Using intuition in social work decision making

ABSTRACT

Social workers must make ‘justifiable’ decisions, but ‘intuition’ is also important in assessment, decision making and working with risk. We discuss intuition within professional judgement as being part of our cognitive faculties; emotionally-informed reasoning processes connecting workers with clients and families; and intuition making use of internalised learning. Challenges discussed include intuition as a taboo topic; communicating intuition-based judgements within group decision processes; and lack of models for integrating intuition with explicit use of knowledge. To develop the professional knowledge base on professional judgement, the paper considers six theoretical frameworks which might be used to conceptualise intuition within social work decision making, including: (1) the ‘tacit knowledge’ of sociological discourse; (2) intuition as ‘sense-making’; (3) internalisation of learning; (4) conceptual schemas from neuroscience; (5) Kahneman’s ‘thinking fast and slow’; and (6) decision heuristics. Intuition is discussed in the context of supervision and organisational governance; use of assessment tools and processes; creation of mental models for practice; implications for education and training; and further research. Although the profession must continue to develop its ability to use the best knowledge to inform practice, a psycho-social rationality model may be required to conceptualise internalised ‘intuitive’ judgement processes in practice.

ABSTRAKT

Gli assistenti sociali devono prendere decisioni “giustificabili”, ma anche “l'intuito” è importante nelle valutazioni, nei processi decisionali e nel lavoro con il rischio. Qui analizziamo l'intuito all'interno del giudizio professionale come parte delle nostre facoltà cognitive, i processi di ragionamento emotivamente informati che collegano gli assistenti sociali agli utenti e alle famiglie e l'intuito che fa uso dell'apprendimento interiorizzato. I punti qui discussi includono l'intuito come argomento tabù, la comunicazione di giudizi basati sull'intuito all'interno di processi decisionali di gruppo e l'assenza di modelli per integrare l'intuito con l'uso esplicito della conoscenza. Per sviluppare ulteriori conoscenze sulla valutazione professionale, l'articolo prende in considerazione sei modelli teorici che potrebbero essere utilizzati per concettualizzare l'intuito all'interno dei processi decisionali del servizio sociale: (1) la “conoscenza tacita” del discorso sociologico; (2) l'intuito come “creazione di senso”; (3) l'interiorizzazione dell'apprendimento; (4) gli schemi concettuali delle neuroscienze; (5) il “pensiero veloce e lento” di Kahneman; e (6) l'euristica decisionale. L'intuito viene discusso nel contesto della supervisione e della gestione delle organizzazioni, dell'utilizzo di strumenti e processi di valutazione, della creazione di modelli mentali per la pratica, delle implicazioni per la formazione professionale e per ulteriori ricerche. Benché la professione debba continuare a sviluppare la sua capacità di utilizzare le migliori conoscenze per orientare la pratica, può essere necessario un modello di razionalità psicosociale per concettualizzare i processi di giudizio “intuitivi” interiorizzati nella pratica.

תַקצִיר

עובדים סוציאליים נדרשים לקבל החלטות “מוצדקות”, אולם “אינטואיציה” הינה חשובה גם כן בהערכה, קבלת החלטות וניבוי של סיכון. אנו דנים במקומה של האינטואיציה בשיקול הדעת המקצועי כחלק מהיכולות הקוגניטיביות שלנו; בתהליכי הסקה מושפעי רגשות בקשר בין העובדים לבין לקוחות ומשפחות; ובהפנמת תהליכי למידה. האתגרים הנידונים כוללים אינטואיציה כנושא שבטאבו; תקשורת של שיקול דעת מבוסס-אינטואיציה בתהליכי קבלת החלטות בקבוצה; והעדר מודלים לאינטגרציה של אינטואיציה עם שימוש מפורש בידע. בכדי לפתח את בסיס הידע בנוגע לשיקול הדעת המקצועי, המאמר מתייחס לשש מסגרות תאורטיות אשר יכולות לשמש להמשגה של אינטואיציה בתחום קבלת ההחלטות בעבודה סוציאלית, בכללן: (1) “ידע לא כתוב” בשיח סוציולוגי; (2) אינטואיציה כ“היגיון”; (3) הפנמה של למידה; (4) מושגי סכמות בחקר מדעי המוח; (5) “חשיבה מהירה ואיטית” של כהנמן ;(6) ויוריסטיקות בקבלת החלטות. אנו דנים באינטואיציה בהקשר של הדרכה ומנהל ארגוני; שימוש בכלי ותהליכי הערכה; פיתוח מודלים מנטליים לפרקטיקה; השלכות עבור השכלה והכשרה; ומחקר עתידי. למרות שהמקצוע נדרש להמשיך ולפתח פרקטיקה המבוססת על הידע הטוב ביותר, יש צורך במודל רציונאלי פסיכו-סוציאלי להמשיג תהליכי שיקול דעת “אינטואיטיביים” המופנמים בפרקטיקה.

ABSTRAKT

Pracownicy socjalni podejmując decyzje dotyczące klientów zasadniczo kierują się racjonalnymi wyborami. W niniejszym artykule wskazujemy, że istotną rolę w procesie decyzyjnym odgrywa intuicja. Analizujemy intuicję jako część poznawczych i emocjonalnych własności wpływających na sposób diagnozy i działania z klientem. W artykule prezentujemy kilka wyzwań, które są związane z pojęciem intuicji w procesie podejmowania decyzji. Jest ona traktowana, szczególnie zestawiona z procesami refleksyjnymi jako swoiste tabu. Brak także analiz dotyczących sposobów komunikowania decyzji opartych na intuicji oraz modeli pozwalających na wykorzystanie wiedzy intuicyjnej. Artykuł zawiera analizę sześciu podejść teoretycznych, które mogą być zastosowane przy konceptualizacji pojęcia intuicji: 1. socjologiczna koncepcja wiedzy niejawnej, 2. podejście sense-making, 3. koncepcja internalizacji wiedzy, 4. schematy związane z neuronaukami\kognitywistyką 5. myślenie szybkie i wolne Kahnemana, 6. heurystyki decyzyjne. Intuicja jest także omawiana w kontekście organizacyjnym, dokonywania ocen, narzędzi wykorzystywanych przy ocenianiu oraz modeli praktyk kognitywnych. Wykorzystanie tej wiedzy powinno wpływać na modele kształcenia i doskonalenia pracowników socjalnych oraz przyszłe badania. Chociaż profesjonalizacja zawodu pracownika socjalnego powinna rozwijać obszary związane z podejściem racjonalnym to istotnym zadaniem wydaje się konceptualizacja pojęcia intuicji i integracja tych dwóch podejść w pracy socjalnej.

ABSTRAKT

Fachkräfte der Sozialen Arbeit müssen ‚begründbare‘ Entscheidungen treffen, gleichwohl ist ‚Intuition‘ beim Assessment, der Entscheidungsfindung und der Risikoeinschätzung in der Praxis von Bedeutung. Wir diskutieren Intuition innerhalb professioneller Urteile als Teil unserer kognitiven Fähigkeiten, ‚emotional informierte‘ Denkprozesse verbinden Fachkräfte mit Klient*innen und Familien und die Intuition bedient sich dabei internalisierter Lernprozesse. Die diskutierten Herausforderungen befassen sich mit Intuition als Tabuthema, der Kommunikation von intuitionsbasierten Urteilen in Gruppenentscheidungsprozessen und dem Fehlen von Modellen zur Integration von Intuition und explizitem Wissensgebrauch. Um das Fachwissen über professionelle Urteile weiterzuentwickeln, werden sechs theoretische Bezugspunkte betrachtet, die für eine Konzeptualisierung von Intuition im Rahmen der sozialarbeiterischen Entscheidungsfindung verwendet werden können. Dazu zählen: (1) das ‚implizite Wissen‘ im soziologischen Diskurs; (2) Intuition als ‚sense-making‘ (Sinngenese); (3) Internalisierung von Lernprozessen; (4) konzeptionelle Schemata der Neurowissenschaften; (5) Kahnemans Modell ‚Schnelles Denken, langsames Denken‘; und (6) Heuristiken der Entscheidungsfindung. Intuition wird diskutiert im Kontext von Supervision und organisationaler Steuerung, der Anwendung von Assessment Tools und Prozessen, Generierung von mentalen Modellen für die Praxis, Implikationen für Bildung und Ausbildung, sowie weiterer Forschung. Obwohl die Profession kontinuierlich ihre Fähigkeiten weiterentwickeln muss, um der Praxis das beste Wissen zur Verfügung zu stellen, bedarf es eines Modells der psycho-sozialen Rationalität, das in der Lage ist, die internalisierten ‚intuitiven‘ Prozesse der Urteilsbildung der Praxis zu konzeptualisieren.

KEYWORDS:

• Assessment
• decision making
• intuition
• professional judgement
• reasoning

Parole chiave:

• Valutazione
• processo decisionale
• intuito
• giudizio professionale
• ragionamento

מילות מפתח:

• הערכה
• קבלת החלטות
• אינטואיציה
• שיקול דעת מקצועי
• הסקה

Słowa kluczowe:

• diagnoza
• podejmowanie decyzji
• intuicja
• praca socjalna
• ocena ryzyka

Schlüsselwörter:

• Argumentation
• Assessment
• Entscheidungsfindung
• Intuition
• professionelle Urteilsbildung

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank our other colleagues in the Decisions, Assessment and Risk Special Interest Group of the European Social Work Research Association for their inspiration and encouragement.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Alessandro Sicora

Alessandro Sicora, PhD is Associate Professor in the Department of Sociology and Social Research at the University of Trento, Italy. He is a registered social worker with professional practice experience in geriatric social work and youth social work. He is Chair of the European Social Work Research Association. His research interests relate to international social work, reflective practice, professional mistakes, emotions and professional practice. Alessandro is the author of Reflective Practice and Learning from Mistakes in Social Work (2017, Policy Press) and co-editor of Shame and Social Work (2020, Policy Press).

Brian J. Taylor

Brian Taylor is Professor of Social Work, Ulster University, Northern Ireland where he leads research on decisions, assessment and risk, and teaches these topics on qualifying and post-qualifying social work courses. He joined the University after 10 years’ experience in practice and management, and 15 years in training and organisation development in health and social care. Brian is a Fellow of the UK Academy of Social Sciences; Honorary Associate Scientist of the Harding Centre for Risk Literacy at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin; and a founder member of the Board of the European Social Work Research Association.

Ravit Alfandari

Ravit Alfandari is a post-doctoral researcher at the school of Management Administration at the University of Haifa. She is a qualified social worker with solid experience in direct service delivery, programmes development and conducting research related to vulnerable children and families. Her empirical investigation focuses on the fundamentals of social work practice and decision-making. It takes place at the triangulated relationships between the practitioner, client and organisation. A core principle of her scholarly work is to develop actions, as much as, knowledge. Her professional experience engaging with individuals who slipped through the net of the state's welfare system, elicited deep commitment to generate evidence that can facilitate effective social programming and policymaking.

Guy Enosh

Guy Enosh, MSW, PhD, is professor of social work, at the School of Social Work, Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, the University of Haifa. He is the chair of the University Institutional Committee for Ethical Research with Human Beings. His research focuses on the ways by which knowledge is constructed and decisions are made within interpersonal relationships. Where relationships may range from trust and cooperation to distrust, conflict, and aggression; and the populations in focus include families, workplace relationships (e.g. social workers and clients); and research relationships (researchers, participants, and other stakeholders). He recently published (with Adital Ben-Ari) a book regarding research relationships and knowledge construction: Ben-Ari, A. & Enosh, G. (2020). Dialectics, power, and knowledge construction in qualitative research: Beyond Dichotomy. Routledge.

Duncan Helm

Duncan Helm, PhD, is a Senior Lecturer and registered social worker with experience of child safeguarding and protection work in local authorities and integrated settings. An academic since 2003, Duncan’s expertise is in child welfare and working with risk and uncertainty. He has taught extensively on qualifying and post-qualifying programmes and his research and teaching interests include judgement, analysis and assessment in professional practice and practice-near research methods. He is currently Head of Social Work at the University of Stirling, Scotland.

Campbell Killick

Campbell Killick is a social work lecturer at the University of Ulster in Northern Ireland. His research interests include risk and decision making particularly in relation to abuse of children and adults. Campbell teaches on undergraduate and postgraduate courses relating to assessment and professional decision making. He is the course director for the MSc Professional Development in Social Work which supports practitioners and service users to undertake literature reviews, research projects and dissemination activities.

Olive Lyons

Olive Lyons is a PhD student at Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto. Prior to pursuing doctoral studies, she spent 10 years as a practitioner, primarily in the field of child protection in Ireland. Her research interests focus on decision making and professional judgment within initial assessments in child protection practice. Other interests include international systems of child welfare and protection.

Judith Mullineux

Judith Mullineux has been employed at Ulster University since 2004. She completed her primary degree in psychology before qualifying in social work in 1990 and was employed in the criminal justice sector. Judith is Course Director for the ‘PgDip Professional Development in Social Work’. Judith is a registered social worker and holds her professional Advanced Scholarship Award (NISCC). She is an active member of the ‘Strategic Advisory Group’ and ‘Professional in Practice’ (PiP) partnership committee in Northern Ireland, also a member of the European Social Work Research Association (ESWRA). Judith is a Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (HEA).

Jarosław Przeperski

Jarosław Przeperski, PhD, is Head of the Center for Family Research at the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, assistant professor in the Social Work Department, and an expert on family matters in the Polish Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Family, Labour and Social Policy. He is the author of many expert opinions and publications in the field of public family and welfare policy. His research interests focus on social work, public policies, family research and social pedagogy.

Michael Rölver

Michael Rölver is a graduated social worker based in Münster/Germany. His major field of interest is discretion and decision-making in social work. Michael has working experience in services for disadvantaged youth and policy advising on the national level. He is holding a Master of Science in International Social Work and Human Rights of the University of Gothenburg/Sweden. Currently, Michael is working on his PhD thesis, a qualitative study on the use of discretion in case conferences of German services for disadvantaged youth. The PhD project is located at the Institute for Sociology at the University of Münster in cooperation with the Catholic University of Applied Sciences in Münster.

Andrew Whittaker

Andrew Whittaker, PhD is Professor of Social Work Research and Head of the Risk and Expert Decision Making (RED) research group at London South Bank University, UK. His specialist field is the study of risk, professional judgement and decision making in child protection services. He is the principal investigator on a British Academy funded RCT of a digital intervention to improve professional judgments, which builds upon a previous ethnographic study of decision making in front-line child protection teams. He is a Co-convenor of the Decisions, Assessment and Risk Special Interest Group (DARSIG) and the editor of the Journal of Social Work Practice.