对变革合作的批判综合:功能主义和批判范式的辩证分析

IF 1.4 Q2 SOCIAL WORK Critical and Radical Social Work Pub Date : 2022-01-13 DOI:10.22329/csw.v22i2.7098
Jangmin Kim, Junghee Lee
{"title":"对变革合作的批判综合:功能主义和批判范式的辩证分析","authors":"Jangmin Kim, Junghee Lee","doi":"10.22329/csw.v22i2.7098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social workers are required to become effective boundary spanners to address complex social problems with community-based and cross-system collaboration. However, substantial tensions exist in the literature about how to build successful collaboration, stemming from the massive use of the two competing paradigms: functionalist and critical paradigms. Using a dialectical analysis, this article attempted to uncover and synthesize paradoxical understandings of the major elements of successful collaboration. Significant contradictions between the two contrasting paradigms are identified at the multidimensional levels, including (1) member capacity for developing objective/consensus knowledge vs. subjective/dissensus knowledge, (2) unity vs. diversity in membership, (3) centralized vs. decentralized network governance, and (4) stable/standardized vs. flexible/responsive coordination. The results suggest that there is no consensual approach to developing transformative collaboration that promotes members’ critical capacity, equal relations, democratic governance, and empowering coordination. Social workers should identify and utilize inherent contradictions as a catalyst for developing and maintaining transformative collaboration by considering its dynamic process, context, and interconnection with other systems.","PeriodicalId":44175,"journal":{"name":"Critical and Radical Social Work","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critical Synthesis Toward Transformative Collaboration: A Dialectical Analysis of Functionalist and Critical Paradigms\",\"authors\":\"Jangmin Kim, Junghee Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.22329/csw.v22i2.7098\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Social workers are required to become effective boundary spanners to address complex social problems with community-based and cross-system collaboration. However, substantial tensions exist in the literature about how to build successful collaboration, stemming from the massive use of the two competing paradigms: functionalist and critical paradigms. Using a dialectical analysis, this article attempted to uncover and synthesize paradoxical understandings of the major elements of successful collaboration. Significant contradictions between the two contrasting paradigms are identified at the multidimensional levels, including (1) member capacity for developing objective/consensus knowledge vs. subjective/dissensus knowledge, (2) unity vs. diversity in membership, (3) centralized vs. decentralized network governance, and (4) stable/standardized vs. flexible/responsive coordination. The results suggest that there is no consensual approach to developing transformative collaboration that promotes members’ critical capacity, equal relations, democratic governance, and empowering coordination. Social workers should identify and utilize inherent contradictions as a catalyst for developing and maintaining transformative collaboration by considering its dynamic process, context, and interconnection with other systems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44175,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical and Radical Social Work\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical and Radical Social Work\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22329/csw.v22i2.7098\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL WORK\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical and Radical Social Work","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22329/csw.v22i2.7098","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

社会工作者需要成为有效的边界跨越者,以社区为基础和跨系统合作来解决复杂的社会问题。然而,由于大量使用两种相互竞争的范式:功能主义范式和批判范式,关于如何建立成功的合作的文献中存在着实质性的紧张关系。本文运用辩证分析的方法,试图揭示并综合对成功合作的主要要素的矛盾理解。这两种截然不同的范式在多维层面上存在显著矛盾,包括(1)成员发展客观/共识知识与主观/异议知识的能力;(2)成员的统一性与多样性;(3)集中与分散的网络治理;(4)稳定/标准化与灵活/响应性协调。研究结果表明,目前还没有达成共识的方法来发展促进成员批判能力、平等关系、民主治理和授权协调的变革性合作。社会工作者应该通过考虑其动态过程、背景和与其他系统的联系,识别和利用内在矛盾作为发展和维持变革性合作的催化剂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Critical Synthesis Toward Transformative Collaboration: A Dialectical Analysis of Functionalist and Critical Paradigms
Social workers are required to become effective boundary spanners to address complex social problems with community-based and cross-system collaboration. However, substantial tensions exist in the literature about how to build successful collaboration, stemming from the massive use of the two competing paradigms: functionalist and critical paradigms. Using a dialectical analysis, this article attempted to uncover and synthesize paradoxical understandings of the major elements of successful collaboration. Significant contradictions between the two contrasting paradigms are identified at the multidimensional levels, including (1) member capacity for developing objective/consensus knowledge vs. subjective/dissensus knowledge, (2) unity vs. diversity in membership, (3) centralized vs. decentralized network governance, and (4) stable/standardized vs. flexible/responsive coordination. The results suggest that there is no consensual approach to developing transformative collaboration that promotes members’ critical capacity, equal relations, democratic governance, and empowering coordination. Social workers should identify and utilize inherent contradictions as a catalyst for developing and maintaining transformative collaboration by considering its dynamic process, context, and interconnection with other systems.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
25.00%
发文量
52
期刊最新文献
Talking about needs and rights in inter-agency meetings: interpretive contests in Swedish welfare provision Maybe you can be too resilient: a sociological investigation into how student social workers perceive resilience in their practice Critique and Critical Social Work: a meta-theoretical perspective Who’s right? What rights? How? Rights debates in Irish social work: a call for nuance Lordship and bondage in the dialectics of social work: regulation and professional autonomy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1