Critical Thinking On A Strategy For Practice

Presentations

In the article entitled “In Search of Accountability in Social Service Program Delivery” the main points that were discussed included a summative discussion of the first three (3) sections. The first section reportedly focused on the topic of identification of accountability which was seen as a social services problem. Section II allegedly explored in greater detail the concept of accountability through identifying relevant components in its definition. Further, Section III noted that the major thrust was to present a discussion of the major concepts and approaches deemed to be employed by managers to enhance program accountability. In addition, Section IV focused on the evolution of changes in the implementation of program evaluation. Finally, the discourse explained in greater depth the accountability system model.
The accountability system was more accurately described as “a vehicle by which social service programs can recognize and realize forms of accountability that are additional to those currently demanded by government. Principles of "economy" and "efficiency" may, therefore, be offset by principles such as "quality of care" and "quality of life" claimed by clients. professionals, and community groups” . From the affirmation, the focus expanded accountabilities from first order principals (claims based on law) to second and third order principals (identified as “clients, practitioners, special-interest groups, professional associations, community groups and others” ), as well as transcending beyond the economy and efficiency principles. In addition, the accountability system was emphasized to be consistently applicable within the realms of management theory and practice. As asserted, due to the multi-dimensional claims of diverse order principals, problems in social services delivery persist. Finally, to enable finding effective resolution to the problems, a collaborative, participative, as well as democratic process was emphasized to be the central strategy in undertaking the delivery of social services programs.

Responses

One affirms that the accountability system could be seen from perspectives of applications of management theories, as asserted. Aside from imbibing the components that are essential in the concept of accountability, the information disclosed from the article illuminated one’s understanding on the imminent problems due to the need to meet varied expectations from multiple constituents. Just like in an organizational setting, the presence of varied people, as stakeholders, with diverse backgrounds make designing of strategies challenging. The concept was amplified with the assertion that “the interests of principals vary, compete and often conflict” . This is understandable since the mere presence of people from varied demographic backgrounds could already result to the need to evaluate a multitude of needs, values, beliefs, and preferences. Therefore, evaluating the progress of social services programs is seen to be tedious and challenging.
The proposed recommendation that envisions the application of a central strategy through participative, collaborative, as well as democratic process is believed to be valid. Similar strategies are observed to be applied in contemporary organizational settings; especially in large organizations with multiple functions and departments. As such, despite the presence of problems, through effective strategies that require continuous open communication, negotiation, and applications of conflict resolution techniques with managerial expertise, the future of social services is seen to progress.

Reference

In Search of Accountablity In Social Service Program Delivery. (n.d.)