Professionalism and Information Technology: Positioning and Mediation

The starting point of this paper is the assumption that - on the one hand - information technology (IT) is increasingly shaping the professional knowledge base and on the other the relation between organisation and profession. IT is changing the role, responsibilities and practices of social workers and therefore it is important to deal with the impact of IT on social work (representative for many: Harlow and Webb 2003; Burton and van den Broek 2008). Hence, the general aim of this paper is to stimulate a basic discussion on “IT application in social work“, or rather, in a more general way, on „technology and professions“. Secondly, it is about an analytical differentiation of the process of informatisation, respectively formalisation. Thirdly we want to discuss the assumption and overall combination of efficiency, effectiveness and IT. Therefore this paper is arranged as follows: After some opening remarks (chapter 1) we outline case management systems as research object (2). Further on, we confront the approach of reflexive professionalism (3) with the process of formalization (4). Subsequently, we touch on the debate of “technologies of care” (5) and conclude with some short remarks on a research program (6).

Personal Data and Encryption in the European General Data Protection Regulation

Encryption of personal data is widely regarded as a privacy preserving technology which could potentially play a key role for the compliance of innovative IT technology within the European data protection law framework. Therefore, in this paper, we examine the new EU General Data Protection Regulation’s relevant provisions regarding encryption – such as those for anonymisation and pseudonymisation – and assess whether encryption can serve as an anonymisation technique, which can lead to the non-applicability of the GDPR. However, the provisions of the GDPR regarding the material scope of the Regulation still leave space for legal uncertainty when determining whether a data subject is identifiable or not. Therefore, we inter alia assess the Opinion of the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) regarding a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of the dispute concerning whether a dynamic IP address can be considered as personal data, which may put an end to the dispute whether an absolute or a relative approach has to be used for the assessment of the identifiability of data subjects. Furthermore, we outline the issue of whether the anonymisation process itself constitutes a further processing of personal data which needs to have a legal basis in the GDPR. Finally, we give an overview of relevant encryption techniques and examine their impact upon the GDPR’s material scope.