureaucracy (Eikenaar et al ; Riccucci ) and studies among inspectors looking at their enforcement styles (Mascini and Van Wijk ; May and Winter ) has noted, public officials can display more coercive or more collaborative behaviours in their relations with citizens. Some studies have focused on value dilemmas resulting from the move from social norms toward economic norms (Brown and Calnan ; Jordan ).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Public Officials Trust Citizens? A Welfare State Perspective

Walle

Lahat

2016

Soc Policy Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this exploratory study, we investigate whether public sector officials and non‐public sector officials differ in the trust they have in members of society and whether this difference is associated with the welfare regime in which they work. Using survey data from the sixth round of the European Social Survey, we compare public sector officials' trust to that of non‐public sector officials in 13 countries with four different forms of welfare regimes. Our results demonstrate that public officials have a higher level of trust than non‐public officials do. Furthermore, trust among both public and non‐public sector officials is much higher in social‐democratic regimes, followed by corporatist countries, liberal regimes, Israel (as a unique case) and, lastly, southern European regimes. As expected, public officials' degree of trust reflects the general trends of their societies. Interestingly, in social‐democratic regimes, differences between trust among public and non‐public officials are the highest compared to the other regimes. In addition, an individual‐level analysis in five countries illustrative of each welfare regime indicates that while income, belonging to a minority group, and age are significant factors in explaining public officials' trust, socio‐demographic variables contribute little to the differences between public and non‐public officials. Given the critical role of trust in the functioning of the welfare state, our results imply that further awareness and mechanisms for increasing the degree of trust of citizens among public officials are warranted.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Public Officials Trust Citizens? A Welfare State Perspective

Walle

Lahat

2016

Soc Policy Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Context characteristics contain information, signals, and clues regarding how street‐level workers are expected to look at their clients and their work roles, how to perceive clients' situations and the problems they are confronted with, how to change their behaviours, and so on. Context characteristics contribute to the shaping of what Zacka () calls workers' dispositions or what Eikenaar, De Rijk, and Meershoek () denote as frames of reference. Many studies have analysed how street‐level workers view their work and their clients.…”

Section: Theoretical Approach and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making welfare conditional: A street‐level perspective

Berkel

2019

Soc Policy Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article looks at how welfare conditionality is delivered at the street level. It argues that the street‐level delivery of welfare conditionality is structured by policies, the governance context in which workers deliver welfare conditionality, the organization in which they work, and the occupation they are part of. Characteristics of these contexts present street‐level workers with a variety of signals and incentives that direct their decision making. The article elaborates on this proposition on the basis of a review of academic studies analysing the street‐level delivery of various aspects of welfare conditionality: the use of sanctions, service personalization, and the treatment of vulnerable clients. The review shows that context characteristics together have a significant impact on the street‐level transformation of welfare conditionality policies into practices. Street‐level decision making concerning the use of sanctions is far more complex than can be captured by a perspective on street‐level workers as merely policy implementers. Sanctioning practices are sometimes harsher, sometimes more lenient than policies lead us to expect. The “soft” side of welfare conditionality—represented by service personalization—is often under pressure at the street level, potentially strengthening welfare conditionality's tough side. This affects vulnerable jobseekers most: Street‐level studies show that the balance between disciplining and enabling aspects of welfare‐to‐work is most at risk for more vulnerable groups. The article concludes that the contextual pressures street‐level workers have to deal with in their daily work hardly reflect the “delicate equilibrium” that they need to deliver welfare conditionality in a professional, responsive, and responsible way.

show abstract

“…In line with the broader 'professionals under pressure' debate (Noordegraaf & Stijn, 2013), several authors conclude that the activation project, with its emphasis on labour-market participation, conditionality and sanctions, may challenge professional service provision (Kjørstad, 2005;McDonald & Chenoweth, 2009;Røysum, 2013). Some authors argue in favour of a (re-)professionalization of the frontline delivery of activation in order to promote transparency in the use of discretion (Eikenaar et al, 2015), strengthen the professional treatment model in delivering activation (Sainsbury, 2008) and encourage the provision of personalized services (Van Berkel, Van der Aa, & Van Gestel, 2010). Finally, and related to the former, there is the debate about how the roles of frontline workers should be perceived.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Various studies showed that workers may use discretion in rather diverse ways, resulting in diversity in treating and servicing clients. This points to the risk that frontline delivery becomes a rather individualized and potentially even arbitrary process (Eikenaar, De Rijk, & Meershoek, 2015;Nothdurfter, 2016). This issue is directly related to the second debate in studies of the frontline delivery of activation: the management of frontline work and the room for professionalism.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The frontline delivery of activation: workers’ preferences and their antecedents

Berkel

Knies

2017

European Journal of Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article intends to contribute to the increasing body of academic literature on the frontline delivery of activation policies. In line with the broader literature on frontline work, this literature focuses attention on frontline delivery practices and preferences and how these can be explained. Activation work is an interesting case in this context, because activation workers' jobs designs vary considerably and workers have a diversity of educational backgrounds (including but not limited to social work) in the many countries that have implemented activation policies. This article looks at workers' preferences rather than actual delivery practices. It analyses how job design and educational background are related to workers' preferences concerning servicing clients, managing activation workers and spending time on various activation-related activities. Although the findings of the research that are presented in the article show that educational background and job design play only a modest role as antecedents of workers' preferences, future research into this issue remains interesting. For it may help to increase our insights into the optimal match between what activation aims to achieve and how the provision of activation is organized on the one hand, and workers' skills/qualifications and job design on the other hand. SAMENVATTING Dit artikel draagt bij aan het toenemende academische onderzoek naar de wijze waarop activeringsbeleid in praktijk wordt uitgevoerd. Dit onderzoek richt de aandacht op handelingspraktijken en voorkeuren van uitvoerders (in Nederland 'klantmanagers' genoemd) en op de vraag hoe die kunnen worden verklaard. Activering is een interessante casus omdat taken en verantwoordelijkheden van uitvoerders heel divers zijn, en omdat uitvoerders in de landen waar activeringsbeleid is ingevoerd zeer diverse opleidingsachtergronden hebben. Onder de uitvoerders bevinden zich sociaal werkers, maar zij domineren dit werkveld zeker niet. Dit artikel richt zich op de voorkeuren (en niet zozeer de praktijken) van uitvoerders. Het analyseert hoe de taakomschrijving en de opleidingachtergrond van uitvoerders samenhangen met hun voorkeuren ten aanzien van de dienstverlening aan klanten, de wijze waarop uitvoerders gemanaged willen worden en de tijd die ze wensen te besteden aan diverse activiteiten in het kader van activeringsdienstverlening. Hoewel we tot de

show abstract

What's in a Frame? How Professionals Assess Clients in Dutch Work Reintegration Practice

Cited by 25 publications

References 33 publications

Do Public Officials Trust Citizens? A Welfare State Perspective

Do Public Officials Trust Citizens? A Welfare State Perspective

Making welfare conditional: A street‐level perspective

The frontline delivery of activation: workers’ preferences and their antecedents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About