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 Deprofessionalisation Thesis, Accountability and Professional Character

It is said that the deprofessionalisation of social work and other welfare occupations reduces workers' professional discretion and autonomy, and thus their capacity to act in the best interests of their client. Without necessarily regarding the deprofessionalisation thesis as conclusive, this paper will ask how the state's control of the role and task of social workers impacts on their role-implicated obligations as professionals. If workers are reduced (as claimed) to the status of mere functionaries in systems they neither approve of nor control, does this exonerate them from bad outcomes or service failures? How should we view the dramatic increase in formal regulation now seen in the UK - as professionalisation or deprofessionalisation? The paper will argue that whatever the drift of policy, workers remain in some measure personally accountable. Service failures imply faults of practical reason that are partly attributable to the moral and intellectual character of professionals as individuals. It is therefore up to professionals, and their organisations, to attend to the improvement of professional character.

A Risky Business: An Examination of Irish Probation Officers Attitudes and Work Practices Regarding Risk Assessment

This article examines recent research on risk assessment and probation practice in Ireland and relates the findings to the ongoing debate regarding risk management practices in probation. The piece discusses current theoretical arguments on the influence of risk in criminal justice and outlines the impact of risk discourse on probation practice in Ireland and England and Wales. Using a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods, Irish probation officers’ attitudes are examined in order to highlight key issues facing probation officers when making risk decisions. These findings are compared and contrasted to other research results from England and Wales. All the conclusions identify both positive and negative consequences of adopting risk tools and point to the continued salience of clinical judgment over actuarial methods of risk assessment. It is argued that the research highlights the role of ‘resistance’ by criminal justice professionals in mediating the effects of the ‘new penology’ at the level of implementation. The idea of resistance holds particular relevance for probation practice in Ireland where professional discretion is maintained within the National Standards framework. Despite this, to date there has been an uncritical approach taken to risk assessment which may ignore the dangers of risk inflation/deflation and the need to take into account local factors in assessing risk of reoffending

Teachers' processes of negotiating meaning of new curriculum

This qualitative study addresses the question of how teachers negotiate meaning of new curriculum to better understand how curriculum is transformed from a theoretical construct to a practical one. Through interviews with 5 teachers, their experiences were examined as they negotiated the process of implementing new curriculum. Three theoretical constructs provided the entry point into the study: epistemology, teacher knowledge, and teacher learning. Using inductive analysis, 4 points or attributes of negotiation emerged: reference, growth, autonomy, and reconciliation. These attributes provided a theoretical framework from which a constructivist conceptualization of teacher learning and teacher knowledge could serve to understand the process of how teachers negotiate meaning of curriculum. Studied and theorized in this way, teacher knowledge and teacher learning are seen to be inextricably linked in a relationship that is dynamically changed by forces of stability and instability. Theorizing the negotiation of meaning from a constructivist epistemology also strengthened the assertion that negotiating meaning is a unique structural process, and that knowledge construction is therefore unique to each knower and subject to experience in a particular time and place. The implications for such a theory are, first, that it questions the legitimacy of privatized teacher practice and, second, that it calls for a renewed conceptualization of collegial network and relationship to strengthen the capacity for negotiating meaning of curricular initiatives. Understanding the relationship of curricular theory and negotiating meaning also has implications for curriculum development. In particular, the study highlights the necessity of professional discretion and the generative process of negotiating meaning.

Professionals, discretion and public sector reform in the UK:re-visiting Lipsky

Purpose – Seeks to examine how far Michael Lipsky's theory of discretion as it relates to public sector professionals as “street-level bureaucrats” is still applicable in the light of public sector reform and in particular the introduction of increased managerial control over professionals. Design/methodology/approach – The main thesis in Lipsky's work, Street-Level Bureaucracy, that street-level bureaucrats devise their own rules and procedures to deal with the dilemmas of policy implementation is linked to public sector reform over the past 25 years or so. The article differentiates between three forms of discretion, rule, task and value and assesses the extent to which these different forms of discretion have been compromised by reform. Examples are drawn principally from the literature on school teachers and social workers Findings – The findings suggest that the rule-making (hence bureaucratic) capacity of professionals at street-level is much less influential than before although it is questionable whether or not the greater accountability of professionals to management and clarity of the targets and objectives of organisations delivering public policy has liberated them from the dilemmas of street-level bureaucracy. Research limitations/implications – The work has focussed on the UK and in particular on two professions. However, it may be applied to any country which has undergone public sector reform and in particular where “new public management” processes and procedures have been implemented. There is scope for in-depth studies of a range of occupations, professional and otherwise in the UK and elsewhere. Practical implications – Policy makers and managers should consider how far the positive aspects of facilitating discretion in the workplace by reducing the need for “rule-making” to cope with dilemmas have been outweighed by increased levels of bureaucracy and the “de-skilling” of professionals. Originality/value – Lipsky's much cited and influential work is evaluated in the light of public sector reform some 25 years since it was published. The three forms of discretion identified offer the scope for their systematic application to the workplace.

Is philanthropy relevant? a study of professional advisers in Australia

CPNS’ new Working Paper examines the latest findings from a national survey of professional advisers on the topic of philanthropy assistance to high-net-worth individuals. Findings confirm a growing willingness within the Australian advisory sector to provide philanthropy advice to clients with means, although the rate of change has slowed since 2005. Advisers are now more likely to see benefits in providing this type of counselling, as well as benefits for their clients in engaging in philanthropy.