1. Doctoral and Postgraduate Symposium Saturday 20th July 2013
Developing a framework for organisational social work leadership in Aotearoa New Zealand
Doctoral and Postgraduate Symposium
Saturday 20th July 2013
Michael Webster
School of Counselling, Human Services and Social Work
Supervisor: Assoc Prof Christa Fouché
Co-supervisor: Dr Carole Adamson
Developing a framework for organisational social work leadership
Abstract
The aim of this doctoral research project is to develop a New Zealand model of social work leadership in an organisational context. Because purposeful research connects with the professional community to which the research is directed (Patton, 2002), the project draws from the recognition in 2004 by the International Federation of Social Workers of management as a core purpose of the profession. Study objectives are to explore how registered social workers (RSW) in Aotearoa New Zealand conceptualise and describe organisational leadership.
The study employs a constructionist, qualitative paradigm in which participants will engage in a sense-making exercise using semi-structured interviews. A descriptive/exploratory methodology will be used and data analysed thematically via NVivo software. Purposive sampling limits participants to RSW and acknowledges that the researcher interprets the meaning assigned by research participants.
The study is informed by purposefully selected leadership literature strands, canvassing leadership in five diverse contexts: management; the historical New Zealand welfare context; international business and public sector leadership, including new public management (NPM); social work ethics, standards and identity; and indigenous leadership approaches and biological complexity thinking. The study treats management as dealing with things, leadership with people. The unique configuration of these strands constitutes the researcher’s thinking which underpins the entire project and from which new knowledge will emerge.
The rationale for—and importance of—the project derives from the current gap in New Zealand social work leadership literature of an overarching model of organisational leadership.
Key words
Leadership; social work
Work in progress
Reference
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

2. Content of presentation
Aims and objectives of the study
Selected review of literature
Methodology
Martin Luther King
‘I Have a Dream’ speech:
“This nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal’”.
‘There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask: Why? ... I dream of things that never were, and ask: Why not?’ (Robert F. Kennedy, borrowed from George Bernard Shaw)

3. Study aims and objectives
Research aim:
To develop a New Zealand model of social work organisational leadership
Research objectives:
How or if strands 1—4 contribute to the research aim.
Strand 1
Leadership as people-related: creating culture
Management as related to things: job descriptions, organisational structure
Strand 2
Welfare policy context
International business leadership
Public sector leadership
New public management (NPM)
Strand 3
Social work ethics, standards, identity
In this project, the central phenomenon (Creswell & Clark, 2011) which the researcher seeks to understand is captured in the research question:
What are the fundamental elements of organisational leadership within social work in the context of Aotearoa New Zealand?
The wording of this question sets the parameters of the research aim and research objectives. The question relates specifically to social work leadership in New Zealand organisational settings. The social work profession is in view, not generic ‘social services’ which include the overarching human services field. Research data are therefore solicited from social workers able to respond to interview questions which relate to leadership in organisations whose function is to deliver social work services. Those responses will address the research aim, which is:
To develop a New Zealand model of social work organisational leadership
How the project will achieve this aim generates its research methodology
Strand 4
Indigenous leadership approaches
Connections with biological complexity thinking

4. Study aims and objectives
Second research objective
1. To explore how social workers in Aotearoa New Zealand conceptualise organisational leadership
2. To describe the elements of organisational leadership as relevant to social work in Aotearoa New Zealand
I propose that these strands represent a unique configuration of the literature, and suggest that their exploration and synthesis will provide a conceptual underpinning for the second group of research objectives which are directed at the data to be gathered for analysis:
To explore how social workers in Aotearoa New Zealand conceptualise organisational leadership
To describe the elements of organisational leadership as relevant to social work in Aotearoa New Zealand
The data gathered and their subsequent findings constitute the addition to knowledge which this project seeks to reveal.

5. Leadership as socially constructed by problem definition
‘Problems, problems, problems’ (Grint, 2005)
Leadership actions as socially constructed by the problems and challenges that organisations face.
‘Tame’ problems are
management issues
‘Wicked’ problems’ are leadership issues
‘Critical’ problems are command issues
Managers devise duty rosters, allocate new referrals and conduct performance reviews: familiar problems with clear processes.
Leaders conduct climate survey questions, for example, to develop strategies designed to address workplace morale issues.
Social work in a risk-averse society (Beddoe, 2010; Webb, 2006) may require ‘command’ actions to address potential or actual risks to practitioners, communities, clients, victims or organisations. From a strategic perspective, restructuring social work programmes (Aronson & Smith, 2011; Stewart & Webster, 2009) may introduce role conflict as agency managers find themselves at odds with senior management directives which challenge their ethical standards.
Assemblage No. 15 (Wicked Problems)

6. Leadership as socially constructed by problem definition
The classical paradigm of science and engineering is not applicable to the problems of open societal systems. The cognitive and occupational styles of the professions—mimicking the cognitive style of science and the occupational style of engineering—have just not worked on a wide array of social problems. We suggest that the social professions were misled into assuming they could be applied scientists—that they could solve problems in the way that scientists can solve their problems. The error has been a serious one. Societal problems are inherently different from the problems that scientists and some engineers deal with. Planning problems are inherently wicked. As distinguished from problems in natural sciences are definable and may have solutions that are findable, the problems of social and policy planning are ill-defined. [They] are never solved.

7. Strand 3: Social work ethics, standards and identity
A century of social work ethics (Flexner, 1915)
‘Norms of right action, good qualities of character and values ... enacted by social workers in their work.’ (Banks, 2008)
‘Personal integrity, professional integrity and the integrity of the helping professions’ (Appleton, 2010)
Ethical considerations and leadership: qualities such as authenticity, ethical values and servant leadership express ethical leadership (Greenleaf, 1977; Liden et al., 2008; Luthans & Avolio, 2003)
Banks (2008, p.1238) defines social work ethics as ‘the norms of right action, good qualities of character and values relating to the nature of the good life that are aspired to, espoused and enacted by social workers in the context of their work.’ The purpose of ethical codes are described elsewhere by Banks (2004) as creating trust in professional workers on behalf of clients and the community—no easy task in a risk-averse environment in which decisions made by social workers can be the subject of media, political and even judicial analysis (Beddoe, 2010). The ANZASW bicultural code of ethics (2008) sets benchmarks for client protection against unethical behaviours by social workers, and also promotes professional behaviour through conscious adoption of core values in order to underpin everyday practice.
In terms of leadership actions, codes of ethics require that organisational activities are integrated with professional practice ideals. In addition, personal character attributes of the social worker need to be congruent with the ethical values of social work practice. Davies (1994) and Reupert (2007) suggest that the use of self informs professional practice. In an unpublished thesis, Appleton (2010, p.105) articulates the connections between ‘personal integrity, professional integrity and the integrity of helping professions’ and reports on one practitioner’s internal struggles to balance personal and professional integrity. Social work ethics enshrine notions of integrity as, for example, ‘honesty, reliability, openness and impartiality’ (British Association of Social Workers, 2003). The literature suggests that ethical considerations are inseparable from leadership, that qualities such as authenticity, ethical values and servant leadership express ethical leadership (Greenleaf, 1977; Liden, Wayne, Zhao & Henderson, 2008; Luthans & Avolio, 2003).
In its Statement of Ethical Principles, the IFSW (2012) connects United Nations human rights declarations and conventions to social work practice and action. In this context, the rights of indigenous populations are validated by the IFSW through the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention (ILO, 1989). Approaches to indigenous social work practice are increasingly emerging in the literature e.g., Briskman (2007); Gray et al. (2008). In the New Zealand context, indigenous Māori perspectives of ‘living’ organisations (Te Whaiti Nui-a-Toi, 2001) connect with organic, or emergent, complex adaptive systems theory (Hannah et al., 2011). In this way, the fourth and fifth ‘strands’ of the literature review are essentially two sides of one coin: New Zealand bicultural social work ethics require an indigenous expression if authentic social work leadership actions are to be consistent with professional values. Further, Māori notions of organisations as living beings connect with organic, complex adaptive thinking in Western leadership and management theory (Lewin & Regine, 2001). These synergies underpin the literature strands selected to conceptually inform this research.
Leadership exercised in an organic context carries the capacity to express social work practice values derived from the profession’s ethical codes (McNabb & Webster, 2010). Attwood et al.(2003, p.58 ) describe such values as ‘humanising servant leadership’ and collective mission building which recognises diversity as contributing to innovation and a community of learners. Values expressed therein draw from social work’s codes of ethics.
Management as a core purpose of the social work profession
Management as a ‘core purpose’ of the social work profession (Sewpaul & Jones, 2005, p.219) was adopted by the IFSW in The significance of this statement for this research cannot be underestimated. The management core purpose is to ‘plan, organise, administer and manage programmes and organisations dedicated to any of the [core] purposes [of social work.]’ Although leadership is not specifically identified, I argue that the wording of the core purposes of the global profession suggests that implementing management responsibility for programmes and organisations committed to those purposes cannot be discharged without leadership actions. For example, a core social work purpose to ‘engage in social and political action to impact social policy and economic development, and to effect change by critiquing and eliminating inequalities’ (Sewpaul & Jones, 2005, p.219) implicitly and equally requires leadership and management skills.
Peter Drucker said of Greenleaf: ‘The wisest man I ever met’

8. Strand 4: Indigenous leadership approaches
The literature identifies indigenous leadership as collective, organic, holistic and spiritual (Calliou, 2005; Durie, 1998; Ivory, 2008)
The preceding discussion on ethical leadership naturally leads to the last literature strand in this review which addresses conceptualisations of indigenous leadership. Three perspectives are employed in exploring this field. First, the nature of indigenous leadership actions arising from the cultural constructs in which they are located are considered. Second, conceptual connections with other strands in this literature review are noted. Third, the historical and political contexts in which indigenous leadership models function are described.
The nature of indigenous leadership
Indigenous leadership actions arise out of unique cultural identities. Analysis derives from social anthropology study of culture (e.g., Peoples & Bailey, 2003). The literature identifies certain generic understandings of indigenous perspectives: leadership is collective; it is organic; and it privileges holistic, spiritual thinking. The literature review in the thesis will utilise these essential indigenous leadership elements in considering its nature.
Conceptual connections: Indigenous, Western and social work leadership thinking
There are striking connections between indigenous leadership thinking and Western leadership and management thinking which has embraced indigenous perspectives by suggesting, for example, that organisations may be seen as living organisms (De Geus, 1999). Morgan (2006, p.34) employs biological images in his organisational metaphors. Attwood et al. (2003, p.23) suggest that ‘whole systems development’ derive from conceiving organisations as ‘complex adaptive systems’ (CAS) (McMillan, 2008, p.60). Complexity-based whole systems development as a biological process rejects the notion of prescriptive command and control leadership-management actions, endorsing instead processes as developmental: outcomes cannot be predicted (Olson & Eoyang, 2001). Such leadership styles are transformational (Burns, 1978) in that they change cultures.
Conceptual connections between indigenous and Western approaches are illustrated in the New Zealand context by the Māori leadership perspective offered by Tipu Ake (Te Whaiti Nui-a-Toi, 2001). Leadership in Tipu Ake (Figure 3) is removed from Western ideas of chief executives at the summit of the hierarchy. Leadership is seen as collective; it operates as a filtering agent that takes responsibility for introducing fresh ideas into the organisation, or organism. In the Australian aboriginal context, Ivory (2008) notes that leadership derives from organic indigenous ‘webs of nodal networks’ (2008, pp.253-4). Similarly, North American indigenous leadership research identifies values of spirituality, holistic worldview and commitment to indigenous perspectives as underpinning leadership validity (Calliou, 2005, p.58).
Leadership in Tipu Ake is conceptually removed from Western ideas of chief executives at the summit of the hierarchy. Instead,
‘Leadership is the courage that germinates the seed of a new idea and moves it … out of the undercurrents. Tipu Ake defines leadership as collective – many individuals can contribute to it. It is defined, recognised, and nurtured by those who support it.’
(Te Whaiti-Nui-a-Toi, 2001, p.7)
New Zealand context: Tipu Ake collective leadership as filtering agent for new ideas
(Te Whaiti Nui-A-Toi, 2001)

9. Research design (adapted from Crotty, 2003)
Epistemology:
Constructionism
Qualitative paradigm
Theoretical perspective:
Symbolic interactionism
Methodology:
Descriptive/ exploratory
Method:
Semi-structured interviews
Method of data analysis: Thematic analysis
A constructionist paradigm
The word ‘constructionism’ is intrinsically onomatopoeic. ‘Meaning,’ says Crotty (2003, p.9), ‘is not discovered, but constructed.’ Unique perceptions of identical phenomena from individual human beings demonstrate that meaning is a construction dependent on the diverse perspectives of an observer’s cultural or generational location (Crotty, 2003).
Guba and Lincoln (2005, pp.195, 197) suggest that a constructivist paradigm (an alternative term for constructionist) is a ‘meaning-making activity’ in which acquired knowledge derives from the consensus of individual or collective reconstructions. Crotty (2003) uses the same terminology of ‘constructed meanings’ terms from both sources to convey the essence of the paradigm selected for the project. Crotty also proposes that ‘constructivism’ as a meaning-making process applies to the individual; ‘constructionism’ applies to a collective process (Crotty, 2003, p.58). This research is located in the latter; Holosko’s (2009) suggestion that social work leadership is collaborative, or constructionist, may inform respondent perspectives in respect of social work leadership.
Interactionist thinking: people act towards things in terms of what those things mean—I suggest, make sense of—to them; what makes sense is dependent on people’s social interactions with others; and what makes sense is filtered through an interpretive process. The essence of symbolic interactionism, Crotty proceeds to argue, is to ‘put oneself in the place of the other’ (2003, p.75). A social worker would instantly recognise such a phrase as the practice value of empathy; or to use Weld and Appleton’s evocative phrase (2008), to ‘walk in people’s worlds.’
Descriptive research represents Denzin and Lincoln’s (2005) research text prior to writing the interpretive document. Schutt comments (2006, p.79) that good description is an ‘essential’ element to understand the community in which the phenomenon is located. Descriptive research is the starting point for exploratory research. While bearing in mind Silverman’s ‘subtle interplay,’ which includes concepts derived from the literature, Schutt (2006, p.77) suggests that data collected, for example, from interviews is the basis for explaining what has been found. The researcher engages in sense-making by asking what interpretations the research informants place on their statements: ‘How do people interpret these experiences?’ (Schutt, 2006, p.78). By standing in the place of the informants, the researcher may perceive an authentic quality in the data and its emergent findings, characteristic of qualitative research (Schutt, 2006, p.79). That said, the qualitative researcher acknowledges that s/he is embedded in the social world and inevitably influences and is influenced by interactions in that world; indeed, the researcher interprets the meaning assigned by research participants (Cunliffe, 2011, p.654). This project proceeds with the assumption that pristine induction is not in view.

10. Sampling, recruitment and ethics
Purposive sampling
Population parameters: Registered social workers (RSWs)
Researcher’s theoretical perspective
Researcher
sends PIS
and CF
Recruitment
Advertisement inviting RSWs to participate
SWRB
Disseminates advertisement
RSWs contact researcher
Ethical considerations
Potential conflict of interests
Confidentiality, anonymity, informed consent, participants’ right to withdraw
1. Have held or hold leadership or management responsibilities OR
2. Aspire to a leadership or management role