Complexity in the front line of the welfare state

Med afsæt hos frontmedarbejderne og lokale ledere i en kommunal velfærdsinstitution undersøger vi de ledelsesmæssige konsekvenser af øget kompleksitet opstået gennem en række samvirkende faktorer, herunder de sidste to årtiers indførelse af nye styringsteknologier inspireret af New Public Management og frygten for skandalisering blandt hjemmeplejemedarbejdere i udføreleddet. Fokus er på relationen mellem leder og de fagprofessionelle, og kernespørgsmålet er, hvilke hidtil oversete udfordringer, de aktuelle ledelsesbetingelser stiller frontlederen overfor i dennes relation til frontmedarbejdere.This article explores the challenges faced by managers of contemporary welfare services which constitute increasingly complex organizational systems. Conventional specialisms have been targeted by reforms inspired by New Public Management and at the same time employees have become exposed to growing mass media attention and the accompanying fear of becoming the subject of scandals. Seeking to obtain a better understanding of these managerial conditions, a qualitative study was carried out in the residential care service in the Danish municipality of Tønder. Over a period of seven months, detailed observations were carried out of project for leadership development and organizational change lead by a consultant. The observations were analyzed from the perspective of Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory which highlighted communication patterns and contradictions. A key observation was the existence of incompatible communication codes – i.e. law, care and money – which employees felt placed paradoxical demands and encroached upon their room for providing professional care. As result, “civil disobedience” became a popular term among the care workers to designate activities guided by professional judgment rather than judicial regulations. The article presents a series of considerations on the conditions of management in such welfare services and offers suggestions as to how managers may attempt to navigate them. It is suggested that the conclusions are of relevance beyond the context of residential elderly care and may find broader resonance in contemporary welfare management