Privatisation as professionalisation? Attitudes, motives and achievements among Swedish social workers

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to discuss the relationship between privatisation and professionalisation in social work. In social services, privatisation is often seen as a politically planned (policy-driven) process as part of liberalisation strategies for market orientation of the welfare state. However, there are several reasons to believe that there is also a process of spontaneous privatisation (sometimes driven by demand), where professionals go private and provide various types of services to local welfare authorities. In this article, our aim is to explore the extent, impact and consequences of such profession-driven privatisation and to discuss whether privatisation is a strategy for professionalisation. This article investigates: (1) attitudes among social workers and social work students toward privatisation in general and private practice in particular; (2) the extent and types of activities being performed privately; (3) the motives whether or not to choose self-employment; (4) the differences between public and self-employed social workers in terms of professionalisation. Data are based on surveys of 1,000 Swedish social workers and 801 social work students. The results show ambivalence among professionals toward privatisation. The authors discuss the reasons for this at an individual and collective level. Although the share of social workers in private practice in Sweden is low, between 6 and 8%, more than one third of Swedish social workers expect to be working in private practice within 10 years. The circumstances faced by self-employed social workers, who rank higher on almost every professionalisation indicator (i.e. formal education, attitude toward research, internal status, wage level, autonomy), support the hypothesis about profession-driven privatisation.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 43 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.