Applying standardisation tools in social work practice from the perspectives of social workers, managers, and politicians: a Swedish case study

ABSTRACT

This article reports findings from a case study of the practical application of a standardisation tool in everyday social work practice. The example tool used herein is the Swedish version of the UK-based Integrated Children’s System, which in Sweden is known as Children’s Needs in Focus (Barns Behov i Centrum; BBIC). The study analyses group and individual interviews with social workers, managers and politicians using concepts from implementation research and the micro-sociological concept of accounts. The findings demonstrate how participants describe and explain their deviations from the BBIC manual and from the more informal intentions of the tool. Such deviations are conditioned by the fact that professionals often employ their own discretion in their work, which is necessarily inherent in human service occupations such as social work. Although the BBIC was initially well received, the professionals describe how that reception eventually turned to scepticism and a more critical stance toward the manual. This can be attributed to both absence of significant necessary implementation conditions and key organisational factors as well as a lack of compatibility between the tool’s construction and users’ needs and expectations. This article also discusses the general socio-technical and organisational implications of these findings.

ABSTRAKT

Denna artikel rapporterar resultat från en fallstudie av den praktiska tillämpningen av ett standardiseringsverktyg i socialt arbete. Det verktyg som används som exempel är den svenska versionen av det engelska Integrated Children’s System (ICS), i Sverige kallat Barns Behov i Centrum (BBIC). Studien analyserar grupp- och individuella intervjuer med socialarbetare, chefer och politiker utifrån begrepp hämtade från implementeringsforskning och det mikrosociologiska begreppet accounts. Resultatet visar hur deltagarna beskriver och förklarar avvikelser från BBIC-manualen och från de mer informella intentionerna med verktyget. Sådana avvikelser är betingade av det faktum att yrkesverksamma ofta använder sig av sitt diskretionära handlingsutrymme, något som av nödvändighet utgör en del av människobehandlande professioner såsom socialt arbete. Trots att BBIC initialt togs emot positivt i organisationen, beskriver professionella hur de efterhand blev mer skeptiska och fick en mer kritisk hållning till verktyget. Detta kan bero på avsaknaden av viktiga villkor för implementering samt bristfällig kompatibilitet mellan verktygets konstruktion och användarnas behov och förväntningar. I artikeln diskuteras även resultatens socio-tekniska och organisatoriska implikationer.

KEYWORDS:

• Social work
• standardisation tools
• Integrated Children’s System
• discretionary space
• domain theory
• accounts

NYCKELORD:

• Socialt arbete
• standardiseringsverktyg
• Integrated Children’s System
• handlingsutrymme
• domänteori
• accounts

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank professor Verner Denvall for comments on earlier drafts of this article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Mikael Skillmark, a former social worker, recently defended his PhD thesis about standardisation of social work practice. He is particularly interested in the implementation and execution of assessment tools in the social services and what consequences standardisation might have for social work as a profession and a field of practice. He has also published articles on social work, gender, violence and victimisation.

Lars Oscarsson is senior professor of social work. His main research areas are implementation and evaluation of social work practice, alcohol and drug abuse treatment, child and family care including foster homes and residential care. He is currently working in a project studying national policies for individual decisions in child and family care and alcohol and drug abuse treatment, their application to and management in local practices.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Linnaeus University (Linnéuniversitetet).