Corporate Citizenship: What are the Social Responsibilities of Australian Business? School of Social Work and Applied Human Sciences Occasional Paper Series No. 6

Corporate Citizenship: What are the Social Responsibilities of Australian Business? School of Social Work and Applied Human Sciences Occasional Paper Series No. 6

The challenge of interdisciplinary collaboration in addressing the social determinants

The importance of professional disciplines working together to address the critical social and health issues facing society today cannot be overstated. Policy makers, service providers and researchers have long been calling for greater interdisciplinary collaboration. Despite this there has been little systemic analysis of the constraints involved in such collaboration. Far too often disciplines continue to work in silos. This paper aims to analyse the barriers to interdisciplinary collaboration through a case study of the relationship between social work and public health. These two disciplines have a lot more in common than might first appear. There is real potential for social work and public health to work together and enhance each other's efforts to address their common goal of greater social equality. However, this will require a genuine commitment from both disciplines to develop a shared political analysis, common language and a framework for action, which utilises their respective strengths.

Working with involuntary clients: Perceptions and experiences of outreach social workers in Hong Kong

The outreach social work service is one of the dominant youth work approaches in dealing with delinquents and youths 'at-risk' in Hong Kong. Yet this approach presents particular challenges. Outreach social workers usually play an active role in initiating and establishing contacts with young people, yet young people are reluctant to engage with the outreach social workers and are resistant towards therapeutic change. To date, little is known about what strategies and techniques are most effective in dealing with client resistance in this context. The aims of this paper are to gain a better understanding of the common resistant behaviours that outreach social workers usually encounter in their day-to-day practice, and to investigate how the outreach social workers respond to their clients' resistance with reference to case examples given in the in-depth interviews. The findings of this study provide evidence that whilst client resistance is common in the outreach social work setting, social workers' patience as well as sensitivity are essential in resolving resistance and building up a rapport with clients.

Personalised social care for adults with disabilities: A problematic concept for frontline practice

This paper explores the complexities and contradictions of frontline practice that pose problems for personalised social care through enhanced choice. It draws on semi-structured interviews with community care workers, social workers, occupational therapists and care managers in a social service department. Practitioners interviewed were asked about their current assessment and documentation system, including the assessment documents currently used; how they approached information gathering and the topics they explored with service users; and their experience of documenting assessment and care management. The paper argues that the validity and sustainability of personalised social care in frontline practice relies on developing a thorough understanding of the complex and implicit assessment processes operating at the service user/practitioner interface and the inevitable tensions that arise for practitioners associated with the organisational context and broader service environment. The findings demonstrate the variability among practitioners in how they collect information and more importantly, the critical role practitioners occupy in determining the kinds of topics to be explored during the assessment process. In so doing, it shows how practitioners can exert control over the decision-making process. More importantly, it provides some insight into how such processes are shaped by the constraints of the organisational context and broader service environment. Complexities and contradictions may be an inherent part of frontline practice. The issues discussed in this paper, however, highlight potential areas that might be targeted in conjunction with implementing personalised social care through enhanced choice for people with disabilities.

Room to move? Professional discretion at the frontline of welfare-to-work

Outcomes of social policies have always been mediated by the discretionary agency of front-line staff, processes which nevertheless have received insufficient attention in policy evaluation and in the social policy literature more broadly. This article takes the case example or the policy reforms associated with the Australian government's welfare-to-work agenda. Drawing on two discreet research projects undertaken at different points in the policy trajectory, the practices of social workers in Centrelink - the Commonwealth government's primary service delivery agency involved in welfare-to-work - is examined. Centrelink social workers have been and remain one of the core groups of specialist staff since the Department's inception in the late 1940s, working to improve the well being Of people in receipt of income security. Their experiences of the recent past and their expectations of the future of their professional practice as welfare reform becomes more entrenched are canvassed. In summary, the discretionary capacity of the Centrelink social workers to moderate or shape the impact of policy on income security recipients is steadily eroding as this group of professionals is increasingly captured by the emerging practices of workfare.

The credentialing of counselling in Australia

Counselling is an unregulated activity in Australia. No statutory regulation currently exists. As a result, different counselling organizations are promoting different voluntary standards for the practice of counselling. This has led to a credentialing dilemma in which counsellors and the public are confronted with a number of counselling qualification choices. This dilemma poses a number of questions: Should counselling become more regulated in Australia? At what level should counselling be regulated? Should there be various levels of counsellor regulation? This article provides an overview of the credentialing dilemma facing counselling in Australia, compares and contrasts two main Australian accreditation efforts, and proposes cooperation as a way of navigating said dilemma. The implications for counselling as a profession are discussed along with suggestions for its development as a profession. This includes a discussion regarding the relative advantages and disadvantages of greater regulation of counselling as a professional activity in Australia. Specifically, what is and is not generally considered a profession is reviewed, different forms of credentialing are outlined, and general arguments for and against accreditation efforts are presented. The efforts of the Australian Counselling Association (ACA) and the Psychotherapy and Counselling Federation of Australia (PACFA) are compared and are shown to have common ground. Consequently, ways in which the main counselling organizations may best work in conjunction to promote counselling as a profession in Australia are proposed. These suggestions include good communication, collaboration, and the avoidance of turf wars. Specifically, that the ACA and PACFA collaborate on developing a combined independent registration list that is supported by both organizations or, minimally, that both organizations have mutual recognition on each other's register lists.