Presentation
Bob Mullaly is the author of books about ‘the new structural social work,’ a concept he has been writing about for many years from a progressive point of view. One of the fundamental questions about how social work should be carried out is ‘Do the clients of social workers need to be changed or does the structure of their society need to be changed?’ I do not mean to imply that the job of a social worker is to attempt to change society’s structure. I am only trying to explain that Mullaly has not observed that contemporary social work has been successful so he is suggesting a new paradigm for the discipline of social work. The reason he feels this is important is because the conventional use of “practice wisdom” has not been particularly successful if we look at how many people live in America today.
A transformation project was done at a human services organization, Island, in Tennessee. Mullaly’s ideas about transformational social work practice were used by Island. The study applies because it discusses the advantages and disadvantages when trying to change an organizations structure. The ‘Island’ is a non-profit human resource center in Nashville helping troubled teenagers and their families. The strategy used was to try to change the organization instead of trying to change the client coming to the Island for help.
Remember that the conventional theory of social work is to create change in an individual so they can be more successful in society. The Island did not see that their community was improving using traditional social work practice so they decided to try some new strategies such a trying to break the habit of relying on old strategies with their clients. The Island experiment addressed “blending ameliorative and transformative approaches” for social workers to take in the organization (Evans, Hanlin, & Prilleltensky, 2007, p. 359). The amelioration of circumstances refers to improving something and/or making circumstances less harsh. So it is not a big change in society’s structure but it is a way of changing the impact of how society’s structure is hard on some families. Transformative is different from ameliorating circumstances because ‘to transform’ requires definitive action. Transformation requires change and change is not easy for most people or for organizations. In order to ‘ameliorate’ an organization small changes can be made here and there, but in order to ‘transform’ an organization, new choices need to be made and actions based on those choices are necessary.
An example of a transformative idea is changing the point-of-view on the role of social services and the impact the services should have on their clients and community. The assumption that ‘bad people need welfare’ is changed into ‘circumstances in society cause people to find themselves in difficult situations.’ Mullaly suggests that capitalism as practiced in the United States gives some people many advantages but leaves a part of the population with very few advantages. Even if people at the lowest income levels in society are offered a “decent minimal standard of living” their emotions are effected by “positional consumption” meaning that compared to the top 1 percent holding most of the country’s wealth those at the bottom feel they can never really succeed in way the rich and powerful have. (Stanford and Biddle, 2008, p. 30)
Social work has a foundation in values that approve of social security but with more egalitarian results than social security now functions. A progressive social worker can work within a social welfare paradigm that offers values of equality and humanity, but the current structure, unfortunately is based on neo-conservative/liberal capitalism. A progressive structure and the current structure are in direct opposition making radical positive change impossible. Conservatism has a fear of radical change whereas the concept of making progress requires embracing change.
The Island had been working in the community for 35 years so many assumptions about what worked and what did not work were habitually taken for granted even if reality did not show any proof. The organization changed by addressing structural organizational changes, a perspective based on the structural theory of social work. The biggest challenges to transformation were the cultural of the organization not used to change and the lack of consistent progress to meeting the goals. Sometimes progress could be felt but many times no difference could be observed which was very discouraging. The researchers concluded that the action-based research project at Island proved that transformation cannot work alone but must also include small steps to improve the lives of their clients.
Regardless of the economic theory in play the most important concept for social workers to remember is that treating clients with respect, helping gain work acceptance and enhancing their self-determination are essential goals. These are the values that are stated in the CASW Code of Ethics. When we understand that the structure of society is generally inhumane and encourages inequality then we must accept that the attitude of the clients is not the cause of their inability to find success. Each social worker can find a way to treat clients with a new perspective after realizing the battle society is waging against their rising to higher income level. At that point progressive social work comes alive and the old structure becomes undermined by the new perspective.
References
Evans, S., Hanlin, C.E., and Prillelrensky, I. (2007). Blending ameliorative and transformative approaches in human service organizations: A case study. Journal of Community Psychology, 35(3: 329-346.
Mullaly, B. (2007). “Capitalism, Crises, and Paradigms” in The new structural social work: Ideology, theory, and practice. (3rd ed.) B. Mullaly (Ed.) Toronto: Oxford University Press. [HV40.M855] pp. 2-43.
Stanford, J. and Biddle, T. (2008). Economics for Everyone: A short guide to the economics of capitalism. Halifax & Winnipeg: Fernwood Publishing and CCPA. [HB501.S83]
