New public management and information communication technology: Organisational influences on frontline child protection practice
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11157/anzswj-vol28iss2id224Keywords:
new public management, care and protection, common factors, ICTAbstract
In this paper the authors examine the new public management (NPM) philosophy influencing the organisational environment in which child protection social workers are located. NPM prioritises outputs through policies, such as results based accountability (RBA) predicated on the expectation that responsibility to achieve designated programme outcomes is sheeted to the agency and its workers. Ongoing funding depends on programme results.
NPM ideology assumes that workers and managers in agencies tasked with delivering care and protection services are able to control the variables influencing outputs which contribute to outcomes. The authors will analyse four key aspects of NPM thinking (RBA, outputs, outcomes and key performance indicators) and explore their organisational consequences. The influence on social work practice of information and communications technology (ICT), on which NPM depends, is also considered.
The paper is not an ideologically based rejection of NPM, but rather an assessment of its consequences for care and protection practice. The authors call for a return to the centrality of relationally based social work processes embodied in common factors (CF) practice, such as the therapeutic alliance. We argue that CF approaches offer a contrasting and more appropriate practice philosophy than NPM thinking while still enabling achievable, multifaceted organisational benefits.
References
Agius, A., & Jones, D. N. (2012). Effective and ethical working environments for social work: The responsibilities of employers of social workers. Berne, Switzerland: International Federation of Social Workers.
Babor, T., & Del Boca, F. K. (2003). Treatment matching in alcoholism. Cambridge, England; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Beckmann, A., & Cooper, C. (2004). “Globalisation”, the new managerialism and education: Rethinking the purpose of education in Britain. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 2(2).
Biestek, F. P. (1957). The casework relationship. Chicago, Ill.: Loyola University Press.
Bland, R., Renouf, N., & Tullgren, A. (2015). Social work practice in mental health: An introduction (2nd ed.). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.
Boston, J. (Ed.). (1995). The state under contract. Wellington, NZ: Bridget Williams Books.
Boston, J., Martin, J., Pallot, J., & Walsh, P. (1996). Public management: The New Zealand model. Auckland, NZ: Oxford University Press.
British Association of Social Workers. (2012). Voices from the frontline: The state of social work 2012. Birmingham, England: Author.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.
Burton, J., & Van den Broek, D. (2009). Accountable and countable: Information management systems and the bureaucratization of social work. British Journal of Social Work, 39(7), 1326-1342. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcn027
Carey, M. (2009). The order of chaos: Exploring agency care managers’ construction of social order within fragmented worlds of state social work. British Journal of Social Work, 39(3), 556-573. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcm143
Chapman, J., & Duncan, G. (2007). Is there now a new “New Zealand model”? Public Management Review, 9(1), 1-25.
Coffey, M., Dugdill, L., & Tattersall, A. (2009). Working in the public sector: A case study of social services. Journal of Social Work, 9(4), 420-442. doi:10.1177/1468017309342177
Fitzgibbon, D. W. (2008). Deconstructing probation: Risk and developments in practice. Journal of Social Work Practice, 22(1), 85-101.
Friedman, M. (2009). Trying hard is not good enough: How to produce measurable improvements for customers and communities. Charleston, SC: BookSurge.
Gambrill, E. (2015). Integrating research and practice: Distractions, controversies, and options for moving forward. Research on Social Work Practice, 25(4), 510-522. doi:10.1177/1049731514544327
Healy, K. (2009). A case of mistaken identity: The social welfare professions and New Public Management. Journal of Sociology, 45(4), 401-418. doi 10.1177/1440783309346476
Heffernan, K. (2006). Social work, new public management and the language of ‘service user’. British Journal of Social Work, 36(1), 139-147. doi 10.1093/bjsw/bch328
Herzberg, F. (2003). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, 81(1), 87-96.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Höjer, S., & Forkby, T. (2011). Care for sale: The influence of new public management in child protection in Sweden. British Journal of Social Work, 41(1), 93-110. doi 10.1093/bjsw/bcq053
Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3-19.
Inkson, K., & Kolb, D. (2002). Management: Perspectives for New Zealand (3rd ed.). Auckland, NZ: Pearson Education.
Johnson, B. (1992). Polarity management: Identifying and managing unsolvable problems. Amherst, MA: HRD Press.
Kemshall, H. (1995). Supervision and appraisal in the probation service. In J. Pritchard (Ed.), Good practice in supervision (pp. 139-152). London, England: Jessica Kingsley.
Lambert, M. J., & Barley, D. E. (2002). Research summary on the therapeutic relationship and psychotherapy outcome. In J. C. Norcross (Ed.), Psychotherapy relationships that work: Therapists’ contributions and responsiveness to patients (pp. 17-32). New York, NY: Oxford.
Laska, K. M., Gurman, A. S., & Wampold, B. E. (2014). Expanding the lens of evidence-based practice in psychotherapy: A common factors perspective. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training,
(4), 467-481.
Lawler, J., & Bilson, A. (2010). Rational planning and control. In Social work management and leadership: Managing complexity with creativity (pp. 75-100). London, England: Routledge.
McDonald, C., & Chenoweth, L. (2009). Leadership: A crucial ingredient in unstable times. Social Work & Society, 7(1), 102-112.
McLaughlin, H. (2009). What’s in a name: “Client”, “patient”, “customer”, “consumer”, “expert by experience”, “service user”—what’s next? British Journal of Social Work, 39(6), 1101-1117. doi 10.1093/bjsw/bcm155
Ministry of Social Development. (2014). Statement of intent 2014-2018. Wellington, New Zealand: Author.
Ministry of Social Development. (n.d.). Results based accountability TM: Guidelines and resources. Wellington,
NZ: Author.
Munro, E. (2010). Learning to reduce risk in child protection. British Journal of Social Work, 40(4), 1135-1151. doi 10.1093/bjsw/bcq024
O ’Donoghue, K., Baskerville, M., & Trlin, A. D. (1999). Professional supervision in the new managerial climate of the Department of Corrections. Social Work Review, 11(1), 8-15.
Office of the Chief Social Worker. (2014). Workload and casework review: Qualitative review of social worker caseload, casework and workload management. Wellington, NZ: Author. Retrieved from http://www.msd.
govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/newsroom/mediareleases/2014/statement-from-brendan-boyle-chiefexecutive.html
Parmenter, D. (2010). Key performance indicators (KPI): Developing, implementing, and using winning KPIs (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Pinnock, M. (2012). How outcomes saved my life (or at least my sanity). Social Work Now, 51, 22-28.
Pollitt, C. (1990). Managerialism and the public services: The Anglo-American experience. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.
Public Service Association. (2015). CYF review: Let’s get real. Retrieved from http://www.psa.org.nz/assets/PDFs/PSA-CYF-review-2015.pdf
Rogers, C. R. (2004). On becoming a person. London, England: Constable.
Rudman, R. S. (2010). Performance planning and review. In Human resources management in New Zealand (5th ed., pp. 195-213). North Shore, NZ: Pearson.
Saleebey, D. (2006). The strengths perspective in social work practice (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Senge, P. M. (1997). The fifth discipline. Measuring Business Excellence, 1(3), 46-51. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb025496
Scott, G. (2001). Public sector management in New Zealand: Lessons and challenges. Canberra, ACT: Centre for Law and Economics, Australian National University.
Taylor, F. W. (1967). The principles of scientific management. New York, NY: Norton.
The Modernising Child Youth and Family Panel. (2015). Expert panel final report: Investing in New Zealand’s children and their families. Retrieved from http://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/workprogrammes/investing-in-children/investing-in-childrenreport.pdf
Turnell, A., & Edwards, S. (1997). Aspiring to partnership: The signs of safety approach to child protection. Child Abuse Review, 6(3), 179-190. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1099-0852(199708)6:3<179::aid-car324>3.0.co;2-j
Wampold, B. E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Wampold, B. E., & Budge, S. L. (2012). The 2011 Leona Tyler Award Address: The relationship—and its relationship to the common and specific factors of psychotherapy. The Counseling Psychologist, 40(4), 601-623. doi: 10.1177/0011000011432709
Weaver, R. (1984). Ideas have consequences. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Webster, M. (2013). Complexity approach to frontline social work management: Constructing an emergent team leadership design for a managerialist world. The situation in 2013. In J. Lawler & T. Hafford-Letchfield (Eds.), Perspectives on management and leadership in social work (pp. 39-68). London, England: Whiting & Birch.
Webster, M. (2014). A vision for social work leadership: Critical conceptual elements. In J. Duke, M. Henrickson & L. Beddoe (Eds.), Protecting the Public – Enhancing the Profession. E tiaki ana i te Hapori – E manaaki ana
i nga mahi (pp. 79-92). Wellington, New Zealand: Social Workers Registration Board
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
By completing the online submission process, you confirm you accept this agreement. The following is the entire agreement between you and the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers (ANZASW) and it may be modified only in writing.
You and any co-authors
If you are completing this agreement on behalf of co-authors, you confirm that you are acting on their behalf with their knowledge.
First publication
By submitting the work you are:
- granting the ANZASW the right of first publication of this work;
- confirming that the work is original; and
- confirming that the work has not been published in any other form.
Once published, you are free to use the final, accepted version in any way, as outlined below under Copyright.
Copyright
You assign copyright in the final, accepted version of your article to the ANZASW. You and any co-authors of the article retain the right to be identified as authors of the work.
The ANZASW will publish the final, accepted manuscript under a Creative Commons Attribution licence (CC BY 4.0). This licence allows anyone – including you – to share, copy, distribute, transmit, adapt and make commercial use of the work without needing additional permission, provided appropriate attribution is made to the original author or source.
A human-readable summary of the licence is available from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0, which includes a link to the full licence text.
Under this licence you can use the final, published version of the article freely – such as depositing a copy in your institutional research repository, uploading a copy to your profile on an academic networking site or including it in a different publication, such as a collection of articles on a topic or in conference proceedings – provided that original publication in Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work is acknowledged.
This agreement has no effect on any pre-publication versions or elements, which remain entirely yours, and to which we claim no right.
Reviewers hold copyright in their own comments and should not be further copied in any way without their permission.
The copyright of others
If your article includes the copyright material of others (e.g. graphs, diagrams etc.), you confirm that your use either:
- falls within the limits of fair dealing for the purposes of criticism and review or fair use; OR
- that you have gained permission from the rights holder for publication in an open access journal.
