風險管理下的社會工作督導

社會工作的督導制度係維繫社會工作服務品質的重要因素，近年來許多國內外的保護性工作案主嚴重傷亡的事件頻傳，致使社會大眾質疑社會工作的效能與督導的品質。在社會工作的歷史發展過程中，督導從早期著重於行政事務，爾後慢慢導入教育與專業發展的功能，卻又在1990年代重視風險管理之後，重回到重視管理控制的功能。一路走來，社會工作督導始終在專業支持取向與風險管理取向間搖擺。本文以風險社會概念下的風險管理為背景，探討在新管理主義影響下，社會工作督導實務之展現。特別是分析目前臺灣之保護性社會工作，於個別督導、團體督導、內部督導、外部督導，表現出哪些徵象？面臨哪些挑戰？本文的論述來自於國內關於社會工作督導制度的研究反思當今臺灣的社工督導現況，和國外關於風險管理與督導制度關係的反省，以及作者多年來擔任公部門與非營利組織的各種不同服務領域之外聘督導經驗的反思。在風險管理中為了精確評估、避免風險，督導關切績效與結果可能多於品質和過程；而人力與經費的緊縮，社工督導必須承擔更多管理責任，督導制度變成是在支持管理者，而不是支持社會工作員。因此，在風險管理下的社會工作實務變成是一種防衛性工作，此時更需要反身性的督導來協助社工反思與重建其工作意義與價值、確立其工作取向、提高專業的認同。

關鍵字

社會工作督導；外聘督導；風險管理；新管理主義

並列摘要

As an essential practice to assure quality of social work service and professional performance, the feature of social work supervision nowadays has been largely modified by growing claims of risk management and increasingly demands for cost-efficiency evaluation. Most social work practice fields developed varied forms of supervision, from traditional internal and individual supervision to external and group supervision, to ameliorate the negative impact on social workers from their risk environment. Many academic educators and senior practitioners are recruited as external supervisors to participate in frontline practice. Most of social workers received various supervisions from internal and external supervisors, individually and collectively. What are the boundaries between internal and external supervisors? How is it designed and rationalized? Do these different forms of supervision truly response to needs of social workers, or just a risk management procedure? In the early history of social work, the function of supervision was administrative rather than educational or supportive. During the early years of twentieth century, the supervision was shifted to educational function to impart required values, professional knowledge and practice skills. From 1990s, under the influence of new managerialism and risk society, the function of supervision was heavily emphasized on administrative accountability and large demand for external supervision was developed. As a general agreement, social work supervision has three main functional elements, educational, administrative and supportive. However, it is not uncontested as a trade-off between managerial and professional concerns. The new managerialism and risk society have disrupted the stability of social work supervision. This article looks at the struggling and difficult positions social work practitioners faced in Taiwan and how social work manage, response and keep balance between various required supervisions, especially in protective social work field. The concept of 'risk management' is also introduced to analyze its development and a reflective model is proposed for good practice of social work supervision.