Indirect Work: Social Work's Uncelebrated Strength

Abstract

On first centenary of professional social work education in United States, there are several ways of celebrating social work's contribution to society. We can remember profession's pioneers and praise advances made in theory and research. Alternatively, we can examine everyday practice and what clients say they value about our efforts. This latter approach reveals importance of indirect social work's unsung hero (Grinnell, 1973). Historically, indirect work has referred to clinical social worker's intervention in clients' environments and collaboration with others in bureaucracies or clients' social networks in an attempt to alleviate clients' difficulties. Grinnell and Kyte (1975) succinctly defined two components of indirect work. The first is concrete assistance, that is, provision of practical or tangible help whereby social worker uses resources or opportunities that exist or are potentially available for benefit of (p. 314). The second is sociopsychological intervention, that is, the modification of attitude or behavior of significant others within client's social . . . environment (p. 314). Direct work, in contrast, has referred to what is achieved mind upon mind, to use Mary Richmond's phrase, through relationship between client and social worker. Indirect and direct work frequently appear in tandem. For example, social worker may collaborate with other professionals in client's presence (Weissman, Epstein, & Savage, 1983). Why Examine Indirect Work? A historical analysis of indirect work traces thinking of many social work theoreticians and therefore enriches our understanding of profession. In addition, an examination of indirect work has conceptual, ethical, and practical relevance. I will argue that indirect work helps define conceptually social work's professional jurisdiction - that is, an area in which social workers exhibit both competence and expertise (Abbott, 1988). Ironically, social work literature has neglected indirect work and, sadly, history reveals that some practitioners have also. This neglect is worrisome given that social work's ethical mandate is to meet people's basic human needs and to give special attention to environmental forces (NASW, 1996, p. 1). Contemporary social problems, for example, fragmented medical and welfare services, require indirect work. Social work has made some progress in classifying distinct components of indirect but there is a need to develop practice principles grounded in empirical research. In addressing these themes, this article traces development of idea of indirect work through works of Flexner, Richmond, Reynolds, and Hollis and comments on social work's ambivalence toward this work. The article also discusses research on indirect work and clients' views of it. In addition, article examines modern portrayals of indirect work that include wider political arena and offers recommendations for practice and research. Indirect Work: History of an Idea History reveals recurring themes and ideas. A few years ago, Andrew Abbott, sociologist, stated that probably vast majority of what people with title 'social worker' actually do in United States is indeed connecting together services provided largely by other professions and other institutions (Abbott, 1995, p. 559). How similar is this depiction to one made by Abraham Flexner some 80 years earlier? Flexner In 1915 Flexner, a prominent developer of medical training programs, delivered a lecture entitled Is Social Work a Profession? at annual session of National Conference of Charities and Correction (a precursor of National Conference of Social Work) (Flexner, 1915). The question addressed in Flexner's speech may have been premature, as social work was in an embryonic stage. Settlement houses had existed for more than 25 years (Addams, 1990), but professional social work training was relatively new. …