Do social workers avoid the dilemmas of work with clients?

Abstract

This article is devoted to Lipsky's suggestion that the purpose of street-level policies is to establish and justify patterns of behaviour that enable street-level bureaucrats to avoid the dilemmas provoked by uncertain working conditions. Based on a review of relevant literature as well as on case studies in the culture of social work service organisations by the authors, the article suggests that two kinds of street-level policies are described by the research. The first one is consistent with the aforementioned idea by Lipsky and follows the wish of social service workers to avoid the dilemmas of their work with clients without trying to change those uncertain conditions that provoke these dilemmas. The actors of the second kind of street-level policy try to negotiate with relevant partners and to change uncertain working conditions that are at the roots of their dilemmas. Both kinds of street-level policy are described by means of empirical examples and their substantive features are summarised.

Keywords:

• Culture of Social Work Service Organisations
• Dilemmas of Work with Clients
• Street-level Policies

Acknowledgments

The authors of the article are obliged to the Research Institute of Labour and Social Affairs which has been supporting the research project on standards and culture of social work services since 2001 and to the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic which is supporting the research project on the function of culture of social work service between 2003 and 2005.

Notes

Despite the current tendency to use such terms as ‘user’ or ‘purchaser’ we use the term ‘client’ to characterise just those people to whom social workers render services. We do this for two reasons. First, we prefer to use the term ‘client’ in a descriptive manner, whereas comparisons among terms like ‘client’, ‘user’ or ‘purchaser’ follow mostly implicit and sometimes even explicit ideological or propagandistic intentions. We would like to avoid being involved in these kinds of discussion because we believe that the crucial thing is to change the quality of the service rendered and not the renaming of services of original quality. The second reason for using the term ‘client’ is that many authors we quote wrote their texts more then 20 years ago and we do not like to impute unsuitable up-to-date terms in quotations where they spontaneously use the term ‘client’.

Titles by authors of relevant studies in the culture of social work services we quote later in this text.

Job Opportunities and Basic Skills’ is the US federal scheme passed in 1988.

The research was done in 2001. The aim was to answer to the question: ‘What are the standards that govern the approach of the selected half-way-house's personnel towards the clients and what significance do the employees attach to the application of these standards?’ The case study of the House was completed. Six semi-standardised (including follow-up) interviews with the personnel and five semi-standardised interviews with the clients of the House were carried out. Study of documents was used. Visits to the House as well as non-standardised, informal interviews were done during more than 12 months of co-operation with personnel.

Cardona (1994) shows how professional consultancy can help the staff and management of the respective organisation ‘to exercise more authority over their situation’.