Value Destruction in Swedish Welfare Services: Frontline Workers’ Impact on Asylum-Seeking Minors’ Possibilities of Creating Value in Early Integration

ABSTRACT

The aim of this article is to investigate ways in which welfare frontline workers’ conceptualization of Swedishness destroys asylum-seeking minors’ (16–17 years) possibilities of creating value during the service process in early integration. Focus group interviews and in-depth interviews were conducted with coaches at accommodation centres, schoolteachers and social workers. The analytical approach employed makes use of a service logic perspective. The findings indicate that the frontline workers contribute to destructed value in three ways through: (1) conditions, (2) limitations and (3) contradictions in their interacation with the minors. All in all, during these asymmetrical service situations, it is significant to understand the importance of frontline workers being given the opportunity by management to increase their own awareness of how their professional work impact upon a minor’s possibilities of creating value.

KEYWORDS:

• Welfare services
• value destruction
• frontline workers
• unaccompanied asylum-seeking minors
• conceptualization of Swedishness

Introduction

A large stream of unaccompanied refugee minors arrived in Sweden in 2015–2016. The integration commences early on during the asylum period, when these minors are placed at municipal accommodation centres and start attending school (Archard & Skivenes, 2009; Brunnberg, 2015). Integration is associated with learning the Swedish language and thus being able to take part in, and carry out, active deeds in society as an important part of forming their own lives and identities (Kaukko & Wernesjö, 2017; Kohli & Mather, 2003; Tisdall, 2017). This places great demands on frontline workers, e.g. coaches at accommodation centres, schoolteachers and social workers, as regards being able to help these minors during their early integration (Lahdenperä, Gustavsson, Lundgren, & von Schantz Lundgren, 2016). Thus, in many respects, frontline workers’ day-to-day operation is about making it easier for minors to create their own value (Wernesjö, 2012).

One field of service research that sheds light on creating value is theory of service logic. This theory is defined as a user-oriented management perspective, which assumes that the organizational goal is always to help the user, regardless of the type of organization (Grönroos, 2008; Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004; Skålén, 2018). According to service logic value is created when the service user uses the service; organizations do not provide value (Grönroos, 2019; Grönroos & Ojasalo, 2004; Normann & Ramirez, 1993). It is the service user who creates his/her own value, being the one who obtains help with this when other resources, such as frontline workers, supplement the service user’s own competence and activities. Here, value is an expression of utility, of the service user’s life improving or of wellbeing (Grönroos, 2008, p. 303; Vargo & Lusch, 2018, p. 740). However, researchers argue that it is misleading to assume that the interaction between the parties, organization and users, is a balanced, symmetrical and controlled process (Fisher & Smith, 2011; Grönroos, 2012; Skålén, 2018). Thus, it is important to realise that a negative outcome or value destruction is realistic in practice (Järvi, Kähkönen, & Torvinen, 2018; Plé, 2017). Value destruction occurs when there is an incongruous perception between the parties regarding the goal, what has been agreed on, or what is included in the course of action regarding procedures, understandings and engagements (Echeverri & Skålén, 2011).

The interaction between asylum-seeking unaccompanied minors and frontline workers is asymmetrical because these minors are dependent on frontline workers, both as minors and as vulnerable people (Hasenfeld, 1983; Lipsky, 1980). At the same time, frontline workers’ operational work involves a high degree of authority. There is thus a very unequal relationship of power (Blom, Evertsson, & Perlinski, 2017; Kohli & Mather, 2003). In addition, the stream of unaccompanied refugee minors into Sweden in 2015–2016 has also contributed towards new issues and the conceptualization of ethnicity, and Swedishness, arising during frontline workers’ day-to-day operation (Eliassi, 2017; Espersson, 2018; Hansen, 2000). It is thus reasonable to assume that frontline workers’ conceptualization of Swedishness, during the asymmetrical interactions, can impact these minors’ possibilities of creating value negatively, resulting in value destruction rather than value creation (Grönroos, 2012, 2019; Hwang, 2016; Kjørstad, 2005).

However, value destruction is a relatively new phenomenon in service research. Concepts and models for understanding and explaining on the basis of the service logic have only recently begun to develop (Järvi et al., 2018; McColl-Kennedy & Cheung, 2018; Strokosch & Osborne, 2016). The existing literature focuses primarily on the interaction, (co-destruction), between service provider and user. Consequently, there is limited knowledge of how frontline workers (a service producer perspective) contribute to value destruction in welfare services when the relationship is significantly asymmetric (Osborne, Radnor, & Strokosch, 2016; Tisdall, 2017; Westrup, 2016; Williams, Kang, & Johnson, 2016).

The aim of this article is to investigate ways in which frontline workers’ conceptualization of Swedishness destroys unaccompanied refugee minors’ possibilities of creating value during the service process. The empirical material is from a case study, consisting of focus group interviews and in-depth interviews with frontline workers at a Swedish municipality. These interviews were conducted within the framework of a research and development project (2016–2017). In this project, the initial period of the integration was studied, with education and social services being two important public organisations for these asylum-seeking minors (16–17) via the welfare services they are covered by on the municipal level.

The study’s theoretical frame of reference is based on the service logic and a complementary part of the sociological aspects of a resource perspective. This combination of references is used to interpret frontline workers’ conceptualization of Swedishness in their work with these minors, thus allowing the development of an understanding, on the micro level of value destruction during the early integration by identifying what destroys value. This study is thus a good example of how to make use of a service logic perspective to understand and explain welfare services. In this sense, this article contributes to the debate on the potential of using the service logic as an analytical approach to safeguarding and developing an effective and user-focused public service organization (see, for instance, Grönroos, 2019; Osborne, 2018).

The article is arranged as follows: Firstly, there is a presentation of the two parts of the theoretical frame of reference: “A service logic perspective on value destruction” and “A resource perspective”. After that, there is a description of the study’s method and how the empirical material was gathered. Then the empirical material is presented and analysed, with conclusions being drawn regarding how frontline workers’ conceptualization of Swedishness destroys young asylum-seekers’ possibilities of creating their own value. By way of conclusion, implications are discussed with an emphasis on the need to increase awareness of how frontline workers’ conceptualization of Swedishness impacts the creation of value, and as regards the fact that value destruction cannot be ignored against the backdrop of societal resources having to be used effectively.

Theoretical frame of reference

A service logic perspective on value destruction

In service research, over a period of two decades, a large amount of literature has been generated on the creation of value (Grönroos, 2019; Normann & Ramirez, 1993; Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004; Vargo & Lusch, 2004). It has, in recent times, been explicitly pointed out that only positive value creation is unrealistic. Instead, the interaction between the organization and the service user has the same potential to lead to value being destroyed as it does to value being created (Grönroos, 2012; Lusch & Vargo, 2014; Plé, 2017). Echeverri and Skålén (2011) emphasize that the result of the interaction is open, interactive value formation, entailing that the outcome can be either value creation or value destruction. Grönroos (2012) stresses that frontline workers are incorporated into the service user’s processes and are available, by means of communication, action and reaction, to directly influence the process. Furthermore, Grönroos (2012) argues that value can be destroyed not only at the end of the process, but also during it.

Similarly Järvi et al. (2018) and Plé and Chumpitaz Cáceres (2010) are of the opinion that an interaction can shift in terms of value creation. It is the expectations of the parties, as regards what the interaction will contain, which has a major bearing on whether the outcome will be value creation or value destruction. If the expectations do not tally with the outcome, then there will be a risk of a decline in wellbeing. Plé and Chumpitaz Cáceres (2010) stress the lack of concordance depends on the misuse of resources, intentionally or unintentionally. One intentional misuse of resources could be a frontline worker trying to minimise efforts. One unintentional misuse of resources could be a frontline worker having too little knowledge of, or lacking training in, something that is of significance to the process, while not being aware of this. Smith (2013) agrees that the misuse of resources can lead to value destruction and explains that, when resources belonging to a service user, e.g. self-esteem, knowledge and hopes, are misused by an organisation, or an organisation misuses its own resources through its approach, the service user will then experience a decline in his/her wellbeing, e.g. insecurity, worry and stress, with value destruction then arising.

In public services, both Grönroos (2019) and Järvi et al. (2018) emphasize that management is about providing resources, processes and skills in such a way that these help users’ relevant processes in a way that is valuable to them. Otherwise, users will experience a low or even insufficient service quality, which will be perceived by them as value destruction. However, in public services, it may well be the case that target groups have conflicting, or at least differing, goals, e.g. when the goals of one or more individuals and the goals of society as a whole (collective goals, laws, etc.) prioritize different things and perceptions of how the service is to be offered (Osborne, 2018). In many cases, individuals, actors and society either may or may not have very clear and predetermined perceptions of their goals, or of how the process should proceed. There are also, as Osborne et al. (2016) point out, individuals who are forced to use public service and are thus involuntary users.

Grönroos (2019) highlights the fact that the management needs to acquire knowledge and insight early on during the different user groups’ processes and goals, and as regards the values that users and user groups have. It is also essential to use the information that frontline workers have regarding the development needs of the organization’s processes, routines and competencies. In order for value creation to take place Grönroos (2012) stresses, it is necessary that the organization understands what creates value for the user, plans the service process on the basis of this insight, and builds on ongoing feedback regarding how the service process workers responds to improvement opportunities through measures and changes. This preparatory work can lead to solutions that have a higher level of value co-creation than would otherwise be the case. At the same time, this kind of joint preparatory work is the beginning of users’ value creation, starting value creation for users at an early stage of the service process. According to Grönroos (2012, 2019), without preparatory work and constant feedback from users and frontline workers, and without any strategic intentions being issued by top management, value destruction is difficult to avoid.

A resource perspective

In order to create sustainable integration, minors need to have the opportunity to sustain both their new and their old cultures (Almqvist, 2006; Kohli & Mather, 2003). This pre-requires mutual give-and-take, rather than a one-sided adaptation through which these minors are forced to renounce their previous experiences in order to be accepted in a Swedish context (Al-Baldawi, 2014). However, several studies point out that, in a Nordic context, frontline workers try to steer new arrivals into adapting to the majority culture, thus contributing towards characterising the process as one of assimilation rather than integration (Darvishpour & Westin, 2015; Eliassi, 2017). Several known factors contribute towards the integration of minors by means of frontline workers making use of these minors’ capacities and skills (resources) in their work, a resource perspective. One such factor, which Franker (2004) and Ager and Strang (2008) emphasise, is the fact that there is scope for the individual to use his/her resources in the form of previous knowledge and experience. For example, the acquisition of a new language, in this case Swedish, will be eased if minors are allowed to develop their own mother tongues (Hyltenstam, 2007). Another factor is the importance of seeing every young person as an individual in order to avoid simplified or stereotypical interpretations of each individual’s knowledge and experience (Kohli & Mather, 2003). A further factor is how minors see themselves in an altogether new and different context. Almqvist (2006) emphasises, here, the significance of minors being given the opportunity to develop and evaluate their own ethnic affinities while simultaneously feeling proud to experience having an involvement in and an affinity with Sweden. At the same time, many of these minors carry with them difficult experiences, which affect and at times impede this process (Başoğlu, Ekblad, Bäärnhielm, & Livanou, 2004; Huemer et al., 2009).

Increased migration has contributed to new questions arising about our society (Eliassi, 2017). Questions linked to immigration and, primarily, defective integration have increasingly been noted and problematized in the media during recent years. The consequence of this is ethnicity being linked to those who represent something else, i.e. people whose ethnicity is not Swedish, with this otherness being portrayed as problematic. In this way, a conceived-of Swedishness is used as a norm for a common-sense-based social order, a norm which everyone else is inevitably compared with and which differences are gauged against (Nilsson Folke, 2017). How these minors are depicted and interpreted, e.g. by important people close to them, can contribute to either maintaining or toning down the power relationship between the ethnified minors and the frontline workers representing Swedishness (Hansen, 2000). Frontline workers are tasked with long- and short-term integrational work. Using assimilation strategies would limit the prerequisites of the minors and consequently lead to value destruction.

The theories presented above, a service logic perspective on value destruction and a resource perspective, constitute the theoretical frame of reference of this study. This combination of references is used to interpret the study’s empirical material. Value destruction theories are used to create a better understanding of how frontline workers contribute to value destruction. The theoretical part regarding a resource perspective is used to understand how frontline workers takes advantage of the minors’ skills and capacities when working with them.

Method and material

During the influx of immigrants into Europe in 2015, almost 35,400 unaccompanied asylum-seeking minors came to Sweden. Of these minors, about 200 were enrolled, aged 16–17, during the autumn term of 2016, to do the upper secondary school language introduction programme while institutionalized at accommodation centres in a mid-sized Swedish municipality. Over a period of two years (2016–2017), a research and development project was conducted by this Swedish municipality, with us taking part as researchers. The overall aim of the project was to improve the possibilities of these minors as regards being integrated into society. Our empirical material was gathered within this project and has been interpreted within the aim of this article, as a case. Yin (2014) describes a case study as an empirically-based inquiry in which the researcher studies phenomena in their natural context. Case studies constitute a research design that is especially adapted to situations where the events cannot be separated from the context (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007).

In order to investigate ways in which frontline workers’ conceptualization of Swedishness destroys asylum-seeking minors’ possibilities of creating value in early integration, the empirical material has been gathered from seven focus group interviews and seven in-depth interviews. To ensure different discussion topics and reliability, we chose to plan and conduct as many as seven focus group interviews. The participants were chosen from the school and accommodation centres engaged in the research and development project. To ensure a broad and dynamic discussion between the participants, the group was composed of nine frontline workers, three coaches at accommodation centres, three schoolteachers and three social workers (Morgan, 1996; Wibeck, Abrandt Dahlgren, & Öberg, 2007). The focus group interviews featured the same nine frontline workers on all occasions. Each focus group interview lasted for two hours and was conducted in a room at a school, with the focus on their descriptions of how day-to-day operation was carried out in order to provide services to the minors. All focus group interviews (except for the first one) started with a short summary of the previous one, in order to check for accuracy. The topics were about how the frontline workers worked with minors regarding the minors’ future, language, security and action capacity in school or at accommodation centres. Exactly how they relate to linguistic, cultural and religious expressions is a notion characterizing the initial encounter between these minors and representatives of the Swedish welfare state, thus having an impact on the first impressions these minors get of Swedish society.

The findings of the focus group interviews indicated that there was a need to even more deeply address questions regarding whether or not frontline workers’ conceptualization of Swedishness had shaped preconditions with regard to working with these asylum-seeking minors. This gave rise to in-depth interviews, which were initiated in order to gain a deeper understanding of how the coaches and the teachers interpret their assignment and describe their actions, when working with these minors (Bryman, 2011). The individual in-depth interviews (Brinkmann & Kvale, 2014) were conducted with seven frontline workers, four of whom were coaches and three were teachers and, from accommodation centres for unaccompanied minors. Three of them had also participated in the focus group interviews. The other four respondents were selected on the basis of recommendations made by the focus group participants.

The in-depth interviews were conducted by two student workers in order to ensure that frontline workers felt free and open when talking about how they relate to these minors when working with them, thus obviating the need to take meetings and conversations which they had had with us researchers earlier on during the project into account (Gunnarsson, 2016). In other words, this was a way of avoiding the influence of the interviewer on the informants (Denscombe, 2016). Fontana and Frey (1994, p. 373) emphasise this as follows: “Clearly, different types of interviewing are suited to different situations”. During the interviews, frontline workers were given the opportunity and scope to develop and expand upon the themes they had previously raised in the focus groups. The interviews were conducted over a period of two hours at the interviewees’ workplaces. The interviews were semi-structured in the sense that there was a question manual; however, neither the wording nor the sequence of the questions were strictly adhered to and the interviewee was given the possibility of providing detailed answers and developing his/her own points of view.

All the focus group interviews and the in-depth interviews were documented using a voice recorder with the consent of the participants. The focus group interviews were transcribed by the authors of this article and the in-depth interviews were transcribed by the student workers. The study uses an interpretive approach (Alvesson & Sköldberg, 2017), with the analysis being conducted in three main stages (Eisenhardt, 1989). During the first stage of the authors’ analysis (Patton, 1987), the frontline workers’ descriptions of their day-to-day operations were categorised and juxtaposed with aspects relating to culture, religion and language. During the second stage, the categories were sorted into themes on the basis of what expressing these represents (Bryman, 2011). Three themes emerged: (1) ideas regarding right and wrong (2) ideas regarding skills and capacities and (3) ideas regarding professional strategies. Stage three involved searching for the ideas recurring in each theme using the question: ‘What is revealed in the information?’ The findings were subsequently linked to and interpreted by the study’s theoretical framework.

Findings and discussion

This section presents the frontline workers’ ideas regarding how day-to-day operations are conducted, being structured in accordance with the three themes emerging during the analysis. The theoretical framework is used to analyse and discuss how frontline workers’ conceptualizations of Swedishness destroy unaccompanied refugee minors’ possibilities of creating value during the service process. In what follows, the term “frontline worker” is used regardless of whether the respondent is a teacher, a coach, or a social worker.

Ideas regarding right or wrong

A key part of frontline workers’ duties is working with integration, both short- and long-term (Ager & Strang, 2008; Franker, 2004). This is about creating a secure environment at the accommodation centre and contributing towards a functional education; however, it is also about teaching these minors about how society works, i.e. where to turn in connection with various issues and, on a purely practical level, how to read a timetable and take a bus ride, for example. Schooling these minors into functioning citizens entails more than just teaching them how society is constituted, or how to approach various situations. It is also about mediating cultural norms, while Swedish integration policy simultaneously places an emphasis on people being entitled to their own cultural identities and not having to be forced to adapt to “things Swedish”. Sweden’s integration policy, which finds practical expression in operations such as education and municipal accommodation, decrees that there must be scope for the asylum-seeker’s freedom of identity (Darvishpour & Westin, 2015). The creation of value entails, in this context that it is these minors themselves who have the best knowledge of their own traditions and cultural expression, and that frontline workers must safeguard these while simultaneously being in control of the measures put in place during the service process. An important prerequisite of successful value creation is knowing the characteristics and needs of the client (Grönroos, 2019). Frontline workers show good knowledge of the differences within the group of asylum seeking youths, which the following quotation from one frontline worker shows:

They’re from different countries and have very different backgrounds. Some of them have experience of child labour and some of them have attended fancy schools. They differ in religious beliefs and language. Not all of them are 16-year-old boys from Afghanistan, we also have an almost 18-year-old man from Somalia and a 14-year-old from Kurdistan. There are major differences.

The frontline worker also stresses that these youths are facing different challenges and have to be treated individually. On the one hand, the differences among the minors are emphasized by the frontline workers, while on the other, when frontline workers talk about these asylum-seeking youths, they tend to refer to them as one homogenous group, which will be shown below. Denying or ignoring the personal traits of the clients, or even inserting one’s own values, influences the effectiveness of the value creation in a negative way (Plé & Chumpitaz Cáceres, 2010) as frontline workers and minors are then acting on unequal terms. In their descriptions of their day-to-day operation with the minors, frontline workers express differing attitudes between culturally- and religiously-flavoured modes of expression and rituals and culturally-flavoured values. On the one hand, there is an expectation to adapt, while on the other, to have a more reciprocal kind of exchange and an emphasis on learning from one another. One of the frontline workers says the following:

There’s a major difference. For example, I know that some minors are more inclined to not respect girls. But when you try to explain that we have more respect for girls here in Sweden, they have gradually changed their attitudes, I feel. You think that, from the start, there is a very big difference between their culture and ours.

Several dimensions are made visible in the quote above. The values concerning girls, that some of these minors express, are described as (collectively- and) culturally-flavoured, which the frontline worker sees as a requirement to adapt to. Thus, it is indirectly being pointed out that a lack of respect for girls is something that does not occur in Swedish culture, which is not the case. Here, two cultures are being juxtaposed – the Swedish and the other – without any problematisation being carried out. The demands for adaptation indicate an idea that Swedish culture is superior to the other, mirroring Eliassi’s (2017) point that welfare work often makes demands regarding assimilation when professionally practiced. The fact that these minors, who could have several different nationalities and backgrounds, are jointly assumed to be lumped together in this otherness is nothing that frontline workers reflect upon. This is often apparent during the interviews; another example of this follows:

I’m thinking more about traditions and all that stuff. Sure, we try to celebrate Christmas Eve and Easter and all that. So we share each other’s [traditions]. Some of the frontline workers are usually at their big Eid [a religious festival in Islam] party. One member of staff, for example, is involved in fasting and eats when they eat in the evenings. We show them this is how we celebrate here and we really want to know how you celebrate in your country. You really have to remind them the whole time that, in Swedish culture, you’re behind.

What is shown in the quote is the openness and curiosity that exists regarding the minors’ feasts and festivals. Here, both exchange and the possibility of learning from each other are valued, even if portrayed in such a way that these minors share this culture and that no (local) variants exist concerning Ramadan or Eid. Feasts and festivals, which are often both culturally- and religiously-flavoured, of course, are described as a way of enriching a culture and increasing understanding between cultures. The difference between how frontline workers relate to values (respect for girls) and rituals (Eid) is clear. Both are described as cultural expressions; however, while these values are described as erroneous and something which must be actively changed in order to fit in with the Swedish way of life, the practicing of rituals is something that brings value to the Swedish way of life. There is a clear difference as regards which types of cultural expression are accepted by frontline workers (Al-Baldawi, 2014). Thus, the value creation is shaped by a conditionality set only by frontline workers, excluding the involvement of the service user, and this misuse of resources thus contributes to value destruction (Echeverri & Skålén, 2011).

Demands to adapt are made during learning situations, too, says one frontline worker. These minors are expected to dissociate themselves from what is not deemed to fit in here:

We often talk about differences, this is one method used in learning. But in Sweden, we do things like this, what do you do there? This is similar, this isn’t. What do we need to change which you did there and which doesn’t really work here, and what can we keep among the things that you did there which might also work here. So, there’s an ongoing discussion.

The frontline worker quoted above convey the view that inclusion in Swedish society is conditional. While there is dissociation, as well as a demand for adaptation to Swedish values, there is also an open and welcoming attitude to these minors’ cultural expression (Hansen, 2000). Occasionally, frontline workers describe certain behaviours as cultural expressions, which could instead be perceived as the expression of a teenager. One such expression is the problem of waking up in the morning, while another one is playing music very loud, as mentioned by a frontline worker:

It’s about the music! They play a lot of music, from YouTube. Maximum volume, their own music. Sometimes, you get a headache listening to it, and we have to interrupt them and tell them to play another song. But they do it a lot and sometimes they also dance.

Their music may differ from what Swedish teenagers listen to, but the volume and intensity are most likely the same, no matter what the cultural affinity of the minors is. In this description, the actions are given a cultural label when they could represent something else, e.g. age. Thus, culture is ascribed more importance than it might necessarily have. This shows that frontline workers also tend to interpret the behaviour of the minors when it might not be relevant. The conditions regarding how the service process should come about are in the hands of frontline workers and there is a conflict of interest as regards how resources should be involved (Echeverri & Skålén, 2011).

The actions of frontline workers thus contribute, on the one hand, towards limiting these minors’ scope during the service process and, on the other, towards creating the space for these minors within the same (Nilsson Folke, 2017). This means that value is being created during the service process while also being reduced or destroyed at the same time (Echeverri & Skålén, 2011; Grönroos, 2012). In the example above, it is frontline workers who, through their expectations and the conditions that they put up with, are contributing towards value destruction (Järvi et al., 2018; Plé & Chumpitaz Cáceres, 2010). The superordination and subordination that exist between frontline workers and these minors means that frontline workers alone can inhibit the value creation of the minors. In this and similar situations, these minors are faced with actions that carry contradictory messages, making things confusing as regards what is expected of them and what they are allowed to both do and express (Almqvist, 2006; Kohli & Mather, 2003). The conditions of co-creation are set by frontline workers who, in various ways, boundarise these minors’ actions.

Ideas regarding skills and capacities

Frontline workers bear witness to the great strengths of these minors, emphasising the attributes, drive and strengths that have taken them away from war-torn areas, eventually reaching Sweden after fleeing through several countries. Their opinion is that these minors who reach Sweden are survivors, and they describe them as powerful. Nevertheless, another side is emphasised by frontline workers when describing their work with these minors. Frontline workers emphasise that an important part of the early integration work is about both motivating these minors into studying and showing them the opportunities that are there for them. Motivating these minors thus works as a way of facilitating the creation of value for the process, in order for the minors themselves to be able to shoulder the responsibility for their integration through education and work, for example. One of the frontline worker describes this as follows:

We often tell them that, just because you’re new here in Sweden, that doesn’t mean that you’ll never be able to become a police officer or a nurse. “You can be what you want to be with just motivation and drive”, that’s what I often say to them. My chargeling first wanted to be a dentist but then he said to me “no, I’ve seen that it’s very difficult to become a dentist. I’ve noticed that it’s difficult and takes a long time so I’d rather be a nurse”. You have to respect that, but you also have to say that if you want to, you can.

At the same time, frontline workers predict a rather gloomy future for these minors. Some of them are completely without any previous schooling while all of them face a major challenge in learning the language. One of the other frontline workers talks about this as follows:

My pupils, specifically, might not have any schooling at all. Even if they’d been 14 on arriving here, they still wouldn’t have had time to get into upper secondary school. So, for many of them, it probably looks as if they’ll have to do adult education, combined with some form of internship. If they’re lucky, and if they like their job practice, they might get a job. I don’t think the majority of these minors have a future in the academic world or doing studies.

While, on the one hand, frontline workers ascribe these minors with more strengths and encourage them to study by saying that they can be what they want to be, as long as they are motivated, it emerges, on the other, that they only have a limited belief in these minors’ performance as students:

You see, it doesn’t stick and that’s the problem. And that’s what the major difference is with a child who knows how to write as opposed to someone who’s illiterate, as it doesn’t quite stick.

In the quotations above, it becomes clear that frontline workers are expressing serious doubts about the future of the minors. Indirectly, these limitations shape the prerequisites regarding the interactions between frontline workers and minors. During this process, value creation is appearing simultaneous to value being destroyed (Grönroos, 2012). The abilities that frontline workers emphasise in these minors are juxtaposed with the minors’ insufficient ability to learn, and the fact that these minors have other (and poorer) fundamentals than young Swedes.

Even the cleverest one we have, the guy who’s the absolute cleverest at Swedish, is still 10 steps behind your average Swede when it comes to the language. So, no matter how clever he is, he’ll still be behind.

The knowledge and experience that these minors take with them is not seen as a resource in a Swedish societal context; instead, what these minors lack is what flavours both their possibilities of performing and their future prospects (Başoğlu et al., 2004; Huemer et al., 2009). It appears to be the case that frontline workers have to work with motivation in a way that they themselves do not believe in. In the stories of frontline workers, it also emerges that these minors are affected by this since they revise their dreams and goals into what they believe to be more realistic plans. Anticipated failure is built into the frontline workers’ stories, which puts their faith in “luck” or the existence of alternative paths of study being to hand if (when) their ordinary schooling has failed. One teacher says this about her and her colleagues’ challenging work:

We’re supposed to educate the students up to the ninth grade level, but even the third grade level is too advanced for some of them. Right now, I’m focusing my teaching on reading and writing. Hopefully, we can split the group in two, and I can continue working with the ones who are the furthest from this goal.

While frontline workers have to motivate these minors, they also see the difficulties they face in achieving their goals. The combined process, which is composed, according to Grönroos (2019), of frontline workers’ motivating efforts and the minors’ strengths, self-studies and ambitions, seems to be insufficient when it comes to contributing to the best possible fundamentals for these minors. The actions of the frontline workers are limiting the value creation and, consequently reducing value for the minors (Grönroos, 2019; Järvi et al., 2018). Frontline workers are of the opinion that their own efforts will not be sufficient to support the minors in their learning, and that the involvement of further (future) welfare actors (e.g. adult education) will be necessary. The approach taken by frontline workers here, according to Franker (2004), is a perspective of insufficiency, a focus on what these minors lack. At the same time, these minors are themselves lowering their ambitions. Thus, there is an adaptation, by both frontline workers and the minors, to a lower level of knowledge, something which will also have repercussions regarding these minors’ opportunities for value creation and, by extension, the service process as well.

Ideas regarding professional strategies

Language is an ever-present challenge for these minors. They are expected to learn Swedish, which is perceived to be key to successful integration (Hyltenstam, 2007). Having a command of Swedish is an end in itself, but it is also a means of coping with studies. This means that frontline workers encourage, and work on the basis of, these minors having a command of the language in order for them to become independent day-to-day and to manage their studies. Motivating the minors is described as very hard, because they keep questioning the value of building relationships and learning Swedish before receiving their residence permits. The minors lack insight into why learning Swedish is a relevant goal and they are also, as Osborne et al. (2016) describe it, involuntary users forced to use the public services that are on offer. Frontline workers struggle to find arguments:

We work a lot together and ask each other “how do you do it”. To the minors, we say “you’ll have another language and you’ll have knowledge that’ll help you to move forward”. But it’s a huge challenge keeping the minors on the right track.

Motivating the minors into learning Swedish is considered crucial by frontline workers. From the material, different ideas emerge regarding what the most effective approach is to language acquisition. One example of this is when a frontline worker talks about how he tries to get these minors, to the greatest extent possible, to speak Swedish and to avoid their mother tongues during learning situations, e.g. during joint homework. In this frontline worker’s description, this is portrayed as promoting the use of Swedish and getting these minors to avoid shortcuts during their learning:

I’ve banned those languages, when I teach, it’s just Swedish or English. They can’t speak their mother tongues then. Because they get stuck in that, you see it’s so easy to fall back on. They happily turn to those who can. Especially when I’m doing homework with 2 or 3 of them and one of them understands better and then he’s almost like an interpreter for the other 2. And it’s so nice for them to just feel “yeah, well ok, he’s interpreting, nice”. That’s why there’s no use of their mother tongues when I’m doing homework for instance.

While this frontline worker emphasises the significance of the individual’s efforts, and the importance of speaking Swedish in terms of it being key to learning, another frontline worker emphasises instead the importance of helping each other to advance by using their mother tongues. Instead of limiting the use of these minors’ mother tongues during their tuition, this frontline worker encourages the use of different methods and different languages in order for these minors to understand. This frontline worker explains it thus:

Those who have learnt to write Dari can often translate the words they need. Then they can tell their classmates what something is called in that language even though these classmates can read neither Pashto nor Dari; but orally, they can manage that. So they can help each other out and they’re really nice because everyone’s in it together, kind of thing. I’ve said this from the start, everyone’s in it together, we don’t leave anyone behind due to not knowing it or not understanding it; we don’t give up until everyone has understood what we’re trying to do or where we’re going with the lesson. There are some who are a bit cleverer at English. Sometimes you can find a word in English if we don’t understand each other, then we find an English word and then either we translate it for the others or the student does.

Frontline workers approach the possibility of using mother tongues during their schoolwork differently. One of them formulates it in terms of taking a shortcut using mother tongues and is of the opinion that there is a risk of getting stuck, while the other formulates it instead in terms of a kind of act of solidarity; helping each other out becomes a way of ensuring that nobody is left behind in a state of ignorance. Indirectly, the group is also given a different significance, one which can either contribute towards learning or impede it. Adopting English during learning situations is presented as a possibility by both frontline workers. However, while the former welfare worker, if anything, equates English with Swedish, the latter emphasises that language is one of several alternatives.

The consequence of this is that an ambiguous message is sent to these minors about how learning takes place most effectively (Hyltenstam, 2007), both with regard to which languages may be used and what significance the group is given. Frontline workers are sending mixed messages about what resources the minors should be using. Grönroos (2019) stresses that competencies and resources should be adapted to the service users and that differences will lead to an experiencing of the quality of services as low or insufficient. In some situations, the possibility of helping each other out using mother tongues is limited, while in other contexts, the expectation is articulated instead that these minors should help each other out using the methods – and languages – that they know.

All in all, this shows that the languages and the community are valued differently and ascribed differing significances in differing contexts. Frontline workers create value jointly with these minors, value co-creation; if the resources are not used, or integrated, in a suitable way during the service process, this will entail negative consequences. According to Plé and Chumpitaz Cáceres (2010) and Smith (2013), the misuse of resources leads to value destruction. Different approaches used in similar situations send contradictory messages to these minors about what is expected of them. When frontline workers have different approaches, and a different view of value in one and the same situation, the message sent to these minors will be hard to interpret. They are expected to act differently in similar situations, and the prerequisites for value creation are unclear.

Conclusion

This article is aimed to investigate ways in which frontline workers’ conceptualization of Swedishness destroys unaccompanied refugee minors’ possibilities of creating value during the service process. The findings show that frontline workers’ conceptualization of Swedishness, as expressed during the interactions with the minors, has a great impact. Specifically, it has been shown that the actions of frontline workers, mainly lead to value destruction. Frontline workers’ conceptualization of Swedishness contributes towards these minors’ creation of their own value, but also towards how these conceptualizations, in various ways, curtail these minors’ scope for action during the service process. This provides insight into the specific prerequisites shaping the service process and into how these contribute towards decreasing these minors’ value creating. The service process is characterized by a power asymmetry in which frontline workers have considerably greater possibilities of shaping the prerequisites for creating value than the young asylum-seekers have. Due to their strong state of dependence, in combination with limited knowledge of different societal functions, these minors are dependent on the actions of frontline workers.

The first way in which value is destroyed is during the encounter between the minors and frontline workers, during parallel processes of increasing and decreasing value. These are shaped by the prerequisites that frontline workers create by making the minors’ values and actions conditional, while mediating strong opinions about what is right or wrong, whereby only some are given space within the framework of “Swedishness”. The second way in which value is destroyed is when frontline workers express limitations of the minors’ development and educational opportunities, disregarding these minors’ skills and capacities. The aim of motivating these minors is limited by a lack of belief in their possibilities of coping with their studies. The third way in which value is destroyed is due to the prerequisites being shaped by contradictoriness due to frontline workers, among themselves, advocating different strategies in their work of contributing towards the teaching of Swedish.

The findings of the study show that frontline workers’ various stances regarding conceptualizations of Swedishness contribute towards these minors being on the receiving end of contradictory information and actions, making things difficult for them to create value during the service process. This results in the value that could have been created instead was being destroyed due to the misuse of resources. When interactions between various parties result in value destruction, this is hardly due to a conscious reluctance to help on the part of frontline workers. On the contrary, frontline workers would like nothing better than to offer good and effective social services to their fellow humans; they have no intentions of bringing about value destruction. It is thus of crucial importance for frontline workers to be given the opportunity by management to increase their own awareness of how their conceptualizations of Swedishness impact upon a minor’s possibilities of creating value (Grönroos, 2019; Järvi et al., 2018) and – by extension – opportuinity to forming their own life and identity.

Conceptualizations fetched from the service logic increase our understanding of how frontline workers’ conceptualizations impede the individual in creating value that contributes to integration. The result of the study is thus increased knowledge of value destruction within welfare services, consequently contributing to the emerging theoretical area of the public service logic. However, an assertion like this needs to be made with caution. One limitation of the study is, thus, that these young asylum-seekers are not included in the empirical material. The young asylum-seeker’s experiences and perceptions of how frontline workers’ conceptualizations can find expression provide variable prerequisites during value creation and are also of great interest; this paves the way for future research. Further, the study additionally paves the way for a problematisation of the scope for action and independence of both parties, thus being of importance to future research. The findings from this study indicate that the need for further research exists. This points to the need for a more critical approach to integration work (Eliassi, 2017), which is done on the basis of conceptualizations, in order to provide a more nuanced picture of this professional work. Therefore, it is necessary to understand that frontline workers’ professional work has an impact on asylum-seeking minors’ possibilities of creating value during the service process. Otherwise, the possibility of a minor achieving integration will be impeded and thus the misuse of resources will risk causing serious consequences, both for the individual and for societal values in general (Alford, 2002; Williams et al., 2016).

Practical implications

For managers and co-workers in the field of integration, it should be of great importance to identify and increase knowledge of value destruction, and to find strategies aimed at reducing its occurrence. Increased knowledge of how frontline workers’ conceptualizations contribute towards making it easier, or more difficult, for these minors to be integrated into society thus has the potential to ensure, to a higher degree, that society’s resources are used fittingly, and that we will thus be able to effectively get the most out of the resources available. Such awareness will provide managers and co-workers with opportunities for noticing the need for reflection, as regards conceptualizations and their consequences. The findings of this study are thus generally relevant to many other welfare services where the user (the individual) is in a vulnerable situation and greatly dependent on what happens during professional work.