Social Acceptability of the Financial Social Work (FinSoc) Intervention: A Qualitative Study Among Clients and Professionals in Finland

Background & Objective: Financial capability interventions that provide access to counselling meetings with social work practitioners represent a promising collaborative strategy. However, little research exists on the acceptability of such interventions. This paper reports on a nested qualitative study within a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a novel financial social work intervention called FinSoc. The intervention aims to increase financial literacy and economic self-efficacy and to reduce financial anxiety among parents with financial problems. FinSoc is intended to be used in child and family social services and it was piloted in Finland. We investigated the acceptability of the FinSoc intervention with qualitative methods. In this paper we focus on social acceptability of the intervention.

Methods: Prior to obtaining the trial results, participating clients and practitioners conducting the intervention were interviewed. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed thematically utilizing theorized concepts of acceptability. 11 intervention receiving clients (female 8, male 3) and 9 intervention delivering practitioners (female 8, male 1) participated in the interviews. The majority of participants are female.

Results: Participants engaged well with the FinSoc intervention and reported positive outcomes from the intervention. We identified the Theoretical frame of the acceptability in FinSoc intervention, TFA FinSoc, which includes six layers of impacting factors. According to our results social acceptability reflects in how others’ (e.g., one’s family) attitude towards and participation in the intervention impacted acceptance of it. Participants in FinSoc included families in which two adults participated in the intervention, as well as families in which only one adult participated. For some, the family model consisted of one adult and children. For others, one spouse’s nonparticipation was influenced by various factors, including scheduling challenges or a lack of motivation to participate in the intervention. We found that the joint involvement of spouses positively impacted feelings of social acceptance. The commitment of both spouses to take part in the intervention contributed to an increasing sense of financial control and increased cooperation within the family in relation to financial matters.

Conclusions: A key finding in our investigation revealed the meaning of social acceptability as an element impacting the acceptance. Social acceptability here refers to the pivotal role of family and family members. More precisely, family and family members could foster motivation and a commitment to the intervention, especially through cooperation and unity among spouses. It is important to discuss the gender role in social acceptability, as social acceptability affects how the family employs the intervention. There is, however, a group of families for whom a genuine need for the intervention exists, but within which spouses disagree regarding whether to participate. This leads us to the question how the intervention could take into account families in which members have conflicting motivations or commitments to the intervention.