Jochen Devlieghere

Electronic information systems : in search of responsive social work

Summary The informational context in which social work has been operating over the past decade has gained much more significance. In this context, Electronic Information Systems are often implemented with the aim of being responsive to the needs of children and families. However, research has critically identified some major concerns with using Electronic Information Systems in ways that tend to reduce social work to a technical practice. As a result, practitioners and managers are using their discretion to shape and bend regulations precisely in order to achieve responsive social work practice. In this paper, our aim is to capture the meaning of these strategies for the development of responsive social work. To do so, we interviewed social practitioners working with Electronic Information Systems on a daily basis. Findings Our results show how practitioners develop a diversity of strategies to recreate the relational aspect of social work, thereby challenging the hypothesis that this was curtailed by the use of Electronic Information Systems. Applications By fleshing out the meaning of the strategies practitioners use in their daily practice, we aim to contribute to the contemporary debate about the use of these strategies in social work practice. At the same time, it is also important to understand the meaning of these strategies in relation to the development of responsive social work as this development cannot be reduced to a mere relational practice where principles of justice, equality and solidarity are not equally considered.

A policy, management and practitioners’ perspective on social work’s rational turn : there are cracks at every level

ABSTRACT Social work has been confronted with a belief that a more rationalised social work will lead to a more effective practice as well as prevent harm to children. However, there is little or no empirical insight into the discourses of the key actors involved (e.g. policy actors, managers and social practitioners). To capture their perspective, interviews were conducted with 15 key policy actors, 29 social service managers and 16 social practitioners. The interviews show that the idea that social work should be based upon a more rational framework continues to capture the imagination. However, the participants formulate critical concerns about social works rational turn. In so doing, they all emphasise the inevitable subjectivity of social work. It should therefore be asked why the rationalisation train hurtles on further. One possible answer lies in the idea that a more rational approach to social work can assist the participants in meeting heightened requirements of accountability. This is disconcerting because many of the interventions in the social domain do not generate effects in a mechanistic way. Social work should therefore not embrace its rational turn, but embrace its ambiguous position and search for alternative ways to legitimise its existence.