‘Social worker’ perceptions of organisational and professional changes to their work in Canada, England and South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Growing global inequality, austerity and retrogressive social policy (Basu et al., 2017) provide the context for social work practice. The profession is committed to empowering people and addressing social justice, inequality and social cohesion but is struggling to achieve its mandate under pressure from shifting social policy; everchanging organisational structures and austerity. This study explored this impact through guided conversations with 18 social workers in both rural and urban areas in Canada, England and South Africa. Using a three-legged case study design, participants discussed and explored their perceptions of organisational and professional change, impact on their work, how management practice modified decision making and focus, professional risk and trust, and how these were accommodated. \n \nThe presentation of social work voices explored their experiences under three broad themes. These were: professional identity and development, social work practice and work with service users and other professionals. The discussion theorises these voiced experiences through the review of contemporary literature. \n \nThe results highlighted that preventative services have all but disappeared with participants feeling compromised ethically, emotionally and professionally by mediating service demands, organizational delivery, service user needs and their own professional judgements. Changing professional structures, new public management, managerialism, and marketisation have introduced new pressures and requirements to practice, affecting their relationships with colleagues, service users and their managers. Surprisingly, no comprehensive research has been undertaken on the impact of these changes for social work. \n \nThe repercussions of these changes have been experienced at macro, mezzo and micro levels, with rising demand for services but reduced resources to help those in distress. Participants highlighted the main challenges of undertaking work within this context, the personal challenges and impact, and how they attempt to manage these competing pressures. As a profession, social work must seek, understand and theorise the impact of these changes to their practice context and how it might exacerbate de-professionalisation within the profession, undermine its contribution to relieving social distress, challenge public support and demoralise the existing and future workforce. The study concludes that the profession must therefore critically consider these impacts, or it may become the victim of these changes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".