Iterations of work inclusion beyond the standard service
Personalised welfare services in the era of activation and innovation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31265/jcsw.v19i2.663Keywords:
active labour market policies, personalisation, caseloads, supported employment, complex family interventions, street-level organisations, relational social workAbstract
Employment services are repeatedly criticised for building barriers to service user participation and decent employment due to combinations of conditionality, bureaucratic logics, high caseloads and scarce resources. However, a range of newer service approaches recognise some of these shortcomings, and aim for personalisation, service coordination, and/or increased connection to employers. In this article, we compare four programmes and their key worker roles, implemented in Norwegian postreform welfare and employment services (NAV) in the 2010s, as iterations of work inclusion beyond the standard follow-up service. These approaches are sensitive to gaps in the current service system, and they invest in the relationship between the professional worker and the service user, working both within and beyond social work approaches. Situated in the broader research literature on activation, personalisation and street-level organisations, we provide an analysis of how these approaches go beyond “business as usual” through strengthened key worker roles. We argue that the relational work approach adopted in these measures has the potential to foster the participation of service users, and to smoothen and sometimes tone down the conditional aspects of services, but that different organisational demands and accountability mechanisms produce a different space of action for key workers and users to shape the path towards labour and social inclusion.
References
Andersen, N. A., Caswell, D., & Larsen, F. (2017). A New approach to Helping the hard-to-place Unemployed: The promise of developing new knowledge in an interactive and collaborative process. European Journal of Social Security, 19(4), 335–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1388262717745193
Andreassen, T. A., & Aars, J. (2015). Den store reformen: Da NAV ble til. [The big reform: When NAV came into being] Universitetsforlaget. https://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-nb_digibok_2021011207554
Bakkeli, V., & Breit, E. (2022). From “what works” to “making it work”: A practice perspective on evidence-based standardization in frontline service organizations. Social Policy & Administration, 56(1), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12757
Bakken, F. M., & van der Wel, K. (2023). Cross-sectoral frontline delivery of welfare-to-work services for young adults with complex problems in Norway. Social Policy & Administration, 57(3), 304–317. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12860
Breit, E., Fossestøl, K., & Pedersen, E. (2018). A knowledge hierarchy in labour and welfare services? Evidence-based and practice-based knowledge in frontline service innovation. International Social Security Review, 71(4), 13–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/issr.12187
Brodkin, E. Z. (2013a). Work and the welfare state. In E. Z. Brodkin & G. Marston (Eds.), Work and the welfare state: Street-level organisations and workfare politics, (pp. 3-16). Georgetown University Press.
Brodkin, E. Z. (2013b). Street-level organisations and the welfare state. In E. Z. Brodkin & G. Marston (Eds.), Work and the welfare state: Street-level organisations and workfare politics, (pp. 17-34). Georgetown University Press.
Bønnhoff, H. E. D. (2019). «Verden går veldig fort». Mødre med migrasjonserfaring møter norsk digitaliseringspolitikk [“The World Goes Very Fast” Migrant Mothers Meeting the Norwegian Digitalization Politics]. Tidsskrift for Velferdsforskning, 22(4), 325–337. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2464-3076-2019-04-05
Dall, T., & Danneris, S. (2019). Reconsidering ‘What Works’ in Welfare-to-Work with the Vulnerable Unemployed: The Potential of Relational Causality as an Alternative Approach. Social Policy and Society, 18(4), 583–596. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746419000186
Drake, R. E., Bond, G. R., & Becker, D. R. (2012). Individual placement and support: An evidence-based approach to supported employment. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199734016.001.0001
Dubois,V. (2010). The bureaucrat and the Poor. Encounters in French welfare offices. Ashgate
Dubnick, M. (2005). Accountability and the Promise of Performance: In Search of the Mechanisms. Public Performance & Management Review, 28(3), 376–417.
EUSE (2010). The European Union of Supported Employment Toolkit. Supported Employment Associations. https://www.base-uk.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/european_supported_employment_toolkit.pdf
Fløtten, T., & Grødem, A. S. (2014). Helhetlige tiltak mot barnefattigdom. En kunnskapsoppsummering [Holistic measures against child poverty. A summary of knowledge]. Fafo. https://www.fafo.no/zoo-publikasjoner/fafo-rapporter/helhetlige-tiltak-mot-barnefattigdom
Fuertes, V., & Lindsay, C. (2016). Personalization and Street-Level Practice in Activation: The Case of the UK’s Work Programme. Public Administration, 94(2), 526–541. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12234
Gjersøe, H. M. (2016). Vurdering av arbeidsevne i NAV: Et spørsmål om kunnskap? [Work Capability assessments in the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Service:
A Matter of Knowledge?]. Sosiologi i dag, 46(1). https://ojs.novus.no/index.php/SID/article/view/1248
Gjersøe, H. M., Leseth, A., & Vilhena, S. (2020). Frontline implementation of welfare conditionality in Norway: A maternalistic practice. Social Policy & Administration, 54(3), 491–504. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12567
Gjersøe, H. M., & Strand, A. H. (2023). The Street-Level Organisation in-between Employer Needs and Client Needs: Creaming Users by Motivation in the Norwegian Employment and Welfare Service (NAV). Journal of Social Policy, 52(3), 682–699. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279421000933
Governmental paper no. 33 (2015-2016). NAV i en ny tid—For arbeid og aktivitet [NAV in a new era – for work and activity]. Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/8f9e56528fb340eb9f6515cc21ab5119/no/pdfs/stm201520160033000dddpdfs.pdf
Gubrium, E., Harsløf, I., & Lødemel, I. (2014). Norwegian Activation Reform on a Wave of Wider Welfare State Change. In I. Lødemel & A. Moreira (Eds.), Activation or workfare? Governance and the neo-liberal convergence (pp. 19–46). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199773589.003.0002
Hansen, H.-T., Lundberg, K., & Syltevik, L. J. (2018). Digitalization, Street-Level Bureaucracy and Welfare Users’ Experiences. Social Policy & Administration, 52(1), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12283
Heidenreich, M., & Rice, D. (2016). Integrating social and employment policies at the local level: Conceptual and empirical challenges. In M. Heidenreich & D. Rice (Eds.), Integrating Social and Employment Policies in Europe: Active Inclusion and Challenges for Local Welfare Governance (pp. 16–50). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783474929
Helgøy, I., Kildal, N., & Nilssen, E. (2011). Mot en spesialisert veilederrolle i NAV? En dokumentasjonsrapport [Towards a specialized supervisory role in NAV? A documentation report]. Notat 12-2011. Uni Rokkansenteret. http://hdl.handle.net/1956/5991
Howard, C. (2012). The contradictions of individualized activation policy: Explaining the rise and demise of One to One Service in Australia. Critical Social Policy, 32(4), 655–676. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018311430456
Johnson, M., Martínez Lucio, M., Grimshaw, D., & Watt, L. (2023). Swimming against the tide? Street-level bureaucrats and the limits to inclusive active labour market programmes in the UK. Human Relations, 76(5), 689–714. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267211045037
Kane, A. A. (2020). NAV’s vurdering av brukeres bistandsbehov [Labour- and Welfare Services’ (NAV) Assessments of Service Users’ Assistance Needs
– Legal Justice within Work Inclusion]. Tidsskrift for Velferdsforskning, 23(1), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2464-3076-2020-01-03
Koch, I., & Reeves, A. (2021). From social security to state sanctioned insecurity: How welfare reform mimics the commodification of labour through greater state intervention. Economy and Society, 50(3), 448–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2020.1844936
Larsen, F., & Caswell, D. (2022). Co-Creation in an era of Welfare Conditionality – Lessons from Denmark. Journal of Social Policy, 51(1), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279420000665
Lindsay, C., Pearson, S., Batty, E., Cullen, A. M., & Eadson, W. (2019). Street-Level Practice, Personalisation and Co-Production in Employability: Insights from Local Services with Lone Parents. Social Policy and Society, 18(4), 647–658. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746419000174
Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services (30th anniversary expanded ed.) Russell Sage Foundation. (First published 1980).
Lister, R. (2016). ‘To count for nothing’: Poverty beyond the statistics: British Academy Lecture read 5 February 2015. In J. Carsten & S. Frith (Eds.), British Academy Lectures 2014-15 (pp. 139–166). British Academy. https://doi.org/10.5871/bacad/9780197265987.003.0005
Lødemel, I., & Trickey, H. (2001). A new contract for social assistance. In H. Trickey & I. Lødemel (Eds.), An Offer You Can’t Refuse’: Workfare in International Perspective (pp. 1–40). Bristol University Press. https://doi.org/10.46692/9781847425249.002
Lundberg, K. G. (2012). Uforutsigbare relasjoner. Brukererfaringer, NAV-reformen og levd liv [Doctororal dissertation]. University of Bergen. https://bora.uib.no/bora-xmlui/handle/1956/5715
Lundberg, K. (2018). The Welfare Subject in the “One-stop Shop”: Agency in Troublesome Welfare Encounters. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 45(2). https://doi.org/10.15453/0191-5096.4098
Lundberg, K. G., & Danielsen, H. (2024). The flexibility of family co-ordinators in complex family interventions: Building relations over time with families living in sustained poverty. European Journal of Social Work, 27(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2023.2297654
Lundberg, K. G., & Syltevik, L. J. (2016). Everyday interaction at the front-line: The case of the Norwegian all-in-one bureaucracy. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 5(2), 152–166. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOE-12-2015-0026
Malmberg-Heimonen, I., & Tøge, A. G. (2022). Family Intervention Projects as Poverty-Alleviating Measures: Results from a Norwegian Cluster-Randomised Study. Social Policy and Society, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746422000124
Moe, C., Brinchmann, B., Borg, M., McDaid, D., Rinaldi, M., Killackey, E., & Mykletun, A. (2023). Implementing individual placement and support in Norway. From vocational rehabilitation to an employment scheme. Social Policy & Administration, 57(5), 610–625. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12881
Mølland, E., Lundberg, K. G., Haraldstad, K., Vigsnes, K. L., Bøe, T., Danielsen, H., Ask, T. A., Wilson, P., & Abildsnes, E. (2023). Economic composition and income volatility of Norwegian low-income families – a mixed method study of its implications. Nordic Journal of Social Research, 14(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.18261/njsr.14.1.2
Mølland, E., Vigsnes, K. L., Bøe, T., Danielsen, H., Lundberg, K. G., Haraldstad, K., Ask, T. A., Wilson, P., & Abildsnes, E. (2021). The New Patterns study: Coordinated measures to combat child poverty. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 49(5), 571–579. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494820956452
NAV (2020). Vedlegg til MD BREV 2021-Faglige føringer for oppfølgingstjenester i egen regi [Appendix to MD BREV 2021-Professional guidelines for follow-up services under own auspices]. Directorate of Labour and Welfare.
Nerskogen, E., & Kane, A. A. (2021). Forutsetniner for skjønsmessig handlingsrom i NAV. [Prerequisites for discretionary leeway in NAV]. In A. A. Kane & Ø. Spjelkavik (Eds.), Arbeidsinkludering, læring og innovasjon i NAV [Work Inclusion, learning and innovasjon in NAV]. (pp. 288–311). Orkana Akademisk. https://doi.org/10.33673/OOA20211/11
Nielsen, M. H., Dall,T., & Madsen, B. M. (2023). A hybrid job center. Composite client experiences with employment services between enforcement and care. European Journal of Social Work, 26(6)1085-1096 https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2022.2154319
Nielsen, M. H., & Monrad, M. (2023). Client Participation and Conditionality: Navigating Conflicting Normative Demands in Employment Services. Administration & Society, 55(5), 802–823. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231157750
NOU 2012: 6 (2012). Arbeidsrettede tiltak [Official Norwegian report 2012:6. Work-oriented measures] Ministry of Labour. https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/f2ce6d22c3914e7b89d15db41285cf85/no/pdfs/nou201220120006000dddpdfs.pdf
Parsell, C., Vincent, E., Klein, E., Clarke, A., & Walsh, T. (2020). Introduction to the special issue on welfare conditionality in Australia. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 55(1), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajs4.102
Røhnebæk, M. (2016). Fra bakkebyråkrati til skjermbyråkrati [From Street-Level to Screen-Level Bureaucracy]. Tidsskrift for velferdsforskning, 19(4), 288–304. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2464-3076-2016-04-01
Røhnebæk, M. T., & Breit, E. (2022). ‘Damned if you do and damned if you don’t’: A framework for examining double binds in public service organizations. Public Management Review, 24(7), 1001–1023. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1882542
Skjold, S. M., & Lundberg, K. G. (2024). Accountability in personalised Supported Employment-based activation services. Journal of Social Policy, 53(4), 916–932. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279422000915
Spjelkavik, Ø. (2012). Supported Employment in Norway and in the other Nordic countries. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 37(3), 163–172. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-2012-0611
Synnes, K. M. (2021). Guarding the borders of the Norwegian welfare state. How NAV employees decide on social assistance for unemployed Polish migrants. Nordic Social Work Research, 11(2), 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/2156857X.2020.1861070
Toerien, M., Sainsbury, R., Drew, P., & Irvine, A. (2013). Putting Personalisation into Practice: Work-Focused Interviews in Jobcentre Plus. Journal of Social Policy, 42(2), 309–327. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279412000980
van Berkel, R., Caswell, D., Kupka, P., & Larsen, F. (2017). Frontline Delivery of Welfare-to-Work Policies in Europe: Activating the Unemployed. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315694474
Van Berkel, R., & Knies, E. (2016). ‘Performance management, caseloads and the frontline provision of social services’, Social Policy & Administration, 50(1), 59-78. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12150
van der Aa, P., & van Berkel, R. (2014). Innovating job activation by involving employers. International Social Security Review, 67(2), 11–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/issr.12036
Volckmar-Eeg, M. G., & Vassenden, A. (2022). Et flipperspill i velferdsstaten: Innlåsing av innvandrere med «språkutfordringer» i NAV [A pinball game in the welfare state: Locking up immigrants with "language challenges" in NAV]. Tidsskrift for samfunnsforskning, 63(4), 260–277. https://doi.org/10.18261/tfs.63.4.2
Vågeng Committee (2015). Et NAV med muligheter. Sluttrapport fra ekspertgruppen som har gjennomgått NAV [A NAV with possibilities. Final report from the Expert group's reviewing of NAV.] Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/departementene/aid/dokumenter/2015/sluttrapport-ekspertgruppen-nav_9.4.15.pdf
Watts, B., & Fitzpatrick, S. (2018). Welfare Conditionality. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315652047
Wright, S. (2016). Conceptualising the active welfare subject: Welfare reform in discourse, policy and lived experience. Policy & Politics, 44(2), 235–252. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557314X13904856745154
Zacka, B. (2017). When the State Meets the Street: Public Service and Moral Agency. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674981423
Øversveen, E., & Forseth, U. (2018). Fremmed i NAV: Arbeidslinja i praksis [The institutional construction of unemployment. Examining the Norwegian work line]. Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, 2(4), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2535-2512-2018-04-01
Åsheim, H. (2018). Aktivitetsplan som styringsverktøy [Activity plan as a governance tool]. Søkelys på arbeidslivet, 35(04), 242–258. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1504-7989-2018-04-01
Åsheim, H. (2019). «Du vil ha behov for ytterligere arbeidstrening». En studie av begrunnelser i arbeidsavklaringsprosess ["You will need further work training". A study of justifications in the work assessment process]. Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, 3(04), 238–253. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2535-2512-2019-04-01
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Kjetil G. Lundberg, Suzan M. Skjold, Arnhild Melve, Astrid O. Sundsbø
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.