| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
British Journal of Social Work 34/6 © BASW Trading Ltd 2004 all rights reserved
Street-Level Bureaucracy, Social Work and the (Exaggerated) Death of Discretion
Tony Evans is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Health and Social Care, Oxford Brookes University.
John Harris is a Professor in the School of Health and Social Studies, University of Warwick.
Correspondence to Professor John Harris, School of Health and Social Studies University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK. E-mail: j.harris{at}warwick.ac.uk
Summary
Lipsky’s classic study of ‘street-level bureaucracy’ (1980) provided a perceptive analysis of front line practice in public organizations that has continuing relevance to recent literature, which has debated whether discretion continues to operate in social work or whether it has been curtailed. Having considered contributions to the debate on the continuation and curtailment of professional discretion in social work, it becomes clear that there are significant differences between these two positions, differences which focus on beliefs about manager’ desire for, and ability to secure, control and workers’ ability to resist control and seek discretion. However, after examining these issues further, through an examination of key aspects of Lipsky’s work and Howe’s (1991) critique of that work, a unifying strand is identified in the curtailment and continuation perspectives. Both perspectives have a tendency to treat professional discretion as a phenomenon that is either present or absent and rest on a background assumption, particularly in the curtailment literature, that professional discretion is self-evidently a ‘good thing’. An alternative argument is advanced, based on two propositions: first, that the proliferation of rules and regulations should not automatically be equated with greater control over professional discretion; paradoxically, more rules may create more discretion. Second, discretion in itself is neither ‘good’ nor ‘bad’. In some circumstances it may be an important professional attribute, in others it may be a cloak for political decision-makers to hide behind or it may be an opportunity for professional abuse of power. If this alternative argument is soundly based, future analysis of and research into professional discretion rooted in ‘all-or-nothing’ formulations are unlikely to advance understanding much beyond the impasse in the existing literature. Rather, the alternative argument suggests that discretion should be regarded as a series of gradations of freedom to make decisions and, therefore, the degree of freedom professionals have at specific conjunctures should be evaluated on a situation-by-situation basis.
Keywords: street-level bureaucracy, social work discretion, managerialism
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. P. Sullivan Social Workers in Community Care Practice: Ideologies and Interactions with Older People Br. J. Soc. Work, October 1, 2009; 39(7): 1306 - 1325. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. Turbett Review: Iain Ferguson Reclaiming Social Work -- Challenging Neo-liberalism and Promoting Social Justice London: SAGE, 2008, 160 pp., {pound}21.99 (pbk), ISBN 9781412906937 Journal of Social Work, April 1, 2009; 9(2): 239 - 240. [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Watson and J. West The Report of the 21st Century Social Work Review: Reviewing the `Transformational' Aspirations of a Major Public Policy Initiative in Scotland Public Policy and Administration, July 1, 2008; 23(3): 302 - 318. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Mantle, I. Williams, J. Leslie, S. Parsons, and R. Shaffer Beyond Assessment: Social Work Intervention in Family Court Enquiries Br. J. Soc. Work, April 1, 2008; 38(3): 431 - 443. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Ferguson Liquid Social Work: Welfare Interventions as Mobile Practices Br. J. Soc. Work, April 1, 2008; 38(3): 561 - 579. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Dickens Welfare, Law and Managerialism: Inter-discursivity and Inter-professional Practice in Child Care Social Work Journal of Social Work, January 1, 2008; 8(1): 45 - 64. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Roose and M. De Bie Children's rights: a challenge for social work International Social Work, January 1, 2008; 51(1): 37 - 46. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. Evans Confidentiality in Mental Health Services: A Negotiated Order? Qualitative Social Work, June 1, 2007; 6(2): 213 - 229. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Scourfield The challenge of engaging fathers in the child protection process Critical Social Policy, May 1, 2006; 26(2): 440 - 449. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. Brandon Empowerment, policy levels and service forums J Intellect Disabil., December 1, 2005; 9(4): 321 - 331. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Wilks Social Work and Narrative Ethics Br. J. Soc. Work, December 1, 2005; 35(8): 1249 - 1264. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Baker Assessment in Youth Justice: Professional Discretion and the Use of Asset Youth Justice, August 1, 2005; 5(2): 106 - 122. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Masson and S. Hackett The Extent and Nature of Work with Adolescents Who Have Sexual Behaviour Problems: Findings from a Survey of Youth Offending Teams in England and Wales Youth Justice, December 1, 2004; 4(3): 160 - 177. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|