The space before action: The role of peer discussion groups in frontline service provision

Laurie S. Goldman, Erica Gabrielle Foldy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Studies of street-level discretion tend to focus on what influences workers’ behaviors and the consequences of their choices for advancing or compromising policy goals, but studies rarely focus on the space before action, that is, the processes through which workers make decisions and, in particular, how they deliberate with one another about practice problems within groups dedicated to improving social service delivery. Drawing from two qualitative studies of peer discussion groups, a study of teams of child welfare workers and a study of interorganizational groups composed of employment service workers, we find that workers in each setting grappled with similar types of problems but differed in their focus on specific clients or routine tasks, how they sought to legitimate their responses, and the extent to which their proposed solutions modified established approaches to practice. Our analysis suggests that features of the accountability contexts associated with the two policy fields help explain observed differences.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)166-202
Number of pages37
JournalSocial Service Review
Volume89
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2015

Fingerprint

group discussion
worker
study goal
employment service
welfare worker
child welfare
mobile social services
Group
responsibility

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

The space before action : The role of peer discussion groups in frontline service provision. / Goldman, Laurie S.; Foldy, Erica Gabrielle.

In: Social Service Review, Vol. 89, No. 1, 01.03.2015, p. 166-202.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ad1d4415dc4a4904b4c6c8680072af5c,
title = "The space before action: The role of peer discussion groups in frontline service provision",
abstract = "Studies of street-level discretion tend to focus on what influences workers’ behaviors and the consequences of their choices for advancing or compromising policy goals, but studies rarely focus on the space before action, that is, the processes through which workers make decisions and, in particular, how they deliberate with one another about practice problems within groups dedicated to improving social service delivery. Drawing from two qualitative studies of peer discussion groups, a study of teams of child welfare workers and a study of interorganizational groups composed of employment service workers, we find that workers in each setting grappled with similar types of problems but differed in their focus on specific clients or routine tasks, how they sought to legitimate their responses, and the extent to which their proposed solutions modified established approaches to practice. Our analysis suggests that features of the accountability contexts associated with the two policy fields help explain observed differences.",
author = "Goldman, {Laurie S.} and Foldy, {Erica Gabrielle}",
year = "2015",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1086/680319",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "89",
pages = "166--202",
journal = "Social Service Review",
issn = "0037-7961",
publisher = "University of Chicago",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The space before action

T2 - The role of peer discussion groups in frontline service provision

AU - Goldman, Laurie S.

AU - Foldy, Erica Gabrielle

PY - 2015/3/1

Y1 - 2015/3/1

N2 - Studies of street-level discretion tend to focus on what influences workers’ behaviors and the consequences of their choices for advancing or compromising policy goals, but studies rarely focus on the space before action, that is, the processes through which workers make decisions and, in particular, how they deliberate with one another about practice problems within groups dedicated to improving social service delivery. Drawing from two qualitative studies of peer discussion groups, a study of teams of child welfare workers and a study of interorganizational groups composed of employment service workers, we find that workers in each setting grappled with similar types of problems but differed in their focus on specific clients or routine tasks, how they sought to legitimate their responses, and the extent to which their proposed solutions modified established approaches to practice. Our analysis suggests that features of the accountability contexts associated with the two policy fields help explain observed differences.

AB - Studies of street-level discretion tend to focus on what influences workers’ behaviors and the consequences of their choices for advancing or compromising policy goals, but studies rarely focus on the space before action, that is, the processes through which workers make decisions and, in particular, how they deliberate with one another about practice problems within groups dedicated to improving social service delivery. Drawing from two qualitative studies of peer discussion groups, a study of teams of child welfare workers and a study of interorganizational groups composed of employment service workers, we find that workers in each setting grappled with similar types of problems but differed in their focus on specific clients or routine tasks, how they sought to legitimate their responses, and the extent to which their proposed solutions modified established approaches to practice. Our analysis suggests that features of the accountability contexts associated with the two policy fields help explain observed differences.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84982734882&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84982734882&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1086/680319

DO - 10.1086/680319

M3 - Article

VL - 89

SP - 166

EP - 202

JO - Social Service Review

JF - Social Service Review

SN - 0037-7961

IS - 1

ER -