research on social work practice

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

The Practice of Research in Social Work

• Rafael J. Engel - University of Pittsburgh, USA
• Russell K. Schutt - University of Massachusetts Boston, USA
• Description

The authors are proud sponsors of the  2020 SAGE Keith Roberts Teaching Innovations Award —enabling graduate students and early career faculty to attend the annual ASA pre-conference teaching and learning workshop.

See the text’s CSWE Competency Matrix , linking chapter content to the 2015 Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS). 

See what’s new to this edition by selecting the Features tab on this page. Should you need additional information or have questions regarding the HEOA information provided for this title, including what is new to this edition, please email [email protected] . Please include your name, contact information, and the name of the title for which you would like more information. For information on the HEOA, please go to http://ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html .

For assistance with your order: Please email us at [email protected] or connect with your SAGE representative.

SAGE 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 www.sagepub.com

Supplements

• Mobile-friendly  eFlashcards  strengthen understanding of key terms and concepts
• Mobile-friendly practice  quizzes  allow for independent assessment by students of their mastery of course material
• A  customized online  action plan  includes tips and feedback on progress through the course and materials, which allows students to individualize their learning experience
• Video and multimedia resources  that appeal to students with different learning styles
• Web resources  to extend and reinforce learning or allow for further research on important chapter topics
• EXCLUSIVE ! Access to full-text  SAGE journal articles  that have been carefully selected to support and expand on the concepts presented in each chapter

SAGE edge for Instructors,  supports teaching by making it easy to integrate quality content and create a rich learning environment for students.

• Test banks  provide a diverse range of pre-written options as well as the opportunity to edit any question and/or insert personalized questions to effectively assess students’ progress and understanding
• Sample course syllabi  for semester and quarter courses provide suggested models for structuring one’s course
• Editable, chapter-specific  PowerPoint ®  slides  offer complete flexibility for creating a multimedia presentation for the course
• EXCLUSIVE! Access to full-text  SAGE journal articles  have been carefully selected to support and expand on the concepts presented in each chapter to encourage students to think critically
• Web resources to extend and reinforce learning or allow for further research on important chapter topics
• Lecture notes  summarize key concepts by chapter to ease preparation for lectures and class discussions
• Suggested student projects designed to promote students' in-depth engagement with course material
• Tables and figures  from the book are available in an easily-downloadable format for use in papers, handouts, and presentations

This is adopted text book for the teaching and the paper copy is required

This book provides a comprehensive yet down-to-earth and practical foundation for social work students.

NEW TO THIS EDITION :

• New and expanded content on qualitative methods and analysis, community-based participatory research, and conversation analysis reflects the latest advances in the field.
• Coverage of emerging research techniques includes discussions of ethical issues and Internet research, expanded material on the use of electronic surveys and cell phones for research, and new coverage of qualitative methods, such as online interviewing and netnography.
• New examples of research in the real-world settings of social work practice address such topics as homelessness, domestic violence, substance abuse, poverty, aging, the methods used and the challenges confronted by researchers.
• Updated and expanded coverage of implications for evidence-based practice , including the steps associated with the practice decision model and the challenges of implementing evidence-based practice at the agency level, prepares students for real-world practice.
• Reorganized and expanded coverage of mixed methods in a new Chapter 12 is supported by social work examples ranging from practice and policy assessment to measurement validity.
• Expanded coverage of secondary data analysis includes coverage of how to access sources, how to assess the utility of a data sets, and the ethical issues associated with analysis and big data.
• New appendices cover questions to ask when reading a qualitative research article.

  KEY FEATURES :

• Each chapter focuses on a particular substantive research question to underscore the strong and weak points of actual research projects.
• Methods are presented within a unified conceptual framework of validity to help students critically evaluate social work research articles and practice.
• Real-world examples demonstrate the methods used by social work researchers to discover the efficacy of interventions, identify needs, and test the impact of social policies.
• Ethics is introduced in an early chapter (Chapter 3) and discussed in concluding sections in every chapter.
• Culture and diversity is discussed within each chapter to address questions about social diversity in every stage of the research process.
• An engaging presentation of qualitative methods appropriate to the field of social work includes coverage of Photovoice and its applicability to social justice.
• Extensive review exercises, presented in a variety of formats, help students master the key concepts of every chapter.
• Free SAGE edge online resources include practice quizzes, a personalized action plan, eFlashcards, web resources, and more.

Sample Materials & Chapters

For instructors, select a purchasing option.

• Search Menu
• Advance articles
• Editor's Choice
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• About The British Journal of Social Work
• About the British Association of Social Workers
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, what is practice research and why (and for whom) does it matter, practice research as an organisationally rooted participatory research methodology, practice research frameworks, how can service users benefit from participating in practice research, integrating practice research processes into social service organisational analysis, applications of practice research for social service organisations, methodological and ethical considerations for practice research-based organisational analysis, implications and an agenda for social work researchers, acknowledgements.

• < Previous

Practice research methods in social work: Processes, applications and implications for social service organisations

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Bowen McBeath, Michael J Austin, Sarah Carnochan, Emmeline Chuang, Practice research methods in social work: Processes, applications and implications for social service organisations, The British Journal of Social Work , Volume 52, Issue 6, September 2022, Pages 3328–3346, https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcab246

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Although social work research is commonly rooted within social service settings, it can be difficult for social work researchers and practitioners to develop and sustain participatory studies that specifically promote knowledge sharing and service improvement involving organisational practice. One participatory approach is practice research (PR), which involves social work researchers and practitioners collaborating to define, understand and try to improve the delivery of health and social care services and organisational structures and processes. The two goals of this commentary are to introduce essential methods and approaches to PR and to identify points of connection involving PR and social service organisational studies. Our specific focus on PR in statutory, voluntary and private social service organisations reflects efforts to connect practice, theory and qualitative and quantitative research methods to develop and share organisationally-situated knowledge.

This paper offers an overview of practice research (PR) that focuses on the delivery of social work services in social service organisations. PR is a participatory method used by researchers to address the needs of vulnerable populations, notably poor communities of colour, who receive health and social care services in formal organisational settings. PR is ‘a knowledge development process that focuses primarily on the roles of the service provider, service user, and the service researcher who all participate in defining the research questions and interpreting the findings’ ( Fisher et al. , 2016 ). PR therefore seeks to improve social work and other social services and promote the well-being of service users; and functions as a collaborative process that minimises power differentials between participants ( Austin, 2020 ).

The macro-organisational context of PR studies includes concerns of managerialism amidst neoliberalism, involving increased professionalisation, the use of evidence-based practices and the structuring of service programmes around carefully defined performance measures in response to administrative and policy requirements ( Hasenfeld and Garrow, 2012 ; Harlow et al. , 2013 ; Yan et al. , 2017 ). The meso-organisational context of PR studies involves the development and sustainment of organisational spaces for reflection and sharing that support practitioner engagement in evidence-informed practice ( Carnochan et al. , 2017 ; Brandt et al. , 2020 ). The immediate context for PR is the bureaucratic encounters that involve staff and service users as well as practitioner use of research to promote organisational learning ( Austin and Carnochan, 2020 ). With its specific focus on statutory, voluntary and private social service organisations, PR aims to strengthen the collaborative capacity of practitioners and researchers to support service improvement and responsiveness to the perspectives of service users (capturing the expertise of experience).

In order to describe PR within organisations providing health and social care services, our paper is divided into four sections. First, we provide a brief introduction to PR to characterise its core elements. We also provide a brief review of the major approaches to PR, distinguishing between PR frameworks at different levels of practice and in different geographic contexts. We then identify how service users can benefit from PR. Secondly, we identify how PR processes can be integrated within social service organisational analysis, focusing in particular on how practice researchers and their agency partners (notably front line staff and managers) collaboratively seek to improve social service delivery, support organisational learning and promote interorganisational knowledge sharing. We also summarise PR processes that are based on the core concepts embedded in the science of the concrete (SOC) ( Flyvbjerg, 2001 ). Thirdly, we illustrate the applications of PR for local authorities/counties and voluntary social service organisations with the use of three brief examples featuring methodological and ethical considerations for researchers using PR approaches. Finally, we conclude by identifying implications for social work organisational researchers participating in PR studies and proposing a future research agenda.

At its core, PR is a negotiated process involving multiple stakeholders ( Uggerhøj, 2011 ). These stakeholders include statutory, voluntary and private social service organisations; managers, staff and service users within the organisation; researchers; and policymakers and community leaders. They all function within the context of intergroup communications, negotiation and shared learning needed to address the gap between research and practice and support learning across role-based social, cultural and organisational distances ( Austin and Carnochan, 2020 ).

In order to address this gap, PR involves elements of both practice and research. The elements of practice include: (1) engaging and including diverse types of stakeholders; (2) an effort to rebalance power relationships across organisational contexts, by validating the experiences and expertise of participants at different levels of the organisation; (3) open and frequent conversations to promote dialogue and sustain norms of trust and reciprocity; and (4) an appreciation for the critical role of organisational supports (notably managers) for exploring service innovation ( Uggerhøj, 2011 ).

Essential research elements of PR include the use of quantitative and qualitative data, as well as the reliance on evidence collected within the agency setting. The use of different types of evidence can generate two major research tensions; namely, balancing the breadth (as seen in large organisational surveys and administrative service databases) and depth (e.g. analysis of client case records, in-depth interviews) of research while navigating the tension between research rigour and practice wisdom displayed by practitioners and service users ( Julkunen, 2011 ).

These practice and research elements are integrated into PR studies that evolve in response to ongoing and changing agency needs and priorities. Facilitated group dialogue is used to collaboratively identify practice concerns, conduct research in response to the concerns, and share findings with a focus on assessing current social work practices and identifying opportunities for improvement ( Austin, 2020 ). PR involves power sharing and role shifting through reciprocal learning, as traditionally less-engaged stakeholders explore new roles (e.g. from service user to PR partner); and as managers and researchers reframe their traditional roles (e.g. exploring the emergence of practice-informed management research and research-informed management practice) ( Fisher et al. , 2016 ).

As one of several participatory social science research methods, PR reflects the emphasis of researchers on practice-in-context. In particular, PR shares a number of characteristics with participatory action research (PAR) and empowerment evaluation. In each method, collaboration with service users and other stakeholder groups is central to identifying basic research questions that relate to practices, programmes and/or policies as expressions of larger institutional forces. Furthermore, these approaches draw on diverse sources of literature, including practice and policy reports as well as academic research studies, to inform research questions. Lastly, collaborative collection and analysis of qualitative and/or quantitative data is carried out by research and practice partners across the three research traditions ( Healy, 2001 ; Fetterman et al. , 2017 ).

However, while PR shares many similarities with PAR and programme evaluation principles, it also differs in several important ways related to goals, data sources, data interpretation and the nature of knowledge development and dissemination (see Table 1 ). For example, a main goal of programme evaluation includes the central role of specifying programme objectives to inform funder or organisational decision making in a narrowly defined area (e.g. continue, modify or eliminate a programme). In contrast, PR goals may be much broader, and intended to inform participants’ conceptual thinking about current practice or service delivery and create dialogical opportunities without the same emphasis on direct implications for organisational decision making. Differences also appear in the area of research dissemination. Specifically, programme evaluation results are often used to support organisational planning in response to formal funding and policy requirements, and PAR is often used to support socio-political action or community change. In comparison, PR focuses more on service and practice improvement as well as the relationship between theory and practice, with the goal of encouraging more research-minded practitioners and more practice-minded researchers ( Saurama and Julkunen, 2012 ).

Comparing PR with other research frameworks a

Adapted from Austin and Carnochan (2020 , p. 199).

Another critical factor that distinguishes PR from other participatory research methods is the connection between social work practice and social service managers. Compared to action research and empowerment evaluation methodologies, PR is more explicitly organisational in understanding how managers, front line staff and service users make sense of their diverse roles and often competing statuses. PR is also more attentive to the collaborative interrelationships of service users, front line agency staff and managers in their interorganisational and institutional context. Finally, PR demonstrates an awareness of how questions of service delivery reflect the professionalisation of social work and social services vis-à-vis questions of organisational learning ( Fisher et al. , 2016 ).

Finally, another key difference between PR and its related methodologies can be found in the relationship of organisationally situated theories vis-à-vis practice. For practice researchers, considerations of theory-informed practice and practice-informed theory are important ( Fisher, 2011 ). The exploration and development of diverse theories (e.g. cultural–historical activity theory; Foot, 2014 ) helps practice researchers and participants identify shared practice challenges and explore possible solutions. For example, practice researchers can share lessons learned and practice implications of different theories of group-based learning and relational work, so that managers, workers and service users can determine how each theory enhances shared understanding of service problems and possible solutions ( Austin, 2020 ; Muurinen and Kaarianen, 2021 ).

In sum, PR is explicitly rooted within social service organisations, with a basic goal of collaborating to improve the delivery of health and social care services and organisational capacity within and between organisations ( Austin and Carnochan, 2020 ). Practice researchers pay close attention to the delivery of front line services as well as multilevel practice issues relating to managers, staff and service users.

The evolution of PR has reflected theoretical and practical developments. Practice researchers have used person-in-organisation theories of practice in an effort to explain the ‘everyday actions’ ( Feldman and Orlikowski, 2011 , p. 1241) and ‘concrete activities’ ( Barley and Kunda, 2001 , p. 76) that capture the relationship between agency-based service providers and service users. Researchers have also proposed ways of enhancing the practical relevance of research that involves social work researchers and practitioners promoting shared learning, with a goal of resolving fundamental service delivery dilemmas ( Austin et al. , 2014 ).

In response to these developments, the interrelated streams of PR have been explored in the form of collaboration and negotiation. For example, the foundational perspective of PR invites practitioners and service users to collaboratively identify opportunities to improve social work practices and organisational processes—particularly in response to administrative requirements and statutory mandates ( Fook and Gardner, 2007 ; Epstein, 2009 ). Similarly, there are opportunities to negotiate across differing approaches and perspectives that practitioners, service users and researchers bring to the knowledge production process ( Uggerhøj, 2011 ).

Based on the original formulation of PR, Julkunen (2011) developed a typology of PR studies, distinguishing between practitioner-oriented, generative, method-oriented and democratic models. In the practitioner-oriented model, the practitioner reflectively dialogues with others in order to address pressing practice issues. The generative model involves cycles of agency practice and research designed to connect practical knowledge to action by testing and evaluating potential practice innovations. The method-oriented model involves the service user, practitioner and researcher collaboratively developing practice-based knowledge as well as knowledge that can inform theory development and application. Finally, the democratic model focuses specifically on service users, practitioners, researchers and organisational and system leaders using PR to advocate for practice reforms, thereby connecting PR to policy change (also see Fisher, 2013 ).

Although scholarship on PR has historically reflected the perspectives of Nordic and US academic institutions and social welfare states, a globally diverse body of PR literature is emerging ( Chan and Sim, 2020 ). This literature demonstrates that different PR studies may reflect different: political, policy and organisational contexts of social service delivery; research methods; understandings of service user and practitioner involvement and collaboration and understandings of practice ( Sim et al. , 2018 ).

Empirical research on benefits accrued by service users when engaging in PR is currently limited. However, preliminary evidence suggests that benefits can be organised in terms of empowerment processes and measurable outcomes built on the service user premise of ‘nothing about us, without us’ ( Beresford and McLaughlin, 2020 ). Such processes invite PR participants to learn how to participate in non-hierarchical relationships that ensure diversity, equity and inclusion among service users and providers. This partnership relationship often involves joint problem-solving as well as developing a critical consciousness leading to an alliance through the articulation of shared and different needs and challenges ( Fook and Gardner, 2007 ). Engaging in this process can help service users gain a greater understanding of the contextualised nature of social problems they face.

Another key benefit of participating in PR involves expanding the capacities of service users to amplify their own voices and assume the position of representing the perspectives of peer-colleagues ( Austin and Carnochan, 2020 ). Service users may advocate internally (in response to management directives) and externally (in response to policy dicta and fiscal requirements). As they engage in advocacy efforts, service users can also increase their skills in identifying and accessing community resources (e.g. job training programmes that enhance employability). The process of engaging in humanising power-sharing relationships using dialogical communications between service users, staff and managers can thus involve a shared search for community resources and organisational funding needed to maintain service delivery at needed levels ( Ramon et al. , 2019 ).

The benefits of service user involvement do not necessarily lead to major organisational changes when the focus is on modifying or improving direct service or managerial practice. However, service user involvement can lead to both changes in practice as well as changes in organisational policies and structures ( Julkunen, 2011 ; Fisher, 2013 ). Through involvement in PR, service users can also participate in training and other learning-oriented events as co-equals with staff and other community stakeholders. These opportunities can involve service users playing critical roles of knowledge navigation and translation within social service organisational contexts, particularly where service user perspectives are needed to translate deep knowledge of programme and policy gaps to staff, managers and policymakers ( Muurinen and Kaarianen, 2021 ). Such PR efforts can help spur organisational change and the development of new approaches to system transformation. For service users, skills acquired through participation in PR can also be leveraged in future advocacy efforts or employment opportunities (e.g. serving as a consultant or staff member based on their expertise of experience with a particular social issue) ( Voronka and Grant, 2021 ).

In summary, some of the major benefits derived from service user involvement have been documented ( Natland and Celik, 2015 ) by noting the transition of service user from functioning with a sense of shame or trauma to one of pride and empowerment, in addition to learning how services can be evaluated and improved based on timely and strategic input from service users. A major limitation related to service user involvement could be that their involvement in which their service user experiences are contextualised or revisited could result in being retraumatised (e.g. reliving the experiences of being homeless, incarcerated, unemployed, physically disabled or mentally disabled), especially when acquiring the ‘big picture understanding’ of the pervasiveness of social problems in the larger society ( Müller and Pihl-Thingvad, 2020 ).

The next section identifies common approaches for practice researchers to collaborate with agency-based practitioners and managers in support of service user preferences.

PR processes reflect the evolving interests of social service organisational researchers and practitioners, as seen in their concerns with the formal delivery of contract-based public services, with specific focus on service access and equity considerations ( Jindra et al. , 2020 ). In a similar way, PR processes capture the concerns of managerialism as a response to neoliberalism and austerity, especially in European, Australian and Asian social welfare contexts ( Yan et al. , 2017 ; Alexander and Fernandez, 2021 ). Underlying these interests is an abiding focus on studies that validate and feature the perspectives of service users and service providers ( Hasenfeld and Garrow, 2012 ; Harlow et al. , 2013 ). These studies reflect decades of organisational research, as seen in Table 2 (for a review, see Austin and Carnochan, 2020 ). The overarching effort is to democratise knowledge sharing within social service organisational settings by identifying complementary ways for service users, practitioners, researchers and advocates to contribute to social service delivery.

Complementary types of practice research with social service organisations

For social service organisational scholars, PR processes support exploratory, explanatory and interventive research aims. In exploratory research, PR is used to identify the diverse organisational experiences of service users and service providers ( Austin, 2020 ). These exploratory studies are analogous to participatory needs assessments. In contrast, explanatory PR examines connections between service, programme or policy logics, and identifies broken or missing logics reflecting needed resources (notably, time, funding and training). For example, the identification of gaps between needs and services often reflects historically and/or currently unaddressed service needs (as seen by service users), programme needs (as perceived by front line staff) and organisational learning and policy implementation needs (as viewed by agency leaders) ( Hasenfeld and Garrow, 2012 ; Spitzmueller, 2018 ). Finally, PR can support intervention studies that involve the co-design, co-development, refinement and sharing of new practices within programmes (e.g. practical innovations that benefit service users and front line workers) ( Schalock et al. , 2014 ).

PR-based social service studies can be viewed from the perspectives of the SOC ( Flyvbjerg, 2001 ) that invites researchers to propose person-oriented research questions related to those individuals and groups most impacted by the issues at hand. The SOC also asks researchers to focus on small practices that support big events or processes by exploring everyday activities and their contexts that connect people and their organisational milieu. Finally, the SOC involves engaging multiple stakeholders while reducing power differentials. In PR, managers are viewed as essential linchpins who facilitate shared learning, by validating the multiple organisational identities of participants.

Although social service organisational research based on the SOC can take many forms, it ordinarily begins with question formulation around one or more practical problems or concerns. As elucidated by Austin and Carnochan (2020) , PR questions can take a variety of forms but generally involve three fundamental questions: How can we improve social services and, more broadly, enhance opportunities for health and social care? How can we amplify the voices of service users? and How can we sustain small innovations and promising practices in social work, particularly in different organisational and policy settings? Jointly defining PR questions involves validating the perspectives of each type of participant. Questions derived from the perspectives of service users and staff require considerable outreach in order to engage and amplify service user and practitioner voices (e.g. via service user- and staff-led meetings) ( Uggerhøj, 2011 ).

In comparison, organisational and policy-focused research questions are often formulated by senior management in regards to intra-organisational issues (e.g. cross-departmental coordination and collaboration) and inter-organisational issues (e.g. contracting and implementation challenges involving statutory, voluntary and private social service organisations) ( Fisher, 2013 ). Negotiating among the diverse types of research questions involves explaining why the questions are relevant for different groups, how each envisioned research study can support mutually beneficial goals, and what benefits and challenges might arise as a result.

Other key concepts of the SOC that support PR studies include collaboration and engagement with partners based on persistent communication, representation of diverse memberships, fostering inclusiveness, engaging in difficult conversations and consensus building. Other needed skills involve managing critical tensions, often relating to the responsibilities and expectations of different PR stakeholders. Additional tensions reflect the evolving demands of the organisation vis-à-vis its institutional environment. These tensions need to be addressed through shared dialogue in PR teams ( Julkunen, 2011 ).

As the PR team coalesces, it informs research design, data collection, data interpretation and research dissemination and utilisation in unique ways ( Austin, 2020 ). For example, the more traditional use of literature reviews is to ensure that the research questions and study design are informed by the latest peer-reviewed research studies, by reflecting their findings, key concepts, research methods and implications for future research. In comparison, building on existing knowledge in PR may also involve review of organisational documents, grey literature and the practice wisdom of practitioners and service users ( Austin and Carnochan, 2020 ).

In PR, literature reviews can also become ends in themselves. For example, PR-informed literature reviews can assist in reframing service processes (i.e. identifying how service users and practitioners understand the theories of action underlying service logic models); help staff to become more evidence-informed by reflecting on diverse practice literature and inform managerial decision-making processes. Similarly, in contrast to the traditional scholarly approach of disseminating research findings via peer-reviewed publications in academic journals, practice researchers also share findings directly with service providers and service users in the form of reports and presentations so that practice partners can identify novel applications and more effective approaches to practice.

This section provides three brief examples of PR-based organisational studies. The institutional context of the examples reflects a longstanding PR centre located in a US public research university, a regional consortium of county organisations that administer statutorily required social services and a regional consortium of non-profit organisations that provide voluntary social services. Regionalisation of PR efforts is not uncommon, particularly when organised through academic–practice partnerships involving research, education and training and service functions (often in metropolitan areas).

PR centres serve as network hubs for developing service, workforce and programme studies in response to institutional and local demands (e.g. new policy implementation requirements impacting service delivery). They share PR-based knowledge in order to advocate with local and regional policy and practice bodies, and work to promote mutual support and shared leadership among social service organisations. From the social service organisational perspective, consortium membership and affiliation with the PR centre can advance knowledge development and utilisation that might not otherwise be possible due to considerations of cost, research capacity or timing ( Schalock et al. , 2014 ). Whilst some PR centres are university-based ( Austin et al. , 1999 ), others are located in public settings (e.g. ministries of health and social services) ( Muurinen and Kaarianen, 2021 ). However, the general purpose of PR centres is similar to centres providing applied evaluation and technical assistance.

For over twenty-five years, the PR centre from which the following examples are drawn has supported collaborative, usable knowledge related to the management and improvement of social work services across the public and non-profit social service sectors ( Austin, 2018 ). Its studies have involved research at the front line, organisational and inter-organisational levels, ranging from qualitative agency-based case studies to large quantitative surveys that span public and non-profit organisations across the region. The studies have supported the collection and sharing of three types of research evidence as noted by Nutley et al. (2007) . The first type relates to conceptual evidence that is often drawn from exploratory PR studies that are designed to support future applications. The second type includes persuasive research evidence that often involves explanatory PR, and is used to advocate (within organisations) and externally (notably, with policymakers, funders and civic leaders). And the third type involves instrumental evidence that often relates to explanatory or interventive PR that is designed to support practice improvements (notably in response to identified service and training needs).

To illustrate some of these PR-informed studies of service delivery, we note the purpose of each study, and then summarise its use by study partners and the consortia of local authorities/counties and non-profit social service organisations. As each study evolved, practice researchers attended to the perspectives of organisational partners through persistent communications, relational work centred in interpersonal and small group meetings, managing tensions in response to ongoing and new challenges and celebrating successes.

The first example involved an exploration of the attributes and sustainability of pioneering non-profit social service organisations through in-depth case histories ( Austin, 2013 ) and focused on the organisational developmental needs of long-serving nonprofits. The study partners and regional consortium of non-profit social service organisations expressed significant interest in findings, leading to requests for self-assessment-based organisational and management support tools designed to promote front line service improvement.

The second example was a survey-based study of how front line and management practitioners across eleven county-based public social service organisations engaged in evidence-informed practice. The quantitative aspect of the study noted the importance of organisational roles and resources, and individual practitioner attitudes towards practice and innovation, in supporting different levels of evidence use ( McBeath et al. , 2015 ). The qualitative component of the study identified the specific cognitive, interactive, action and compliance dimensions of evidence-informed practice that are embedded within agency-based social and organisational practices and priorities ( Carnochan et al. , 2017 ). This explanatory study resulted in the provision of recommendations to the eleven county social service organisations, focused on identifying needed resources and opportunities for peer sharing and social support.

The third example involved a mixed methods study examining the collaborative nature of non-profit contracting amidst technical challenges that reflect the underlying complexity of social service delivery. Qualitative, comparative case study analysis was used to explore the multiple dimensions of relational contracting between non-profit and county social service organisations in three counties ( McBeath et al. , 2017 ). The quantitative component of the study entailed surveying non-profit and county social service organisations across different counties to assess the importance of cross-sector communications, trust-building and shared client accountability for collaborative contracting and social service outcome achievement ( Carnochan et al. , 2019 ; Chuang et al. , 2020 ). Study findings identified the need for public-non-profit social service contracting support structures and processes, including: regularly scheduled cross-sector meetings to identify emergent needs and promising service approaches; and cross-sector training and technical assistance to promote collaborative contracting and improved service outcomes.

Each example involved engagement with agency directors, division heads, senior managers and line staff. In each study, the research design and reporting process was iterative between levels, in support of facilitating communication on broadly relevant topics involving diverse staff groups. Overall, these and other studies from the specific PR centre have regularly featured critical information exchange sessions, involving agency staff presentations of local practices as well as research staff presentations of research syntheses, and in which the audience is cross-division and multi-level.

PR methods complement social service organisational research methodologies in at least two ways. First, PR offers an alternative to traditional organisational research that relies on quantitative analysis of elite surveys (notably agency directors). In comparison, PR studies incorporate diverse types of data (e.g. use of agency documents, interviews, focus groups, surveys) and the perspectives of individuals at different levels of analysis (including administrators and managers, front line staff and service users). These qualitative and quantitative data collection methods are intended to address common source bias and validity concerns. Mixed methods PR studies therefore need to anticipate concerns about the perceived trustworthiness, credibility, confirmability and dependability of the data (e.g. by pilot testing survey instruments and interview guides). (For a summative review concerning how to promote the rigour and relevance of PR studies, see Austin and Carnochan (2020 , pp. 183–189)).

Secondly, PR provides a balanced response to the understanding of researchers as either directing and managing the research process, or serving in subsidiary roles. In comparison, PR is a participatory process in which the research interests and perspectives of the researchers and practitioners are actively negotiated, and often reflect multiple objectives ( Fisher et al. , 2016 ). As noted previously, these include instrumental objectives (e.g. to use PR to enhance understanding of services and programmes, and/or to support organisational learning) along with process and interactional objectives (e.g. to support PR-based participation and collaboration). Among the most challenging aspects embedded in negotiations are values-based objectives that are designed to enhance equity and empowerment through PR projects.

Practice researchers therefore need to be prepared to take on co-facilitative roles on issues ranging from research question formulation to the interpretation, use and wider sharing of PR findings in organisations and broader contexts. These co-roles are essential for addressing group dynamics and cross-sector challenges, celebrating shared wins and fostering inclusiveness and active dialogue. Working through these critical tensions depends on power sharing—particularly for practice researchers and senior agency staff vis-à-vis front line staff and service users—and reflects key elements of intergroup dialogue amidst difference ( Austin, 2020 ).

Whilst there is a wide range of ethical issues associated with PR that draws heavily from social science research, some of the more prominent issues include service user and case record confidentiality, final report contributor equity, teamwork accountability derived from participatory decision making in search of consensus and adherence to data source protocols. The theme of confidentiality is wide ranging. It includes respecting the confidential nature of service user information collected as part of a PR project. It also involves the confidential discussions among research team members, who can include service users and staff. A final concern relates to the ethics of the timely reporting of the research to service users, other agency stakeholders and the larger community (e.g. elected officials, other organisations and researchers). In essence, PR involves the various ethical views of three different communities; namely, the research community, the service provider community and the service user community. The convergence of these three perspectives can be challenging for the various participants to both understand and accept.

These methodological and ethical considerations lead to four suggestions for social service organisational researchers when co-facilitating PR studies to enhance their ability to anticipate common PR challenges. First, PR presents communication-based coordination challenges (involving questions of trust, ethical dilemmas and available expertise), as practice and research partners may need to dialogue regularly amidst already-demanding work schedules. Secondly, partners may face changing and/or limited capacity for and engagement with PR, particularly as practice and research roles and priorities evolve. Thirdly, navigating PR projects requires attending to differing perspectives on the time frame to generate research results, viewed as fast by university standards and slow by agency standards. Fourthly, practice researchers need to demonstrate the capacity to convert research implications into practical recommendations for organisational change given the limited experience with the unique aspects of organisational cultures that differ across participating agencies and research institutions. Underscoring these suggestions is the importance of practice researchers and agency partners remaining flexible with respect to different role-based expectations and university versus agency-based priorities.

We conclude with two major recommendations for social work researchers and practitioners in the social service organisational milieu. First, developing, maintaining and supporting collaborative, trust-based relationships is essential for PR studies. Relationship-building involves recognising mutually beneficial capabilities and shared objectives across different organisational roles (e.g. service users, staff and managers within the agency, and practice-informed researchers inside and outside the agency) to advance collaborative planning. Supporting relationships can involve power-sharing to promote mutual respect and trust as well as social support, particularly amidst the complex dynamics of PR teams. Sustaining relationships calls for transparent information-sharing, consistent communication to address evolving practice and research dilemmas and reciprocal risk-taking that respects the negotiated boundaries of various partners. Finally, sustained relationships often require continuous boundary spanning within the organisation and between agency and university partners.

For productive PR relationships to evolve, an ongoing assessment of practice and research relationships includes monitoring evolving organisational and community contexts, revisiting shared goals in light of changes, and managing PR project expectations in response to evolving stakeholder needs and ethical challenges. Relational work is perhaps the most essential dimension of collaborative, participatory research with social service organisational partners.

Secondly, for practice researchers and agency-based practitioners, the balancing of diverse relational commitments requires sustained self-reflection . Self-reflection involves considering the tensions between the breadth and depth possible in empirical research as well as between the commitment to peer-reviewed empirical research and the investment in practice-based research (e.g. grey literature, agency statistics, practice wisdom). Self-reflection also relates to addressing the different expectations and emphases of service users, staff, managers and other agency stakeholders as well as the different collaborative roles that researchers are required to play when they are invited to step up as co-leaders or step back (e.g. comfortably serving as a research consultant), depending on the specific needs of the research team in its organisational context. These reflexive considerations are centred in an ethos of collaboratively improving service delivery to enhance service user well-being.

While reflecting on identified tensions is a critical aspect of the efforts of practice researchers in relationship with agency-based partners, it is also essential for researchers located in university-based settings. Self-reflection on these tensions can involve deeper questions of how to: (1) reconcile the often-competing expectations of one’s academic home, one’s social service organisational partners and one’s role as a scholar–researcher and (2) reframe these competing expectations into complementary aims. Regular dialogue involving practice and research partners concerning these two issues can involve iterative processes of shared debriefing, deconstructing and redefining key needs. The overall goal is to find win–wins that benefit the university, agency and oneself in carrying out research and disseminating practical knowledge in community-based organisational settings.

In order to identify mutually beneficial PR opportunities for social service organisational researchers, we propose a research agenda in the form of ten questions designed to promote speculation and dialogue as illustrated in Table 3 . The array of questions captures the tensions related to the different ways that practice researchers: engage and consider collaborating with possible agency partners; transition from the development of participatory research studies to their dissemination in complex agency contexts and sustain participatory studies in larger institutional settings. The questions seek to capture a lifecycle of participatory research projects at different stages of organisational development and across different contexts.

New directions for practice research-informed social service organisational analysis.

In summary, PR is a participatory, organisationally focused approach that combines the search for practice-relevant knowledge with qualitative and quantitative research methods in order to enhance services and promote organisational improvement in diverse contexts. PR therefore complements participatory methodologies as well as other applied social science methods used in social service organisational analysis. The future challenges include promoting more participatory studies of social service organisations as well as articulating additional perspectives on PR processes, applications and implications.

The authors would like to express their appreciation to the anonymous peer reviewers and Editors for their very helpful suggestions regarding the manuscript.

Alexander J. , Fernandez K. ( 2021 ) ‘ The impact of neoliberalism on civil society and nonprofit advocacy ’, Nonprofit Policy Forum , 12 ( 2 ), pp. 367 – 94 .

Google Scholar

Austin M. J. ( 2018 ) ‘ Mack Center on nonprofit and public sector management in human service organizations ’, Research on Social Work Practice , 28 ( 3 ), pp. 386 – 91 .

Austin M. J. ( 2020 ) ‘Identifying the conceptual foundations of practice research’, in Joubert L. , Webber M. (eds), The Routledge Handbook of Social Work Practice Research , New York , Routledge .

Google Preview

Austin M. J. ( 2013 ) Organizational Histories of Nonprofit Human Service Organizations , New York , Routledge .

Austin M. J. , Carnochan S. ( 2020 ) Practice Research in the Human Services: A University-agency Partnership Model , New York , Oxford University Press .

Austin M. J. , Julkunen I. , Fisher M. , Uggerhøj L. ( 2014 ) ‘ Helsinki statement on social work practice research ’, Nordic Social Work Research , 56 ( 3 ), pp. 284 – 88 .

Austin M. J. , Martin M. , Carnochan S. , Duerr Berrick J. , Goldberg S. , Kelley J. , Weiss B. ( 1999 ) ‘ Building a comprehensive agency-university partnership: The Bay Area Social Services Consortium ’, Journal of Community Practice , 6 ( 3 ), pp. 89 – 106 .

Barley S. R. , Kunda G. ( 2001 ) ‘ Bringing work back in ’, Organization Science , 12 ( 1 ), pp. 76 – 95 .

Beresford P. , McLaughlin H. ( 2020 ) ‘Service user involvement in research: What difference does it make?’, in McLaughlin H. , Beresford P. , Cameron C. , Casey H. , Duffy J. (eds), The Routledge Handbook of Service User Involvement in Human Services Research and Education , New York , Routledge .

Brandt S. , Roose R. , Verschelden G. ( 2020 ) ‘ The caged bird sings: The voice of the workfare generation ’, The British Journal of Social Work , 50 ( 7 ), pp. 2022 – 39 .

Carnochan S. , McBeath B. , Austin M. J. ( 2017 ) ‘ Managerial and frontline perspectives on the process of evidence-informed practice within human service organizations ’, Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance , 41 ( 4 ), pp. 346 – 58 .

Carnochan S. , McBeath B. , Chuang E. , Austin M. J. ( 2019 ) ‘ Perspectives of public and nonprofit managers on communications in human service contracting ’, Public Performance & Management Review , 42 ( 3 ), pp. 657 – 84 .

Chan T. M. S. , Sim T. ( 2020 ) ‘ East meets West: Five decades of practice research in Hong Kong ’, Research on Social Work Practice , 30 ( 3 ), pp. 259 – 66 .

Chuang E. , McBeath B. , Carnochan S. , Austin M. J. ( 2020 ) ‘ Relational mechanisms in complex contracting: Factors associated with private agency managers’ satisfaction with and commitment to the contract relationship ’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory , 30 ( 2 ), pp. 257 – 74 .

Epstein I. ( 2009 ) Clinical Data-mining: Integrating Practice and Research , Oxford , Oxford University Press .

Feldman M. S. , Orlikowski W. J. ( 2011 ) ‘ Theorizing practice and practicing theory ’, Organization Science , 22 ( 5 ), pp. 1240 – 53 .

Fetterman D. M. , Rodríguez-Campos L. , Zukoski A. P. ( 2017 ) Collaborative, Participatory, and Empowerment Evaluation: Stakeholder Involvement Approaches , New York , Guilford Publications .

Fisher M. ( 2011 ) ‘ Practice literate research: Turning the tables ’, Social Work & Society , 9 ( 1 ), pp. 20 – 28 .

Fisher M. ( 2013 ) ‘ Beyond evidence-based policy and practice ’, Social Work and Social Sciences Review , 16 ( 2 ), pp. 20 – 36 .

Fisher M. , Austin M. J. , Julkunen I. , Sim T. , Uggerhøj L. , Isokuortti N. ( 2016 ) ‘Practice research’, in Mullen E. (ed.), Oxford Bibliographies in Social Work , Oxford , Oxford University Press .

Flyvbjerg B. ( 2001 ) Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again , New York , Cambridge University Press .

Fook J. , Gardner F. ( 2007 ) Practising Critical Reflection: A Resource Handbook , New York , McGraw-Hill Education .

Foot K. A. ( 2014 ) ‘ Cultural-historical activity theory: Exploring a theory to inform practice and research ’, Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment , 24 ( 3 ), pp. 329 – 47 .

Harlow E. , Berg E. , Barry J. , Chandler J. ( 2013 ) ‘ Neoliberalism, managerialism and the reconfiguring of social work in Sweden and the United Kingdom ’, Organization , 20 ( 4 ), pp. 534 – 50 .

Hasenfeld Y. , Garrow E. E. ( 2012 ) ‘ Nonprofit human service organizations, social rights, and advocacy in a neoliberal welfare state ’, Social Service Review , 86 ( 2 ), pp. 295 – 322 .

Healy K. ( 2001 ) ‘ Participatory action research and social work: A critical appraisal ’, International Social Work , 44 ( 1 ), pp. 93 – 105 .

Jindra M. , Paulle B. , Jindra I. W. ( 2020 ) ‘ Relational work in the struggle against poverty: Balancing scholarly critiques and emancipatory practices in the nonprofit sector ’, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly , 49 ( 1 ), pp. 160 – 79 .

Julkunen I. ( 2011 ) ‘ Knowledge production processes in practice research–Outcomes and critical elements ’, Social Work & Society , 9 ( 1 ), pp. 60 – 75 .

McBeath B. , Carnochan S. , Stuart M. , Austin M. J. ( 2017 ) ‘ The managerial and relational dimensions of public-nonprofit human service contracting ’, Journal of Strategic Contracting and Negotiation , 3 ( 2 ), pp. 51 – 77 .

McBeath B. , Pérez Jolles M. , Carnochan S. , Austin M. J. ( 2015 ) ‘ Organizational and individual determinants of evidence use by managers in public human service organizations ’, Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership, & Governance , 39 , pp. 267 – 89 .

Müller M. , Pihl-Thingvad S. ( 2020 ) ‘ User involvement in social work innovation: A systematic and narrative review ’, Journal of Social Work , 20 ( 6 ), pp. 730 – 50 .

Muurinen H. , Kaarianen A. ( 2021 ) Using Theory in Practice—An Intervention Supporting Research Dissemination in Social Work . Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance , Advance Access published July 9, 2021.

Natland S. , Celik H. D. ( 2015 ) ‘ Service users’ self-narratives on their journey from shame to pride: Tales of transition ’, Journal of Evidence-informed Social Work , 12 ( 1 ), pp. 50 – 63 .

Nutley S. M. , Walter I. , Davies H. T. ( 2007 ) Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services , Bristol , Policy Press .

Ramon S. , Moshe Grodofsky M. , Allegri E. , Rafaelic A. ( 2019 ) ‘ Service users’ involvement in social work education: Focus on social change projects ’, Social Work Education , 38 ( 1 ), pp. 89 – 102 .

Saurama E. , Julkunen I. ( 2012 ) ‘ Approaching practice research in theory and practice ’, Social Work and Social Sciences Review , 15 ( 2 ), pp. 57 – 75 .

Schalock R. L. , Lee T. , Verdugo M. , Swart K. , Claes C. , van Loon J. , Lee C. S. ( 2014 ) ‘ An evidence-based approach to organization evaluation and change in human service organizations ’, Evaluation and Program Planning , 45 , pp. 110 –1 8 .

Sim T. , Chan T. M. S. , Chok M. , Cui K. , Wang S. S. , Abdullah F. , Wong K. ( 2018 ) ‘ Contextualising the development of practice research in Asia ’, China Journal of Social Work , 11 ( 2 ), pp. 116 – 31 .

Spitzmueller M. C. ( 2018 ) ‘ Remaking “community” mental health: Contested institutional logics and organizational change ’, Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance , 42 ( 2 ), pp. 123 – 45 .

Uggerhøj L. ( 2011 ) ‘ What is practice research in social work?—Definitions, barriers and possibilities ’, Social Work & Society , 9 ( 1 ), pp. 45 – 59 .

Voronka J. , Grant J. ( 2021 ) ‘ Service user storytelling in social work education: Goals, constraints, strategies, and risks ’, Social Work Education , Advance Access published March 31, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2021.1908251 .

Yan M. C. , Cheung J. C. S. , Tsui M. S. , Chu C. K. ( 2017 ) ‘ Examining the neoliberal discourse of accountability: The case of Hong Kong’s social service sector ’, International Social Work , 60 ( 4 ), pp. 976 – 89 .

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1468-263X
• Print ISSN 0045-3102
• Copyright © 2024 British Association of Social Workers
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

The link between social work research and practice

When thinking about social work, some may consider the field to solely focus on clinical interventions with individuals or groups.

There may be a mistaken impression that research is not a part of the social work profession. This is completely false. Rather, the two have been and will continue to need to be intertwined.

This guide covers why social workers should care about research, how both social work practice and social work research influence and guide each other, how to build research skills both as a student and as a professional working in the field, and the benefits of being a social worker with strong research skills. 

A selection of social work research jobs are also discussed.  

• Social workers and research
• Evidence-based practice
• Practice and research
• Research and practice
• Build research skills
• Social worker as researcher
• Benefits of research skills
• Research jobs

Why should social workers care about research?

Sometimes it may seem as though social work practice and social work research are two separate tracks running parallel to each other – they both seek to improve the lives of clients, families and communities, but they don’t interact. This is not the way it is supposed to work.

Research and practice should be intertwined, with each affecting the other and improving processes on both ends, so that it leads to better outcomes for the population we’re serving.

Section 5 of the NASW Social Work Code of Ethics is focused on social workers’ ethical responsibilities to the social work profession. There are two areas in which research is mentioned in upholding our ethical obligations: for the integrity of the profession (section 5.01) and for evaluation and research (section 5.02). 

Some of the specific guidance provided around research and social work include:

• 5.01(b): …Social workers should protect, enhance, and improve the integrity of the profession through appropriate study and research, active discussion, and responsible criticism of the profession.
• 5.01(d): Social workers should contribute to the knowledge base of social work and share with colleagues their knowledge related to practice, research, and ethics…
• 5.02(a) Social workers should monitor and evaluate policies, the implementation of programs, and practice interventions.
• 5.02(b) Social workers should promote and facilitate evaluation and research to contribute to the development of knowledge.
• 5.02(c) Social workers should critically examine and keep current with emerging knowledge relevant to social work and fully use evaluation and research evidence in their professional practice.
• 5.02(q) Social workers should educate themselves, their students, and their colleagues about responsible research practices.

Evidence-based practice and evidence-based treatment

In order to strengthen the profession and determine that the interventions we are providing are, in fact, effective, we must conduct research. When research and practice are intertwined, this leads practitioners to develop evidence-based practice (EBP) and evidence-based treatment (EBT).

Evidence-based practice is, according to The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) , a process involving creating an answerable question based on a client or organizational need, locating the best available evidence to answer the question, evaluating the quality of the evidence as well as its applicability, applying the evidence, and evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of the solution. 

Evidence-based treatment is any practice that has been established as effective through scientific research according to a set of explicit criteria (Drake et al., 2001). These are interventions that, when applied consistently, routinely produce improved client outcomes. 

For example, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) was one of a variety of interventions for those with anxiety disorders. Researchers wondered if CBT was better than other intervention options in producing positive, consistent results for clients.

So research was conducted comparing multiple types of interventions, and the evidence (research results) demonstrated that CBT was the best intervention.

The anecdotal evidence from practice combined with research evidence determined that CBT should become the standard treatment for those diagnosed with anxiety. Now more social workers are getting trained in CBT methods in order to offer this as a treatment option to their clients.

How does social work practice affect research?

Social work practice provides the context and content for research. For example, agency staff was concerned about the lack of nutritional food in their service area, and heard from clients that it was too hard to get to a grocery store with a variety of foods, because they didn’t have transportation, or public transit took too long. 

So the agency applied for and received a grant to start a farmer’s market in their community, an urban area that was considered a food desert. This program accepted their state’s version of food stamps as a payment option for the items sold at the farmer’s market.

The agency used their passenger van to provide free transportation to and from the farmer’s market for those living more than four blocks from the market location.

The local university also had a booth each week at the market with nursing and medical students checking blood pressure and providing referrals to community agencies that could assist with medical needs. The agency was excited to improve the health of its clients by offering this program.

But how does the granting foundation know if this was a good use of their money? This is where research and evaluation comes in. Research could gather data to answer a number of questions. Here is but a small sample:

• How many community members visited each week and purchased fruits and vegetables? 
• How many took advantage of the transportation provided, and how many walked to the market? 
• How many took advantage of the blood pressure checks? Were improvements seen in those numbers for those having repeat blood pressure readings throughout the market season? 
• How much did the self-reported fruit and vegetable intake increase for customers? 
• What barriers did community members report in visiting and buying food from the market (prices too high? Inconvenient hours?)
• Do community members want the program to continue next year?
• Was the program cost-effective, or did it waste money by paying for a driver and for gasoline to offer free transportation that wasn’t utilized? What are areas where money could be saved without compromising the quality of the program?
• What else needs to be included in this program to help improve the health of community members?

How does research affect social work practice?

Research can guide practice to implement proven strategies. It can also ask the ‘what if’ or ‘how about’ questions that can open doors for new, innovative interventions to be developed (and then research the effectiveness of those interventions).

Engel and Schutt (2017) describe four categories of research used in social work:

• Descriptive research is research in which social phenomena are defined and described. A descriptive research question would be ‘How many homeless women with substance use disorder live in the metro area?’
• Exploratory research seeks to find out how people get along in the setting under question, what meanings they give to their actions, and what issues concern them. An example research question would be ‘What are the barriers to homeless women with substance use disorder receiving treatment services?’
• Explanatory research seeks to identify causes and effects of social phenomena. It can be used to rule out other explanations for findings and show how two events are related to each other.  An explanatory research question would be ‘Why do women with substance use disorder become homeless?’
• Evaluation research describes or identifies the impact of social programs and policies. This type of research question could be ‘How effective was XYZ treatment-first program that combined housing and required drug/alcohol abstinence in keeping women with substance use disorder in stable housing 2 years after the program ended?’

Each of the above types of research can answer important questions about the population, setting or intervention being provided. This can help practitioners determine which option is most effective or cost-efficient or that clients are most likely to adhere to. In turn, this data allows social workers to make informed choices on what to keep in their practice, and what needs changing. 

How to build research skills while in school

There are a number of ways to build research skills while a student.  BSW and MSW programs require a research course, but there are other ways to develop these skills beyond a single class:

• Volunteer to help a professor working in an area of interest. Professors are often excited to share their knowledge and receive extra assistance from students with similar interests.
• Participate in student research projects where you’re the subject. These are most often found in psychology departments. You can learn a lot about the informed consent process and how data is collected by volunteering as a research participant.  Many of these studies also pay a small amount, so it’s an easy way to earn a bit of extra money while you’re on campus. 
• Create an independent study research project as an elective and work with a professor who is an expert in an area you’re interested in.  You’d design a research study, collect the data, analyze it, and write a report or possibly even an article you can submit to an academic journal.
• Some practicum programs will have you complete a small evaluation project or assist with a larger research project as part of your field education hours. 
• In MSW programs, some professors hire students to conduct interviews or enter data on their funded research projects. This could be a good part time job while in school.
• Research assistant positions are more common in MSW programs, and these pay for some or all your tuition in exchange for working a set number of hours per week on a funded research project.

How to build research skills while working as a social worker

Social service agencies are often understaffed, with more projects to complete than there are people to complete them.

Taking the initiative to volunteer to survey clients about what they want and need, conduct an evaluation on a program, or seeing if there is data that has been previously collected but not analyzed and review that data and write up a report can help you stand out from your peers, be appreciated by management and other staff, and may even lead to a raise, a promotion, or even new job opportunities because of the skills you’ve developed.

Benefits of being a social worker with strong research skills

Social workers with strong research skills can have the opportunity to work on various projects, and at higher levels of responsibility. 

Many can be promoted into administration level positions after demonstrating they understand how to conduct, interpret and report research findings and apply those findings to improving the agency and their programs.

There’s also a level of confidence knowing you’re implementing proven strategies with your clients. 

Social work research jobs

There are a number of ways in which you can blend interests in social work and research. A quick search on Glassdoor.com and Indeed.com retrieved the following positions related to social work research:

• Research Coordinator on a clinical trial offering psychosocial supportive interventions and non-addictive pain treatments to minimize opioid use for pain.
• Senior Research Associate leading and overseeing research on a suite of projects offered in housing, mental health and corrections.
• Research Fellow in a school of social work
• Project Policy Analyst for large health organization
• Health Educator/Research Specialist to implement and evaluate cancer prevention and screening programs for a health department
• Research Interventionist providing Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for insomnia patients participating in a clinical trial
• Research Associate for Child Care and Early Education
• Social Services Data Researcher for an organization serving adults with disabilities.
• Director of Community Health Equity Research Programs evaluating health disparities.

No matter your population or area of interest, you’d likely be able to find a position that integrated research and social work. 

Social work practice and research are and should remain intertwined. This is the only way we can know what questions to ask about the programs and services we are providing, and ensure our interventions are effective. 

There are many opportunities to develop research skills while in school and while working in the field, and these skills can lead to some interesting positions that can make a real difference to clients, families and communities. 

Drake, R. E., Goldman, H., Leff, H. S., Lehman, A. F., Dixon, L., Mueser, K. T., et al. (2001). Implementing evidence-based practices in routine mental health service settings. Psychiatric Services, 52(2), 179-182. 

Engel, R.J., & Schutt, R.K. (2017). The Practice of Research in Social Work. Sage.

National Association of Social Workers. (n.d). Evidence Based Practice. Retrieved from: https://www.socialworkers.org/News/Research-Data/Social-Work-Policy-Research/Evidence-Based-Practice

Advances in Social Work

Announcements, call for papers: special issue licensing & credentialing.

Special Issue, Summer 2025

“The Dynamic Landscape of Licensing and Credentialing in Social Work”

Guest Editors Goutham M. Menon , Ph.D., MA, MBA, Professor, Loyola University Chicago School of Social Work Joan Blakey , Ph.D., MSW, Director & Associate Professor, University of Minnesota School of Social Work Jayashree Nimmagadda , Ph.D., MSW, LICSW, Professor, Rhode Island College School of Social Work Maria Torres , Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Stony Brook University School of Social Welfare

Submissions due: September 30, 2024

Current Issue

Summer/Fall 2023 Issue

Fall/Spring 2023 Editorial Learning to Improve in Anti-Racism, Health Care, Practice, and Education

For white social workers: re/un/discover heuristic for dual awareness in ongoing anti-racist practice, lessons learned from the cswe task force to advance anti-racism in the social work education policy and accreditation standards: praxis in a racially volatile society, teaching anti-racism to white social work students a practical approach, conceptualizing anti-racist social work pedagogy practical ideas for increasing faculty capacity, reflexivity, and ability, back to the (not so) basics of anti-racist education and practice the need for white social work students to learn how to create trust and relationships, enhancing competency-based social work skills through service learning and interprofessional education in a student-run free healthcare clinic, does where we live matter to oral health tensions between rural older adults’ concept of community and health individualism, social work boundary issues in the digital age reflections of an ethics expert, identifying indicators of high-conflict divorce among parents a systematic review, observed risks of client safety by social care professionals in finland trend analysis for 2016-2020, introducing the theory of neurosocial interdependence moving beyond the person-in-environment perspective in social work, mitigating the violence of mass immigration detention through community-based case management, post-master’s career progression of social workers a developmental perspective, learning from their stakeholders social work students’ perspectives on a university’s response to the covid-19 pandemic.

Advances in Social Work is committed to enhancing the linkage among social work practice, research, and education. Accordingly, the journal addresses current issues, challenges, and responses facing social work practice and education. The journal invites discussion and development of innovations in social work practice and their implications for social work research and education. Advances in Social Work seeks to publish empirical, conceptual, and theoretical articles that make substantial contributions to the field in all areas of social work including clinical practice, community organization, social administration, social policy, planning, and program evaluation. The journal provides a forum for scholarly exchange of research findings and ideas that advance knowledge and inform social work practice. All relevant methods of inquiry are welcome. Advances in Social Work is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original work. Articles are accepted on the basis of appropriateness, clarity, sound methodology, and utility for social work practice, research, and education. Articles are indexed or abstracted in Social Work Abstracts and Social Service Abstracts. Editor: Margaret E. Adamek, Ph.D.

Make a Submission

Information.

• For Readers
• For Authors
• For Librarians

Advances in Social Work ISSN: 1527-8565 eISSN: 2331-4125

Land Acknowledgement. We acknowledge the Indiana University School of Social Work is located on the ancestral lands of Indigenous Peoples from time immemorial. Indiana is the traditional lands of Potawatomi, Illini, Miami, Kickapoo, Lenape/Delaware, Wea, Piankashaw, Shawnee, Nanticoke, and Wyandot. We are dedicated to amplifying Indigenous voices and perspectives, improving community relationships, correcting the narratives, and making the Indiana University School of Social Work supportive and inclusive places for Native and Indigenous students, faculty, and staff. With humility and respect, we at Indiana University School of Social Work recognize and honor all Indigenous Peoples, their histories, their political rights and sovereignty and their sacred ties to the land and waters.

• Career Resources
• Addressing Trauma in Students
• BSW Holders: Advanced Standing
• Academics FAQs
• CASAC Credentialing
• Gerontology and Palliative Care Certificate
• Application and Admissions Requirements
• Tuition and Financial Aid
• Admissions FAQs
• A Letter from the Dean
• Our Faculty
• Student Resources
• Student Support
• The Heights: Virtual Learning
• Licensing and CE
• Alumni Network

Social Work Research and Evaluation Foundations

Studying social work and its effect on societies is essential to understanding and enhancing human and community well-being. By effectively measuring and evaluating social work outcomes, practitioners can employ evidence-based social work practices and evidence-based treatments (EBTs) to provide structured approaches to addressing client needs. For example, in the case of a client with an anxiety disorder, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and behavioral science can be applied as efficient and ethical frameworks to address communication and collaboration problems. 1

Read on to learn more about the essential role of social work research and evaluation.

The Importance of Research and Evaluation in Social Work Practice

By rigorously assessing and evaluating social work studies, researchers can better identify the most effective strategies to achieve their client’s objectives. 2 Instead of trial and error, a data-driven approach ensures researchers make better use of the resources available to them.

Evidence-based interventions result from analyzing past research findings. After choosing a solution, researchers test it to verify replicability in multiple real-world scenarios before it’s deemed successful. 3 New intervention methods are constantly being standardized across the social work field of study, letting practitioners choose from a wider range of tools and techniques suitable for their study. These are usually taught in more advanced research courses in graduate or master's programs.

For example, at Wurzweiler School of Social Work, students participate in individual research projects and learn the basics of conducting social work research . This includes learning how to use measurement instruments; logic of research design, including sampling and design selection; ethical and legal issues; quantitative and qualitative modes of observation; analysis of data; use of computers and computer programs; and research report writing.

Methodologies and Approaches for Conducting Social Work Research

Conducting social work research requires access to large amounts of data supplied by study participants, which can be historical data or up-to-date surveys. 4 Due to social work’s multifaceted nature, researchers must then use their understanding of how psychosocial factors intersect. They need to develop and adhere to strict research methodologies that are evidence-based instead of preconceived notions of a particular social issue. 5

Action Research and Participatory-Action Research (PAR)

By emphasizing the importance of direct collaboration with communities, researchers can hope to identify and address a demographic’s needs. 6

Empowerment Research

Studies, surveys and experiments aim to increase the feelings of empowerment, equality and social justice among people in communities by having them participate directly in the research process. 7

Constructivist Research

Constructivist research begins with the individual and their social contexts instead of the community as a whole. 8 It highlights the importance of perspective and social standing in shaping communities .

Designing Effective Evaluation Frameworks for Social Programs

Data collected from participants in a target demographic is considered raw data that needs to go through several stages of cleaning and refining before any insights can be extracted. 9 That’s why researchers need to be able to develop robust evaluation frameworks that facilitate access to the data.

Logic Models

Logic models are often used to evaluate a single program or intervention. 10 Logic models are designed to offer:

• Development approaches: Using forward logic to develop models starts from activities to predict outcomes, or vice versa in the case of reverse logic
• Framework utility: Frameworks guide the implementation and reporting of the logic model by clarifying its methodology and expected results
• Visual representation: Graphical depictions of data illustrate the connections between a study’s input, activities and outputs, showcasing the anticipated outcomes
• Components: Key elements include the problem statement, outcomes, outputs, resources and strategies

Theories of Change and Program Theory

Merging theories with logic models adds depth to frameworks by outlining the research process, mechanisms and the logic behind the expected outcomes. 11 Furthermore, theories explain the “how” and “why” the desired changes and outcomes are expected to occur in the program’s context, including factors outside the program’s control.

Furthermore, leveraging resources such as The Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Development Guide and the CDC Framework for Program Evaluation in Social Work can offer guidance and tools for constructing and utilizing robust evaluation frameworks. 12,13

Data Collection and Analysis Techniques in Social Work Research

Researchers can collect relevant data in a variety of ways , such as surveys, in-person focus groups, observations and official census reports. They can then select the suitable social work data analysis technique based on the type of data they have and the nature of the insights they’re looking for. 14 These techniques include:

• Thematic analysis: A qualitative approach that identifies, analyzes and reports patterns and anomalies
• Descriptive statistics: Mean, medians, modes and averages of datasets
• Inferential statistics: Predictive models that provide insights based on patterns

Ethical Considerations in Social Work Research and Evaluation

Ethical considerations determine the efficacy of social work research methods and evaluations. 15 Participants in the study must give informed consent to the data being collected on them without attempts to persuade or influence their answers. 16 Similarly, confidentiality and anonymity, especially when handling socially sensitive topics, are needed to ensure candid responses from study participants.

Utilizing Research Findings to Inform Evidence-Based Practice

In order to use results from past studies to inform future practices, researchers need to translate the studies’ outcomes through systematic reviews and guideline development. 17 The outcomes of earlier implementations often require constant monitoring to detect any underlying biases that can be addressed early on.

Challenges and Limitations in Social Work Research and Evaluation

Research in social work often faces numerous challenges that might impact the quality and efficacy of studies. Some of the most common ones include:

• Time constraints
• Hard-to-reach populations
• Inadequate strategies
• Financial constraints

Case Study of Successful Research and Evaluation Initiative

Despite the many complexities, many research studies can be successfully conducted in the field of social studies. One example is the study of developing new treatments for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) patients.

First developed in the 1980s by Francine Shapiro, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing has been successful in treating emotional distress associated with PTSD. The method’s application was then expanded to include a wide range of issues from trauma and anxiety to addiction.

It’s been supported by over 30 controlled outcomes studies and has since been recognized by the World Health Organization and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) as an effective therapeutic method. 18

Deepen Your Impact Through Social Work

The intersection between theoretical research and practical evaluation in the field of social work produces solutions that make a profound impact on the quality of life of communities and individuals. 19 This is a testament to the commitment of researchers to advance the field through progressively available means, particularly technology for data collection and mathematical algorithms for Big Data analytics.

Yeshiva University’s online Master of Social Work focuses on cultural responsiveness, social justice, and human transformation. You will gain hands-on experience in the field of social work and obtain CSWE accreditation that qualifies you for the post-graduate state exam. The expert faculty will equip you with the tools to create positive change in the world. Make an appointment to speak with an admissions outreach advisor today.

• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from hbr.org/podcast/2021/01/using-behavioral-science-to-improve-well-being-for-social-workers
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from researchgate.net/publication/323370072_Evaluating_effectiveness_in_social_work_sharing_dilemmas_in_practice
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK547524/
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from researchgate.net/publication/298697140_Big_data_in_social_work_The_development_of_a_critical_perspective_on_social_work’s_latest_electronic_turn
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from https://caseworthy.com/articles/why-is-evidence-based-practice-important-in-social-work/
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from nature.com/articles/s43586-023-00214-1
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from academic.oup.com/bjsw/article/51/4/1482/6202975
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/16094069231186257
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/17456916221137350
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from sopact.com/guides/theory-of-change-vs-logic-model
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from betterevaluation.org/frameworks-guides/rainbow-framework/define/develop-programme-theory-theory-change
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from naccho.org/uploads/downloadable-resources/Programs/Public-Health-Infrastructure/KelloggLogicModelGuide_161122_162808.pdffrom-being-a-breeding-ground-for-threats/
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from cdc.gov/evaluation/framework/index.htm
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from nesta.org.uk/feature/eight-ways-councils-are-using-data-create-better-services/the-data-driven-social-worker/
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from cmsindia.org/sites/myfiles/Guidelines-for-Ethical-Considerations-in-Social-Research-Evaluation-In-India_2020.pdf
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from researchsupport.admin.ox.ac.uk/governance/ethics/resources/consent
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from health-policy-systems.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12961-020-00662-1
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from ptsd.va.gov/understand_tx/emdr.asp
• Retrieved on April 10, 2024, from researchgate.net/publication/8480043_Future_directions_in_evaluation_research_People_organizational_and_social_issues

Return to Blog

Yeshiva University has engaged Everspring , a leading provider of education and technology services, to support select aspects of program delivery.

• UB Directory
• School of Social Work >
• Admissions >
• Explore the Social Work Profession >

Social Work Practice Areas

Social workers improve lives in every corner of society — from community-based agencies, nonprofits and mental health clinics, to hospitals, schools and beyond. With a graduate degree in social work, you can make a positive difference on the populations and issues you're most passionate about, even in unexpected places. 

Explore a variety of social work practice areas through the experiences of alumni and students from the University at Buffalo School of Social Work: