Hi, Karen,

Is this really the question for an applied field like social work? Aren't we more focused on testing the effectiveness and efficiency of programs and interventions than we are on groundbreaking discoveries? Aren't we more concerned with giving a voice to those who do not have one?

Maybe a groundbreaking discovery or program gives a voice to the oppressed??????

Social workers by virtue of their professional values, training and practice recognise dominant and non-dominant paradigms and processes which contribute to disadvantage and marginalising sectors of the population.

By this recognition, social workers can continually be looking out for new ways of 'empowering and enabling' approaches ('ground breaking discoveries') while simultaneously challenging the focus of 'effectiveness and efficiency' of programs - which often ignores the human experience of social injustice and psychosocial factors.

I think in the governance of human programmes literature / implementation science, the realisation that compliance technologies [rules, procedures] alone are insufficient to improve service quality - along with the notion of 'social workers (and other front line professionals) co-producing' policy outcomes in conscious relationships with service users. Michael Lipsky is getting a dust-off.

Are there any specific examples---like CBT, DBT, shared decision-making?

Hi Karen may we also consider the impact of the digital era on social work practise. Disruptive innovations such as the use of digital assessment and intervention tools such as email/text-based therapy, utilization of Skype, Whatsapp, Virtual Reality/Augemented Reality is maybe changing the notion that social work practise can only be rendered through face-to-face engagement with clients, groups or communities. Client systems now have both a real world presence as well as a digital presence so we need to develop interventions , theories and ethics that can accommodate these emerging technologies.