NCU Job Description of the Position of a Director of Social Work Paper

User Generated



North Central University


For this final assignment, create a job description for a position within your agency/organization. As part of this description, you must provide the following:

A description of your agency and the services you provide.

A description of the job and professional duties including the role of other professions when engaged in inter-professional teams and an understanding how diversity and difference characterize and shape the human experience and are critical to the formation of identity.

Education and skills required including an understanding of strategies designed to eliminate oppressive structural barriers to ensure that social goods, rights, and responsibilities are distributed equitably and that civil, political, environmental, economic, social, and cultural human rights are protected.

  • Previous experience required
  • Any other requirements including understanding quantitative and qualitative research methods and their respective roles in advancing a science of social work and in evaluating their practice.  (Hint: Be sure to review your state’s requirements as explored in an earlier assignment.)
  • In addition, provide 8 to 10 screening questions for your job applicants. These questions should be used to determine which candidates you will want to bring in to the office for a face-to-face interview. 
  • Along with your job description and screening questions, provide a rationale for why you selected these characteristics and questions and how this position/employee will contribute to your organization and overall success in the associated service delivery system. 
  • Support your assignment with at least five scholarly resources. In addition to these specified resources, other appropriate scholarly resources, including seminal articles, may be included.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance ISSN: 2330-3131 (Print) 2330-314X (Online) Journal homepage: Leadership Challenges Facing Nonprofit Human Service Organizations in a Post-Recession Era Karen Hopkins, Megan Meyer, Wes Shera & S. Colby Peters To cite this article: Karen Hopkins, Megan Meyer, Wes Shera & S. Colby Peters (2014) Leadership Challenges Facing Nonprofit Human Service Organizations in a Post-Recession Era, Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 38:5, 419-422, DOI: 10.1080/23303131.2014.977208 To link to this article: Published online: 24 Nov 2014. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 2449 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 7 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 38:419–422, 2014 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 2330-3131 print/2330-314X online DOI: 10.1080/23303131.2014.977208 GUEST EDITORIAL Leadership Challenges Facing Nonprofit Human Service Organizations in a Post-Recession Era Karen Hopkins and Megan Meyer University of Maryland School of Social Work, Baltimore, Maryland, USA Wes Shera University of Toronto School of Social Work, Toronto, Ontario, Canada S. Colby Peters University of Maryland School of Social Work, Baltimore, Maryland, USA The nonprofit sector has been the fastest growing segment of the U.S. economy in the last decade, primarily due to growth in the economy’s service fields of health care, education, and social services, which account for 87% of nonprofit employment (Salamon, Sokolowski, & Gellar, 2012). While the sector has grown significantly, it has still struggled to meet the demand for human services during the recent recession. The Nonprofit Finance Fund’s 2014 State of the Sector Survey, which captured just over 5,000 nonprofits (human services being the largest proportion) showed 80% of respondents reported an increase in demand for services, the 6th straight year of increased demand, 56% were unable to meet demand in 2013, the highest reported in the survey’s history, and 28% ended their 2013 fiscal year with a deficit. Accompanying the growth of the sector and the recession are significant challenges that have threatened the survival of nonprofits, especially smaller and mid-size agencies. These challenges include insufficient financial, human, and technical resources for responding to growing need and demands for service in the face of government and foundation cutbacks, tightly defined contracts, high rates of underfunded infrastructure and overhead, and even higher expectations for accountability (Nonprofit Finance Fund’s 2014 State of the Sector Survey; Urban Institute, 2011). Thus, while the demand for nonprofits to provide more services and accountability is increasing, there is also a thinner spread of funding that forces organizations to provide more services with less money. Often, nonprofit leaders and managers have to make difficult decisions about staffing and rationing of services to clients, as well as embrace new practice models that improve efficiency and demonstrate clearer outcomes. The managerial competencies needed to successfully navigate this complex environment have evolved, and recent scholarship on leadership emphasizes the clear need Correspondence should be addressed to Karen Hopkins, University of Maryland School of Social Work, 525 W. Redwood Street, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. E-mail: 420 HOPKINS ET AL. for strong and “adaptive leadership” that is able to usher in technical and innovative organizational changes at a pace that organizational stakeholders can manage. Also noted is that leadership needs to be cultivated not just in the managerial and executive positions of human service nonprofits, but across positions and roles at various levels. (Oftelie, Booth & Wareing, 2012). THE LEADERSHIP “CRISIS” IN HUMAN SERVICE NONPROFITS There is evidence of a leadership deficit or possible “crisis” in the nonprofit sector due to the retirement of many nonprofit managers, inadequate succession planning, and far fewer potential managers trained to take the helm of the growing number of nonprofits. While some suggest this crisis may be overstated (Johnson, 2009), others predict that by 2016, nonprofits will need almost 80,000 new senior-level managers annually (Bridgespan Group, 2012; Center for Creative Leadership, 2012; Tierney, 2006). While the need and intensity for human services is increasing, there is concern that leadership talent is declining (Leadership for a Networked World, 2010, 2013). According to the Center for Creative Leadership (2009, p. 1), “Crucial leadership skills in today’s organizations are insufficient for meeting current and future needs and many managers are voicing their fears that the talent they have is not the talent they need”. Indeed, with the growing shortage of nonprofit managers and leaders, many professionals in human service organizations (HSOs) find themselves thrust into managerial and leadership positions without the knowledge and skills necessary to be effective. Many current nonprofit managers recognize their leadership limitations and desire new approaches and leadership skills to help them increase their organization’s capacity in areas such as restructuring and organizational change, resource development, collaboration and integrative services, technology and tools for planning and decision-making, diversity and inclusiveness, and evidence-informed practice (Cohen & Hyde, 2014; Nonprofit Leadership Alliance, 2011). Community-based human service organizations also seek community-building leadership skills to successfully identify and respond to their community’s issues, needs, and resources. The health of the human services sector is dependent upon equipping these emerging leaders with both key managerial and leadership skills, and funders are increasingly pressuring organizations to hire “professionally certified human service administrators” with leadership skills (Nonprofit Leadership Alliance, 2011). Nevertheless, few nonprofit organizations provide in-house leadership training for their staff, and while the number of nonprofit management degree and training programs has increased in the last decade, leadership development specific to nonprofit human service organizations has lagged behind. For instance, despite the critical need for preparing students in human services graduate programs to develop management and leadership skills that will make them more marketable and competitive in securing administrative positions in human service agencies, related degree programs (i.e., Social Work, Nursing, Public Health) are “lagging in their approach to both management and leadership education”, thus preparing an inadequate number of human service workers to become future administrators or leaders (Rothman, 2012). After several years in practice many human service professionals do access continuing education programs in leadership to improve their skills in this area. While these programs can be useful they are often not as rigorous nor as comprehensive as graduate level training. Educational institutions should provide both students and human service professionals with opportunities to develop and use management and leadership skills seamlessly as a continuum across a range of organizational types and community settings. Some professional associations, like the Network for Social Work Managers and the National Public Health Leadership Development Network, have identified core competencies in management and leadership upon which educational programs can draw to craft leadership curriculums and measure participants’ progress (Hassan, Waldman & Wimpfheimer, 2013;Wimpfheimer, 2004). GUEST EDITORIAL 421 NEW LEADERSHIP MINDSETS In addition to calls for increased emphasis on and access to leadership training within the nonprofit sector, are arguments for the need for training in new models of leadership. The Leadership Learning Community, for instance, comprised of hundreds of funders from across the country, has called for a transformation in how nonprofit leadership is “conceived, conducted, and evaluated”. Their goal is to promote leadership approaches that are more inclusive, networked, and collective (Cohen & Hyde, 2014; Meehan & Reinelt, 2012). The idea of collective leadership, in which people come together within and across organizations and in partnership with community stakeholders to collaboratively develop innovative solutions to both community and agency problems, is consistent with human service values for empowerment and self-determination evident in the missions of many human service nonprofits (Hardina, Middleton, Montana & Simpson, 2007). Additionally, research conducted by the Leadership Learning Community questions the effectiveness of traditional and hierarchical nonprofit leadership models in “tackling complex, systemic, and adaptive problems” (Meehan & Reinelt, 2012). These findings echo previous survey results from thousands of nonprofit managers, stressing that the leadership competencies of today are not the competencies needed for tomorrow’s success of the nonprofit sector (Nonprofit Strategic Alliance, 2011; Leadership for a Networked World, 2010; Center for Creative Leadership, 2009). While past paradigms have focused primarily on identifying and emphasizing the discrete skill sets leaders need to possess, new paradigms highlight the centrality of “mindset” and the increasing importance of emotional and social intelligence to leadership success (Goleman, 2011; Kennedy, Carroll & Francoeur, 2012). For instance, proponents of shared leadership and the “collective leadership mindset” advocate for openness, inclusion, sharing of information and resources, and recognizing the leadership potential throughout the organization (Allison, Misra & Perry, 2014; Meehan & Reinelt, 2012). Connected to collective leadership is the notion of “generative leadership” requiring leaders’ adaptive and “network-intensive focus” in response to the rapid evolution of technology and a new generation of human service workers and consumers who are digitally savvy. Organizational structures and workspaces may have to be altered where “work will comprise actively managing a set of resources, clients and programs, often without the constraint of jurisdictional and programmatic boundaries.” Leaders across the organization will need to be “actively mobilizing” technological and organizational innovations to survive and thrive (Leadership for a Networked World, 2010, p. 28). Clearly, the rapidity of social, economic and technological change requires nonprofit leaders to change their mindset and behaviors, regardless of size or mission. They now must be adept at connecting and weaving relationships within the agency and across boundaries in the community, engaging in continuous learning, experimenting, risk taking, collaborating, integrating change, being creative with limited resources, fostering an adaptive organizational culture, and inspiring, facilitating, and supporting agency and community members to do the same (Meehan & Reinelt, 2012; Meehan, Reinelt, Chaux, & Holley, 2012; Leadership for a Networked World, 2010, 2013; Center for Creative Leadership, 2012, 2009). It is also important to highlight that this type of collaborative, collective, networking approach facilitates organizations working together to advocate for adequate resources to deliver creative, cost-effective services for clients. It is imperative that leadership development programs keep pace and offer innovative curriculums that equip nonprofit executives and their teams with the skills to implement these new strategies. These programs must also structure themselves to be flexible, capitalizing on technology to make programming accessible, and integrate on-going individual and peer coaching models to ensure the knowledge and skills participants learn in coursework are reinforced over time by real-world problem solving and peer support. 422 HOPKINS ET AL. REFERENCES Allison, M., Misra, S., & Perry, E. (2014). Doing more with more: Putting shared leadership into practice. Nonprofit Quarterly. Retrieved from Bridgespan Group. (2012). Nonprofit leadership development: What’s your “Plan A” for growing future leaders? Boston, MA: The Bridgespan Group, Inc. Center for Creative Leadership. (2012). Top three issues facing nonprofit organizations. Retrieved from http://www. Center for Creative Leadership. (2009). The leadership gap: What you need and don’t have when it comes to leadership talent (pp. 1–14). Retrieved from Cohen, M. B., & Hyde, C. A, (2014). Empowering workers & clients for organizational change. Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books, Inc. Goleman, D. (2011). Leadership: The power of emotional intelligence. North Hampton, MA: More than Sound. Hardina, D., Middleton, J., Montana, S., & Simpson, R. A. (2007). An empowering approach to managing social service organizations. New York, NY: Springer. Hassan, A., Waldman, W., & Wimpfheimer, S. (2013, October 1). Human services management competencies: A guide for non-profit and for profit agencies, foundations, and academic institutions. The Network for Social Work Management. Johnson, J. (2009). The nonprofit leadership deficit: A case for more optimism. Nonprofit Management Leadership, 19(3), 285. Kennedy, F., Carroll, B., & Francoeur, J. (2013). Mindset not skill set: Evaluating in new paradigms of leadership development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 15(1), 10. Leadership for a Networked World. (2013). Leadership in an era of disruption: Insights from the Human Services Summit at Harvard University (pp. 1–28). Cambridge, MA: Author. Leadership for a Networked World. (2010). The next generation of human services: Realizing the vision. A Report from the Human Services Summit at Harvard University (pp. 1–23). Cambridge, MA: Author. Meehan, D. & Reinelt, C. (2012). Leadership & networks: New ways of developing leadership in a highly connected world. (pp. 1–17). Leadership Learning Community, Oakland, CA. Meehan, D., Reinelt, C., Chaux, N., & Holley, J. (2012). Leadership and collective impact: A guide for strengthening the impact of your leadership development work (pp. 1–28). Leadership Learning Community, Oakland, CA. Nonprofit Finance Fund. 2014 State of the Nonprofit Sector Survey (pp. 1–19). A Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI). Retrieved from Nonprofit Leadership Alliance. (2011). The skills the nonprofit sector requires of its managers and leaders: A research report (pp. 1–43). Kansas City, MO: Author. Oftelie, A., Booth, J. & Warren, T. (2012). Leading change in human services. Policy & Practice (19426828), 70(3), 11. Rothman, J. (2012). Education for macro intervention: A survey of problems and prospects. Report for the Association of Community Organization and Social Administration (ACOSA). Salamon, L., Sokolowski, S., & Gellar, S. (2012). Holding the fort: Nonprofit employment during a decade of turmoil. Center for Civil Society, Bulletin #39, 1–17. Baltimore, MD: Johns-Hopkins University. Tierney, T. (2006). The leadership deficit. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Summer, 26–35. Urban Institute. (2012). The nonprofit almanac. Washington, DC: Author. Wimpfheimer, S. (2004). Leadership and management competencies defined by practicing social work managers: An overview of standards developed by the National Network for Social Work Managers. Administration in Social Work, 28(1), 45–56. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance ISSN: 2330-3131 (Print) 2330-314X (Online) Journal homepage: Social Work Leadership: An Analysis of Historical and Contemporary Challenges S. Colby Peters To cite this article: S. Colby Peters (2017) Social Work Leadership: An Analysis of Historical and Contemporary Challenges, Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 41:4, 336-345, DOI: 10.1080/23303131.2017.1302375 To link to this article: Published online: 11 Apr 2017. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 6237 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 3 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at HUMAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE 2017, VOL. 41, NO. 4, 336–345 Social Work Leadership: An Analysis of Historical and Contemporary Challenges S. Colby Peters School of Social Work, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA ABSTRACT KEYWORDS With an increased interest in the outcomes and benefits of social work leadership, a general consensus has emerged that the profession lacks leadership on multiple practice levels. A review of historical social work leadership literature reveals broad themes that have contributed to the profession’s current leadership challenges: (1) uncertain professional identity; (2) insufficient education and training, and (3) sexism, discrimination, and power. Current leadership challenges in social work research and practice are discussed in light of these historical themes. Resolution of these challenges requires integration and acceptance of our identity through pursuing leadership research and practices for social justice. Leadership; literature review; social work Over the past 20 years, researchers have demonstrated an increasing interest in the outcomes and benefits associated with leadership in social work settings. While researchers may not agree as to the specific nature of social work leadership and its most effective applications, a general consensus exists in the social work literature and education that the profession lacks leadership on the individual, organizational, and interprofessional practice levels. On the interprofessional level, social workers often have to contend with secondary professional status, especially in health care settings (DeLoach & Monroe, 2004; Lymbery, 2005). On the organizational level, social workers are competing for fewer administrative jobs with individuals from other disciplines and losing (Knee & Folsom, 2012). Finally, on the individual level, social workers often do not understand the organizational influences on their work and how they can use informal leadership to make changes (Spitzer, Silverman, & Allen, 2015). Many social work researchers point to the lack of leadership and management curriculum in baccalaureate and masters programs in social work (Knee & Folsom, 2012) and the lack of leadership training for practicing social workers (Austin, Regan, Samples, Schwartz, & Carnochan, 2011), especially those in direct practice, as the reasons for the noticeable scarcity of social workers in upper-level administrative positions in agencies and organizations that offer social services (Austin & Ezell, 2004; Knee & Folsom, 2012). The dearth of social work leadership has profound negative consequences for the profession as well as for its employees and clients, especially in the context of the after-effects of the 2007–2009 recession and various noteworthy trends in the recent political and social climate, to include globalization, increased expansion of and reliance on information technology, and the push for increased risk management and accountability procedures in both the public and the private sectors. New public policies and programs, most notably and recently the Affordable Care Act and the National Institute of Health’s behavioral health initiative (Weinstein, 2013), will necessitate several changes to the system and delivery of health care. Aside from the steady loss of administrative social work positions to other professions (Knee & Folsom, 2012; Patti, 1984), a culture of risk-averse managerialism has spread across public and private agencies (Lawler, 2007). Instead of allowing CONTACT S. Colby Peters © 2017 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC SC Peters Consulting, LLC, Annapolis, MD 21401, USA. HUMAN SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE 337 social workers to use creativity and an individualistic approach to client care, methods of risk management remove decision-making power from social workers and instead, overburden them with standardized client questionnaires and extensive paperwork (Ruch, 2012). Moreover, a generation of social workers in top-level administrative positions will soon join the wave of baby boomer retirees, taking their knowledge and expertise with them (Hofer-Alfeis, 2009). With the dearth of macro-oriented social workers, the resulting vacuum could continue to be filled by leaders from other professions, such as public health and business (Knee & Folsom, 2012). These internal and environmental challenges highlight the need for social workers to not only aggressively pursue the administrative positions that may be occupied by individuals from other disciplines (Knee & Folsom, 2012) but also bring social work leadership to positions outside of the profession. Leadership—what it is, where it is, and who practices it and how well—has been the subject of many theoretical and empirical articles in the business literature and, more recently, in the broader social sciences (Ruch, 2012). Since the early 20th century, theories of leadership have proliferated; one recent literature review of leadership research in the social sciences identified over 60 distinct theoretical approaches to the study of leadership in over 700 articles published between 2000 and 2012 (Dinh et al., 2013). Some of the most prominent and popular leadership theories include traditional behavioral-based leadership development models (Day, Fleenor, Atwater, Sturm, & McKee, 2014) related to individual cognitive processes, such as authentic leadership (Avolio, Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009; Dinh et al., 2013); theories that focus on individual aspects and on relationships and organizational processes, as in transformational and charismatic leadership, leadermember exchange, and cross-cultural leadership (Avolio et al., 2009; Dinh et al., 2013); and leadership theories that focus on the system or organization as the unit of analysis, including complexity leadership, distributed leadership, and team leadership (Dinh et al., 2013). Theories that tend to promote more-inclusive leadership behaviors and consideration for workplace diversity include feminist leadership (Lazzari, Colarossi, & Collins, 2009) and social justice leadership, particularly in education research (Mistry & Sood, 2015; O’Malley & Capper, 2015). The aims of this article are, first, to examine the historical origin and consequences of challenges related to social work leadership using an analysis of historical peer-reviewed literature and, second, to illuminate some contemporary issues in social work leadership and practice that, if addressed, could pave the way for a new conceptualization of leadership that would allow the social work profession to fully embrace, integrate, and solidify its identity as a legitimate and unified force for social justice. The historical review and exploration of current social work leadership challenges will be used to argue that the conceptualization of a strong identity, coupled with a redefinition of leadership based on social work goals and values, could empower social workers to successfully address our most urgent internal professional challenges and external societal issues. Method Material for this review and analysis of leadership in social work was assembled from a combination of books, writings, and peer-reviewed articles, which were identified using database and reference list searches to produce a broad overview of the history and evolution of the concept of social work leadership in the United States. The articles used in the historical analysis of social work leadership were found using two systematic searches. First, a search for historical articles, where historical was defined as 1990 or earlier, was conducted. Based on the literature searches, the 1990s seemed to represent the time during which social work research started reflecting the modern and growing interest in business leadership. Prior to this decade, social work leadership articles appeared only once every 8–10 years; in the 1990s alone, three articles with both “leadership” and “social work” in the title were published (Irizarry, Gameau, & Walter, 1993; Spitzer, 1995; Stempler, 1993). In order to narrow the scope and ensure that the focus remained on leadership (as opposed to management or other closely related terms), only articles that included “social work” as a key term and had some form of the word “leadership” in the title were initially included, for a total of 7 articles (Bogardus, 338 S. C. PETERS 1936; Brilliant, 1986; Hagerty, 1923; Kamerman, 1974; Klingbeil, 1987; McCoin, 1973; Patti, 1984). An additional three articles (De Hoyos & De Hoyos, 1968; Deschin, 1968; Philips & Mandlebaum, 1968) were identified in reference list searches of the original seven articles. These additional articles did not have “leadership” in the title but offered commentary on leadership in the social work profession. A second search for articles with the key term “social work” and with a form of “leadership” in the title was conducted for the years 1996 to the present in order to find articles that offered historical commentary or analysis on social work leadership; two additional articles were found (Jabour, 2012; Stotzer & Tropman, 2006), for a total of 12 articles used in this historical analysis of leadership in the social work profession. Historical context of social work leadership Historical peer-reviewed literature and analyses on social work leaders and social work leadership research, development, and practice reveals several underlying tensions in the discipline that have remained fairly consistent over time. Since the professionalization of social work and the opening of the first school dedicated to the education and training of social workers in 1903 (the School of Sociology; Heraud, 2014), social work educators, researchers, theorists, and advocates have debated whether the underlying values and ethics of social work should lean towards sociology or psychology (McCoin, 1973; Philips & Mandlebaum, 1968); whether the profession’s true roots are in the Settlement House movement or the casework method (Brilliant, 1986; Jabour, 2012); whether grassroots participative leadership or leadership based on hierarchical business models is more effective (Brilliant, 1986; Patti, 1984); and whether social workers should be educated in clinical field work and practice or focus more on administrative and management training (Hagerty, 1923). These often passionate debates cut to the heart of social work’s identity and were focused around major ideological shifts that were identified as vital for the profession’s integrity and ability to effect positive change. At the crux of each of these arguments is the question: If leadership embodies innovation and change and social workers are supposed to be agents of change for social justice, why aren’t social workers assuming more formal and informal leadership roles right now? An analysis of the articles found in the historical literature review shows that a combination of external societal and internal professional issues have contributed to social workers’ failure to lead. Specifically, three broad themes emerged: (1) uncertain professional identity; (2) insufficient leadership and administrative education, and (3) issues related to sexism, discrimination, and power. Earlier decades saw the profession struggle to coalesce around the theoretical underpinnings from sociology (Bogardus, 1936; Hagerty, 1923)—as demonstrated by the Settlement House movement— and later, with the rising popularity of psychological science, around psychotherapeutic method—a movement with roots in casework and clinical practice. Subsequently, social work practitioners and researchers either fought against or attempted to accommodate the rise of conservatism and new business management practices in the 1970s. An uncertain identity Though not included in the results of this literature review, social work’s identity issues can be traced to the speech given by Abraham Flexner in the 1900s at the 42nd National Conference of Charities and Corrections. Flexner, previously known for his thorough assessment of medical education in the United States (Flexner, Pritchet, & Henry, 1910), was asked by the conference to speak on social work’s status as a profession according to certain criteria he developed. The profession’s uncertainty regarding its purpose and status is illustrated not only in the request for validation by an individual from another profession but also because the conference asked for a definitive answer from one person, who, by Flexner’s own admission, had “a very genuine doubt as to [his] competency to undertake the discussion of [social work’s professional status]” because his “acquaintance with social HUMAN SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE 339 work, with the literature of social work, and with social workers [was] distinctly limited—far too much so” (Flexner, 1915, p. 152). Regardless of his competency to judge, Flexner determined that social work met only three of his six criteria in that it (a) does not have intellectual operations with large individual responsibility, (b) does derive its methods from science and learning; (c) does not use these methods in the pursuit of definite goals; (d) does not have a technique that can be systematically taught; (e) does self-organize, and (f) does tend, over time, to become more altruistic. Though Flexner’s assessment of social work as only meeting half of his criteria was countered somewhat by his determination that social work had a “professional spirit” that, through the “unselfish devotion” of its workers might “lift it above all the [criteria],” he stated that (1915; p. 175) the decision still must have stung. It continues to do so today, as evidenced by a steady stream of commentary on Flexner’s conclusions in social work classrooms and in the literature over the next 100 years (Austin, 1983; Bisman, 2004; Greenwood, 1957; Popple, 1985; Thyer, 2002). Hagerty (1923) introduces the sociological and psychological identity conflict when he asserts that social workers are being well trained in clinical matters but are neglecting to take enough classes in the sociological and economic disciplines to establish a context for their work. In a qualitative analysis by Stotzer and Tropman (2006) of the opening addresses by the 21 women presidents of the National Conference for Social Work (NCSW) between 1910 and 1983 (the year of dissolution), Grace L. Coyle (2005) asserted that, while social workers were successful in understanding individuals, they needed to concentrate on understanding issues related to communities and society. In 1968, Deschin and De Hoyos wrote two companion articles in the same year in the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, in which they argued that social workers were losing their jobs because the profession was in a state of identity crisis and must choose, once and for all, either a sociological or psychotherapeutic orientation. Fifty years after the publication of Hagerty’s (1923) article, social workers’ continued lack of leadership education, the new conservative political climate, and consolidation of social services under the aegis of the recently coined “human services” resulted in reduced professional opportunities for social workers due to reduced funding and competition for administrative positions from other disciplines (Brilliant, 1986; Patti, 1984). Recognizing this leadership challenge, some social work researchers attempted to integrate the new business management model with social work values, sparking periodic debate about the fit of business leadership models to social work that would last for decades. In one of the first of these articles, Kamerman (1974) attempted to resolve the debate by advocating for a balance between the business model of leadership, client participation, and use of social worker expertise based on the results of several community organizing projects. Other researchers rejected the business-based leadership principles altogether. Patti (1984) asserted that acceptance or accommodation of the current leadership and management practices for business administration would cause social workers and the profession to compromise core social work values. He went on to state that the blending of social work into the human services soup comprised a “transformation … characterized by a displacement of previously paramount values such as individualization, mutuality, and social change, with such values as productivity, efficiency, and compliance” (Patti, 1984, p. 22). In 1986, Brilliant advocated for and established the context for social work leadership and practice in the literature that continues today. Citing the divide between business and social work as a primary reason that the profession lacks strong leadership, the author echoed McCoin’s (1973) assertions when she pointed out that in interprofessional teams, social workers are rarely the leaders, and administrative positions are being taken by professionals with non–social work degrees. Insufficient leadership education and training The paucity of leadership and management training in social work education has been strongly emphasized in recent years, but this issue was illuminated decades ago by Hagerty (1923) when he 340 S. C. PETERS asserted that social workers were learning the casework method as a trade, rather than receiving a broader university-style education in sociology, economics, and psychology, which would not only provide context for their work, but enable them to be better leaders and administrators. The author concluded his argument by saying that the social work schools were training individuals to “fill the ranks of the army of social workers but not those in command of the army” (Hagerty, 1923, p. 163). Over 60 years later, Patti (1984) agreed with Hagerty (1923) and added that social workers were losing their administrative positions not only because many smaller, independent social service organizations were being consolidated under large human services organizations (Patti, 1984) but also because social workers lacked leadership and managerial skills and training that were popular in the new conservative climate. Brilliant (1986) identified the lack of leadership training in graduate school as one of the primary reasons for the leadership gap in the social work profession and in 2000. Sexism, discrimination, and powerlessness The issues of identity and education in the social work profession, however worthy of attention and action, may be symptoms of a much larger and intractable challenge: sexism, discrimination, and powerlessness (Brilliant, 1986; Jabour, 2012; Patti, 1984; Stotzer & Tropman, 2006). These challenges have manifested themselves in several ways, one of which is revealed by Stotzer and Tropman (2006) in their qualitative analysis of women presidents’ speeches at the National Conference for Social Work (NCSW). They note that of the 21 women presidents, only two—Gertrude Vaile (1927) and Eveline M. Burns (1958)—took the opportunity provided by the address to overtly address the lack of leadership and management skills in the social work profession. The authors hypothesize that most of the presidents chose to avoid advocating for aggressive leadership because they were attempting to protect a young and vulnerable profession that offered women a viable career path. Patti (1984) supported this finding, writing that “the profession’s status is inextricably intertwined with how society values women” and Brilliant (1986) concurred, maintaining that women social workers not only experienced the deleterious effects of sexism but also a broad discrimination because of their close association with disadvantaged groups. According to the literature discussed above, the prejudices against the social work profession and its workers has coincided with the development of a workforce, approximately 81% of whom are women (Center for Health Workforce Studies & NASW Center for Workforce Studies, 2006), who may be uncomfortable with power and lack the confidence to develop, achieve, and maintain rigorous educational and professional standards for themselves and their clients. Several authors observed that social workers must find ways of being comfortable with having and using power and with empowering others (Brilliant, 1986; Klingbeil, 1987; McCoin, 1973; Patti, 1984). Brilliant (1986) further argues that, since social workers’ jobs were eliminated by the reorganization of social work services into “human services,” social workers have attempted to regain some lost ground and maintain the social work profession’s openness to women and minorities by creating an “enabling culture” (p. 326) that provided opportunities for easy entry and advancement rather than concern for quality standards in practice and education. Current challenges in social work leadership Research One potential deficit in social work leadership research is the lack of a systematic and purposeful evaluation of available leadership models’ applicability to social work research and practice. In her seminal article advocating for the use of business leadership models, Brilliant (1986) presents a comprehensive assessment of the reasons for social workers’ lack of leadership skills, but her arguments for adopting business-based leadership models do not include a thorough assessment of the usefulness and applicability of such models in the social work profession. Subsequently, social work researchers tended to adopt the theories that have HUMAN SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE 341 had the most success in business leadership—that is, transformational leadership (Elpers & Westhuis, 2008; Gellis, 2001; Mary, 2005; Tafvelin, 2012) and leader-member exchange (Brimhall & Mor Barak, 2014; Hopkins, 2002). While Brilliant’s (1986) article and the empirical research that followed has effectively advanced the social work leadership research agenda, leadership theories and models that have been developed for business may be incompatible with social work for several reasons. First, many of the current business-oriented leadership models arose from a White male militaristic tradition (Lawler, 2007) that stresses competition rather than collaboration. Additional influences include strict, scientifically based management techniques for the purpose of increased efficiency and output in the post–Industrial Revolution era (Lawler & Bilson, 2013; Patti, 1985). Second, in contrast to for-profit business models, the primary purpose of social work, to increase human (National Association of Social Workers, 2008) and community (Commission on Accreditation & Commission on Educational Policy, 2008) well-being equates to essentially decreasing demand for services and products (Lawler & Bilson, 2013). Moreover, the values of social work differ sharply from those of business: Social work emphasizes the promotion of social justice (Commission on Accreditation & Commission on Educational Policy, 2008; National Association of Social Workers, 2008), while businesses harbor the primary objective of continually increasing profits. Third, there is a strong emotional aspect—both negative and positive—in social work practice (Ingram, 2013) that may not exist to the same extent in the for-profit world. Social workers, especially those in direct service, are called upon to enter into potentially unsafe and emotionally wrenching situations to work with individuals who may not want their help, and they do their job for low pay and, often, insufficient benefits (Blome & Steib, 2014). Finally, leadership theories that are currently popular in social work, most notably transformational leadership theory, emphasize the importance of the individual characteristics of a leader but neglect to take organizational and social factors into account. In contrast, social workers are trained to assess their clients in the context of their environment and discouraged from attributing individuals’ problems to personal failings (Commission on Accreditation & Commission on Educational Policy, 2008). A potential underlying cause of the unqualified adoption of business-oriented leadership models may be the lack of a clear definition of social work leadership. Attempts to define social work leadership, while effective in some ways, do not specify how definition elements connect to the practice methods and goals of social work (i.e., Holosko, 2009; Webster, 2010). Specifically, the primary purpose of social work, to increase human and community well-being through the pursuit of social justice (Commission on Accreditation & Commission on Educational Policy, 2008; National Association of Social Workers, 2008), may be best served with the adoption of a model and definition of leadership that has been linked, at least theoretically, to leadership actions that arise from and serve this purpose. Finally, although social work researchers agree that the social work profession lacks leadership (Holosko, 2009; Knee & Folsom, 2012; Rank & Hutchison, 2000), very few articles explore the importance of leadership and related outcomes to social work (Lawler, 2007) except to cite general improvements such as potential increases in productivity (Yliruka & KarvinenNiinikoski, 2013) or reduction of employee stress (Webster, 2010). Outcomes for clients, the ultimate beneficiaries of improved leadership, are almost never mentioned. Finally, social work leadership research must begin responding to the changing landscape of leadership research in the broader social sciences. As early as 1996, researchers have been questioning mainstream approaches to leadership research (Bresnen, 1996); today, researchers are more commonly acknowledging the role of power, context, and time in leadership and related outcomes (Collinson, 2014). Newer articles advocate for a focus on the context and environment related to leadership, rather than the traits of a leader (Fairhurst & Connaughton, 2014; Kelly, 2013). Dichotomous assessments—good/bad leadership, manager/leader, transformational/transactional, leader/follower—may be replaced by a more dialectical approach that accepts ambiguity, complexity, and contradiction (Collinson, 2014). Kelly (2013) argues that the term leadership is not concrete or necessarily definable but rather an ideological, almost mythical, concept that changes according to the time and context. 342 S. C. PETERS Practice Despite the clear need for strong leaders in the managerial and executive positions of social work organizations, educational institutions, agencies, and nonprofits, social work educational programs place little emphasis on leadership and management curriculum in their schools (Knee & Folsom, 2012). In general, there are very few courses that teach the social work leadership skills needed for the administration of social work in the context of client needs, employee needs, organizational needs, and changing political climates (Austin et al., 2011). In a survey by the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) assessing the state of leadership education, 36 social work institutions submitted 74 class syllabi for leadership and management courses, representing only 6.8% of all accredited social work education programs (Lazzari, 2007). According to the 2013 annual report on social work education in the United States (CSWE, 2013), just 4% of the total number of students from 204 reporting institutions—1,578 students—were pursuing administrative/management concentrations. Moreover, only 11.2% of programs even offered an administrative concentration (CSWE, 2013). Professional-leadership training for social workers is also scarce. In the past decade, human service agencies have only rarely offered leadership education and when they do, trainings are often sporadic and devote inadequate time and resources to allow individuals to learn and practice new leadership skills (Austin et al., 2011). Agencies and organizations that offer social work services may either lack funding or have doubts about the value of leadership training. In a case study of a leadership training by Austin et al. (2011), many of the participants, although they found the courses to be valuable and informative, complained that their agencies did not allow them enough time away from their regular work duties to fully take advantage of the program. In fact, 12 of the 22 participants were forced to abandon the program due to work obligations. The lack of training and education in leadership skills, administration, and management affects clients, employees, organizations, and the integrity of the social work profession. Social workers with direct service experience are often promoted with little or no training in leadership or management, leaving these individuals to rely on skills that may work well with individual clients but do not address the professional needs of their employees or organizations (Knee & Folsom, 2012). A study by Patti (2003) found that between 25% and 50% of MSW graduates occupy management positions with little or no training. In these cases, the supervisees suffer; it has been shown that insufficient managerial and leadership skills have a significant negative impact on the job satisfaction of supervisees (Elpers & Westhuis, 2008). Recognizing a dearth of leadership capabilities in social workers, many organizations that offer social work services are choosing to hire individuals with degrees in other disciplines, such as public administration or business administration (Knee & Folsom, 2012). Although these individuals may possess the required leadership skills, they may not have adequate knowledge of social work practice and ethical values (Knee & Folsom, 2012). Thus, a growing number of individuals who are not necessarily committed to principles of social justice are occupying leadership positions in social work organizations. Examinations of underlying assumptions and sources of power in the development and practice of leadership in social work may reveal significant issues of discrimination and devaluation of social workers, especially those who work directly with clients. Very few leadership development and training programs are available to social workers who practice direct service, which may be problematic, given that social workers in direct service have the most contact and direct influence with clients. Yliruka and Karvinen-Niinikoski (2013) assert that social workers with the most contact with clients are often seen as a necessary cost that can only be offset by finding ways to make them more productive, instead of a source of expertise. Moreover, many of the most popular leadership theories (i.e. transformational leadership, authentic leadership, servant leadership) harbor assumptions about necessary power differentials between those who handle administrative tasks and those who work with clients; some of these assumptions come to light when terms like frontline workers, coalface workers (Webster, 2010), worker capacity, and subordinates are used. The use of frontline and coalface to refer to direct service social workers both simultaneously demean the worker and her client by indicating that the worker is HUMAN SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE 343 expendable or interchangeable and that the client is an enemy or a harvestable resource. Even as early as the 1990s, researchers began questioning the power differential highlighted by the contemporary leadership language. Bresnen (1996) argued that simply using the terms “leader” and “follower” places the power with the individual who leads and disempowers the “follower,” leaving him or her helpless and dependent on the leader. Conclusions Despite the many theories and models of leadership that are available in the literature, some of which have been used in social work research and practice, a reconceptualization of leadership—and potentially a new model—may be needed that incorporates the mission, values, and goals of the social work profession. A reconceptualization that includes the newer critical assessments of leadership would assist researchers in shaping studies with theoretical underpinnings that account for issues of gender, discrimination, and power both in the social work profession and in its clientele. Further, a new leadership definition could aid practitioners in more effectively and openly addressing such critical issues, which are often at the core of clients’ disadvantage. On another level, social work leadership that encourages critical assessment and reflection might uncover issues of internal discrimination, such as those indicated by the pay gap between men and women social workers, and external discrimination, as when social workers, reacting to discrimination they experience in the workplace, in turn, make negative judgments about their clients’ lives that prevent the worker from providing empathetic and caring service. These discrimination issues may be just one barrier between social work practice and social justice. Finally, critical self-reflection might reveal that the way forward for social workers is the integration, rather than the dichotomization, of values related to sociology and psychology, the Settlement House movement and the casework method, grassroots and administrative leadership, and field work and management skills. Solidifying and embracing our integrated identity could provide social workers with the confidence, authority, and clarity to raise the standards of social work education, research, and practice. Social workers’ ability to confidently and consistently assert a perspective grounded in the goal of human well-being through the pursuit of social justice (National Association of Social Workers, 2008) when partnering with other disciplines could influence interprofessional actions and effect subtle but farreaching changes. Providing leadership across hierarchies and disciplines by maintaining an integrated professional identity and social justice vision might allow us to devise and implement creative, evidence-based solutions for addressing society’s most wicked problems. References Austin, D. M. (1983). The Flexner myth and the history of social work. Social Services Review, 57, 357–377. doi:10.1086/644113 Austin, M. J., & Ezell, M. (2004). Educating future social work administrators. Administration in Social Work, 28, 1–3. doi:10.1300/J147v28n01_01 Austin, M. J., Regan, K., Samples, M. W., Schwartz, S. L., & Carnochan, S. (2011). Building managerial and organizational capacity in nonprofit human service organizations through a leadership development program. Administration in Social Work, 35, 258–281. doi:10.1080/03643107.2011.575339 Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 421–449. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163621 Bisman, C. (2004). Social work values: The moral core of the profession. British Journal of Social Work, 34, 109–123. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch008 Blome, W. W., & Steib, S. D. (2014). The organizational structure of child welfare: Staff are working hard, but it is hardly working. Children and Youth Services Review, 44, 181–188. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.06.018 Bogardus, E. S. (1936). Leadership in social work. Sociology and Social Research, 20, 559–565. Bresnen, M. J. (1996). All things to all people? Perceptions, attributions, and constructions of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 495–513. doi:10.1016/1048-9843(95)90024-1 Brilliant, E. L. (1986). Social work leadership: A missing ingredient? Social Work, 31, 325–331. 344 S. C. PETERS Brimhall, K. L., & Mor Barak, M. E. (2014). The mediating role of inclusion: A longitudinal study of the effects of leader–member exchange and diversity climate on job satisfaction and intention to leave among child welfare workers. Children and Youth Services Review, 40, 79–88. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.03.003 Burns, E. M. (1958). Social work is our commitment, in National Conference of Social Welfare Official Proceedings of the Annual Meeting: 1958. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Library. Center for Health Workforce Studies & NASW Center for Workforce Studies. (2006). Licensed social workers in the United States, 2004. Washington, DC. Retrieved from Center for Workforce Studies website: http://workforce. Collinson, D. (2014). Dichotomies, dialectics, and dilemmas: New directions for critical leadership studies? Leadership, 10, 36–55. doi:10.1177/1742715013510807 Commission on Accreditation & Commission on Educational Policy. (2008, Updated 2016). Educational policy and accreditation standards. Alexandria, VA: Council on Social Work Education. Available at Accreditation/Accreditation-Process/2015EPAS_Web_FINAL.aspx. Council on Social Work Education. (2013). 2013 Statistics on social work education in the United States. Alexandria, VA: Author. Coyle, G. L. (2005). Social work at the turn of the decade, in National Conference on Social Welfare, Official Proceedings of the Annual Meeting: 1940. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Library. Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. Leadership Quarterly, 25, 63–82. doi:10.1016/j. leaqua.2013.11.004 De Hoyos, A., & De Hoyos, G. (1968). The future direction of social work: The professional mobility of social work and its middle-class orientation. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 38, 18–24. doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.1968.tb00550.x DeLoach, R., & Monroe, J. (2004). Job satisfaction among hospice workers: What managers need to know. The Health Care Manager, 23(3), 209–219. Deschin, C. S. (1968). The future direction of social work: From concern with problems to emphasis on prevention. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 38, 9–17. doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.1968.tb00549.x Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L., Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C., & Hu, J. (2013). Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. Leadership Quarterly, 25, 36–62. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.005 Elpers, K., & Westhuis, D. J. (2008). Organizational leadership and its impact on social workers’ job satisfaction: A national study. Administration in Social Work, 32, 26–43. doi:10.1080/03643100801922399 Fairhurst, G. T., & Connaughton, S. L. (2014). Leadership: A communicative perspective. Leadership, 10, 7–35. doi:10.1177/1742715013509396 Flexner, A. (1915). Is social work a profession? In National Conference of Charities and Corrections, Proceedings of the National Conference of Charities and Corrections at the Forty-second annual session held in Baltimore, Maryland, May 12-19, 1915. Chicago, IL: Hildmann. Flexner, A., Pritchet, H., & Henry, S. (1910). Medical education in the United States and Canada bulletin number four (The Flexner Report). New York, NY: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Gellis, Z. D. (2001). Social work perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership in health care. Social Work Research, 25, 17–25. doi:10.1093/swr/25.1.17 Greenwood, E. (1957). Attributes of a profession. Social Work, 2, 45–55. Hagerty, J. E. (1923). The universities and training for public leadership and social work. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 105, 162–164. doi:10.1177/000271622310500132 Heraud, B. J. (2014). Sociology and social work: Perspectives and problems. London, UK: Pergamon Press.. Hofer-Alfeis, J. (2009). The Leaving Expert Debriefing to fight the retirement wave of the aging workforce. International Journal of Human Resources Development, 9, 300–304. doi:10.1504/IJHRDM.2009.023458 Holosko, M. J. (2009). Social work leadership: Identifying core attributes. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 19, 448–459. doi:10.1080/10911350902872395 Hopkins, K. M. (2002). Organizational citizenship in social service agencies. Administration in Social Work, 26, 1–15. doi:10.1300/J147v26n02_01 Ingram, R. (2013). Emotions, social work practice, and supervision: An uneasy alliance? Journal of Social Work Practice, 27, 5–19. doi:10.1080/02650533.2012.745842 Irizarry, C., Gameau, B., & Walter, R. (1993). Social work leadership development through international exchange. Social Work in Health Care, 18, 35–46. doi:10.1300/J010v18n03_04 Jabour, A. (2012). Relationship and leadership: Sophonisba Breckenridge and women in social work. Affilia, 27, 22–37. doi:10.1177/0886109912437496 Kamerman, S. B. (1974). Participation, leadership, and expertise: Imbalance or in balance? Social Service Review, 48, 403–411. doi:10.1086/643152 Kelly, S. (2013). Towards a negative ontology of leadership. Human Relations, 0, 1–18. Klingbeil, K. S. (1987). The social worker as a leader. Social Work Health Care, 12, 37–52. doi:10.1300/J010v12n03_05 HUMAN SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE 345 Knee, R. T., & Folsom, J. (2012). Bridging the crevasse between direct practice social work and management by increasing the transferability of core skills. Administration in Social Work, 36, 390–408. doi:10.1080/ 03643107.2011.604402 Lawler, J. (2007). Leadership in social work: A case of caveat emptor? British Journal of Social Work, 37, 123–141. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch404 Lawler, J., & Bilson, A. (2013). Social work management and leadership: Managing complexity with creativity. New York, NY: Routledge. Lazzari, M. (2007). Final report on senior scholar activities related to the CSWE leadership initiative (Unpublished manuscript). Lazzari, M. M., Colarossi, L., & Collins, K. S. (2009). Where have all the feminist leaders gone? Affilia, 24, 348–359. doi:10.1177/0886109909343552 Lymbery, M. (2005). United we stand? Partnership working in health and social care and the role of social work in services for older people. British Journal of Social Work, 36, 1119–1134. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch348 Mary, N. L. (2005). Transformational leadership in human service organizations. Administration in Social Work, 29(2), 105–118. doi:10.1300/J147v29n02_07 McCoin, J. M. (1973). A quest for dynamic leadership in the mental health rehabilitation team. Clinical Social Work Journal, 1, 32–37. doi:10.1007/BF01798793 Mistry, M., & Sood, K. (2015). Permeating the social justice ideals of equality and equity within the context of early years: Challenges for leadership in multi-cultural and mono-cultural primary school. Education, 43, 548–564. National Association of Social Workers. (2008). Code of ethics of the national association of social workers (Unpublished manuscript). O’Malley, M. P., & Capper, C. A. (2015). A measure of the quality of educational leadership programs for social justice: Integrating LGBTIQ identities into principal preparation. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51, 290–330. doi:10.1177/0013161X14532468 Patti, R. J. (1984). Who leads the human services? The prospects for social work leadership in an age of political conservatism. Administration in Social Work, 8, 17–29. doi:10.1300/J147v08n01_02 Patti, R. (1985). In search of purpose for social welfare administration. Administration in Social Work, 9(3), 1–14. Patti, R. J. (2003). Reflections on the state of management in social work. Administration in Social Work, 27, 1–11. doi:10.1300/J147v27n02_01 Philips, D. G., & Mandlebaum, H. (1968). The scandal of inertia. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 38, 586. doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.1968.tb02424.x Popple, P. R. (1985). The social work profession: A reconceptualization. Social Services Review, 59(4), 560–577. Rank, M. G., & Hutchison, W. S. (2000). An analysis of leadership within the social work profession. Journal of Social Work Education, 36, 487–502. Ruch, G. (2012). Where have all the feelings gone? Developing reflective and relationship-based management in child-care social work. British Journal of Social Work, 42, 1315–1332. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcr134 Spitzer, W., Silverman, E., & Allen, K. (2015). From organizational awareness to organizational competency in health care social work: The importance of formulating a “profession-in-environment” fit. Social Work in Health Care, 54, 193–211. doi:10.1080/00981389.2014.990131 Spitzer, W. J. (1995). Effective leadership: The social work healthcare director. Social Work in Health Care, 20, 89–109. doi:10.1300/J010v20n04_07 Stempler, B. L. (1993). Supervisory co-leadership: An innovative model for teaching the use of social work group work in a clinical social work training. Social Work with Groups: A Journal of Community and Clinical Practice, 16, 97–110. Stotzer, R. L., & Tropman, J. E. (2006). Professionalizing social work at the national level: Women social work leaders, 1910-1982. Affilia, 21, 9–27. doi:10.1177/0886109905283145 Tafvelin, S., Hyvonen, U., & Westerberg, K. (2012). Transformational leadership in the social work context: The importance of leader continuity and co-worker support. The British Journal of Social Work, 44(4), 886–904. Thyer, B. A. (2002). Developing discipline-specific knowledge for social work: Is it possible? Journal of Social Work Education, 38, 101–113. Vaile, G. (1927). Some significant trends since Cleveland, 1912 (Presidential Address) in Proceedings of the National Conference of Social Work at the Fifty-Third Annual Session, Cleveland, Ohio, May 16-June 1, 1926. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Webster, M. J. (2010). A vision for social work leadership: Complexity approach to frontline social work management: Constructing an emergent team leadership design for a managerialist world. Social Work and Social Sciences Review, 14, 27–46. doi:10.1921/095352210X518162 Weinstein, S. E. (2013, August 23). Behavioral health in Maryland and the University of Maryland School of Social Work: Current status and opportunities. Available at: University of Maryland School of Social Work, College Park, MD. Yliruka, L., & Karvinen-Niinikoski, S. (2013). How can we enhance productivity in social work? Dynamically reflective structures, dialogic leadership and the development of transformative expertise. Journal of Social Work Practice, 27, 191–206. doi:10.1080/02650533.2013.798157
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Explanation & Answer:
10 Pages
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

View attached explanation and answer. Let me know if you have any questions.


A Job Description of the Position of a Director of Social Work


Job Description for a Director of Social Work
A Description of the Agency and the Services
The agency is a nonprofit organization, its main objective being the administration of
healthcare services to patients with various mental illnesses. From research findings, the rate of
homicides based on suicidal attempts is on a rise, a problem eminent in societal set ups as a
result of the transformational aspects pertaining to human survival. The agency is also a
nongovernmental organization that is supported by private investors who dedicate funds to
increase the quality of life for the less fortunate. During a random visit to a psychiatric healthcare
facility, it was evident that treatment processes based on oral and injected medications was not a
permanent solution to the drastic effects of mental illnesses. Different mental illnesses require
diversification in the plan of care for diagnosed patients to ensure the sustainability of healthy
lifestyles through proper decision making as a result of critical thinking (Xenaki et al., 2021).
The purpose of the agency is to provide psychiatric diagnosis to patients with mental issues, free
of charge, especially for patients with humble family backgrounds. From this perspective, it is
important to acknowledge the fact that many lives are threatened because of lacking funds to
cater for treatment processes. The agency provides clinical assistance through advice from
professional medical practitioners with psychiatric experiences. Since the agency is non
profitable, running its scheduled operations is facilitated by charitable funds from well-wishers
and fund raisins conducted through various platforms.
The psychiatric treatments offered by the agency entails the assistance with mental,
behavioral and emotional disorders. In this perspective, the services are categorically separated
depending on age and gender as the main factors. Additionally, the extent of the mental illness
upon diagnosis will determine referral options to healthcare facilities with much sophisticated

aids. Official hours for the services depend on measures taken by reporting patients and the type
of bookings. For instance, physical examination works in the day time hours and online
assistance works twenty-four hours on a weekly basis. The vision and mission of the agency is to
provide sustainable solutions that will counter the emergent problem of mental illnesses hence
saving humanity from the drastic effects of despair, emotional imbalances and depression.
The Job Descriptions and Assessment of Professional Qualities for the Tasks within
the Agency
a) The Psychiatrist
The position of a psychiatrist is very crucial for the agency as it serves as a reference
point for mental illness diagnosis and treatment procedures. In this perspective, the job
description of the psychiatrist entails providing various inpatient and outpatient services such as
interviews for psychological assessments, medical prescriptions for diagnosed illnesses and
planning the care of inpatients and outpatients. The role of the psychiatrist within the agency
requires team players in order to achieve dissective analysis of patients and establish the plan of
care. Given the current size of the organization and the factor of available funds, this position
requires one professional who will work with the available team to ensure that patients receive
quality services. As a result, the qualities for this job include an educational background in the
field of psychiatry, years ...

Really helped me to better understand my coursework. Super recommended.


Similar Content

Related Tags