Social services agency, occupational well-being and goals attainment in social work

1. Social services agency, occupational well-being and goalsattainment in social work Žalimienė, Laimutė Vilnius University, Lithuanian Social Research Centre 2nd Joint World Conference on Social Work and Social Development Action and Impact Stokholm, 2012

2. Outline ofpresentation • Methodologicalframeoftheresearch. • Mainfactors of occupational well-being (OWB) instatesocialservicesagencies. • Pecularities of OWB in stateinstitutions. • Conclusions, implicationsforpractice. H: employees of state (“old fashion”)social services institutions experience less friendly organisational environment than of municipal or private agencies. Research “Occupational well-being of social work practitioners in Lithuania” under support of the Research Council of Lithuania, implementing National Programme “Social Challenges for National Security” (Project No. SIN-02/2011).

3. Conceptualisation of occupational well-being

4. Groups of empirical indicators of OWB • Nature of work. • Social guarantees at work. • Stress at work. • Organization of work: functions, workplace, workload, leadership. • Power, control: participating in planning, control strategies, involvement in decision-making. • Organizational support: support of leaders and colleagues, supervision. • Professional growth: career, training, innovations. • Reconciliation family and work. • Professional prestige (to be proud of being a social worker) • General satisfaction at work, happiness at work.

5. Factors of OWB ofdifferent social services agencies

6. Factors of OWB in state socialservices

7. Occupational wellbeing in state institutions (1) • Stress at work: 10% suffers stress from disrespect ofleaders (in non-state -2-4 %) • Psychological environment in organisation : 45%havementionedas „well“ (innonstate63- 77% . • Sharing information: between employees; managers-employees: 50% sad „well“ (in non-state- 70 %). • Employees’ involvement in strategic planning - very rare. • Support of leaders: more rare than in non-state institutions.

8. Occupational wellbeing in state institutions (2) • Conflicts between employees; between managers-employees: in state institutions twice more often than in non-state. • Culture of control: more frequently are used diverse penalties, requirements for very detailed daily work planning. • Power relationships: 20% havementioneddisrespectful behaviour of leaders towards employees(innonstate 2-5%). • Reconciliation family-work: instateinstitutionslesssatisfied. • Professional prestige, loyalty to organization: less are proud to be a SW or part of the organisation.

9. Eemployeesof state institutions experience less friendly organisational environment than of municipal or privateagencies: • More often suffer stress from disrespect of leaders. • Work in poorer psychological environment. • Experience more barriers in sharing information. • More often work in destructive environment. • More often experience direct control. • Are more powerlessinorganisation. • Receive less support of leaders. • Have less possibilities to reconcile family andwork. • Are less loyalto organization ad social work profession.

10. Implications to socialpolicyandadministration Employees of state institutions experience less friendly organisational environment (thus, overall OWB). This could be an obstacle to a high quality performance, SWgoalsattainment (how to empower SW clients). Powerlesssocialworkers are notable to empower ... What are theways to changedisciplinaryculture, hierarchicalrelationshipsinstateinstitutions?