Neoliberalism and Macro Practice: A Statewide Analysis of Macro Social Workers' Experiences of Managerialism, Professional Discretion and Resistance

Background: Macro social work focuses on community, organizational, and policy change towards the betterment of society, which has become even more essential in recent years due to the COVID-19, racial justice efforts, and many other broad social problems (Abrams & Dettlaff, 2020). Macro social workers (MacSW) are positioned to lead change, yet are sometimes undervalued by the broader public and many institutions (Reisch, 2016). Neoliberal managerialism, which prioritizes the use of business principles over person-centered approaches, is a phenomenon that may limit macro social work. Currently, there are few workforce studies on MacSW that attempt to quantify the mechanisms of neoliberalism and its impact on professional discretion. Even fewer have measured the degree to which MacSW have resisted this erosion of their professional discretion. This research assesses MacSW experiences of neoliberal managerialism in Minnesota. We ask: 1) To what extent do MacSW experience managerialism? 2) How much professional discretion do they have? 3) To what degree have they resisted neoliberal managerialism?

Methods: All licensed Minnesota social workers were invited to complete an online survey about their working conditions. Among respondents (n=3,662), 117 identified as MacSW. Respondents were 86% white and female, 66% held their master’s degree, had 15 years of practice experience on average, and 82% worked in an urban area. These social workers described their macro work in administration, therapy, community organizing, policy analysis, and research as well as work across the micro, messo, and macro spectrum. They were asked to respond to questions on their practice, extent of managerialism, breadth of professional discretion, and the extent of their resistance. Measures were sourced from the literature, prior workforce items, research and theory, team’s professional practice experience, and expert consultation (scale validation ongoing).

Results: Findings illustrated that 55% of MacSW were pressured by management to prioritize efficiency over quality, 46% had most of their work reviewed by others, and 47% had their computer activities actively monitored. Over 80% of MacSW reported feeling burned out with 41% suggesting the likelihood of looking for a new job in the next year. Regarding professional discretion, 40% felt dissuaded by management to organize stakeholders for change, and 20% felt dissuaded to advocate for social policy change. Lastly, for resistance 47% reported “loosely interpreting eligibility and assessment guidelines,” 53% reported organizing with coworkers, and 32% reported practicing outside of management approved interventions.

Conclusions: Arguably, macro social workers seek social change, however neoliberal managerialism and its impacts on professional discretion make fulfilling this essential work unnecessarily challenging. Research shows that MacSW are resisting neoliberalism within their work and maintaining their momentum despite neoliberalism, yet we have to understand the impact of neoliberalism on the high rates of burnout among macro social workers. Notable differences arise when compared with direct line workers (Toft et al., in progress) including higher rates of prioritizing efficiency and burnout, but lower rates of problematic discretion and barriers to resistance. Future research must further explore the levers of power that hinder and support resistance of neoliberalism within our communities.