16 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Nudging social workers towards interpretive vigilance: approaches supporting management of conduct in the workplace
In the UK, Government Inquiries into health and social work failures have burgeoned ever more bureaucratic regulatory mechanisms for managing the conduct of professionals. This article draws on the concepts of Nudge Theory and Interpretive Vigilance to consider the impact upon the social work profession of mandatory registration (license) with a regulatory body. The author’s earlier UK based empirical qualitative study found that, as a regulatory method, registration had perverse consequences contrary to its purpose. A secondary analysis of data identified ‘nudge’ points which encouraged social workers to engage proactively with conduct issues in the workplace. Risks caused by both active and passive failures of ‘interpretive vigilance’ by social workers, who had witnessed concerning conduct of other professionals in workplaces, were identified. Criticisms of nudge theory as ethically dubious are considered in relation to the transparency of nudge interventions. It is proposed that, in the context of international concern about the inefficiency of regulation, nudge theory may be a low cost, light touch, local approach to encouraging social workers to exercise interpretive vigilance to conduct related risks and to take active collective ownership of conduct management in the work place
Reframing conduct: a critical analysis of the statutory requirement for registration of the social work workforce
The relationship between the statutory registration of a workforce and impact upon practice and practitioners is unclear. Little empirical research in relation to the efficacy of existing professional registers has been undertaken. No research has so far been undertaken in relation to the impact of UK legislated registration upon social work practice. A number of high profile cases in health care such as the Bristol, Shipman, Ayling and Allit inquiries (DH, 1994; Crown Office, 2001 & 2005) have drawn attention to the inadequacies of workforce registration systems. Regulatory approaches to modifying the behaviours of the regulated are widely viewed as problematic in a broad range of theoretical literature from diverse disciplinary bases and methodologies. Literatures caution that just as ‘markets’ may behave imperfectly, so may regulatory mechanisms such as workforce registration systems (Ayres & Braithwaite, 1992; Baldwin, Scott & Hood, 1998; Haines, 1999; Sparrow, 2000; Ashworth & Boyne, 2002; Johnstone & Sarre, 2004; Haines & Gurney, 2004; Walshe & Boyd, 2007). The UK Better Regulation Task Force cautions that some regulatory interventions can make a situation worse (2003b). The potential of professional registers generally and the social work register specifically to impact upon quality and improve protection has been questioned since 1982 when the first meetings about the development of a national social work regulatory council were held (Malherbe, 1982).
The regulatory body for social work in England, the General Social Care Council (GSCC) came into being in 2002. The first UK register of social workers came into force in 2005 with protection of title implemented shortly after. The first three conduct cases applying sanctions to registrants were heard within a year of the social work register opening.
Using a grounded theory approach, in the context of the first three conduct case outcomes, this study sought to elicit the perceptions of qualified social workers on the positive and negative impact(s) of the statutory requirement to register, for both the individuals and the organisations in which they work.
This study finds that the first registration conduct case outcomes triggered a reframing of the concept of conduct and that as a consequence, respondents in this study re-positioned their allegiance to registration, and engagement with conduct matters in the workplace. The study considers the relevance of research findings in the context of a changing policy and political landscape
Recommended from our members
GSCC targeted inspections of Approved Mental Health Professionals (AMHP) courses in England (2011-12)
The General Social Care Council (GSCC) has duties under Section 19 of the Mental Health Act 2007 to approve Approved Mental Health Profession (AMHP) training. This function will transfer to the Health Professions Council on 31 July 2012. The GSCC carried out a targeted inspection between March 2011 and February 2012 of all 22 AMHP programmes across England. This was to ensure at the point of transfer all courses were sufficiently meeting standards. There had been a number of issues and concerns raised about inconsistencies in the quality of AMHP programmes. The inspection process involved consulting all stakeholders concerned in delivering and using the programmes, including AMHP candidates, service users and carers. Each programme has their inspection report on the GSCC website. The key findings of these inspections are that the majority of the 22 programmes are meeting the standards expected and where they are not, action has been taken to ensure that prior to transfer of the GSCC’s AMHP inspection function, all programmes will meet the standards and not require regulatory intervention. There is inconsistency in the length and attached credit of each AMHP programme, although this did not seem to impair the threshold standard required for being competent in the AMHP role. This composite report features the overall outputs from the inspections
Recommended from our members
Coram’s permanence improvement project: children’s social care innovation programme evaluation report 24
Research on improvements to the adoption services of 2 local authorities, including the development of a new diagnostic tool for special guardianship orders and the creation of a ‘permanence improvement’ academy.
The project was intended to support children who could not safely live at home, particularly those with the most complex needs, where adoption was the long-term plan
Recommended from our members
[Review] Brian J. O'Neill, Tracy A. Swan, and Nick J. Mulé, ed. (2015) LGBTQ people and social work: intersectional perspectives
No description supplie
Defensive behaviours in public and private domains: the impact of regulation on English social workers
No description supplie
"But I'm still a human being": exploring the implications of social media connection within social work practice, education and research
No description supplie
Reframing conduct: the impact of regulation on social work registrants
No description supplie