Proceduralisation of decision-making processes: a case study of child welfare practice

Abstract

This article examines the use of a standardized assessment framework (the Kvello Assessment Framework (KF)), and how it guides assessment work, professional discretion and the knowledge base in child welfare practice. The KF is explored as an example of a standardized tool; it is a non-manual based assessment tool commonly used in Norway. The data stem from fieldwork in two child welfare offices and client documents from one of these offices, which were analysed using thematic analysis. The findings show that the use of the assessment tool led to proceduralisation of assessment work in two areas. First, through requirements for focus and for activities to obtain information. Second, the tool included procedural requirements of form-filling, which in turn placed interpretive demands on the professionals that turned interpretations into conclusions. The findings also identified gaps in their chain of argument. Based on these findings, I argue that use of this tool influences professionals’ discretionary activity as it leads to standardization of decision-making and a narrow knowledge base. The tool may increase the level of transparency of decision-making, and thus function as an instrument of control in association with accountability. However, the use of a standardized assessment tool does not seem to enhance child welfare professionals’ analytical skills and thus does not solve the challenges of child welfare practice. The article discusses how these shortcomings may lead to biased assessments, and emphasizes the importance of a transparent decision-making process.

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 — 8 citations exist upstream.

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