The Impact of User Involvement Strategies in Welfare - Essay Example

Key issues in social policy: The impact of user involvement strategies in welfare Recently serious concerns have been raised with regard to a range of issues associated with the role and impact of user involvement in shaping public policies and welfare in general. Debates surrounding the role of ordinary people in shaping policies that ensure their well-being have been raised over the past several decades. Issues such as the role of citizen participation in the formation of social policies especially with regard to those policies which are considered critical for their survival such as health, education, social security, housing, welfare and other social policy arenas; are gaining widespread importance among researchers, administrators and policy makers alike (Ellison, 1999). This paper on social policy and the impact of user involvement strategies in public welfare aims to discuss the critical issues associated with service user involvement; the impact and role in formation of policies; the various challenges faced; the various benefits of such an involvement to the society at large; its impact on bringing about a positive change; and theoretical perspectives. Introduction: The positive impact of contribution of service users on the development, establishment and planning of social care policies are widely being recognized and hence accommodated by the government in UK, in recent times. The issue of social policy has been historically viewed and described as a state responsibility whereby the state is involved in developing and delivering welfare programs. With the introduction of marketization, a slight change in attitudes towards such policies was observed, whereby the focus was shifted from the state to the consumers, who were considered and attributed a special status and freedom to participate in development of a range of services accessed by them. The involvement of service users signifies and challenges the fundamental premise of social policies and raises various critical issues with regard to the nature, citizen participation, and long term impact of the same (Davies, 2000; Connor, Simpson, 2011). Table 1: Stakeholder perspectives on objectives, limits and goals of user involvement Such a change in attitudes towards social policy and the user involvement in the same was brought about by a simultaneous change in the economic, social and political spheres, a change in demographics which eventually led to the rise in decentralization, privatization, and globalization. Thus the conventional approaches to service delivery were transformed drastically to include public opinions and voice in the framing of policies that affect them. Current debates surrounding user involvement in welfare: The debate on user involvement strategies in welfare is mainly surrounded around five key issues which include - welfarism, professionalism, consumerism, managerialism and participationsim. Welfarism: Traditionally, the responsibility of developing social welfare policies was borne by the state, whereby strategies to provide welfare to the people included (but not limited to) offering relief funds to the poor and needy; providing benefits to the citizens, and enabling them to lead respectable and dignified lives (Dean, 2003). However, the changes in the external environment brought about by the change in demographics, technology, liberal trade policies etc., a simultaneous change in welfare policies was observed. The modern and evolved welfare state incorporated changes in the policy, although the model was built on the classical model of administration whereby the social welfare policies were established by the elected bodies and decision making was centered on the bureaucrats (Jensen, Pfau-Effinger, 2005; Dean, 2003). There was hardly any room for user involvement and little or no freedom of equal treatment. Such a model faced increased criticism from the public, which then paved way for including user contribution in policy matters and the policies were now increasingly centered considering public welfare (Taylor-Gooby, 2005). However despite such changes, the user involvement, particular with regard to Europe, was centered on and restricted to Trade Unions, and non-governmental organizations. Professionalism: Although the emphasis on increased user involvement in welfare as well as their involvement in all aspects of designing and developing of programs intended for users, has been popularized over the years, the social policy according to some researchers is more or less influenced more from the communitarian ideologies of he conservative governments as opposed to the liberal and consumerist ideologies. Thus, despite efforts to increase user involvement and increase user participation in development of welfare programs, the government / administration has instead, developed policies which encourage an “expert opinion” in the panel, which takes into consideration the needs and requirements of users on their behalf, to be included in the policy making. Such professionalism or professional inputs on behalf of the actual users, tends to dissuade effective policy formation and defeats the very purpose of seeking user involvement in welfare. According to Beresford & Croft (2003) the movement to increase user involvement in welfare policies has brought about significant changes in terms of developing a more focused human and civil rights system which aims at taking care of the needs and requirements of the people as opposed to those identified by a professional or an expert. Various activist groups and other members of the public have strongly criticized the governments plan to include a professionally-led development team as a representative of users. According to Lindow (in OConnor & Hughes, 2006) the use of professionals to represent service users does not quite serve the purpose and present a false image of the actual concerns of the users thus rendering the policy making ineffective. The opponents of user involvement however argue that such an involvement poses a great challenge for the development of social work, since the professionals have the right knowledge as well as resources to make accurate decisions and judgements regarding issues concerning the users, and hence are far more reliable for policy making as compared to the inputs of ordinary / non-professional general service users. According to researchers participatory discourse, especially with regard to child care could prove to be extremely misleading and harmful for the end user, since it could prevent professional inputs and judgements and hence denial of authoritative decisions. It could deprive the users from using professional services, openness and clarity in the system, which in retrospect is far more beneficial to the users. Consumerism: The concept of consumerism has been described as a market system whereby the individuals were assigned rights and encouraged their involvement in running an effective social work. This included a right to provide valuable and meaningful information, which in turn could be used by professionals for providing optimum service to the end users. It was further expanded to include a right to complain regarding the services so provided, thus enabling the authorities to develop welfare strategies framed with consumers at the centre of the service provision model (OConnor & Hughes, 2006). According to Richardson (1983) "consumers were assumed not only to have little interest in policy deliberations but also little capacity for contributing effectively to the process. It was upto the experts – the professionals, politicians and managers – to ensure that consumers’ needs were well served" (pp. 2-3). The opponents of this policy (of consumerism) argued that consumerism has little or no effect in the framing of social welfare policies, since it is mainly restricted to individual levels of service and fails to address critical issues concerning the wider society (Flösser, Otto, 1998). According to Kuhlman (2006) consumerism reacts differently to diverse market types and welfare systems. For instance in a market driven and tax-financed system there is a greater pressure on the administration to include consumers’ perspectives in policy making as opposed to a corporatist system. It does however help in bringing about innovative means and alternatives to address a range of issues faced by the service users. Managerialsim: According to Dustin (2007) the concept of managerialism in social care entails "rational planning, needs-led assessment based on eligibility criteria, targeting, separation of purchasing from provision of service, managerial rather than professional criteria determining priorities, new roles and skills such as commissioning, service contracts, care management, short term goals and performance indicators" (pp. 45). There has been a significant shift in approaches to social policy & welfare framework in the UK, whereby the development of a new public management has dominated the series of reforms initiated to improve public services over the past several decades. These reforms were aimed at bringing about changes and implementing more economical, cost-effective and efficient system in organizations involved in delivering welfare services. The use of such market-like mechanisms in the provision of welfare services thus indicated the beginning of managerialism within social welfare spheres. These newly formed organizations which were better connected and strategically networked, used enhanced systems of deliver of welfare services, using technology for faster data processing helped in improving the managerial aspects of care (Clark, Cochrane, McLaughlin, 1994; Evans, 2010). Furthermore the introduction of policies which ensured setting of targets, followed by a culture of auditing as a means of performance management, helped fuel the concept of managerialsim in service delivery. The inspection and scrutiny of processes and services provided helped in greater transparency and efficiency in welfare policies thus leading to a drastic improvement in services to the end users (Alcock, May, Wright, 2011). Participationsim: Conventionally in a democratic form of governance, there is a significant credibility assigned to accountability, which is ensured in the form of presence of a strong and effective opposition parties, media, or the general public (Blair, 1998). The participation of citizens thus, ensures their direct involvement in issues concerning them, and ensures an indirect representation in policy matters (Gaventa & Valderama, 1999). Such public participation in policy matters is argued to be the sole contributor in enhancing public welfare services and in ensuring an effective form of governance, which is highly transparent and accountable. There has been a steady and consistent rise in participatory approaches in welfare policies, with a view to encourage and enable more public participation in key policy matters. Such participation has enabled wide ranging transformations in public spheres across various levels from local to national and international levels as well (Holland & Blackburn, 1998). The co-operation and co-ordination of end users and those involved in decision making, ensures greater accountability and responsiveness, and hence results in positive changes in favour of the general public (De Sousa Santos, 1998). Thus as opposed to self-designed policies implemented through the use of professionals, the inclusion of public opinions in framing welfare policies helps in elevating the role of citizens in demanding and negotiating positive changes in the system, and help in shaping a better and more effective social policy. User Involvement Programs in the UK: Help the Aged Speaking up for our Age (SUFOA) is a program run by the national voluntary organization Help the Aged (HtA) which is operational in all cities across the UK. The organization aims at providing support to older people and encourages user involvement in terms of service planning as well as provision. The organization encourages optimum user involvement which is in the form feedback from people involved in providing services to the aged. This is done on a regular basis, whereby the representatives from the organization collect information from the users, and seek for recommendations for improving the service delivery. On the basis of this feedback the organization has implemented various changes such as providing written material in large prints; using simple lucid language for communication; and encouraging participation from older people from across the nation, to list a few (Help the Aged, 2011). Conclusion: The focus of user involvement strategies is to constantly devise plans with a view to ensure optimum involvement of service users. It is concerned with developing policies concerning the best possible manner to optimize and involve ordinary citizens in decision making with regard to public services and welfare policies. The rise of consumerism further fuelled this movement, and ultimately has emerged as one of the key social movements in recent times. Equality plays a crucial role in ensuring optimum benefits of such widespread user involvement. Thus if the users are to expect a fair and realistic chance of participating in public policy making, and secure welfare policies in their favour, it is preferable to active involvement across all sections of the society and thus ensure equitable access to welfare policies. References: Alcock, P., May, M., Wright, S., (2011). The students companion to social policy, John Wiley & Sons Publication, Pp. 266-70 Beresford, P. and Croft, S. (2003) Involving service users in management: citizenship, access and support. In (eds) J. Reynolds, J. Henderson, J. Seden, J. Charlesworth and A. Bullman, The Managing Care Reader, Routledge and The Open University. Blair, H., (1998), Spreading Power to the Periphery: an Assessment of Democratic Local Governance, USAID Program and Operations Assessment Report 21 Clarke, J., Cochrane, A., McLaughlin, E., (1994). Managing social policy, SAGE Publication, pp. 75-80 Connor, S., Simpson, G., (2011). Social policy for social welfare professionals: Tools for understanding, The Policy Press, Pp. 43-45 Davies, M., (2000). The Blackwell encyclopedia of social work, Wiley-Blackwell Publication, pp. 355-357 Dean, H. (2003), Re-conceptualising Welfare-To-Work for People with Multiple Problems and Needs, Journal of Social Policy, 32(3): pp. 441-459. De Sousa Santos, B., (1998), Participative Budgeting in Porto Alegre: Towards a Redistributive Democracy, Politics and Society 26(4): pp. 461-510. Dustin, D., (2007). The McDonaldization of social work, Ashgate Publishing, Pp. 45-50 Ellison, N., (1999), Beyond Universalism and Particularism: Rethinking Contemporary Welfare Theory, Critical Social Policy, Vol 19, No 1: pp. 57-83 Evans, T., (2010). Professional discretion in welfare services: Beyond street-level bureaucracy, Ashgate Publishing Ltd., Pp. 64-66 Flösser, G., Otto, H., (1998). Towards more democracy in social services: Models and culture of welfare, Walter de Gruytyer Publication, pp. 195-96 Gaventa, J., and Valderrama, C., (1999), Participation, Citizenship and Local Governance, Background note for Workshop: ‘Strengthening Participation in Local Governance’, Institute of Development Studies, Sussex, June 21-24 1999 Holland, J., Blackburn, J., eds. (1998), Whose Voice? Participatory Research and Policy Change, London: Intermediate Technology Jensen, P.H and B Pfau-Effinger (2005): Active citizenship: the new face of welfare. I J. Goul Andersen, A.-M Guilllemard, P.H Jensen og B. Pfau-Effinger: The changing face of welfare. Bristol: The Policy Press Kuhlman, E., (2006). Modernizing health care: reinventing professions, the state and the public, The Policy Press, Pp. 87-89 OConnor, I., Hughes, M., (2006). Social work and social care practice, SAGE Publication, Pp. 37-39 Richardson, A., (1983), Participation, Concepts in Social Policy I, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Taylor-Gooby, P. (2005), Ideas and policy change. In Taylor-Gooby (ed) 2005: Ideas and welfare state reform in Europe. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan Help the Aged (2011). [Online] Available at: http://www.helptheaged.org.uk [Accessed: December 19, 2011] Read More