Operation C: Changing the diagram of power (operations 9, power 2)

We can assume that there a diverse social (political, economic …) forces (powers) at work in a given social field. They result in what presents itself as a social situation – be it per se, or of a certain person or a group – in the form of statuses, interaction capacity and social roles. Some of the forces at work in a situation are manifest, easy to spot, some are often hidden in the background or in, what Kurt Lewin (1947) terms a quasi-stationary balance – combined in a mutual action resulting in a balance that hides the forces in themselves. The forces should be decoded and mapped in a diagram by, inter alia, breaking the balance by an intervention in the field. Such a map can help identifying the sources of power that can be used of empowerment of the power-lacking agent, as well as spotting the forces that are taking away, reducing the power and causing dis-empowerment. (For example of use of such mapping see Flaker et al. 2007: 37–39).

The basic power diagram in social work and other people serving activities is the power relationship between the service user and the professional. Although seemingly a dyadic relationship, it is a threesome, a tripartite diagram – it is not only about the expectations of users and social worker regarding each other, it is also about the power endowed into the social worker by the centres of power (and extracted from the users). Social work is basically a “middle-dog” to the user as a social “under-dog”.

Types of relationship (Basaglia, 1987)

→           Aristocratic relationship – contractual relationship between the economic power holder and the professional power holder

→           Helping relationship – relationship between a rightful claimant and expert (bureaucrat)

→           Institutional relationship – relationship of sheer control between the institutional power holder and the person without rights

The first relationship is based on the balance of the professional power (knowledge and skill) of the professional and economic power of the customer, the purchaser of the service. The second relationship exists within the welfare state. A social worker or another professional (a doctor, nurse etc.) has monopoly and the state gives them the power. The users, on other hand, are claiming their rights as citizens. The power is bureaucratic; the user depends on the professional, but also has some freedom and as a citizen some power over him. In the institution, the power is minimal or taken away from the inmates. They are sheer objects of power, things to be cared and controlled by the staff.

The professional power is articulated as a mandate and need to be derived from both his actual relationship with the user and from the power vehicles (vectors) from without. In the aristocratic relationship this power and mandate is derived on one hand on the actual capacity for dealing with the situation and on the general aura and prestige of the professional, however it is actually given by the user him or herself. In the helping relationship the mandate comes mostly from the state (public sector) but also from the user who is as a citizen at the same time a rightful claimant. In the institutional relationship the mandate of the professional comes mostly from others (state, users’ environment) and the user’s mandate is abrogated, denied.

While the first of these types of relationship is horizontal the other two are vertical, the last toughly so. In these two diagrammatic arrangements, the mandate of social work (and any other similar profession) should be of an operation that pushes the diagram at least towards a horizontal relation. The issue, the art of the profession is how to use the power invested in it in order to empower the user. It is about delegating and relegating the power invested in the profession to the users. This can be done by securing the power to “speak” to the users, listening to and being receptive to their distress and conveying the message to the powerful, thus implicating them in the situation and conveying their power to it in order to actively contribute to improvement and empowerment of the “under-dog”.

 

The diagram above depicts the flow of information, and of the involvement of the bearers of power in the situation – thus redistribution of power. In this way social work is not only an agent of redistribution of wealth but also of power. Besides if portrays the double mandate social work needs to have.

Social work is always about seeking and securing double mandate – from the powerful and the powerless, from the user but also from the centres of power who have the necessary power to alter the user’s situation.

References:

Basaglia, F. (1987), Psychiatry Inside Out: Selected Works of Franco Basaglia. European Perspectives, Columbia University Press.

Flaker, V. (2007), Empowerment In Theory And Practice (An EX-IN  training module). Ljubljana: University of Ljubljana, Faculty for Social Work.

Lewin, Kurt (1947). "Frontiers in Group Dynamics: Concept, Method and Reality in Social Science; Social Equilibria and Social Change". Human Relations. 1: 5–41. doi:10.1177/001872674700100103.

Operacija C: Krepitev moči – merilo je pogodbena moč (operacije 9, krepitev moči 1)

Pri socialnem delu gre za moč. Pravzaprav je socialno delo odnos moči. Njegova družbena funkcija je posredovati med močnimi in nemočnimi (bogatimi in revnimi, elitami in ljudstvom, zatiralci in zatiranimi).

Socialno delo ima opraviti z veliko raznolikostjo človeških situacij, ki pa imajo le malo skupnega. Lahko pa bi rekli, da je skupni imenovalec uporabnikov socialnega dela prav primanjkljaj moči. Na socialno delo se obrnejo, ko česa ne morejo opraviti sami, ko potrebujejo dodatno moč.

Moč je mera suverenosti, ki jo nekdo ima v svojem življenjskem svetu, zmožnost, da kaj naredi, spremeni ali vzdržuje tako kot je.

Moč torej ni lastnost življenjskega sveta samega, je njegova funkcija, odvod te zmožnosti premikanja po življenjskem svetu, hkrati pa tudi odvisna od shem, ki so onkraj doživljenega sveta (kot je, na primer, položaj v hierarhiji, lastnina, ekonomski in politični status).

Pomoč paradoksno, po definiciji, jemlje moč tistemu, ki mu pomagamo. Potreba po pomoči ne le dokazuje nemoč in brezmoč, temveč jo tudi ustvarja. Delati nekaj namesto drugega zmanjša njegov dejanski nadzor in moč nad zadevo, nad svojim življenjskim svetom, odtegne mu njegovo suverenost nad njim. Po pomoči, je torej potrebno popravljalno delo, da bi si opomogli, okrevali, znova dobili moč in okrepili položaj, ki smo ga izgubili.

Smisel operacije krepitve moči je torej dobiti moč, pa tudi jo ohranjati in si opomoči po »epizodi pomoči«. Pretežna načina dela v krepitvi moči sta zagovorništvo in pogajanje.

Pogodbena moč

V socialnem delu je najbolj prikladno moč definirati kot pogodbeno moč. Torej jo moramo ocenjevati in analizirati glede na to, kaj sestavlja tovrstno moč, z kartografiranjem moči glede na moč, ki je na voljo oziroma ki jo je treba pridobiti. To vključuje tudi dešifriranje »diagrama moči« - sil moči, ki oblikujejo situacijo in ustvarjajo nekogaršnji položaj. Oziraje se na moč, ki je vložena v socialno delo lahko s tem ugotovimo mehanizme in mesta, s katerimi izgubljamo moč, priložnosti za večanje moči ali uvoza moči v situacijo od zunaj.

Pogodbena moč ni le sposobnost izvedbe pogodbe, ampak je tudi zmožnost zagotavljanja take izvedbe oz. še prej – sposobnost, potencial stopiti v pogodbeno razmerje. Na interakcijskem registru pogodba tudi predpostavlja, kakšne vrste človek je pogodbenik, predpostavlja idejo o njem samem (Goffman, 2019). Izhaja predvsem iz družbenega položaja, ki ga lahko imamo za splošni in kvazi-formalen temelj pogodbene sposobnosti in moči. Ta virtualna lastnost se opira na interaktivno kredibilnost (ali pa na njej pade). Rezultanta teh dveh zmožnosti ali njihova sinteza so družbene vloge, v katerih se statusi uresničujejo na kredibilen ali diskreditirajoč način.

Pravno je pogodbena moč ali zmožnost oblikovana kot poslovna sposobnost.[1] Poslovno sposobnost dobimo skorajda avtomatsko z državljanstvom. Samo državljansko pa nam zagotavlja le omejeno pogodbeno in poslovno sposobnost (saj država ni porok za dejanja svojih državljanov) in se mora opirati na lastnino, ali navadno, kot je primer za večino, na zaposlitev. Velik del družbe, tisti, ki niso zaposleni, pa dobijo nadomestne statuse – nekateri od teh za začasni, na primer, status otroka ali mladoletnega, bolnika, zapornika, tujca; nekateri pa so trajni, kot so na primer, upokojenec, »invalid«, varovanec pod skrbništvom, itd.). Nadomestni statusi zagotavljajo vsak nek status, vseeno pa je pogodbena ali celo poslovna sposobnost, značilna za te statuse, močno zmanjšana. Obstajajo pa drugi formalni statusi, ki jih človek lahko dobi, kot so imeti službo, delovno mesto, izobrazbo, razne funkcije, članstva formalnih skupin in organizacij, status je celo imeti stalni naslov. Ti statusi in položaji nam ne zagotavljajo osnovne poslovne sposobnosti same po sebi, jo pa podpirajo in jačajo, včasih pa so pogoj ta pogodbeno sposobnost ali moč.

Denar nima le nakupne moči, je tudi moč stopanja v pogodbene odnose.[2] Denar in druga sredstva, ki jih je moč oceniti z denarno mero, ustvarjajo naslednjo zmožnost za stopanje v pogodbene odnose. Dohodek, plača, premoženje, nepremičnine, obresti, prihranki so lahko poroštva za izvedbo pogodb. Denar je poleg splošnega ekvivalenta delu (politična ekonomija) tudi splošni ekvivalent zaupanja (moralna ekonomija).

Za pogodbe so potrebni pologi. Poleg statusa in denarnih temeljev, so možne še druge vrste poroštev, ki jamčijo za pogodbo. Poroki, skrbniki, zagovorniki lahko zagotovijo podporo pogodbenim izmenjavam in interakcijam, kakor tudi pologi, premoženje in socialni kapital. Slednjega navadno artikuliramo kot ugled in spoštovanje in ju lahko podpirajo dosežki, družinski ugled, cenjene spretnosti in vloge.

Interakcijska kredibilnost igra, v primerjavi z družbenim statusom, manjšo, a še vedno pomembno vlogo v pogodbenih interakcijah. Prvi in splošni vtis, ki ga nekdo daje, olajša stopanje v pogodbena razmerja, podobno pa tudi zaupljivost in zaupanje drugih. Zmožnost jasno izraziti svoje namene, želje, upanja itn. je pomembno orodje pri oblikovanju pogodbene izmenjave; zveze in poznanstva niso le osnova stikov ampak zagotavljajo dober vtis in zaupanje pri sklepanju pogodb, včasih pa tudi dejanske posrednike za poslovanje. Interakcijske spretnosti kot so opravičevanje, pojasnjevanje, hudomušnost večajo zaupanje in kredibilnost, lajšajo poslovanje in prispevajo k pogodbeni sposobnosti. Oblikovanje pogodb lahko spodbujajo tudi statusni simboli, če so cenjeni, ali pa jih kvarijo, če so stigmatizirani.

Družbene vloge imamo lahko za sintezo statusa in interakcije kredibilnosti, ki ju povezuje v funkcionalno in interakcijsko celoto. Če imamo cenjeno vlogo delavca, matere, člana, kupca itn., nam to neposredno poveča zmožnost oz. nam jo zmanjša z razvrednoteno vlogo bolnika, uporabnika socialnih storitev, socialnega primera ipd. Več vlog nekdo igra večja je njegova pogodbena moč – in nasprotno – manj ko ima človek vlog na razpolago ali pa če se mu je repertoar vlog skrči na eno, deviantno pičlejša je njegova pogodbena moč.[3] Ena od najbolj pomembnih funkcij stigme (in dominantne odklonske vloge) je, da deluje kot opozorilo, ki diskreditira igralce glede virtualne splošne predpostavke o pogodbeni sposobnosti (Goffman, 2008).

Elemente statusa, kredibilnosti in vlog lahko uporabimo kot opomnik, ko ocenjujemo moč v katerikoli družbeni situaciji ali operaciji socialnega dela. Lahko jih uporabimo kot začetno merilo pogodbene moči na začetku dela. Lahko jih uporabimo po koncu, da ovrednotimo svoj poseg z merili okrepitve – ali je naše delo pripeljalo večje ali manjše družbene moči. Lahko pa se z njihovo pomočjo usmerimo naravnost v večanje moči, uporabimo za kartografijo moči, ki je nekomu na voljo, in da ugotovimo področja, na katerih primanjkuje moči. Na temelju takega zemljevida lahko ustvarimo »načrt krepitve moči«, ki trasira pot, po kateri bomo napolnili področja zmanjšane moči.

Vendar pa tak zemljevid prikaže moč, ki je na voljo, pa tudi tisto, ki je potrebna – v situaciji, za človeka ali skupino; prikazuje, kaj manjka, ne pa od kod moč dobiti. Za to je potreben drugačen zemljevid – prikaz diagrama moči, diagrama silnic v danem polju.

Referenci

Goffman, E. (2008) Stigma: Zapiski o upravljanju poškodovane identitete. Maribor: Aristej.

Goffman, E. (2019) Azili. Ljubljana: Založba /*cf.

---

[1] V žargonu pogosto neustrezno poimenovana kot »opravilna sposobnost«.

[2] Laže je pričakovati od nekoga, ki ima denar, da bo izpolnil svoje obveznosti: če nekdo ne izroči svojega dela pogodbe v naravi, potem mora biti sposoben to poplačati, pa naj gre za povrnitev škode ali najem nekoga, ki bo to storil namesto njega.

[3] Imeti več vlog nam, paradoksno, daje določeno svobodo biti mi sami. Več ko imamo vlog, manj smo zavezani eni sami. Igrati več vlog nam da bogastvo izkušnje in prispeva k naši vrednosti in spoštovanju. Več imamo cenjenih vlog, večja je naša družbena vrednost.

Operation C: Empowerment – enhancing contractual power (operations 8, power 1)

 

Social work is about power. In fact, it is a power relation. Its function in the society is to be intermediary between the powerful and powerless (rich and poor, elites and folk, oppressors and the oppressed).

Social work is deal with immense variety of human situations, with very little in common. However, the common denominator of the social work users is lack of power. They turn to social work when they cannot do something on their own, when they need extra power to perform.

Power is a measure of sovereignty one has over his or her Life-World, ability to do things, to change or maintain it as it is.

Power therefore is not a property of the Life-world itself, but it function, calculus, which is derived from this ability to direct (move about) the Life-World, but also dependent on the schemes beyond the lived world (such as position in the hierarchy, ownership, economic and political status).

Paradoxically, the assistance and help by definition take this power away from the assisted. Needing help, not only proves and demonstrates helplessness and powerlessness, it also produces it. Doing things for or instead of somebody diminishes his or her actual control over the matter, over one’s Life-World – it distract the sovereignty over it. Hence, after being helped, a remedial action is required to regain the power, to recover the ground once shared.

Rationale of empowerment operation of social work is therefore gaining power, but also conserving it and recovering it after an “episode of assistance”. The mode of working applied in empowerment are usually advocacy and negotiation.

Contractual power

In social work, it is optimal to operationally define power as a contractual power. Thus, power must be assessed and analysed according to what constitutes this very kind of power, mapping the power according to the power possessed and according to the power to be attained. This involves also decoding the “power diagram” – the forces of power that are shaping the situation and establishing the status of the person. Taking into account the power invested in social work, this enables to spot the mechanisms and places where one is losing power, potential of enhancing power or importing it into the situation from without.

Contractual power is not only the capacity to perform a contract but also the capacity to vouch this performance. On the registry of interaction the contract implies also what kind of a person the contractant is, implies the notion of his or her self (Goffman, 1961). It stems mainly out of social status, which could be seen a general and quasi-formal basis of contractual capacity and power. However, this virtual property is upheld (or down played) by the credibility of interaction. The resultant of this two faculties or the synthesis of them are the social roles, in which statuses are enacted in credible or discredited manner.

In legal terms, contractual power or capacity is articulated as legal capacity. Legal capacity is granted almost automatically with citizenship. However, mere citizenship provides limited contractual and legal capacity (since the state does not vouch for the deeds of their citizens) and must be supported by property, or as it is the case for majority usually by employment. For large segments of society who are not in employment surrogate statuses are provided – some of these are temporary as a status of a child or a minor, a patient, a convict, an alien, an some are of more permanent nature as being retired, disabled, being under guardianship, etc.). The surrogate statuses provide at least some kind of a status, however, the contractual and even the legal capacity pertinent to these statuses is greatly diminished. There are other formal statuses that somebody can acquire such as having a job or a work position, education, performing a functions or being a member of formal group or organisation or even having a permanent address. These do not provide the basic legal capacity per se but can support and enhance or even condition the contractual capacity and power of a person.

Money is not only a purchasing power, but also power to enter contracts.[1] Money or other resources that can be appreciated by monetary measure constitute next to the status the other potential of entering into the contractual relationships. Income, salary, property, real estate, annuities, savings provide the capacity to deliver the contracts. Money is, besides being a general equivalent of work (political economy), also a general equivalent of trust (moral economy of trust).

The collaterals are needed in contracts. Apart from status and monetary base, various kinds of guarantees can vouch the contract. Guarantors, guardians, advocates can provide a backing to contractual interaction and interchange, as can deposits, property and social capital. The latter is often articulated as reputation and respectability and can be supported by achievements, family reputation, valued skills and valued roles.

Credibility in interaction plays in comparison with social status a minor, but still important role in the contractual interaction. First impression and general impression a person gives, eases the entering into contractual relationship, as do the trustworthiness, confidence enjoyed by others. Ability to clearly state one's intentions, wishes, hopes etc. are important tools in articulating the contractual interchange, connections and acquaintances do not provide only the base of contracts but also can give off the good impression and credibility when entering into contracts, as well as being actual intermediaries and brokers of the deals. Interaction skills as apologising, explaining, using humour increase the credibility, ease the dealings and contribute to contractual capacity. And status symbols can encourage the formation of contracts if valued, and spoil it when stigmatized.

Social roles can be seen as syntheses of the status and interaction credibility combining them into a functional and interactional whole. Having a valued role of a worker, mother, member, customer, etc. directly provides the increase capacity in the specific range that the role extends or ebb it by devalued roles of a patient, service user, social case, etc. The more roles one performs the greater is the contractual power – and vice versa – the less roles there are on disposal or even the repertoire being reduced to one dominant deviant role meagre is the contractual power.[2] One of the most important function of the stigma (and dominant deviant role) is to serve as a warning, discredit the actor from the virtual general assumption of contractual capacity (Goffman, 1963).

The element of status, credibility in the interaction and social roles can serve as a checklist when assessing the power in any social work situation or operation. It can serve as an initial benchmarking of the contractual power on the onset of work. It can be used afterwards to evaluate the intervention in terms of empowerment – whether the work resulted in an enhanced or reduced power. Or it can be geared directly into enhancing power, used for mapping the power that is available to somebody and to identify the areas where power is lacking. Based on such map an “empowerment plan” can be made making a roadmap of which lacunae of power should be filled.

However, such a map detects the power available and needed in a situation or with a person or a group, it conveys what is missing but not where to get the power from. For this, another map is needed – a map of power diagram, i.e. the diagram of powers in a situated field. 

References

Goffman, E. (1961), Asylums. New York: Doubleday & Co. (Pelican edition 1968).

Goffman, E. (1963), Stigma - Notes on the management of Spoiled Identity.  Engelwood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; (1968), Penguin edition.

---

[1] It is easier to expect from a person who has money to fulfil one’s obligations; if one does not deliver it in kind, then one is able to pay – either the damage, or somebody to perform the service instead of him.

[2] Having many roles gives us, paradoxically, a certain freedom to be ourselves. The more roles we have, the less fixed we are to a particular one. Playing different roles gives us richness of experience and adds to our value and respect. The more of valued roles we have, the bigger is our social worth.