Administrative Leadership in the Social Services

The Next Challenge

Yeheskel Hasenfeld

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781136553677
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Medicine
• Subtopic: Medical Theory, Practice & Reference

What should be the roles and behavior of administrators to meet the challenges facing social service agencies today? Here is a thought-provoking book that provides a great deal of insight into administrative leadership, an essential component in the survival and effectiveness of social service agencies.In response to the enormous challenges that social service agencies are facing, including justification of their mission, mobilization of resources, and responsiveness to new social needs, experts present theoretical and empirical studies on administrative leadership in the social services, reviewing the most recent theories and research on the relationship between leadership and service effectiveness. They also focus on emerging issues in social work administration, including a description of the role of women in social work administration and an assessment of a feminist model of macro practice; the rise of for-profit social service agencies; management-union relations; and entrepreneurship as a new model for administrators.Administrative Leadership in the Social Services is especially useful for administrators of social service agencies by providing them with insight into their own practice and giving them guidance to improve their administrative effectiveness. To students and scholars, this outstanding new volume presents a review of theories and research on current and emerging issues in social work administration.

A Feminist Model for Macro-Practice: Promises and Problems

Cheryl Hyde, MSW

INTRODUCTION

Feminist social workers justifiably have criticized the ways in which macro-practice has neglected the contributions of women. Fieldwork opportunities, curriculum topics, theoretical models, historical accounts, and strategic methods reflect this oversight. This critique has resulted in a proliferation of writings on feminist administration, planning, and organizing. Two themes dominate this literature. The first focuses on women as organization or community practitioners (Cantarow, 1980; Garland, 1988; Gregory, 1980; Reinharz, 1983). In these works, authors refute the stereotype of the passive female primarily through the compilation of interviews with and stories about successful activists. The second theme concerns the development of feminist models of social work, in general, and macro-practice, in particular (Brandwein, 1981, 1982, 1987; Bricker-Jenkins & Hooyman, 1986a; Collins, 1986; Ellsworth et al., 1982; Hooyman & Cunningham, 1986; Van Den Bergh & Cooper, 1986; Weil, 1986). Such works identify the biases of existing social work paradigms, fill in historical gaps by noting the roles of women, and delineate new approaches and methods. These frameworks center on key feminist principles and usually are ideal types.

Both themes make important contributions to the field. From the former, rich and inspiring illustrations of women are presented. From the latter, imaginative and liberating approaches to social change, through organization and community venues, are created. Yet, there also are weaknesses. Interviews and stories rarely are analyzed or synthesized. With the exception of some introductory comments, the material is not applied to or grounded in theoretical or practice models. With respect to the development of frameworks, there is a tendency to assume that there is common agreement as to what constitutes feminism. Most frameworks are not empirically based, and implementation difficulties and contradictory dimensions rarely are discussed. Both themes assist in the construction of dynamic feminist approaches to macro-practice. It is time, however, to expand the boundaries of this enterprise.

It is the purpose of this paper to contribute to this effort. The paper is divided into two main sections. First, a composite model of feminist macro-practice is presented. Based upon the synthesis of various feminist frameworks, five practice principles are discussed: the centrality of women’s values, lives, and relationships; consciousness raising, linking the personal and political; the reconceptualization of power; democratizing processes and structures; and fundamental cultural and structural change. Second, a critique is given of this model, and by extension, of other feminist models. Focus is on some of the implementation difficulties of the model, specifically the contradictions of a cooperative setting and the dichotomy between service provision and political action. A suggested future agenda for feminist praxis is offered.

Both the delineation and critique of this model is influenced by the experiences of 50 feminist practitioners.¹ All these practitioners. identified themselves as feminists. Some made only passing reference to this identity, e.g., “I’m a socialist feminist,” while-others’ provided detailed explanations of what it means to be feminist. Information on ten of the practitioners was collected in 1984 through interviews and presentations as part of a project on women as social-change agents. The remainder were interviewed in 1987-1988 as part of a larger project on the survival of feminist organizations in the 1980s. Experiences in both groups ranged across issues: violence against women, unionization, peace, health care, civil rights, and women’s music. Practice settings varied from explicitly feminist groups and agencies to male-dominated organizations, though at some time virtually all worked in a service setting by or for women. Their collective vision focused on empowering women and other oppressed groups. Despite the many problems these women encountered, their presentations and interviews conveyed a high degree of passion and commitment.

The depth and range of their views provided ample material from which to construct the model of feminist practice that follows. Some of these principles may be recognized as components of other social work models. For example, radical social work has embraced the importance of consciousness raising and fundamental structural change. I argue that it is the unique intersection of these principles, combined with explicit attention to the gendered nature of oppression, that results in a feminist model of macro-practice.

A COMPOSITE MODEL OF FEMINIST MACRO-PRACTICE

The Centrality of Women’s Values, Lives, and Relationships

Recognizing, validating, and incorporating traditionally “feminine” attributes, such as using emotions, providing nurturance, and giving care, are keystones of feminist practice (Bricker-Jenkins & Hooyman, 1986a; Hooyman & Cunningham, 1986). A feminist approach refutes the notion that such characteristics are negative or inappropriate, and thus rejected from practice. Instead, feminists acknowledge the feelings and experiences of women, integrate such strengths into practice, and blend such qualities with those that traditionally are considered “masculine” traits. Recognition of “the feminine” shapes the ways in which feminists approach both social change endeavors and their roles as social change agents. The pursuit of social change often is tied intimately to or is an extension of the emotional and social roles held by women (Farenthold, 1988; Mayes, 1979).

Discussions on issues, strategies, and services emphasize this practice principle. It is revealed in the ways issues are framed or “owned”:

Women are the ones who are really doing the work for peace. Women are the ones who more closely have a sense of what life is, they birth children and care for life. (Liza)

Dealing with women is different. They are responsible for lives and families. They can’t separate home, work, and care. The concerns go from one to another. The most successful [union] drives are when issues are not separated. . . . Women tend to identify more with families than with work. (Karen)

Strategic options, particularly regarding constituent support and development, suggest this theme:

The organization . . . focuses mostly on the elderly and the rights of nursing home residents. I organized a lot of relatives, mostly women. I did a lot of outside advocacy work on behalf of families. (Marie)

Who do I deal with, men or women? A fair number of women, usually female parents of the kids in trouble [at school]: Social change needs the resources of women. We need to make education a national priority. (Renee)

We are feminist because we care more than others. (Barbara)

When I was still at [the auto plant] I always talked to the women, even in the grocery stores. You talk whenever you can—grocery stores, lunch rooms, bowling allies, the punch out area [time clock]. You keep up the contacts and the ideas. (Gloria)

And, frequent mention of a woman-centered orientation to services also supports this principle:²

We’re a feminist organization because we are mainly woman-run. We are helping to end a crime [sexual assault] that affects women. And we are trying to change the way people think and work with men. (Kim)

[Do you think this organization is feminist?] Yes, I do. The staff is real dedicated to the work we do and to the women who come in. We still radicalize and politicize the women who use our services. (Teresa)

These practitioners reveal one aspect of the “feminine” side of organizing: a family, domestic, or private (as opposed to public domain) orientation. This approach results in qualitatively different decisions regarding which issues are important, who the “experts” are, and what the constituency is. Because of this orientation, feminist activists may possess greater credibility and awareness concerning key issues for women such as school conditions, children’s problems, neighborhood safety, and family planning (Brandwein, 1982). Since women focus on family and social networks, personalized analyses and assessments of the community environment also develop (Bokemeier & Tait, 1980; McPherson & Smith-Lovin, 1982).

In addition to influencing approaches to issues and strategies, this orientation provides a basic rationale for involvement in program development and mobilization efforts. Improving one’s community (no matter how defined) and the process of meeting one’s basic needs are core reasons for undertaking action. The organizer of a women’s music series explained:

It really came out of my need to be with women. I love women’s music and being with women. Women’s music, listening to it and going to concerts is like being high. It affirmed myself. (Pam)

The need for personal fulfillment resulted in a collective expression of feminist culture. Yet Farenthold (1988) notes that it is usually a direct threat to something of personal value, like health or home, that catalyzes action:

It [self-help group] started with my own health. I was misdiagnosed. Endometriosis is really tied to women’s issues. First there is pain, and pain is taboo. . . . Yes, I had all the classic symptoms, yet I couldn’t get a diagnosis because of the myths of being young and, therefore, promiscuous. When I found out I had it, I had no idea what it was. There was so little information. (Nancy)

Organizing to save [my housing area], this is real important. It’s our home. I am guided by personal needs. I need that kind of investment to organize, (Hannah)

I think I initially became involved because of self-interest. The neighborhood was going down and nobody was doing anything about it. (Fahey, 1978, p. 24)

Caring and nurturing and protecting family and community provide the impetus for involvement. The recognition of women’s perspectives and experiences is not only valid but essential to feminist practice (Bricker-Jenkins & Hooyman, 1986a; Hooyman & Cunningham, 1986).

This acknowledgment of “feminine” qualities, particularly the social and emotional dimensions, substantiates Gilligan’s (1982) thesis concerning women’s sense of justice and moral development (Brandwein, 1987; Collins, 1986). Rather than base moral judgments on a single event, women factor in the various implications of roles and relationships held by the key actors in a given scenario. Decisions are not determined by isolated, fragmented events but on a complex series of events and the likely consequences. Placing social justice within this relational framework is reflected in the generational reasons for involvement in feminist endeavors:

Having children definitely influences the work that I do. I feel strongly that what I’m doing is for them. . . . Social change is the slow but constant process of fighting. It’s realizing that you and others are not getting what is needed. It’s people getting for their children what they didn’t have. I don’t think major social change, in which everyone is cared for, will happen in my lifetime. You just have to chip away and trust that others will follow you. (Marie)

OK, do I see some; most or all of my life was involved with social change. I’d say almost all of it. When I talk with my children, share my values and how the world works, that’s a conscious form of social change. (Renee)

In an exploratory study of feminist social workers, Bricker-Jenkins and Hooyman (1986b) found that Gilligan was one of the most influential social scientists for the respondents. Furthermore, the respondents emphasized the importance of developing a relationship structure that would empower their clients.

Brandwein (1987) suggests that this analytical framework produces a fluid strategic planning process since the practitioner is able ‘to consider or anticipate both short- and long-term consequences. Other feminists indicate that a multi-dimensional approach to problem identification and resolution emerges from this relational context. Issue definition is shaped by the subjective—that is, by women’s values, insights, and experiences. Each problem has multiple causes and solutions, all of which deserve exploration (Bricker-Jenkins & Hooyman, 1986a; Hooyman & Cunningham, 1986; Weil, 1986). The examination of a range of options, grounded in participants’ lives, is in sharp contrast to the rational model employed by the traditional approaches to macro-practice (Ellsworth et al., 1982).

Consciousness Raising:
Linking the Personal and Political

Flowing directly from the first principle is the second: the use of consciousness raising as the mechanism through which personal experiences are linked to political solutions. Consciousness raising is central to feminist theory and methodology:

Consciousness raising is the major technique of analysis, structure of organization, method of practice, and theory of social change of the women’s movement. In consciousness raising, often in groups, the impact of male dominance is concretely uncovered and analyzed through the collective speaking of women’s experience, from the perspective of that experience.

Through consciousness raising, women grasp the collective reality of women’s condition from within the perspective of that experience, not from outside it. The claim that a sexual politics exists and is socially fundamental is grounded in the claim of feminism to women’s perspectives, not from it. Its claim to women’s perspective is its claim to truth. (MacKinnon, 1982, pp. 519-520, 536)

Consciousness raising provides women (and other oppressed persons) with a means of discovering the social construction of patriarchal reality, reclaiming history, affirming experiences, healing wounds caused by oppressive acts, and generating collective solutions (Bricker-Jenkins & Hooyman, 1986a; Collins, 1986; Van Den Bergh & Cooper, 1986; Weil, 1986). Consciousness raising groups were the backbone of the radical wing of the women’s movement during the late 1960s and early 1970s (Evans, 1980). Currently, it is not uncommon for feminist organizations to offer consciousness raising sessions (Hyde, forthcoming). The use of consciousness raising, combined with additional educational tools, is the most frequently mentioned characteristic of feminist practice in the Bricker-Jenkins and Hooyman (1986b) study.

At the heart of consciousness raising is the process through which participants understand that the personal is political. Individual problems are linked to the institutional, cultural, and material factors that generate inequalities. Women learn to reject s...

Table of contents

• Front Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• About the Guest Editor
• The Challenge to Administrative Leadership in the Social Services: A Prefatory Essay
• The Human Service Executive
• Recent Themes in Theory and Research on Leadership and Their Implications for Management of the Human Services
• Executive Entry: Multiple Perspectives on the Process of Muddling Through
• Managerial Leadership and Service Quality: Toward a Model of Social Work Administration
• The Effect of Leadership on Workers in Human Service Organizations
• Women’s Prospects for Leadership in Social Welfare: A Political Economy Perspective
• A Feminist Model for Macro-Practice: Promises and Problems
• Human Service Corporations: New Opportunities for Administration in Social Work
• Social Service Administration and the Challenge of Unionization
• Human Service Entrepreneurship: The Four “C” Approach
• The Life Cycle of Human Service Organizations: An Administrative Perspective