Unformatted Attachment Preview
Administration in Social Work
ISSN: 0364-3107 (Print) 1544-4376 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wasw20
Bridging the Crevasse Between Direct Practice
Social Work and Management by Increasing the
Transferability of Core Skills
Ryan Tolleson Knee & Jeff Folsom
To cite this article: Ryan Tolleson Knee & Jeff Folsom (2012) Bridging the Crevasse Between
Direct Practice Social Work and Management by Increasing the Transferability of Core Skills,
Administration in Social Work, 36:4, 390-408, DOI: 10.1080/03643107.2011.604402
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03643107.2011.604402
Accepted author version posted online: 31
Jan 2012.
Published online: 31 Jan 2012.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 3500
View related articles
Citing articles: 6 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wasw20
Download by: [Walden University]
Date: 01 April 2017, At: 16:49
Administration in Social Work, 36:390–408, 2012
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0364-3107 print/1544-4376 online
DOI: 10.1080/03643107.2011.604402
Bridging the Crevasse Between Direct Practice
Social Work and Management by Increasing
the Transferability of Core Skills
RYAN TOLLESON KNEE
Department of Social Work, University of Montana –
Missoula, Missoula, Montana, USA
JEFF FOLSOM
AWARE Inc., Helena, Montana, USA
The following is a conceptual article that critically examines a
longstanding concern in social work administration that involves
the promotion of social workers primarily educated for and
employed in direct service or clinical positions to entry or middle
management levels. A review of the literature identifies four core
skills commonly learned in graduate foundational courses and
whose applicability could be expanded, making them more relevant to management. The analysis provides specific suggestions to
graduate social work programs and human service organizations
so social workers in direct practice can better transfer the skills to
improve proficiency in the non-technical aspects of human service
management.
KEYWORDS clinical, core skills, direct practice, generic skills,
management, social work, transferability, versatility
INTRODUCTION
In 1977, Patti and Austin indicated, “In the foreseeable future the vast
majority of persons assuming lower and middle-management positions will
continue to be drawn from the ranks of direct practice” (p. 267). The authors
identified the promotional practice as a troubling trend and predicted that,
Address correspondence to Ryan Tolleson Knee, Department of Social Work, University
of Montana – Missoula, Jeannette Rankin Hall, Missoula, MT 59812, USA. E-mail: ryan.tolleson
knee@umontana.edu
390
Bridging the Crevasse
391
in spite of a growing number of graduate students selecting concentrations
in administration, new managers would continue to be ones whose experience and skills were embedded in direct practice. A follow-up study of
clinical social workers promoted to management positions confirmed their
prediction, and findings further indicated that the managers had difficulty discontinuing their clinical practices and were frequently treating staff members
as clients (Patti, Diedreck, Olson, & Crowell, 1979).
Years later, Skidmore (1995) and Martin, Pine, and Healy (1999) identified that managerial positions were continuing to be filled by social workers
whose primary expertise was in working with troubled clients and whose
skills were less effective for the management and supervisory responsibilities
required in entry and middle management positions. Patti (2000) then reconfirmed his earlier prediction by indicating that the most common career path
continued to be promoting social workers in direct practice to supervisors
and eventually to management and administrative positions. Unfortunately,
the promotional practice has been exacerbated by the new managers receiving little or no management training and frequently relying on skills that
worked well for clients but not for staff or organizations (Mor Barak, Travis, &
Bess, 2004; Patti, 2000).
Because of difficulties associated with the newly promoted managers
and since fewer MSW graduates are selecting the administrative track (Ezell,
Chernesky, & Healy, 2004), more organizations have chosen to hire graduates with degrees in public administration (MPA) or business administration
(MBA) (Hoefer, 2003). Unfortunately, the decision to hire outside the profession could result in the MSW degree becoming less valued as one suitable for
human service management, and the profession could begin to experience
an ideological shift as people with a limited understanding of social work’s
knowledge, skills, values, and ethics are placed in important decision-making
positions (Wuenschel, 2006). “The image of the human service manager as
incompetent lingers and competition continues” (Martin et al., 1999, p. 74).
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
One reason so many managers are promoted from direct service is because
the vast majority of graduate level social work students choose clinical programs and concentrations. In their study of incoming MSW students, Rubin
and Johnson (1984) indicated that 86% of incoming students were obtaining
the MSW degree to enter private practice, 82% were planning to be in private
practice within five years of graduation, and the majority were not committed
to the profession’s focus on helping disadvantaged groups of people. Two
years later, a follow-up to the study found that while students were less likely
to believe they would enter private practice upon graduation than when they
entered the program, respondents still remained most interested in private
392
R. Tolleson Knee and J. Folsom
practice (Rubin, Johnson, & DeWeaver, 1986). In a similar study of incoming
MSW students, Butler (1990) found that while more were interested in the
profession’s mission to help the disadvantaged, the majority (84%), were still
seeking a career in direct practice. Butler’s findings are consistent with others
who found students shared a dual interest in direct practice and the profession’s traditional focus on disadvantaged populations (Bogo, Michalski,
Raphael, & Roberts, 1995; Limb & Organista, 2006). Although the data on
student interest in direct social work appears to be less than what Rubin
and Johnson (1984) originally reported, the current literature indicates that
approximately 80% of MSW students’ primary interests are in direct practice
(Austin & Ezell, 2004).
Strong interest in direct practice and working directly with clients is
exacerbated by a declining student interest in administration (Ezell et al.,
2004). Approximately 10% of MSW students choose the macro concentration
(Patti 2003, Raymond, Teare, & Atherton, 1996; Swartz & Dattalo, 1990) and
a modest 3%, or approximately 1,000 students, select the administrative
concentration (Ezell et al., 2004). One of many possible explanations for
the decreased interest is that students in administrative tracks experience
anti-management comments, perceive anti-management attitudes, and hear
statements that “administration is not real social work” (Ezell et al., 2004,
p. 63). Students also feel pressured to become licensed and realign their
initial interest in management to direct practice upon learning that more
employment options are likely to be available following graduation (Pine &
Healy, 1994).
Other possible explanations are potentially rooted in the graduate programs themselves. In a survey of social work deans, Neugeboren (1986)
found that 63% believed that direct practice was a prerequisite to becoming
a manager. Foundation practice courses have also been narrowly focused
on teaching skills specific to direct practice and working with individuals
and families rather than small groups or teams (Ezell et al., 2004; Martin
et al., 1999). Many students, especially those in direct practice (approximately 80%) who are less likely to complete an administrative course, have
few opportunities to learn basic management skills or how to better apply
the generic people skills frequently learned in direct practice courses (e.g.,
communication, interpersonal skills) to management settings and situations.
The combination of the anti-management sentiments and the focus
on individuals and families in foundation practice courses has the potential to keep direct practice students minimally informed about the role of
management and to foster a bias against those in management positions
(Patti, 2003). Furthermore, “the negative climates experienced in professional
education of both management and non-management students may exacerbate the gulf between managers and clinicians as MSW graduates move
into agencies, further increasing the strain between the competing domains
within organizations” (Ezell et al., 2004, p. 74).
Bridging the Crevasse
393
If students take the anti-management sentiments from the classroom to
the workplace following graduation, the profession is likely to undermine
many of its own aspirations and ethical principles, shooting itself in the
foot as it limps forward. For example, many organizations employing clinical social workers are required by state regulatory and accrediting agencies
to hire supervisors who are licensed and have direct practice experience.
Teaching management skills to former direct practice social workers is difficult enough, and negative attitudes about management can make the process
of transferring the new skills or positively socializing them into management roles even more challenging (Austin, Weisner, Schrandt, Glezos-Bell, &
Murtaza, 2006).
Social workers in direct practice who have proven their value to
the organization and whose credentials help the organization to meet
licensing and regulatory structures are often the ones first considered for
management positions. Patti (2009) conservatively estimates that there are
360,000 management-related jobs in the private and public sectors (p.7),
25% of NASW members are in management-related positions (p. 8), and
27% of LCSW’s spend 20 hours or more each week completing managerial tasks (p. 8). Unfortunately, between 25% and 50% of MSW practitioners
are completing management-related tasks with little or no training (Patti,
2009). In a survey of managers who belong to the National Network of
Social Work Managers, Mor Barak et al. (2004) found that 80% of the respondents attended a clinical or combined clinical/generalist program and that
one-third were enrolled in a clinical program (p. 29). The study further indicated that the majority of managers felt unprepared for their managerial
responsibilities.
Higher Education and Organizational Leadership
Graduate schools of social work and public and private nonprofit leadership
both share a responsibility to prepare clinical social workers for management
and leadership positions. For schools of social work, the problem is magnified by students’ negative attitudes toward macro and administrative courses
and increased pressure to provide micro content courses directed toward students’ more immediate educational and employment interests. Furthermore,
the vast majority of MSW students are women and most administrators are
men (Patti, 2003), thereby limiting the number of administrative role models
for female students Scholars in the field of career development also indicate
that women must still balance career aspirations with what they perceive as
possible (Farmer, 1997). Super (1990) suggests that self-concept is a strong
determinant in career selection and that, with more professional experience, the self-concept expands and creates new opportunities for career
choices. Super’s explanation is consistent with Bandura’s (1977) contributions to social learning theory whereby through contextualized observations
394
R. Tolleson Knee and J. Folsom
of others new behaviors can be assimilated and reproduced in the future.
Since most social work students are women and administrators are men, and
most are launching their first career, few have had opportunities to have
the behaviors of leadership modeled for them by same sex mentors, thereby
limiting career choice. Moreover, many students enter the social work profession to help people overcome personal problems and have a limited ability
to envision a professional role beyond helping clients in a way similar to
how they were helped (Sheafor, Horejsi, & Horejsi, 2000).
In spite of students’ immediate desires to obtain training and a career
in direct practice, nearly half will be promoted to management positions
(Patti, 2009). As a result, well-developed management training programs and
continuing education are critically important (Thompson, Menefee, & Marley
1999). Management training, however, can be expensive and time consuming, and administrative leaders must consider them in light of shrinking
budgets and potentially limited positive impacts. Professional development
and staff training in the private and public sectors is estimated at an annual
cost of $100 billion and consumes 15 billion work hours of time each year.
Unfortunately, the current return on the organization’s investment in the
transfer of skills, knowledge, and attitudes from the classroom to current job
performance is estimated at between 10%–15% one year later (Austin et al.,
2006; Holton & Baldwin, 2003; Yamnill, & McLean, 2001).
The literature clearly indicates that many managers who were previously
in direct service positions frequently suffer from a case of “tunnel vision”
that limits their capacity to effectively manage employees (Patti & Austin,
1977). As Patti (2003) states, “poorly socialized and inadequately informed
graduates send an unfortunate message to the field” (p. 7). And, by applying
direct practice skills to managerial problems, the staff and organizations they
manage could be adversely affected.
ANALYSIS-DIRECT PRACTICE AND MANAGEMENT SKILLS
Many of the fundamental skills being taught in the foundation year are
the ones most needed to effectively provide direct services to clients and
to effectively manage people. The generalist focus of the foundation year
has required that students acquire skills generic in nature and applicable to
multiple settings and situations, including management. In their respective
studies, Menefee and Thompson (1994), Martin et al. (1999), and Hoefer
(2003) reached similar conclusions by identifying the skills that managers of
human service organizations most frequently used were non-technical and
include: communication, supervision, facilitation, teaming, and interpersonal
skills. While technical skills were important, the authors also identified that
they were less often employed when managing human service organizations.
The only exception was Martin et al.’s (1999) study of students graduating
Bridging the Crevasse
395
with an administration concentration, who indicated that communication
and budgeting were the most important skills followed by leadership, team
building, and problem solving (p. 85).
The literature indicates that the fields of direct practice social work and
human service and business management share a set of common core skills.
Borrowing from each practice area, the following section identifies four
generic skills frequently cited as requirements to effectively provide direct
practice social work and to manage in mid-level administrative positions of
human service organizations that employ clinical social workers. Each skill
is defined with attention given to its significance and applicability in direct
practice and management, identifying the similarities and differences of each
skill, and how the different contexts have honed a specialized subset of
practice behaviors making it potentially difficult to transfer the skills from a
clinical to a managerial role.
Communication
Superb communication skills are a prerequisite to developing effective therapeutic relationships with clients, facilitating group and family meetings,
conducting interviews, negotiating and mediating conflicts, and working
effectively with other professionals (e.g., judges, physicians) (Hepworth,
Rooney, Dewberry Rooney, Strom-Gottfried, & Larsen, 2010; Sheafor et al.,
2000; Shulman, 1992; Trevithick, 2000). In fact, “verbal communication is at
the heart of social work practice” (Sheafor et al., 2000, p. 136), and if social
workers do not have the ability to communicate extremely well, their effectiveness is limited (Trevthick, 2000). Social workers in direct practice must
possess sound verbal and non-verbal forms of expressing ideas, thoughts,
and meaning through skilled questioning, paraphrasing, voice tone, facial
gestures, eye contact and “tuned in” body movements to effectively establish
rapport and convey a sense of genuineness, trust, empathy, and unconditional positive regard (Boyle, Hull, Mather, Smith, & Farley, 2006; Hepworth
et al., 2010; Shulman, 1992). Similarly, social workers in direct practice must
have the ability to accurately interpret verbal and non-verbal forms of communication and the capacity to actually experience the client’s emotional
state in an accepting and non-judgmental manner (Hepworth et al., 2010;
Shulman, 1992).
In studies measuring what managers do, communication has been consistently identified as one of the most important skills for managers to
possess (Hoefer, 2003; Martin et al., 1999; Menefee & Thompson, 1994;
Whetten & Cameron, 2011) since “80% of a manager’s time is spent in verbal communication” (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 239). Managers should
be able to: understand multiple forms and styles of communication; accurately interpret what is being communicated verbally and non-verbally; and
respond to cues appropriately. Managers who communicate effectively must
396
R. Tolleson Knee and J. Folsom
also be articulate and succinct; keep staff accurately informed (Menefee &
Thompson, 1994); minimize ambiguity when articulating goals and objectives (Whetten & Cameron, 2011); make presentations (Whetten & Cameron,
2011); respond empathically (Goleman, 1994); effectively converse with a
diverse constituency (Whetten & Cameron, 2011); and exchange information
internally and externally (Menefee & Thompson, 1994).
Similar to social workers in direct practice, effective managers should
understand that people perceive and interpret situations in a variety of ways
and that the differences can frequently lead to miscommunication. Both roles
require an ability to understand the emotional implications of difficult conversations and the capacity to monitor and manage one’s emotional state
to minimize defensive reactions (Sheafor et al., 2000; Whetten & Cameron,
2011). In both positions, the listener must work to understand what is being
communicated, determine how to best present complicated information, and
monitor the affective and cognitive states of both the speaker and receiver
to accurately judge the person’s understanding of what was communicated.
Moreover, both roles require an ability to competently and quickly establish
rapport; mediate and negotiate conflicts (Whetten & Cameron, 2011); provide
sound supervision (Menefee & Thompson, 1994); establish positive working
relationships (Goleman, 1994); convey a sense of competence and confidence; accurately interpret and respond to the emotions of others (Goleman,
1994); and convey an interest in the personal and professional development
of supervisees (Austin et al., 2006)
While both professional roles require exceptional communication skills,
social workers in direct practice must fine tune a subset of communication
skills that incorporate careful attention to the nuanced verbal and nonverbal forms of communicating emotions and how thinking processes, mood
regulation, and behavior impact personal functioning. This subset of communication skills is particularly effective for gathering clinical information and
assessing a client’s emotional state. The subset of skills, however, is rarely,
if ever, needed in management. Similarly, managers’ communication skills
are situationally fine tuned and perfected through the process of developing
professional organizational relationships with clients, staff, and board members, and community relationships with legislators, community leaders, and
donors. This subset of skills requires an ability to communicate with a more
diverse group of people, within a wider range of contexts, and on a less
intimate basis.
In their study of managers who were previously employed as clinical social workers, Patti, Diedrick, Olson, and Crowell (1979) found that
the respondents had “difficulty in changing from an individual to systems perspective, a hesitancy to disengage from clinical practice, and a
tendency to treat subordinates as clients” (p.149). If a newly promoted
manager is unable to distance himself from a previous clinical role and
continues to rely on a subset of specialized communication skills that are
Bridging the Crevasse
397
therapeutic, employees could become confused and professional boundaries
blurred.
To illustrate the point further, consider two common situations where
new managers might use therapeutic communication skills and easily revert
back to their former roles. The first example involves communication skills
commonly used when facilitating group meetings. Middle managers are frequently required to facilitate meetings, small group discussions, and team
brainstorming sessions. Clinical social workers are typically skilled group
facilitators and trained to attend to interactional processes, the group’s capacity to actively explore emotional concerns, and generating positive feelings.
While the group facilitation and corresponding communication skills are an
asset for a new manager, if the focus is on group members’ cognition, affect,
or behavior, the manager will likely fail to disseminate information, instructions, and guidelines that will assist the group members in completing their
work. A similar example involves conflict resolution. If new managers use
therapeutic communication skills to resolve conflict, the focus is likely to be
on expressing feelings, which could further entrench each party’s respective position as being ‘right’ and subsequently jeopardize the possibility of
reaching a solution (Northam, 2009).
Direct practice social workers have refined the skill of communication
within a specific context and precise role, perfecting a subset of skills well
suited to clinical practice, but not to management. Unfortunately, therapeutic
communication skills often become domain dependent, are more applicable
to a client’s personal needs rather than an organization’s goals, and are difficult to cognitively reorganize to be made more useful for management
(Billing, 2007).
Problem Solving
Clinical social workers would not be employed if clients could independently
solve their personal problems. The personal problems social workers in
direct practice typically address are complex, multi-dimensional, ambiguous,
and require an ability to employ a wide array of complementary cognitive and interpersonal skills to effectively resolve them (Hepworth et al.,
2010). Prior to engaging clients in a problem-solving process, social workers in direct practice must comprehensively assess how thought processes,
coping strategies, emotional stability, family relationships, and environmental and political forces impact presenting problems. Social workers typically
implement a framework to divide the problem-solving process into sequential and manageable steps to ensure that specific actions are implemented.
Commonly used frameworks involve engaging clients in multiple phases and
include: 1) exploring and assessing presenting problems; 2) implementing a
plan of action and mutually establishing a set of goals; 3) evaluating and
monitoring progress toward goal attainment; and 4) terminating the helping
398
R. Tolleson Knee and J. Folsom
relationship (Hepworth et al., 2010; Shulman, 1992). A theoretical orientation
and specific therapeutic tools then guide the intervention in an attempt
to increase the likelihood that positive change will occur. To successfully
engage clients in the problem-solving process, the social worker must have
sound interpersonal skills and the capacity to reason abstractly and think
critically to accurately analyze complex information provided by multiple
sources (Sheafor et al., 2000). Finally, social workers in direct practice must
know the clients’ strengths and resources and be able to engage both in the
problem-solving process.
A primary responsibility of middle managers is to address problems that
staff members are unable to solve independently. The problems managers
confront are frequently complex, ambiguous, multi-faceted, and cumulative,
and originate from both within and outside of the organization (Brody, 2005;
Whetten & Cameron, 2011). To successfully solve the internal and external
problems that organizations typically face, managers frequently employ a
problem-solving framework and trace the origin of the presenting problem
by gathering information to provide a comprehensive understanding of what
led to its development. A commonly used framework involves: 1) defining
the problem, 2) generating alternative solutions, 3) evaluating and selecting an alternative, and 4) implementing and following up on the solution
(Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 175). The process of defining the problem
involves conducting an assessment and collecting factual information from
relevant sources. The information is analyzed and relevant parties are usually involved to select and implement a potential solution. Finally, managers
must evaluate how the imposed solution is impacting the problem and make
modifications as needed to increase the likelihood that the problem is solved.
Middle managers involved in organizational change employ a similar
process and framework that involves: 1) establishing a climate of positivity, 2) creating readiness for change, 3) articulating a vision of abundance,
4) generating commitment to the vision, and 5) institutionalizing the positive
change (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 543). The framework encourages the
active participation of employees impacted by the problems experienced in
the workplace in an empowering process to increase the likelihood that the
problems are resolved by the people most affected by them. To successfully solve the internal and external problems, managers must be skilled at
analyzing problems and creatively solving them.
Problem solving is a skill that social workers in direct practice and
managers share. In both roles, a similar framework is used to define the
problem, assess its origin and contributing factors, and implement a strategy and system to evaluate its success. Both positions also require an ability
to analyze complex information, use sound reasoning and judgment skills,
and to collaboratively engage the people most impacted by it. Although
problem solving is a shared skill, the subset of practice behaviors are contextually developed and subsequently best suited for their respective practice
Bridging the Crevasse
399
settings. For example, social workers in direct practice must hone a subset
of problem-solving skills tailored to the personal needs of individual clients.
The method commonly used by clinical social workers to solve or decrease
the impact of the problem involves implementing a specific therapeutic
technique (e.g., cognitive behavioral therapy) to extinguish the problematic behavior, alter thought processes, or improve emotions. The focus of
the problem-solving effort is specific to the client or client system presenting
the problem, and the solution is largely dependent on the specific needs
of the client. The focus on an individual’s needs and presenting problem
is unique to a clinical perspective and critical to ensure that the client’s
presenting problem is effectively resolved.
Managers engage in a similar assessment and problem-solving process,
but the focus of the solution is on a larger system, and the organization’s
mission and purpose will determine how the problem is perceived and subsequently solved. To help solve a client’s personal problems, social workers
in direct practice must attend to how thoughts, mood, and behavior impact
personal well-being. Managers, on the other hand, must attend to the organization’s mission and goals and be sure that problem solving consistently
support both. Managers attempting to solve a problem associated with work
productivity, for example, might contend with how negative thinking or
unproductive behavior affects a teams’ ability to complete an assignment, but
the employees’ thoughts and behaviors are secondary to finishing the project
to meet the organization’s goals. If mid-level managers revert to their former
roles and become preoccupied with the employees’ cognition or behavior,
the organization’s goals could be compromised.
Problem solving is an important skill for direct practice social workers and managers to possess. When attempting to solve problems in either
position, a framework is needed that includes careful assessment, an understanding of available resources and strengths, and an evaluation of the
solution being employed. Both positions share a common goal: solving a
specific problem. However, the contrasting perspectives of the two positions
complicate how the problem is initially framed and subsequently solved.
To successfully problem solve, new managers must understand that the
organization’s goals take precedence over individual needs.
Empowering Others
The process of “helping people, both individually and collectively, to gain
power over their lives has been a part of social work’s philosophy since its
founding” (Sheafor et al., 2000, p. 77). Clients seeking help from social workers in direct practice are often challenged by fears, negative self-concepts,
and low levels of motivation that undermine their capacity to recognize personal strengths, solve personal problems, or to learn more positive behaviors
and skills. To successfully empower clients, social workers in direct practice
400
R. Tolleson Knee and J. Folsom
must create opportunities that build on individual and collective strengths
(i.e., team, group, family) and instill a sense of confidence to limit selfdefeating thought processes or behaviors. Social workers must also counsel
and teach through guided discussions and role plays that emphasize the
knowledge, skills, wisdom, and experience clients possess, and build on
strengths, instill confidence, recognize clients’ sources of power, and teach
them how to employ personal assets in an effort to lead healthier lives
(Gutierrez, Parsons, & Cox, 1998)
Managers empower employees to help encourage productive and professional behaviors and to overcome apathy and discouragement that might
limit their ability to reach organizational goals. It is critical for managers
through their words and actions to support employees by recognizing their
strengths and creating opportunities that energize productive behaviors and
instill an intrinsic desire to complete work-related tasks (Austin et al., 2006;
Whetten & Cameron, 2011). Through supportive teaching and coaching
techniques, managers can create opportunities for employees to gain selfconfidence and initiative in a way that capitalizes on personal talents and
creativity.
While it is critical for managers to help create an empowering environment, they must also be strategic about how and when to use power to
convey to employees that they are competent, able to make choices, that
their actions have an impact and are meaningful, and that they can trust
those in power (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 447). Unfortunately, some
managers might view empowering others as a threat to their own power and
a recipe for anarchy, subsequently becoming less empowering, more top
down, and autocratic when organizations are unstable (Whetten & Cameron,
2011), which can be commonplace in human services.
Empowerment is a skill shared by clinical social workers and managers
to help clients and employees better understand and capitalize on their talents and to reach their fullest potential. Both must create an environment
that conveys a sense of trust and recognizes the strengths, competencies,
and choice-making opportunities available. The subtle contextual differences
that exist between the positions are largely based on well-established perspectives. Direct practice social workers should consistently support and
encourage thinking processes and behaviors that further clients’ personal
growth and capacity to overcome obstacles that have previously limited
them. Managers must also foster a supportive environment that encourages
personal and professional development as long as it supports the organization’s mission and goals. If new managers revert to their previous role
and corresponding perspective by primarily focusing on individual needs
rather than organizational goals, the agency’s mission could be compromised and the nature of the professional relationship blurred. To illustrate
further, consider when staff members request a 10-hour a day, four-day
workweek. If new managers respond to the employees’ personal needs
Bridging the Crevasse
401
by immediately saying ‘yes’ or encouraging them to collectively advocate
executive management for a policy change, the manager’s actions has the
potential to: negatively impact the work of senior management; violate regulatory requirements established by licensing and accreditation agencies;
negatively affect the workload and morale of staff who remain on a fiveday schedule; and decrease the availability of services for clients who can
only meet on the days staff are now absent. Unfortunately, in this situation, the manager’s immediate approval or efforts to empower employees
by encouraging them to advocate for their personal needs could have a
backlash and very well disempower the organization and the clients it
serves.
It is important for new managers to carefully discern how and when
to empower staff members, bearing in mind that the skill of empowering
employees requires a systems perspective and recognizing that the personal
needs of supervisees are secondary to organizational goals. By reverting back
to a clinical role and corresponding individual perspective by empowering
staff the same way clients were empowered, managers could jeopardize the
organization’s mission and professional relationships.
Self-Awareness
Self-awareness is a critical skill that social workers in direct practice should
possess and continually hone to understand how personal biases, emotional
triggers, assumptions, and values will either aid or hinder their capacity
to work effectively with clients. The ability to internally monitor personal
thoughts and emotions can increase one’s capacity to understand how
a client’s thoughts and emotions could impact their behaviors and personal lives. Being continually self-reflexive and knowing what aspects of
self can be utilized is also identified as crucial to the therapeutic relationship (Cooper & Granucci Lesser, 2002). The 2008 Educational Planning and
Assessment System (EPAS) also reinforces the importance of self-awareness
and encourages a curriculum whereby social workers “gain sufficient selfawareness to eliminate the influence of personal biases and values in
working with diverse groups” (CSWE, 2008, EP 2.1.4).
Social workers in direct practice should understand what personal traits
limit and benefit the therapeutic relationship and under what conditions
one is most and least able to demonstrate empathy, flexibility, hopefulness, compassion, and self-determination (Sheafor et al., 2000). High levels
of self-awareness guide how the use of self, self-disclosure, and counter
transference might help or hinder the therapeutic relationship. By understanding personal feelings that result from hearing a client’s life story or
through the client’s immediate behaviors, better diagnoses and corresponding treatment can occur (Cooper & Granucci Lesser, 2002). If a social worker
in direct practice cannot introspect or actively self-examine the impact of
402
R. Tolleson Knee and J. Folsom
personal cognition, emotions, and behavior, the therapeutic relationship can
be negatively affected (Sheafor et al., 2000; Shulman, 1992).
Whetten and Cameron (2011) identify self-awareness as one of the most
important skills to develop since it impacts so many managerial responsibilities. The authors contend that in order for managers to understand and
lead others, they must first be able to self-manage and understand how personal thoughts, feelings, behaviors, values, assumptions, and expectations,
to name a few, impact their lives and how each might affect the lives of
others. The Center for Creative Leadership reinforces the importance of selfawareness and identifies it as a critical skill and one that helps to: put people
at ease; strike a healthy balance between personal lives and work; build and
maintain relationships; and confront problem employees and manage organizational change (Leslie, 2003). In the book Emotional Intelligence, Goleman
(1994) also identifies self awareness as crucial to: 1) understanding how
personal thoughts, feelings, and reactions might impact decision making;
2) identifying strengths and weaknesses; 3) maintaining a positive outlook;
4) self-regulation; and 5) successfully building and maintaining relationships.
Becoming more self-aware and understanding personal strengths has also
become a national phenomenon as such best-selling books as Strengths
Finder 2.0 and Strength-based Leadership has helped business and nonprofit
managers and leaders to increase self-awareness and to identify and better understand the value of personal strengths, determine how to build on
assets, and develop the capacity to identify and build on the strengths of
others (Rath, 2007). Managers who possess strong self-awareness skills and
are willing to continually improve them have the necessary foundation to
successfully acquire other important management-related skills (Whetten &
Cameron, 2011).
Clinical social workers and managers must understand how personal
characteristics affect their ability to accurately understand and respond to
others. Self-awareness and the ongoing disciplined practice of reflecting
on how personality traits impact professional relationships are critical to
both positions. The skill, however, has subtle differences if developed as
a direct practice social worker or as a manager. For example, the nature
of the therapeutic relationship and the clinical social workers’ focus on
personal problems experienced by individual clients shapes self-awareness
skills that are more therapeutically confined and center on intra- and interpersonal processes and how each might impact emotional stability and the
capacity to remain objective when analyzing the cognitions and emotions
of clients. Since direct practice social workers perform few managerial tasks,
self-awareness is likely to be less developed in such areas as: developing and
maintaining professional relationships with community leaders and power
groups; managing the politics that impact the organization’s goals; addressing organizational conflict; confronting or disciplining staff; and conducting
performance evaluations.
Bridging the Crevasse
403
The self-reflexive skills developed as a direct practice social worker
are an asset and can be similarly applied as a manager. The process of
introspection, however, should shift from how personal values, beliefs, and
former experiences impact the therapeutic relationship, emotional health,
and capacity for professional objectivity to how these and related items are
likely to affect the ability to build and maintain professional relationships
within and outside the organization and impact one’s capacity to create the
conditions that help to promote the organization’s success.
Summary
Communication, problem solving, empowering others, and self-awareness
are skills that social workers in direct practice and middle managers must
possess to effectively execute their responsibilities. While each skill is
required in both positions, transferring the skills into management is difficult if each was initially learned as a micro practice skill and subsequently
perfected within the context of addressing personal problems experienced
by individuals, couples, and families. Furthermore, the 2008 EPAS encourages schools of social work to create explicit curriculums that “respond to
contexts that shape practice” to ensure that:
. . . social workers are informed, resourceful, and proactive in responding
to evolving organizational, community, and societal contexts at all levels
of practice. Social workers recognize the context of practice is dynamic,
and use knowledge and skill to respond proactively.” (EP2.1.9)
In order for social workers to become more contextually competent and able
to transfer their skills from direct practice to management, schools of social
work and human service organizations will need to make specific changes.
What follows is a set of recommendations to help both improve with that
transition.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The first recommendation is a reiteration of what was proposed by Martin
et al. (1999) and involves modifying the way foundational direct practice
courses are taught. To help more social workers successfully transition from
direct practice to management and to maximize the versatility of foundational core skills it is important for faculty to clearly identify how the skills
apply to management. If such skills as communication, problem solving,
empowering others, and self-awareness are purposefully confined within
the parameters of direct practice, students will have a limited ability to
implement them in other professional contexts (Billing, 2007). By providing
404
R. Tolleson Knee and J. Folsom
clear examples, case studies, experiential activities, or reflective exercises the
instructor can demonstrate how, for example, active listening can apply to a
client being counseled and also pertain to an employee who is complaining
about unfair workloads or vacation time. The instructor, however, should
understand the versatility of active listening and its application in multiple
settings rather than its sole application to individuals, couples, or families.
By creating multiple contexts and opportunities for students to apply the
skill, then its transferability will increase from one setting to another (Billing,
2007).
The responsibility to improve the versatility of core skills should not rest
solely with faculty teaching the foundational practice courses. Most professors, especially ones new to academia, strive to match their course objectives,
learning competencies, and content to the program’s mission and guiding
philosophy. When programs choose to be micro- or macro-focused, it automatically establishes precedence for its course content. Clinical programs
might offer concentrations in macro practice or administration, but the literature suggests that foundational course content is more focused on individuals
and families (Ezell, 2004; Martin et al., 1999). Rather than widening the chasm
between the two areas of practice, deans and directors should help to ensure
that the foundation year is truly generalist and that the program philosophy
and academic climate reflects a commitment to finding common ground
between direct practice and management rather than reinforcing a division
between the two.
Most schools of social work provide opportunities for professional
development to clinical social workers, supervisors, and managers as
their careers evolve and career-related responsibilities and interests evolve.
Many schools have also partnered with human service organizations to
develop management training programs specifically designed to address the
specialized needs of the organization and the clients it serves.
Private businesses and public nonprofits have also developed internal
professional leadership programs. One that is outside of the social work
profession but could serve as an effective model for organizations seeking
to develop internal programs in partnership with a local university has been
developed within the Baylor Health Care System in Dallas, Texas. As one of
the largest health care employers in the nation with 4,000 affiliated physicians, Baylor developed a three-tier leadership program to help clinically
trained physicians further develop their management and leadership skills.
The three levels include:
1) A one-day course early in physicians’ entry into leadership roles (e.g.,
team/committee members), so they understand that direct clinical responsibilities are one facet of their job and another important role is to manage
and lead teams of health care providers to ensure that the patient’s
multiple health care needs are met.
Bridging the Crevasse
405
2) Physicians who are interested in management and demonstrate strong
leadership potential can be nominated and then apply to Baylor’s
Physician Leadership Development Program, which consists of six instructional classroom days over a period of two years. Participants selected
for the program attend a course developed by Southern Methodist
University’s (SMU) Cox School of Business in collaboration with Baylor.
Following each class session, a member of Baylor’s executive leadership
team discusses how the system currently addresses such issues as financials or effective communication skills. Between course meeting times,
senior physician leaders host a dinner for the program participants who
read a case study that raises managerial concerns that physicians might
be less skilled to address (e.g., conflict, miscommunication, and creative problem solving). The group discusses the management concerns
raised in each case and considers how others might manage the situation.
The group’s composition changes each meeting time to maximize learning opportunities among colleagues with senior managers functioning as
mentors.
3) Each year one physician who applies for additional management training
is provided a scholarship to attend SMU’s MBA program.
Baylor’s leadership program was developed in response to physicians’
requests to have senior physicians who are trained in management to function in the hospital’s administrative positions. Similar to human service
agencies, the program limited the possible negative impact of clinically
trained practitioners assuming management responsibilities with no training
and little idea of what they’re getting themselves into. Level one of the program also encourages physicians to expand the parameters of their perceived
clinical responsibilities immediately by assuming an important leadership
role and by understanding that their responsibilities are to their patients,
the organization, and the teams that provide care. Level two responds to
physicians’ intellectual curiosity and the hospital’s desire to build internal
leadership by developing a partnership with a local university and by utilizing its internal expertise and administrative resources. The six-day program
and interspersed roundtable discussions recognize the relevance of physicians’ technical skills and purposefully integrates skill development processes
in such lesser developed areas as communication, mediation, and conflict
resolution (Paul Convery, MD, MMM, senior vice-president and chief medical officer, Baylor Health Care System, personal interview, December 29,
2010). Human service organizations agencies might benefit from developing university partnerships and internal management training programs to
help foster professional development, promote leadership skills, and retain
talented clinical social workers by transitioning them into management
positions.
406
R. Tolleson Knee and J. Folsom
CONCLUSION
The well-established trend of students choosing direct practice in graduate
school and as an initial career, followed by opportunities to be promoted
to management, is likely to continue. To help offset the negative impacts
experienced by human service organizations who promote them, schools
of social work should play a leadership role by finding ways to increase
the versatility and transferability of core social work skills and by assisting
human service organizations to educate and train better managers. In spite of
the fact that most graduates are educated for and employed in direct practice,
today’s organizational hierarchies are much flatter and demand that more
employees share in executing some management responsibilities. As a result,
social workers in direct practice will be required to assume some managerial
responsibilities upon hire and many more as their careers evolve. Because
of this reality, it is imperative that their core skills are not too narrowly
imbedded in direct practice.
NOTE
The terms clinical and direct practice are used synonymously throughout the paper. The terms middle
manager and manager are also used synonymously throughout the paper.
REFERENCES
Austin, M. J., & Ezell, M. (2004). Educating future social work administrators.
Administration in Social Work, 28(1), 1–3.
Austin, M. J., Weisner, S., Schrandt, E., Glezos-Bell, S., & Murtaza, N. (2006).
Exploring the transfer of learning from an executive development program for
human services managers. Administration in Social Work, 30(2), 71–90.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Orrville, OH: Prentice Hall.
Billing, D. (2007). Teaching for transfer of core/key skills in higher education:
Cognitive skills. Higher Education 53, 483–516.
Bogo, M., Michalski, J., Raphael, D., & Roberts, R. (1995). Practice interests and selfidentification among social work students: Changes over the course of graduate
social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 31(2), 228–246.
Boyle, S. W., Hull, G. H., Mather, J.H., Smith, L.L., & Farley, O. W. (2006). Direct
practice in social work. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Brody, R. (2005). Effectively managing human service organizations (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Butler, A. (1990). A reevaluation of students’ career interests: Grounds for optimism.
Journal of Social Work Education, 26, 45–56.
Cooper, M. G., & Granucci Lesser, J. (2002). Clinical social work practice: An
integrated approach. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Bridging the Crevasse
407
Council on Social Work Education. (2008). Educational policy and accreditation
standards. Washington, DC: Author.
Ezell, M., Cheresky, R. H., & Healy, L. M. (2004). The learning climate for administration students. Administration in Social Work 28(1),
57–76.
Farmer, H. S. (1997). Diversity and women’s career development. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Goleman, D. P. (1994). Emotional intelligence. New York, NY. Bantam Books.
Gutierrez, L., Parsons, R. J., & Cox, E. (1998). Empowerment in social work practice:
A source book. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Hepworth, D. H., Rooney, R. H., Dewbery Rooney, G., Strom-Gottfried, K. &
Larsen, J. (2010) Direct social work practice: Theory and skills (8th ed.). Belmont,
CA: Brooks/Cole.
Hoefer, R. (2003). Administrative skills and degrees: The “best place” debate rages
on. Administration in Social Work 27(1), 25–46.
Holton, E. F., & Baldwin, T. T. (Eds). (2003). Improving learning transfer in
organizations. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass Publishers.
Leslie, J. (2003). Leadership skills and emotional intelligence. Research synopsis 1.
Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
Limb, G. E., & Organista, K. C. (2006). Change between entry and graduation student
views on social work’s traditional mission, career motivations, and practice preferences: Caucasian, student of color, and American Indian group comparisons.
Journal of Social Work Education, 42(2), 269–290.
Martin, M. E., Pine, B. A. and Healy, L. M. (1999). Mining our strengths. Journal of
Teaching in Social Work, 18(1), 73–97.
Menefee, D. T., & Thompson, J. J. (1994). Identifying and comparing competencies
for social work management: A practice-driven approach. Administration in
Social Work, 18(3), 1–25.
Menefee, D. T. (2000). What managers do and why they do it. In R. Patti. (Ed.), The
handbook of social welfare management (pp. 247–266). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Mor Barak, M. E., Travis, D., & Bess, G. (2004). Exploring managers’ and administrators’ retrospective perceptions of their MSW fieldwork experience: A national
study. Administration in Social Work, 28(1), 21–44.
Neugeboren, B. (1986). Systemic barriers to education in social work administration.
Administration in Social Work, 10(2), 1–14.
Northam, S. (2009). Conflict in the workplace: Part 2. American Journal of Nursing
109(7), 65–67.
Patti, R. J., & Austin, M. J. (1977). Socializing the direct service practitioner in the
ways of supervisory management, Administration in Social Work 1(3), 267–280.
Patti, R., Diedreck, E. Olson, D., & Crowell, J. (1979). From direct practice to administration: A study of social workers’ transitions from clinical to management
roles: Part I: Analysis. Administration in Social Work, 3(2), 131–151.
Patti, R. (2000). Handbook of social welfare management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Patti, R. (2000). The landscape of social welfare management. In R. Patti (Ed.), The
handbook of human services management (2nd ed.) (pp. 1–25). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
408
R. Tolleson Knee and J. Folsom
Patti, R. J. (2003). Reflections on the state of management in social work.
Administration in Social Work 27(2), 1–11.
Patti, R. J. (2009). Management in the human services: Purposes, practice, and
prospects in the 21st century. In R. J. Patti (Ed.), The handbook of human services
management (2nd ed.) (pp. 3–28), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Patti, R. J. (Ed). (2009). The handbook of human services management (2nd ed.)
Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Pine, B. A., & Healy, L. M. (1994). Is state licensing an obstacle to social work students’ selection of macro practice as a specialization? In M. J. Austin & J. I. Lowe
(Eds.), Controversial issues in communities and organizations (pp. 267–273).
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Raymond, G. T., Teare, R. J., & Atherton, C. R. (1996). Do management tasks differ
by field of practice? Administration in Social Work, 20(1), 17–30.
Rubin, A., & Johnson, P. J. (1984). Direct practice interests of entering MSW students.
Journal of Education for Social Work, 20, 5–16.
Rubin, A., Johnson, P. J., & DeWeaver, K. L. (1986). Direct practice interests of MSW
students: Changes from entry to graduation. Journal of Social Work Education,
22, 98–108.
Schwartz, S., & Dattalo, P. (1990). Factors affecting student selection of macro
specializations. Administration in Social Work, 14(3), 83–96.
Sheafor, B. W., Horejsi, C. R., & Horejsi, G. A. (2000). Techniques and guidelines for
social work practice (5th ed). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Shulman, L. S. (1992). The skills of helping individuals, families, and groups (3rd ed.).
Itasca, IL: Peacock.
Skidmore, R. A. (1995). Social work administration: Dynamic management and
human relationships (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Super, D. E. (1990). A life span, life-space approach to career development. In
D. Brown & L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and development (2nd ed.). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey–Bass.
Thompson, J., Menefee, D., & Marley, M. (1999). A comparative analysis of social
workers’ macro practice activities: Identifying functions common to direct
practice and administration. Journal of Social Work Education, 35(1), 115–124.
Trevithick, P. (2000) Social work skills: A practice handbook. Philadelphia, PA: Open
University Press.
Whetten D. A., & Cameron, K.S. (2011) Developing management skills (8th ed). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Wunenschel, P. (2006). The diminishing role of social work administrators in social
service agencies. Administration in Social Work, 30(4), 5–18.
Yamnill, S., & McLean, G. N. (2001). Theories supporting transfer of training. Human
Resource Development Quarterly, 12(2), 195–208.
The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare
Volume 37
Issue 3 September
Article 7
2010
Social Work and Civic Engagement: The Political
Participation of Professional Social Workers
Rome
Susan Hoechstetter
Alliance for Justice
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/jssw
Part of the Civic and Community Engagement Commons, Politics and Social Change Commons,
and the Social Work Commons
Recommended Citation
Rome and Hoechstetter, Susan (2010) "Social Work and Civic Engagement: The Political Participation of Professional Social
Workers," The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare: Vol. 37: Iss. 3, Article 7.
Available at: http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/jssw/vol37/iss3/7
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Social Work at
ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact
maira.bundza@wmich.edu.
Social Work and Civic Engagement:
The Political Participation of
Professional Social Workers
SUNNY
HARRIS
ROME
George Mason University
Department of Social Work
SUSAN HOECHSTETTER
Alliance for Justice
This article examines the involvement of practicing social workers
in one type of civic engagement: the use of political processes to
promote the public good. Based on a survey of 1,274 randomly selected members of NASW, this is the largest study to date examining the involvement of social workers in political action and policy
advocacy. Findings suggest that approximately half of social workers demonstrate high levels of participation in the policy process.
The authorsanalyze the frequency with which respondents engage
in specific political and policy-relatedactivities, and compare these
results to those of other studies. They also examine respondents'attitudes toward political participationand share recommendations
for increasingthis aspect of civic engagement within the profession.
Key words: Policy, advocacy, civic engagement
Despite its great promise, the new millennium has witnessed the continued erosion of benefits and services for populations at risk (Parrott, Cox, Tristi, & Rice, 2008). In addition
we face war and alienation abroad, an economic crisis and
new hazards for immigrants at home, and profound threats to
our civil liberties. In the face of these challenges, scholars and
Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, September 2010, Volume XXXVII, Number 3
107
108
Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare
activists have decried America's low levels of civic engagement. Distrust of government runs high, with turnout at
the polls hovering around 45% for non-Presidential federal
elections (Day & Holder, 2004) and topping off at 60-64% in
Presidential races (Holder, 2006). The 9/11 tragedy boosted
trust in government temporarily (Putnam, 2002), but the gains
were short-lived. Even at their height, positive attitudes failed
to generate concomitant changes in behavior. The tide may be
turning, however. The Presidential elections of 2004 and 2008
generated larger voter turnouts than at any time in the previous forty years (Wolf, 2008), with voters in 2008 representing
unprecedented racial and ethnic diversity (Lopez & Taylor,
2008).
As social workers who value social justice and human
rights, we have an ethical responsibility to participate in civic
life by advocating for compassionate leaders and constructive
social policies. This obligation appears explicitly in the NASW
Code of Ethics:
Social workers should engage in social and political
action that seeks to ensure that all people have equal
access to the resources, employment, services, and
opportunities they require to meet their basic human
needs and to develop fully. Social workers should be
aware of the impact of the political arena on practice and
should advocate for changes in policy and legislation to
improve social conditions in order to meet basic human
needs and promote social justice. (1999, Sec. 6.04)
The Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards of
the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE, 2008) and the
International Federation of Social Workers' mission statement
(IFSW, 2005) similarly testify to the importance of political
action. This emphasis is a natural outgrowth of social work's
long history of involvement in championing important social
causes.
Commitment to social and political action has taken many
forms within the social work community. Some choose public
service. There are currently ten social workers who are members
of the U.S. Congress and sixty-eight who hold statewide office
(NASW, 2008). Social workers also serve as staff in national,
Social Work and Civic Engagement
109
state, and local legislative offices. Others work as advocates or
lobbyists. Meanwhile, policy practice has gained some currency in social work education with faculty teaching courses, requiring assignments, and providing practicum experiences in
political and policy settings (Anderson & Harris, 2005; Hoefer,
1999; Sundet & Kelly, 2002; Wolk, Pray, Weismiller & Dempsey,
1996).
Review of the Literature
Most research examining the political participation of social
workers has sought to identify whether or not social workers
are politically active, what characteristics distinguish those
who are highly active from those who are not, and how social
workers express their political involvement. Several studies
have concluded that social workers, as a group, are more politically active than the general population (Parker & Sherraden,
1991; Ritter, 2007; Wolk, 1981). A number have categorized
respondents into those who are inactive, active, and highly
active. Replicating an earlier study by Wolk (1981), Ezell (1993)
found that the proportion of politically active social workers
had increased by nearly 20% over the course of a decade, from
66% to 85.7%. In a more recent study using a different measurement scale, Ritter (2007) found only 46% of her national
sample of social workers to be active or very active in political
affairs.
The relationship between various demographic characteristics and level of political participation has been examined in
a number of studies. Those found to be more active include
African Americans (Ezell, 1993; Reeser & Epstein, 1990; Wolk,
1981), NASW members (Ezell, 1993; Hamilton & Fauri, 2001),
macro practitioners (Ezell, 1993; Reeser & Epstein, 1990; Wolk,
1981), those with higher levels of education (Ezell, 1993; Parker
& Sherraden, 1991; Wolk, 1981), those who are older (Wolk,
1981), those with higher salaries (Wolk, 1981), those who own
their own homes (Parker & Sherraden, 1991), and those with
more years of professional experience (Ezell, 1993).
Finally, researchers have attempted to identify the specific
activities in which social workers are most likely to engage.
Because different researchers have employed different subjects, scales, definitions, and time frames, readers should
110
Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare
exercise caution in comparing results across studies. Instead,
the findings are useful in painting a picture of what seem to
be common trends. Studies that have asked about "voting"
(Hamilton & Fauri, 2001; Parker & Sherraden, 1991; Ritter, 2007)
found it to be the single most common activity, even compared
to other forms of electoral participation. "Contacting legislators" and "belonging to organizations that take a stand on political issues" were also among the most common (Ezell, 1993;
Hamilton & Fauri, 2001; Ritter, 2007; Wolk, 1981). At the other
end of the scale were "campaigning" and "testifying," which
consistently ranked last (Ezell, 1993; Hamilton & Fauri, 2001;
Parker & Sherraden, 1991; Ritter, 2007; Wolk, 1981).
Despite its importance, there remains little scholarly literature on the topic of civic engagement among social work
professionals. Increasing our understanding of whether, how,
and why social workers use political processes to promote the
public good is critical to identifying strategies for increasing
social work's influence in important policy debates affecting
vulnerable client groups. The descriptive study presented in
this article adds to the growing body of literature on this topic
in several ways. First, it is one of the few to use a national
sample. Most have relied upon subgroups of social workers:
members of a single NASW chapter, licensed social workers
within a single state, NASW chapter directors, etc. Second, this
study features the largest sample size to date. With the exception of Reeser (1986), sample sizes have fallen in the 200-400
range, averaging about 350 respondents. This study is based
on 1,274 valid responses. Third, the activity scale used here is
more detailed than those used in other studies, addressing a
larger number of activities and permitting finer distinctions in
terms of frequency. Finally, this study includes a set of questions about social workers' attitudes toward political participation that adds a new dimension to previous research findings.
Method
A self-administered, self-report questionnaire was developed by the authors in 2000, and pre-tested with social work
colleagues and students. Final revisions were made, and the
instrument-together with a cover letter and business-reply
Social Work and Civic Engagement
111
envelope-was subsequently sent by first-class mail to a computer-generated list of 3,000 randomly-selected "regular"
members of NASW. Four weeks later a follow-up mailing,
including cover letter, duplicate survey instrument, and reply
envelope, was sent to those who had failed to respond to the
initial mailing. Surveys returned by the post office as "undeliverable" were excluded, as were surveys completed by respondents indicating they were not currently practicing social
workers. A total of 1,274 valid responses were obtained, for a
return rate of 43%.
The instrument is divided into three sections. The first contains a series of 20 statements representing various types of
political activity. The activities were derived from two sources:
some were based on those used in other studies; others were
suggested by the direct experience of the researchers, both of
whom are former registered lobbyists. Respondents were asked
to signal how often they engage in each activity listed, using
a Likert scale of "never," "rarely," "sometimes," "often," and
"always." The second section contains a list of 22 statements
expressing attitudes or beliefs regarding political participation
and social work. Respondents were asked to indicate their level
of agreement with each statement by marking "strongly disagree," "disagree," "no opinion," "agree," or "strongly agree."
The final section asks for demographic information concerning
educational background, practice background, age, sex, and
political party affiliation. There is also an open-ended question
soliciting additional thoughts regarding political participation
and social work practice.
Frequencies and cross-tabulations were computed using
SPSS, allowing for percentage comparisons. A content analysis
was performed on the responses to the open-ended question
using open-source coding and categorization to identify recurrent themes.
Characteristics of Respondents
The vast majority of respondents (93.8%) hold an MSW
degree. The modal length of time in social work practice is 1120 years. Approximately 78% identify as female and 22% as
male. The largest age concentration (40.8%) is in the 46-55 year
112
Journal of Sociology &Social Welfare
old category. Slightly more than 70% of respondents identify
themselves as Democrats. Independents (12.4%) outnumber
Republicans (7.9%). Those reporting no political party affiliation represent 6.4%. In addition, several respondents identified themselves as having run for, having held, or currently
holding elective office.
The largest cohort of respondents indicates working in
nonprofit agencies (33.4%), followed in descending order by
public agencies (25.9%), private clinical practice (23.8%), and
for-profit settings (12.5%). Most (86.2%) work in urban or
suburban areas. Nearly half (45.7%) are employed in health
or mental health settings, including private/group practice,
mental health facilities, and hospitals. Only 7% work for advocacy or membership organizations. Of the entire sample, 61.8%
identify themselves as direct service providers. The clients
served are largely lower and middle income (84.5%), with very
few respondents primarily serving upper income clients.
Results
An overall rating of political participation was devised,
based on the list of identified behaviors. Scores were divided
into "high" and "low," reflecting the frequency with which
respondents engaged in each political activity. Slightly fewer
than half (46.6%) of respondents fell in the "high" range, while
slightly more than half (53.4%) fell in the "low" range.
Comparing rates of overall participation to various respondent characteristics yielded few significant differences.
There was no discernable difference in level of activity related
to issues of personal interest versus issues of professional interest. Respondents with a BSW degree were equally divided
between the high and low categories, as were respondents with
an MSW degree. Only doctoral level preparation showed a difference, with 75% of those with doctoral degrees falling in the
"high" category compared with 25% in the "low" category.
Age and years of social work practice experience both were
positively correlated with civic engagement. The older the respondent, the more likely to be highly involved in political
activity; similarly, the more years of social work practice experience, the more likely to be highly involved. Respondents
Social Work and Civic Engagement
113
employed in the public sector showed the highest percentages
of political activity (equally divided between the "high" and
"low" categories), followed in order by those in nonprofit agencies, those in private clinical practice, and those in for-profit
agencies (one-third of whom were in the "high" category and
two-thirds of whom were in the "low" category). In terms of
employment setting, those with the strongest showing in the
"high" category work in universities (86.3%) and advocacy/
membership organizations (85.7%). Those with the lowest
overall participation rates work in nursing homes (25% in the
"high" category), correctional facilities (22.2%), and substance
abuse programs (17.6%).
In addition to overall participation, frequencies were calculated for each individual behavior in order to get a clearer
picture of how social workers participate in civic life (See Table
1). The most common activities, defined as those engaged
in "often" or "always" by more than half the respondents,
include: voting (95.0%), keeping up with the news (89.2%),
knowing who represents them in state and national government (79.4% and 85.3% respectively), encouraging friends,
neighbors, or colleagues to vote (67.0%), monitoring legislation of interest (58.0%), sharing political opinions with others
(54.6%), and discussing current policy issues with others
(53.6%). The least common activities include: participating in
(7.8%), helping to organize (3.4%), or encouraging others to
attend (9.5%) rallies, marches, or demonstrations; voicing opinions through the media (7.1%); attending or testifying at hearings (11.5% and 4.3% respectively); actively campaigning for
a candidate (13.4%); contacting legislators (17.9%); participating in community groups that seek to influence policy (18.2%);
and keeping track of how legislators vote (26.7%). Particularly
noteworthy is that more than 40% of respondents report never
having attended a rally, march, or demonstration; nearly half
(48.2%) have never contacted the media; and more than twothirds (68.3%) have never testified at a public hearing.
Respondents were also asked about their attitudes and
opinions regarding participation in the political process. For
ease of reporting, responses have been organized into three
thematic categories: Professional Role, Perceived Influence,
and Educational Preparation. In a few cases where statements
114
Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare
Table 1. Frequency of Participation in Specific Activities
I vote on election day
1269
I encourage others to vote on
election day
10
(0.8)
11
(0.9)
43
(3.4)
264
(21.0)
941
(74.0)
45
(4.0)
100
(8.0)
267
(21.0)
385
(30.0)
471
(37.0)
I share my political opinions with
others
126
25
(2.0)
86
(7.0)
463
(36.6)
463
(36.6)
227
(18.0)
I actively campaign for candidates
of my choice
1266
384
(30.3)
411
(32.5)
302
(23.9)
105
(8.3)
64
(5.1)
I read, listen to, or watch the news
1271
9
(0.7)
23
(1.8)
105
(8.3)
348
(27.4)
786
(61.8)
I know who represents me in the
state capital
1266
14
(1.1)
50
(3.9)
197
(15.6)
364
(28.8)
641
(50.6)
I know who represents me in
Congress
1265
10
(0.8)
42
(3.3)
134
(10.6)
318
(25.1)
761
(60.2)
I follow the progress of legislation
that interests me
1265
31
(2.5)
120
(9.5)
381
(30.1)
460
(36.4)
273
(21.6)
I discuss current policy issues with
others
1269
35
(2.8)
114
(9.0)
440
(34.7)
489
(38.5)
191
(15.1)
I attend public hearings on issues
that interest me
1269
402
(31.7)
418
(32.9)
304
(24.0)
105
(8.3)
40
(3.2)
I contact my legislators to share my
opinion on policy issues
1266
209
(16.5)
397
(31.4)
434
(34.3)
177
(14.0)
49
(3.9)
I keep track of how my legislators
vote on issues that interest me
1269
170
(13.4)
327
(25.8)
434
(34.2)
256
(20.2)
82
(6.5)
I participate in political rallies,
marches, etc.
1264
513
(40.6)
396
(31.3)
257
(20.3)
64
(5.1)
34
(2.7)
I encourage others to participate in
political rallies, marches, etc.
1265
513
(40.6)
379
(30.0)
254
(20.1)
78
(6.2)
41
(3.2)
I help organize political rallies,
marches, etc.
1266
906
(71.6)
235
(18.6)
83
(6.6)
21
(1.7)
21
(1.7)
I testify at federal, state, or local
hearings
1263
863
(68.3)
220
(17.4)
125
(9.9)
42
(3.3)
13
(1.0)
I participate in community groups
that seek to influence policy
1265
355
(28.1)
342
(27.0)
338
(26.7)
166
(13.1)
64
(5.1)
I voice my opinions on policy
issues to media outlets
1261
608
(48.2)
331
(26.2)
233
(18.5)
69
(5.5)
20
(1.6)
I take an active role in relation to
issues that affect my clients
1242
137
(11.0)
314
(25.3)
455
(36.6)
267
(21.5)
69
(5.6)
I take an active role in relation to
issues that affect me personally
1261
129
(10.2)
291
(23.1)
506
(40.1)
255
(20.2)
80
(6.3)
Social Work and Civic Engagement
115
were phrased in the negative (to avoid acquiescent response
set), they are re-phrased in the positive to allow for comparative analysis. The items comprising Professional Role are displayed in Table 2. A full 87.5% disagreed or strongly disagreed
with the contention that it is unethical for social workers to be
involved in politics, demonstrating that the vast majority find it
ethically acceptable. Of the seven remaining statements, more
than half the respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the
first five, affirming the relevance of political action to their jobs
and recognizing their professional obligation to stay informed,
educate others, and advocate for constructive policies. The remaining two statements apparently were more problematic.
Table 2. Professional Role and Political Participation
N
(Valid
Responses)
SD
D
N
A
SA
It is unethical for social
workers to be involved in
politics
1238
651
(52.6)
432
(34.9)
115
(9.3)
29
(2.3)
11
(0.9)
I consider it my professional
obligation to stay informed
about changes in social
policy
1264
11
(0.9)
35
(2.8)
106
(8.4)
692
(54.8)
420
(33.2)
Every social worker has an
obligation to promote policies that benefit their clients
1240
36
(2.9)
140
(11.3)
255
(20.6)
564
(45.5)
245
(19.8)
I wish I had enough time to
advocate for policy changes
affecting my practice or my
clients
1232
47
(3.8)
144
(11.7)
267
(21.7)
564
(45.8)
210
(17.0)
Increasing the general
public's understanding of
social policy is an integral
part of the social work role
1232
45
(3.7)
177
(14.4)
328
(26.6)
532
(43.2)
150
(12.2)
I consider political action
relevant to my job
1228
62
(5.0)
161
(13.1)
179
(14.6)
498
(40.6)
328
(26.7)
It is part of my mission to
empower my clients politically as well as personally
1228
92
(7.5)
290
(23.6)
330
(26.9)
375
(30.5)
141
(11.5)
I wish my agency would
let me be more involved in
politics
1121
145
(12.9)
276
(24.6)
512
(45.7)
131
(11.7)
57
(5.1)
SD= Strongly Disagree; D= Disagree; N= No Opinion; A= Agree; SA= Strongly Agree
116
Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare
The statement on politically empowering clients generated the
most ambivalence, with approximately 42% agreeing that it
is part of their mission, 31% disagreeing, and 27% expressing
no opinion. Finally, the statement "I wish my agency would
let me be more involved in politics" elicited stronger levels of
disagreement (27.5%) than agreement (26.8%), with 45.7% expressing no opinion.
The second theme represented by the attitude/opinion
questions concerns Perceived Influence. Responses are summarized in Table 3. These statements were designed to measure
the degree to which social workers believe they have the power
to influence policy outcomes. The vast majority of respondents
(93.4%) agreed or strongly agreed that voting is important.
Nearly 85% disagreed or strongly disagreed that influencing policy should be left to professional lobbyists, suggesting
that they potentially see a role for social work practitioners in
shaping policy outcomes. More than 65% indicated that they
believe they could influence social policy if they tried.
Table 3. Perceived Influence on Public Policy
N (Valid
Responses)
SD
D
N
A
SA
Voting is an important tool
for influencing social policy
1243
16
(1.3)
23
(1.9)
42
(3.5)
490
(39.4)
671
(54)
Influencing policy should be
left to professional lobbyists
1249
422
(33.8)
637
(51.0)
126
(10.1)
52
(4.2)
12
(1.0)
254
(20.4)
579
(46.5)
215
(17.3)
165
(13.3)
32
(2.6)
It is unlikely that I would
have much influence, even if
I tried to affect social policy
1245
SD= Strongly Disagree; D= Disagree; N= No Opinion; A= Agree; SA= Strongly Agree
Finally, several statements sought respondents' opinions
about the adequacy of their Educational Preparation for civic
engagement. These appear in Table 4. The strongest level of
agreement (78.1%) concerned the link between social work
practice and social action. This compares favorably to the 36.2%
who felt they'd had adequate guidance on integrating political
action into their professional roles. A total of 41.7% said they
wished they were more knowledgeable about how to impact
the political process, and 47.5% expressed being satisfied with
their level of political involvement.
Social Work and Civic Engagement
117
Table 4. Educational Preparation for Political Participation
N (Valid
Repose)
Responses)
My social work education
emphasized the link between
social work practice and social
action
I wish I were more knowledgeable about how to effectively
impact the political process
I believe I've had adequate
guidance on how to integrate
political action into my professional role
I am satisfied with my level of
political involvement
SD
D
N
A
SA
25
(2.0)
121
(9.7)
129
(10.3)
665
(53.2)
311
(24.9)
75
(6.0)
332
(26.7)
318
(25.6)
437
(35.2)
81
(6.5)
1243
102
(8.2)
431
(34.7)
259
(20.9)
346
(27.9)
103
(8.3)
1251
52
(4.2)
419
(33.5)
186
(14.9)
505
(40.4)
89
(7.1)
1251
1243
SD= Strongly Disagree; D= Disagree; N= No Opinion; A= Agree; SA= Strongly Agree
Discussion
The nearly equal division of respondents between high
and low overall levels of political participation is not surprising, given the breadth and diversity within the profession. It
echoes the profession's historical dual emphasis on casework
and social action. The fact that nearly half of NASW members,
nationally, are highly politically active is a positive sign, especially since some view NASW as a mainstream organization
in which social work activists may be underrepresented. The
levels of participation here are lower than those found (using
a different index) by Wolk (1981) and Ezell (1993), but very
similar to those found by Ritter (2007).
The effects of educational preparation (PhD), age, and
number of years in social work practice are consistent with
other findings. The fact that those with BSW and MSW degrees
are equally active might be considered at odds with previous
findings in which higher levels of education correlated with
higher levels of civic engagement. The finding here may be a
positive one, reflecting the attention paid to policy practice in
BSW curricula, as required by the CSWE curriculum policy
statement. Alternatively, it could be interpreted as negative,
reflecting the sometimes narrower "clinical" focus of many
118
Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare
MSW social workers. It is not surprising that public sector and
nonprofit agency employees show higher levels of involvement than those in private clinical practice or for-profit agencies. Nor is it surprising that those employed by universities
and advocacy/membership organizations show the highest
levels of participation. Of some concern, however, are the
overall low levels of participation by social workers in nursing
homes, correctional facilities, and substance abuse programssettings beset by systemic problems and often in need of policy
interventions.
Looking at the various ways in which social workers manifest their involvement in the political process, a clear pattern
emerges. With the exception of voting, the activities engaged
in most often are those that require the least amount of effort;
they could be described as passive rather than active. These
include: keeping up with the news, identifying one's legislative
representatives, following the progress of legislation, sharing
political opinions with others, and discussing policy issues
with friends and colleagues. At least half of the respondents
indicated engaging in these activities "often" or "always." By
contrast, those activities requiring greater commitment scored
lower. These include contacting legislators, actively campaigning for candidates, testifying at hearings, attending marches or
rallies, contacting the media, and joining community groups
that advocate for policy change. A similar preference for activities requiring lower, rather than higher, levels of commitment
was identified by Parker and Sherraden (1991) in their study of
electoral politics and social work participation.
Of the behaviors identified in the survey, perhaps the most
widely studied is voting. The fact that 95% of respondents indicated they vote often or always is impressive. Even accounting for possible social desirability bias, this far outstrips the
voting rate in the general population. It is, in fact, consistent
with other studies all of which show more than 90% of social
work respondents indicating they vote.
Findings on several other items were more surprising. Only
18.2% indicated that they "participate in community groups
that seek to influence local, state, or federal policy." First, this
is at odds with the findings of previous studies that identify organizational membership as one of the more common
Social Work and Civic Engagement
119
ways of expressing political involvement. Second, everyone in
the sample is a member of NASW, an organization that has
an active lobbying presence at both the national and chapter
levels. The outcome here may be a function of how the item
is worded: Perhaps most NASW members don't view their
membership as "participation"-or perhaps they don't consider NASW to be a "community group." Another possibility
is that members are unaware of NASW's role in political advocacy. This suggests that more aggressive outreach to NASW
members around the Association's policy efforts could be an
important strategy for increasing overall levels of political participation within the profession.
The other finding that seems inconsistent with previous
research is the small proportion of respondents who report
contacting their legislators. The difference might be due to the
ways in which the variable is measured across studies. For
example, 60% of social workers may have contacted a legislator
at least once during the past year (Hamilton & Fauri, 2001), but
they might not characterize this in the present study as doing
so "often" or "always." This interpretation of the data is supported by the fact that 34.3% say they contact their legislators
"sometimes" and an additional 31.4% do so "rarely." Perhaps
the findings are less inconsistent than they first appear.
Also rated surprisingly low was "participating in marches,
rallies, or demonstrations." Reeser and Epstein (1990) characterize this as one of a set of "non-institutionalized" social action
behaviors. One of their key findings is that, between the 1960s
and the 1980s, social workers increased their use of "institutionalized" methods of political participation and decreased
their engagement in "non-institutionalized" behaviors. This
finding is consistent with that pattern, yet it remains counterintuitive. With so many causes sponsoring walks and runs and
rallies (AIDS, breast cancer, genocide, suicide prevention, gun
control, gay rights, etc.), one would expect more social workers
to participate. Perhaps respondents weren't thinking of the political agendas underlying these events, but only of their social
or fundraising goals.
Consistent with other research findings, involvement in
electoral campaigns ("I actively campaign for the candidates
of my choice") scored low. This may reflect the profession's
120
Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare
lagging attention to the importance of electoral politics. Unlike
policy advocacy, electoral politics does not appear in the NASW
Code of Ethics, nor is it mentioned in the CSWE curriculum
policy statement. Some social workers remain uncomfortable
with partisan politics, believing it is unethical or "dirty"-or
mistakenly viewing it as an incursion into others' self-determination. (Haynes & Mickelson, 2010) Others may be wary of
publicly affiliating themselves with a specific party or candidate, lest they jeopardize government or foundation support
for their agencies. Social workers and social work students
should clarify their legal rights to engage in partisan politics.
Where appropriate, they can then begin with small expressions
of their own electoral convictions: by putting up a yard sign,
making a monetary contribution, sporting a bumper sticker,
etc. Though looked on as relatively minor, these behaviors are
a vital part of campaigning and may lead to more ambitious
activities.
Also consistent with previous research is the low ranking
attributed to attending or testifying at public hearings. What
is curious about this finding is that testifying is among the
policy practice exercises most often incorporated into policy
courses in schools of social work. The low numbers are likely
due to lack of opportunity to attend hearings or to testify in the
context of one's job. The work force might benefit from training that focuses on increasing social workers' comfort level
with the art of testifying. Issues of great importance to human
service agencies often are considered by state and local governing bodies. Increasing the visibility and input of professional social workers would be an invaluable asset in influencing
budget and policy outcomes that can determine the survival of
key programs and services.
Using the media is another low-scoring activity, and one
that has rarely been studied. Its importance, however, is undeniable. Political scientists have long observed that public
call-in shows on radio and television skew conservative; social
work voices are rarely heard. Fortunately, several policy textbooks now incorporate material on working with the media;
hopefully the next generation of practitioners will be more
comfortable with that role and will voice their opinions on important policy issues through strategic use of broadcast, print,
Social Work and Civic Engagement
121
and electronic media.
Finally, although more than half of respondents indicated
they often or always discuss current policy issues with friends,
neighbors, or colleagues, this is a number that can and should
be increased. This kind of discussion is critical to shaping
public opinion, and public opinion is an important determinant
of policy change. Amidei (2002) extols the virtues of talking
about the issues in public: on the subway, in the elevator, etc.
Social workers often are reticent about expressing their views.
This will require a cultural shift that should begin with social
work education. We have an obligation to be knowledgeable
and to share that knowledge (and resulting convictions) with
policy-makers and with the public.
Many social workers continue to harbor ambivalent feelings toward participation in the political process. Haynes
and Mickelson attribute this reluctance to a "perceived conflict between political ideology and professional impartiality"
(2010, p. 23). Students often express the mistaken belief that it
is unethical for social workers to be involved in politics. The
survey findings suggest, however, that among a strong majority of NASW members (87.5%), political participation is not
viewed as ethically suspect. This comfort with political action
on ethical grounds is essential; until we reach 100% agreement,
we must continue to stress the integral relationship between
political action, social work practice, and the quest for social
and economic justice.
Respondents were asked to express their views regarding
what functions are relevant to their jobs, what obligations they
hold as social work professionals, and how they perceive the
parameters of the social work role. The responses were impressive: 88% said they consider it their professional obligation to
stay informed about changes in social policy, approximately
67% said they consider political action relevant to their job,
and approximately 65% agreed that every social worker has an
obligation to promote policies that benefit his or her clients. In
regard to relevance, however, many of the clinical practitioners
expressed a different opinion in response to the open-ended
question. A typical comment was: "In my opinion, community
action is far removed from clinical practice." Another mental
health professional wrote, "Politics is not much relevant to the
122
Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare
day-to-day issues in my practice."
Comparing beliefs to action reveals some disparities; despite
positive attitudes, fewer than half of the respondents demonstrated high overall levels of political participation. It is likely
that lack of time is one explanation: 62.8% said they wished
they had enough time to advocate for policy changes affecting
their practice or their clients. Lack of time also emerged as a
theme in the analysis of the responses to the open-ended question. The responsibilities of parenthood emerged as another.
As one respondent wrote, "Since the birth of my baby, my time
and energy are devoted to the politics at home! It feels impossible to march in D.C. like I did when I was in grad school. I
suppose this is an area I will return to when my life changes
again." The effect of agency rules and expectations is less clear.
While only 6.8% indicated that they wish their agency would
let them be more involved in politics, this could reflect one of
two things: either their agencies already do permit their political involvement, or they lack interest in becoming more
politically involved. Greater levels of concern about agency
constraints surfaced in response to the open-ended question,
largely among public employees. In some cases the agency's
position seems to depend on the particular issues involved.
For example:
I believe my state agency (public health) is quite
paranoid about lawsuits and doesn't encourage
political action. An exception was when there was a
threat to privatize all home health in the state. With
agency leadership, we individual workers contacted
fellows in other agencies and clients to write, call and
testify at the state Congressional level.
Perhaps the most interesting responses were to the statement: "It is part of my mission to empower my clients politically as well as personally." While 42% agreed, more than 30%
disagreed and more than one-fourth expressed no opinion. The
role of social workers in encouraging clients to be politically
active-as distinct from advocating on their behalf-is an area
that deserves further investigation. Although our profession
subscribes to client empowerment as a fundamental practice
goal, how we operationalize it remains unclear. This is an area
Social Work and Civic Engagement
123
of enormous promise that could help give our clients a voice
while promoting the public good and facilitating broad-based
civic engagement (Rome, Hoechstetter, & Wolf-Branigin, In
press).
Scholars have long taken an interest in identifying what
factors might predict greater engagement in the political
process. Political scientists, in particular, have defined a series
of variables that comprise a measure of what they call "psychological engagement" (Verba, Schlozman & Brady, 1995).
Among them is something similar to what social workers call
"agency"-that is, the belief that one has the ability to affect
outcomes. Hamilton and Fauri (2001) and Ritter (2007) have
tested this notion with a social work audience. They found
that those who believe they have the power to influence outcomes are indeed more likely to engage in the political process.
Against this backdrop, the findings in the current study are encouraging: a strong majority of respondents believe that voting
matters and disagree that influencing policy should be left to
professional lobbyists. More than two-thirds believe that, if
they tried, they would be likely to have some influence over
social policy. One respondent wrote: "It continually amazes me
how one or two or three people-plain citizens-can get legislation passed or killed, if they have a good case that doesn't
gore anyone's ox, and they are persistent in their efforts." On
the other hand, a few responses suggest skepticism about the
political process: "As someone who was very politically active
in the 60s and 70s, I have become totally disillusioned with
the political system and increasingly cynical about the political
change process."
Finally, respondents were asked about the adequacy of
their preparation for policy practice. It appears that most respondents got the message about the interdependence of
policy and practice, but many are having difficulty applying
this conviction on the job. This suggests a need for continuing education that helps administrators, supervisors, and
workers identify opportunities to incorporate political action
into the work place as seamlessly as possible. Consider this
comment: "Political involvement is an 'extra' when you have
too few resources, too little time, and are generally doing more
with less." The goal is for policy and practice to exist as an
124
Journal of Sociology &Social Welfare
integrated whole, rather than as two separate pursuits.
According to a few respondents, political participation can actually help relieve some of the stresses of the workplace: "I feel
very strongly that it is our duty to become active in the political
arena. Public policy impacts on our families in dramatic ways.
I also feel it will help us to fight bum-out. I first became active
as an advocate for child welfare when I was a CPS worker.
When things felt hopeless I'd get involved in shaping policy."
The study further suggests that another topic for continuing education should be skill development in policy practice.
Over 40% of respondents said "I wish I were more knowledgeable about how to effectively impact the political process."
While not a majority, this constitutes a sizeable number of
social workers who might well become more active with the
confidence and comfort that stem from proper training.
Limitations
As mentioned previously, this study adds to a limited body
of research on the topic of social workers' political participation. Yet caution should be exercised in drawing direct comparisons across studies. Each has asked somewhat different
questions, employed somewhat different samples, used somewhat different instruments, and applied somewhat different
interpretations to the results. Taken together, however, they
begin to create a picture of the status of the profession in relation to the political process.
Although this study draws on a large, national, random
sample of social workers, all are members of NASW. Although
NASW is the largest association of professional social workers
in the world, NASW represents only a fraction of those practicing social work. Since the responses were self-reported, there is
also a risk of social desirability bias. Answers may be inflated
in an effort to "look good" to the researchers. This study measured engagement in specific activities using a Likert scale of
"never," "rarely," "sometimes," "often," and "always." These
categories are imprecise, calling on respondents to interpret
the labels and make judgments about the frequency of their
various behaviors. Readers should consider this a relative,
rather than an absolute, measure of participation. Finally, the
Social Work and Civic Engagement
125
response rate of 43%, though respectable for a mailed questionnaire, suggests that findings should be generalized with
caution. There is no way of knowing how those who didn't
respond might have answered the questions. It is possible that
non-respondents, as a group, have less interest in political
action than those who took the time to complete and return
the survey instrument.
Conclusion
This study surveyed a randomly-selected national sample
of 1,274 practicing social workers, seeking to describe their
attitudes toward, and engagement in, political action. The
results show that slightly fewer than half of the respondents
are "highly" politically active, with doctorally-prepared
social workers, older social workers, and social workers with
more years of practice experience demonstrating greater
involvement.
With the exception of voting, behaviors requiring lower
levels of commitment were far more common than those requiring higher levels of commitment. Consistent with previous findings, testifying at hearings and campaigning for candidates were among those activities engaged in least frequently.
Contrary to the conventional wisdom, the social workers surveyed express little ethical ambivalence about engaging in
political action. Most expressed the belief that political action
is relevant to their jobs, and that they have an obligation to
stay informed about policy changes and to promote policies
that benefit their clients. Lack of time may inhibit some social
workers from acting on these beliefs. Their comfort with encouraging political activity on the part of their clients is less
clear. Respondents were divided about whether they have a
role in empowering their clients politically. This is an issue deserving of furthe...