References

• Aaltonen, S., Berg, P., & Karvonen, S. (2017). Affordances of welfare services – perspectives of young clients. Nordic Welfare Research, 1(2), 30–38. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2464-4161-2017-01-04
   Google Scholar
• Ashforth, B., Rogers, K., Pratt, M., & Pradies, C. (2014). Ambivalence in organizations: A multilevel approach. Organization Science, 25(5), 1453–1478. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0909
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bø-Rygg, A., & Oltedal, S. (2017). Ung@Jobb. Sluttrapport for Rogalandsprosjektet Praksis- Og Kunnskapsutvikling I Nav-kontor. Stavanger University.
   Google Scholar
• Caswell, D. (2020). Talking policy into being—how street-level bureaucrats and vulnerable unemployed talk about labor market participation. European Policy Analysis, 6(1), 23–37. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1071
   Google Scholar
• Clayman, S. E. (1992) Footing in the Achievement of Neutrality: The Case of News-Interview Discourse. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at Work, (pp. 163–198). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Danneris, S. (2018). Ready to work (yet)? Unemployment trajectories among vulnerable welfare recipients. Qualitative Social Work, 17(3), 355–372. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325016672916
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danneris, S., & Dall, T. (2017). Expressing and responding to self-efficacy in meetings between clients and social work professionals. Nordic Social Work Research, 7(2), 115–140. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/2156857X.2017.1310128
   Google Scholar
• Djuve, A. B., & Kavli, H. C. (2015). Facilitating user involvement in activation programmes: When carers and clerks meet pawns and queens. Journal of Social Policy, 44(2), 235–254. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279414000804
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work (pp. 3–65). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Flinkfeldt, M. (2017). Wanting to work: Managing the sick role in high-stake sickness insurance meetings. Sociology of Health & Illness, 39(7), 1149–1165. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12567
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fossestøl, B. (2019). Ethics, knowledge and ambivalence in social workers’ professional self-understanding. British Journal of Social Work, 49(7), 1968–1986. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcy113
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frøyland, K., Andreassen, T. A., & Innvær, S. (2019). Contrasting supply-side, demand-side and combined approaches to labour market integration. Journal of Social Policy, 48(2), 311–328. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279418000491
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furlong, A., Cartmel, F., & Biggart, A. (2006). Choice biographies and transitional linearity: Re-conceptualising modern youth transitions.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1981). Footing. In E, Goffman (Ed.), Forms of Talk (pp. 124–159). University of Pennsylvania Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gjersøe, H. M. (2021). Frontline provision of integrated welfare and employment services: Organising for activation competency. International Journal of Social Welfare, 30, 280–290. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12464
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haglund, A. (2016). The activating profession: Coaching and coercing in the welfare services. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(7), 725–739. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-02-2016-0036
   Google Scholar
• Hauss, G. (2014). Generating productive citizens or supporting the weak? Ambivalences and contradictions in working with young welfare recipients. European Journal of Social Work, 17(5), 656–671. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2014.954239
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healy, K. (2014). Social work theories in context. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Hillcoat-Nallétamby, S., & Philips, J. E. (2011). Sociological ambivalence revisited. Sociology, 45(2), 202–217. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038510394018
   Google Scholar
• Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. Russell Sage. (Original work published 1980).
   Google Scholar
• Merton, R. K., & Barber, E. (1976). Sociological ambivalence. In R.K. Merton (Ed.) Sociological Ambivalence and Other Essays, (pp. 3–31). Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Minas, R. (2014). One-stop shops: Increasing employability and overcoming welfare state fragmentation? International Journal of Social Welfare, 23(1), S40–S53. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12090
   Google Scholar
• Motallebzadeh, K., Garmabi, H., & Fayendari, M. (2018). Professional success among Iranian university professors of TEFL: A study on the basis of Goffman’s footing theory. The Journal of English Language Pedagogy and Practice, 11(22), 168–185. https://doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.30495/jal.2018.541071
   Google Scholar
• Nothdurfter, U., & Hermans, K. (2018). Meeting (or not) at the street level? A literature review on street-level research in public management, social policy and social work. International Journal of Social Welfare, 27(3), 294–304. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12308
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2018). Investing in youth, Norway. OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Raeymaeckers, P., & Dierckx, D. (2013). To work or Not to work? The role of the organisational context for social workers' perceptions on activation. British Journal of Social Work, 43(6), 1170–1189. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcs048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reich, T., & Wheeler, S. C. (2016). The good and bad of ambivalence: Desiring ambivalence under outcome uncertainty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(4), 493–508. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000047
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riis-Johansen, M. O., Halvorsen, K., Andenæs, E., & Hammerstad, G. T. (2018). Interaksjon med brukere i Nav: analyse av samtaledata som grunnlag for fagutvikling. Tidsskrift for velferdsforskning, 21(3), 227–240. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2464-3076-2018-03-03
   Google Scholar
• Senghaas, M., Freier, C., & Kupka, P. (2019). Practices of activation in frontline interactions: Coercion, persuasion, and the role of trust in activation policies in Germany. Social Policy & Administration, 53(5), 613–626. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12443
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. (2012). The skills of helping individuals, families, groups, and communities (7th ed.). Brooks/Cole.
   Google Scholar
• Solberg, J. (2017). Logic of accounting: The case of reporting previous options in Norwegian activation encounters. Discourse Processes, 54(7), 545–567. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1149395
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (2nd ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Trevithick, P. (2018). The ‘self’ and ‘use of self’ in social work: A contribution to the development of a coherent theoretical framework. The British Journal of Social Work, 48(7), 1836–1854. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcx133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Berkel, R. (2020). Making welfare conditional: A street-level perspective. Social Policy and Administration, 54(2), 191–204. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12564
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Wel, K. A., Hermansen, A., Dahl, E., & Saltkjel, T. (2021). Utsatte unges livsbaner før og etter NAVreformen: flere «integrerte», sammenhengende, progressive og effektive forløp? [Welfare trajectories among vulnerable youth before and after the ‘NAV-reform’: Integrated, cohesive, progressive and effective?]. Tidsskrift for Velferdsforskning, 24(1), 62–84. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2464-3076-2021-01-06
   Google Scholar