DRAFT – PLEASE DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE WITHOUT PERMISSON
Exploring dignity in Norwegian activation policy
Author: Carolina Ohls / Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences
E-mail: carolina.ohls@hioa.no
Paper to be presented at:
Developing and Implementing Policies for a Better Future at Work
4th Conference of the Regulating for Decent Work Network
International Labour Office, Geneva, Switzerland, 8-10 July 2015
Abstract
Welfare recipients are often faced with issues of imposed stigma and shame in their interactions
with the welfare system, even though being treated with dignity should be a fundamental aspect
of such encounters. The aim of this article is to explore the extent to which a dignity-based
approach is employed in a Norwegian activation work context. Data were gathered in qualitative
interviews with twenty participants in an activation programme and with ten activation workers.
To conceptualise dignity, Axel Honneth’s thesis of recognition, characterised by three stances,
love, rights and solidarity, is employed as an analytic framework. The findings show that, in order
address recognition, there is a need to first explore the question of ‘recognition of what?’
Furthermore, activation workers must be able to critically reflect upon their practices in order to
effectively recognise participants. Recognition, in relation to Honneth’s stances of mainly
solidarity and rights, is interpreted in terms of signs such as empowerment, support and having the
right to choose. There are also instances of misrecognition, illustrated by a mismatch between
participants’ needs and activation workers’ ability to address them. Lastly, the article highlights
the need to conceptualise dignity in order to discuss dignity-based issues.
Introduction
Being treated with dignity ought to be a foundation for any relationship, both within and outside a
welfare context. However, welfare recipients often experience imposed shame and stigma in their
interactions with welfare practitioners (Angelin, 2009; Walker et al., 2013; Baumberg et al., 2013).
1
For welfare recipients, shaming has also negative consequences for their wellbeing, as well as
shaming reduces individual agency (Lister, 2004; Walker, 2014). In order to avoid issues of
shaming and stigma, previous research (Gubrium & Lødemel, 2014; Walker, 2014) has advocated
a dignity-based approach towards welfare recipients. In this context, a dignity-based approach is
believed to enhance individual agency. To enable a discussion of a dignity-based approach, there
is a need for defining the concept of dignity. Sawyer (2011) argues that ‘dignity’ is a vague term,
pointing out that: ‘To be told that dignity is “worthiness” or “that which is worthy of respect” is
of little help, though it is easier to recognize instances of dignity being threatened or denied’ (2011,
p. 191). Others, such as Misztal (2012), points out that the principle of dignity holds a universal
value, garnering increased interest not only as a key legal notion but also as a fundamental aspect
of democratic society. Nussbaum (2006, 2011), on the other hand, links dignity to the enhancement
of capabilities and legal rights. For the purpose of this study, to analyse the extent to which a
dignity-based approach is employed within Norwegian activation work, Honneth’s (1995) thesis
of recognition has been applied as a conceptualization of dignity. For Honneth, an enhancement
of self-esteem is especially connected to strengthen dignity. Furthermore, recognition builds on a
relational aspect between individuals and/or institutions, which aim at enhancing self-confidence,
self-respect and self-esteem (Honneth, 2007). In a framework of activation work, the relational
emphasis is important for establishing a relationship, which aims at enhancing recognition,
embodied morally and ethically in the practice.
Data to explore the research question, ‘To what extent is a dignity-based approach employed in an
activation work context?’ are based on perceptions of both activation workers and participants in
a Norwegian activation programme. While there is a vast literature on activation, some scholars
argue that relatively little is known about the role activation workers play in implementing and
delivering activation services (see for example van Berkel & van der Aa, 2012). Other scholars
argue that users’ perceptions are often overlooked when discussing activation workers’ practices
(Wright, 2013; Marston, 2013). Against this background, the aim of the study is: (1) to gain a
deeper understanding of what characterises a dignity-based approach; (2) to add to our
understanding concerning activation workers’ roles in delivering of services; (3) to include the
voices of users in a discussion of practices.
2
Defining recognition
Honneth’s (1995) thesis of recognition is inspired by Hegel, who claims that the philosophical
theory of society must proceed not from individual actions, but from a framework of ethical bonds.
The element of ethical bonds informs the theory of recognition. Honneth highlights that there are
two different ways to understand recognition: either as an attributive or a receptive act. Both
concern a cognitive relation between the persons involved. In the first case, recognition contains
an attribution through ascribing to the person a new, positive quality. In the second case,
recognition is understood as a perception, meaning that qualities the person already possesses are
strengthened or manifested publicly. Furthermore, Honneth points out that that recognition is not
only granted by individuals, but also by social institutions. Patterns of recognition can first be
established as rules and practices within an institution, before they are carried out as actual praxis.
In his deliberations over recognition, Honneth (2007) calls for a ‘restriction of egocentrism’,
referring to actions that do not violate our self-love. He claims that ‘…to recognize someone is to
perceive in his or her person a value quality that motivates us intrinsically to no longer behave
egocentrically, but rather in accordance with the intentions, desires, and needs of that person’
(2007, p. 337). Honneth reaches the conclusion that we need to distinguish between three sources
of morality corresponding to the various forms of recognition behaviour. These forms of moralities
are love, legal respect and social esteem. The three forms reflect upon ‘the value of horizon of
modern societies’ (2007, p. 337) where humans are equally entitled to autonomy and equally
capable of achievement.
Another way to capture the essence of Honneth’s thesis on recognition is to focus on the concepts
of basic self-confidence, self-respect and self-esteem, which according to Brink and Owen (2007)
form the three axes of recognition. Self-confidence relates initially to the relationship between
mother and child, and Honneth describes this relationship as ‘conceptually and genetically prior
to every other form of recognition’ (1995, p. 107). The recognition of self-confidence is an ongoing
activity continuously carried out between parents, friends etc., whereas legal recognition, labelled
as self-respect, enables a person to exercise her rights and stand up for herself in public debates.
A struggle for respect/recognition is marked by a generalisation and /or de-formalisation of rights
3
(Brink & Owen, 2007). Honneth means by self-esteem a practical relation-to-self in which one’s
abilities and traits are valued. He argues, ‘Relationships of this sort can be said to be cases of
“solidarity” because they inspire not just passive tolerance but felt concern for what is individual
and particular about that person’ (1995, p. 136).
In terms of criticism towards Honneth’s axes of recognition, Brink and Owen (2007) point out that
there may be more or fewer axes of recognition than those Honneth initially identifies. Also, they
find that Honneth’s specification and strict demarcation may create blind spots in terms of
neglecting power struggles. Furthermore, Brink and Owen imply that there is an element of
unawareness within Honneth’s thesis in that it overlooks structural injustice ascribed to, for
example, forms of ethno-centrism and social patterns of expectation and normative evaluation
common in Western societies. Garret (2010), on the other hand, criticises Honneth’s thesis for
psychological reductionism when it stresses the importance of a well-developed bond between
mother and child in order for the child to become a confident individual. Garret points out that
people lacking in confidence may still be able to provide esteem and recognition to others. Within
activation work, the criticism may play out in terms of a top-down approach between activation
workers and participants, and there may also be a normative approach found within the structure
and/or delivery of activation work. Situated ‘misrecognition’ may also impose shame and stigma
on participants. In the discussion section these issues of recognition will be further explored. The
next section briefly describes the QP and how participants experience the programme. Earlier
studies investigating activation workers’ attitudes in a Norwegian and European context are also
presented.
Research context – participants’ experiences and activation workers’ approaches
The Norwegian activation work programme, The Qualification Programme [QP] is a point of
departure for studying to what extent a dignity based approach is employed in a Norwegian
context. The QP was introduced in 2007 and is designed for long-term recipients of social
assistance, with the aim of enhancing participants’ abilities to find employment (Ministry of labour
and social affairs, 2014). It is a one-year programme, with the possibility for a 12-month extension.
While participants are enrolled in the programme, they are entitled to a qualification benefit (NAV,
2014). Furthermore, QP has been described as a successful programme (Duffy, 2010). Other
studies on the QP showed, among other things, that participants felt empowered by their
4
participation in the programme; they found the programme meaningful and, especially participants
with a minority background, found that it enhanced their employment possibilities as they gained
work training and improved their Norwegian language skills (Reichborn-Kjennerud, 2009; Schafft
& Spjelkavik, 2011; Djuve, 2012). On the other hand, there are also contradictory findings
showing that QP participants experienced feelings of being ‘exploited’ after ‘working for free’
within the programme (Gubrium & Lødemel, 2014, p. 98).
Focusing on QP activation workers, in a national evaluation, when activation workers were asked
to assess their capabilities, the ones they most appreciated were social work and related
professional work skills and interpersonal skills focusing on enhancing user involvement. QP
activation workers also felt that they were fairly effective in assessing participants’ employability
and work possibilities. Skills related to labour market issues were scored lowest (Schafft &
Spjelkavik, 2011). Although professional and interpersonal skills seem to be evaluated highly, a
study conducted by the Board of Health Supervision (2015) demonstrated gaps in the actual
delivery of services. For example, employability assessment was often lacking or was poorly
conducted. Individualised activation plans, considered a key element for successful participation,
were often not thoroughly followed up on. Moreover, the focus on user involvement was not
successfully maintained.
The two presented studies show that there is a lack of coherence between how activation workers
assess their own skills and how the actual work is implemented. However, Schafft and Spjelkavik
(2011) as well as the study from the Board of Health Supervision (2015) found that there are local
variations in the delivery of activation services, which may affect the quality of the services. In
cases of poorly delivered services, it is largely the participants that suffer most, which holds
negative implications for the activation process.
Activation workers’ perceptions are also highlighted in different European studies (Fletcher, 2011;
Raeymerckers & Dierckx, 2013; Dunn, 2013). Raeymerckers and Dierckx (2013) analysed ways
social workers perceive and define activation in Belgium. They found that social workers who had
adopted an empowerment perspective of activation defined activation work in terms of a more
tailor-made approach that also aimed at enhancing clients’ dignity. In contrast to the empowerment
approach, findings also indicated a disciplinary approach to activation. The main emphasis in this
approach is on attaining employment rather than enhancing the overall life situation of the clients.
5
Fletcher’s (2011) qualitative study on English activation workers showed that discretion was a
main feature of their work. Some activation workers emphasised providing enhanced services for
their clients, while others held a policing attitude. Policing attitudes, or normative ones, were also
found in another English study, conducted by Dunn (2013). Dunn investigated activation workers’
views about their clients’ work attitudes and job search behaviour. He found that the activation
workers believed that their clients were ‘choosy’ about their jobs and that they held ‘unrealistic
expectations’ (2013, p. 813). Furthermore, Dunn found that a large majority of the forty activation
workers interviewed supported the idea that a ‘dependency culture’ existed among some of their
clients.
The following sections outline the methodological framework and the result from exploring the
extent to which a dignity-based approach is employed within Norwegian activation work, based
on the perceptions of QP participants and the activation workers. When conceptualising activation
workers, other references include ‘frontline workers’, ‘street-level bureaucrats’ (Lipsky, 1980) and
‘agents of welfare’ (Jewell, 2007). In this following discussion the term ‘activation worker’ refers
to a service provider who is involved in the delivery of activation services.
Methods
Data collection
The study builds on two sources: semi-structured qualitative interviews conducted with twenty QP
participants (n=20) and ten activation workers (n=10). Data were collected by the author at a
publicly funded activation centre in Oslo. The main recruitment criteria for participating in the
interviews were that the activation workers were working with QP activities and that they were in
frequent contact with the QP participants. The requirement for QP participants was that they were
taking part in QP activities offered by the centre.
The majority of the QP participants, seventeen out of twenty, were recruited by activation workers
at the centre, and the remaining three were recruited directly by the researcher. Due to practical
reasons, two of the interviews with participants were conducted outside the centre, while the rest
were conducted at the centre. The interviews with QP participants were conducted in Norwegian
and most lasted about 60 minutes, although some were shorter due to language issues. QP
6
participants received compensation in the form of a gift card of 100 NOK (approximately £9) for
participating in the interview.
The researcher recruited activation workers for interviews about four months after completing
most of the interviews with the QP participants. All interviews with activation workers were
conducted at the centre, either in their office or in a meeting room. The interviews with activation
workers lasted approximately 60–80 minutes and they were conducted in Norwegian. All of the
interviews, both with participants and activation workers, were recorded and transcribed by the
researcher.
Limitations
The majority of the QP participants were recruited by activation workers at the centre. Due to
established contacts between QP participants and activation workers, the activation workers may
have recruited QP participants that they favour. During the interviews with participants there were
also some language issues, as some of the participants had limited Norwegian language skills. In
hindsight, an interpreter should have been used in those cases where language issues arose. Except
for interviews with two of the participants, all of the interviews (both with activation workers and
participants) were conducted at the centre due to convenience. The location could have influenced
the discussions by hindering people from speaking freely about their experiences.
Analysis
The qualitative interviews have been analysed by conducting an interpretative phenomenological
analysis (IPA). IPA is employed especially in qualitative health and psychological studies
(Biggerstaff & Thompson, 2008). IPA explores personal experiences, based on the individual’s
perceptions or accounts of object or events that ascribe meaning to those experiences. (Smith &
Osborn, 2007; Biggerstaff & Thompson, 2008). In this case participants’ and activation workers’
experiences and perceptions are a point of departure for exploring a dignity-based approach. The
analysis of the qualitative interviews was started by reading through the verbatim transcripts,
followed by using the qualitative software program Atlas.ti to code data. The coded data differ
depending on data sets; examples of codes for interviews conducted with activation workers are
(1) staff attitudes, (2) collaboration with others and (3) work challenges. The codes for participants
7
focus on activation-course-related aspects, such as work placement, and other issues such as
previous welfare experiences and health-related problems.
Findings of the study
Overview of data
Ten activation workers, seven female and three male, were interviewed. Eight of the ten workers
hold university degrees within social sciences and arts. Two activation workers are skilled social
workers. The average length of time working at the research site was six years, though with
variations – some had been working there for nearly 15 years while one activation worker was
newly employed.
In addition to interviews with activation workers, data built on interviews with twenty QP
participants; thirteen female and seven male participants were interviewed. Nine women and four
men had a minority background, having been born in countries in Africa, the Middle East, South
Asia and Latin America. Most of the participants with a minority background had been in Norway
for less than seven years. Seven of the respondents were ethnic Norwegians. Most of the QP
participants had been involved with QP activities for the past 6–12 months at the time they were
interviewed. In table 1 the main characteristics of respondents, activation workers and QP
participants are outlined.
Table 1. Main characteristics of respondents.
Background
Minority background
- Female
- Male
Majority background
- Female
- Male
Education above
- secondary level
- university level
Average age
Average time spent at
research site
Activation workers
(n=10)
QP participants (n=20)
0
1
9
4
7
2
4
3
1 (female: 1, male: 0)
9 (female:6, male: 3)
48 years
9 (female: 6, male: 3)
7 (female: 3, male: 4)
42 years
6 years
6-12 months
8
Participants’ background
The twenty participants who were interviewed had in common their aim of finding paid
employment. For participants with a minority background, there was an additional aim of
increasing their level of Norwegian language skills. However, participants struggled with finding
work for different reasons, such as limited Norwegian language skills, insufficient work
experience and low education. Furthermore, some participants had financial issues. Other
challenges, such as mental and physical health issues, were also mentioned in the interviews. Being
unemployed was also linked to feelings of inadequacy. One of the participants, Alice, referred to
shame when describing her situation:
It is may be that (shame) which makes it take such a long time finding work. That is shame. It is
uncomfortable also embarrassing, talking about it… Thinking about my network, the one I had in
the USA, that feels shameful. I do not want to tell them that I am out of work. All of them are CEOs
in different places, right? // I have been in touch with a couple of them on LinkedIn. Until recently,
I have not been saying that I am out of work. It is somewhat shallow what we are writing to each
other, right? They ask, ‘What do you do?’ I was employed before, it still says there (on LinkedIn),
and you do not write back that you are unemployed.
As shown, Alice believed that feelings of shame held her back from exploring opportunities.
Eventually, shame may also have been a reason for her unwillingness to mention her situation to
her acquaintances. For other participants, previous experiences from different welfare initiatives
held negative connotations. Monika shared the following experience from a previous activation
course she had taken part in:
Erm… because at the other place (another activation course) they were more passive. Still, they
were stressed out about finding us work placements because NAV (national welfare office) pushed
for that. My opinion is that you cannot participate in work placement at any price. That is… Are
you not supposed to get something out of it as well?
To sum up the participants’ point of departure, the aim of participating was to find employment
and to increase the level of Norwegian language skills. As shown, there were also challenges and
9
external circumstances which affected their situation. Furthermore, previous experiences may also
have affected how participants perceived their current activities and how they were approached by
activation workers. In the discussion section this will be further elaborated. Next, the focus is on
exploring the extent to which a dignity-based approach is employed in an activation work, based
on the perspective of participants and activation workers.
Exploring recognition and misrecognition
The concepts of recognition and misrecognition have been applied as an analytic framework for
understanding dignity. In table 2, the findings are summarised to identify themes of recognition
and misrecognition. In the following sections these themes will be illustrated with extracts from
the interviews with participants and activation workers. Participants’ accounts of recognition and
misrecognition were mostly based on their interactions with activation workers. Activation
workers’ accounts of recognition and misrecognition highlight examples where they have
acknowledged
or
neglected
situations
participants’
or
circumstances.
Occasionally
recognition/misrecognition has taken place on a structural level. The findings will be further
discussed in the last section.
Table 2. Themes of recognition and misrecognition
PARTICIPANTS
ACTIVATION
WORKERS
RECOGNITION
Right to choose
Empowerment
Treated with respect
Critical reflection – a
premise for recognition
Understanding approach
Supportive
Tailor-made solutions
STRUCTURAL
LEVEL
Enhance agency
Openness
MISRECOGNITION
Pushed to accept offers
Ignoring needs
Belittling attitudes
Avoid reflection
Pushing own agenda
Disfavour /
Normative
Standardised
approach
Hinder agency
Discrimination
Participants’ accounts of recognition and misrecognition
10
First, having the freedom to choose will be explored. For three female participants, having the
possibility to choose held a significant meaning. One of the participants, Ingrid, pointed out that
earlier in her life she used to accept all kinds of work offers. This made her feel used and she had
ended up in bad working conditions. Her new activation workers stressed that she had the
opportunity to choose for herself and she had the right to decline offers that did not match her
wishes. Having the freedom to decline offers was an empowering feeling for Ingrid. Another
participant, Amina, framed her abilities to choose as follows: I can think for myself – What is best
for me? For my health? For my emotional well-being? Amina also mentioned that the activation
workers acknowledged her choices, and they did not push her into activities she was not interested
in; for example, they did not require her to take a work placement in a place that did not appeal to
her. Alice shared a similar experience of being acknowledged for her ability to choose for herself.
She had had somewhat negative experiences in previous activation courses and was not keen on
joining the activation centre. She described her expectations and experience accordingly:
Am I supposed to participate in a course, and be told that I have to keep trying? Of course I know
I have to keep trying. Now, it has not been like that here. And that is good.
Anne, on the other hand, showed an example of being empowered, when activation workers had
acknowledged difficulties and slowed down the process. She explained:
Anne: They started to push somewhat. And I could feel that I resisted that, and they understood at
once that… there was something… But I have been honest all the time. I do not know, maybe that
impacted on the result as well.
I: What did they push?
Anne: I do not know really… It was more like, what can we do for you…? We need to find a work
placement for you. And I became… Because my self-confidence was next to nothing… It was down
to minus ten, right? (Laughter). Therefore, they realised that they needed to do something before
they could find me a work placement.
Anne pointed out that in her intake meeting she had stated that she was ready for anything, but it
became apparent as she started the process that she was not feeling ready to go out into the labour
market. As she highlighted, she struggled with very poor self-confidence. Her activation workers
helped her to work on her self-confidence issues by supporting her and letting her steer the process.
At the same time, Anne felt that ‘They believed in me all the time.’ For Anne, it was fundamental
for her well-being, and the activation workers’ support made her appreciate their efforts.
11
The majority of the participants talked mostly positively about their experiences at the activation
centre. For example, activation workers at the centre were described as ‘kind’ and ‘supportive’.
Some participants also highlighted how their confidence increased as the programme opened up
new opportunities. Eric described his experiences accordingly:
It is better here (compared to another activation centre) because you have somebody walking by
your side. Someone who helps you to look for work and prepare for interviews.
However, these examples in which recognition took place were juxtaposed with events of
misrecognition. A cause of misrecognition was found in a mismatch between participants’ and
activation workers’ perceptions of what constituted ‘good practice’. Activation workers may have
acted with good intentions while the participants felt the opposite. One of the male participants,
Sven, illustrated such an event:
Sven: Although she was a keen listener, she was caring, I think we were just talking without
achieving much.
I: You wanted something else…?
Sven: I did not want that much, actually. I did not have much of my own will. For example, I
wanted to get rid of my debt, which I owed the state. // It was that (the debt) that made me feel
depressed at times.
I: So there is another issue here… You have a debt, which makes you feel bad about yourself.
Sven: Very much so, a lot of my issues are linked to that.
Sven’s activation worker was described as thoughtful. However, the thoughtfulness did not satisfy
Sven’s needs, as he was more concerned about sorting out his debt than about participating in the
activation activities. He found that he and his activation worker did not ‘achieve much’ and his
needs were not recognised. Another participant, Monika, also shared an event, which highlighted
a mismatch between her activation worker’s good intensions, and Monika’s actual preferences.
Her story related to finding a work placement. She had visited a shopping centre together with an
activation worker, and the activation worker had asked in different shops about the possibility of
Monika undertaking a work placement there. This is how Monika felt about the situation:
But I did not want to walk around the whole shopping centre and announce myself in that way. If
you understand what I mean? // Because I find it a bit belittling.
12
Monika showed she was not comfortable with the situation and how the search for a suitable work
placement was being carried out. She explained later on that she would have preferred that the
activation worker had investigated the possibilities without Monika being present. In comparison
to the earlier case, where the activation worker was accused of not achieving much, this particular
case showed the opposite; the activation worker had been too proactive and was overriding
Monika’s preferences.
A third participant, Anders, felt that he was placed in a box due to his professional background
and he was not given an opportunity to look for other options. Anders found that some of the
offered activities were ‘…wasted. That course is best suited to people who do not know what they
want.’ His disappointment could have been avoided if his activation worker had been able to
discern and acknowledge his needs instead of offering him standardised solutions based on his
professional background.
Lastly, work placement was a common activation offer for the participants. However, work
placement also became a source of frustration and misrecognition, as it did not fulfil the conditions
of paid employment. Some participants felt trapped; for example, Aisha, expressed her
disappointment by asking herself, ‘Am I supposed to spend my whole life on work placement?’
Other examples of misrecognition were found in issues related to discrimination in the labour
market. Two female participants felt that their minority background was used against them in
employment situations, and the discrimination strongly violated their sense of being recognised.
Next, the focus turns to the activation workers.
Activation workers’ accounts of recognition and misrecognition
Throughout the interviews with activation workers, an overriding theme was their ability to
critically reflect upon their own practice as well as their own prejudices. Although self-reflection
did not necessarily mean that recognition was achieved, it may have been perceived as a first
premise for enabling recognition. One of the female activation workers, Anne, gave the following
example:
My opinion is that we make so many assumptions in this business. We assume things so quickly. I
have been wrong so many times, based on a first impression after meeting participants. I have
been wrong. Those I believed were the most resourceful may be the ones who needed the most
13
support, and those who seemed less resource—... ‘resourceful’ is the wrong word here, but say
‘not ready for work’, they managed to become employed.
Anne showed that by reflecting on her own presumptions, she was able to acknowledge them and
come to realise that she had been mistaken at times. The complexity of challenging one’s
presumptions was also illustrated in the interview with Katrine, an activation worker who shared
the following reflections in a discussion of Somali female participants’ clothing preferences:
Katrine: // How do I communicate and build trust, without thinking ‘oh my god’? We need to build
communication skills.
I: And it takes time to build a relationship, where they can trust you and know that you want their
best, without/
Katrine: / me pushing them. // I need to reflect on my own practice because sometimes I notice,
‘my lord, that is exactly what I want to do’ (push them). Right? I need to challenge myself. I need
to watch myself. And my own motives, because of my issue with this. Sometimes it is easy for me
to just take a shortcut and say, ‘Damn it, I cannot keep trying with her. She has to understand
where she is. [She has to] put on those trousers if she wants to become employed, or she finds
herself a Muslim country.’ And sometimes it may be ok to say that. While other times it is just my
own tiredness speaking. I need to find the balance, right?
Katrine was honest with herself about the issues she was struggling with in terms of Somali female
participants’ clothing preferences. She realised that at times it was just her tiredness speaking,
which showed that she was able to reflect upon her own practices. At the same time, the signs of
tiredness also showed that there were underlying presumptions, which indicated misrecognition.
Furthermore, a number of activation workers had gone through difficult periods themselves in life,
and they reflected upon this in relationships with participants. Another activation worker, Per,
explained: ‘I recognise some of the same issues. I really do. Some of them have really hit the wall.
// I think it is ok to acknowledge that you have been… Erm… I have gone through some health
issues myself.’ By acknowledging and reflecting upon the issues he had gone through himself, Per
was able to understand the participants’ circumstances from a viewpoint of empathy.
Furthermore, some of the activation workers worked only with participants with a minority
background, because the activation centre had tailored activation activities to suit their specific
target group. The tailor-made services, which focused particularly on enhancing language skills
through group activities and work placements, were in themselves a way of recognising
14
participants’ needs. The local welfare office also supported these kinds of tailor-made services. A
practical example of tailor-made solutions was giving a list of work-related words to nonNorwegian speaking participants involved in work placement. Activation workers also paid
frequent visits at the beginning of a period of work placement to follow up on their participants’
progress. Participants were also encouraged to find work placements themselves, but if they did
not succeed, the activation workers helped them. Despite the support and tailor-made services,
there were issues, according to the activation workers. Mano gave an example showing how he
tried to support his participant and, as well, how his willingness to be supportive became
counterproductive:
I believed in him. He did not manage to find a work placement on his own, but I found a place for
him, where he began. And he was there for two months. But I sensed that something was wrong
there. I invited him to a trialogue with the welfare office to discuss my concern. And in the meeting
this elderly man started to cry. I asked him, ‘What has happened?’ He replied that he did not like
his work placement. It was dreadful for him. I told him, ‘But I visited you, every day, and every
second day, why did you not tell me?’ He answered, ‘Because you were the one who found the
work placement for me.’ He tried to satisfy me instead of himself. And from that moment, I stopped
looking for work placements on behalf of the participants. We do it together. You try first, and we
help and guide you. But it is your life, your process. // I can guide you and offer advice. But you
are making the choices. // They need to own the process; until now, there were others who owned
their process and development. They have only been marionettes, moving in the direction that the
society or these welfare institutions want them to go.
As Mano claimed, without ownership, the participants will end up as ‘marionettes’, pleasing other
people and going where others want them to go. However, being supported in finding a work
placement may not necessarily lead to such a ‘marionette situation’, but in this particular case, the
activation worker’s efforts disfavoured the participant. Mano suggested later a way to enhance
ownership and agency. He explained:
Therefore, the Norwegian language teachers need to teach them. It begins with something as
simple as visiting a business, knocking on the door and asking, ‘May I hand in an application?’
That is five, four sentences. That is what they need to know (laughter), at first. And we continue
from there.
Mano’s approach may be suitable for some participants, but others may need support and guidance
in order to overcome their fears and enhance their agency. A female activation worker, Harriet,
gave an example of how a participant changed when individual agency was supported.
15
When she started here she was shy and always looked down, and it was nearly impossible to reach
out to her. Then she got some small work tasks, here in the café at the site. It was like, she literally
– you could notice a physical transformation. She lifted her head, started to smile and was given
those opportunities to do something. // She is enrolled in another work placement now, and she
receives very good feedback.
Lastly, the illustrated examples in this section have touched upon issues of both recognition and
misrecognition. In terms of misrecognition, the activation workers pointed out an overriding
theme, which indicated misrecognition on a structural level: language requirements for participants
with a minority background. For people learning Norwegian there is a national standardised test,
which indicates a person’s Norwegian oral and written language skills. The skills are assessed on
a range of levels, with level one being the lowest and level three being the highest one. Most of
the participants with a minority background had taken the test at level one and/or two and some
planned eventually to take the level three test. Activation workers were highly aware of the
implications of passing the tests, as municipalities may require public employees to have passed
language test three in order to qualify to work for the municipality. Some work tasks require
employees to have passed the oral, but not the written language test at level three. However,
Katrine highlighted the following issue related to this requirement:
Public employment possibilities will be excluded for… Two thirds of all immigrants who come
here will never pass language test three. It may be even fewer who reach level three. This means
that they are referred to the part of the private labour market with harsh conditions // all the talk
of social dumping… they (the participants) end up there.
Katrine, along with other activation workers, agreed that passing the oral test at level three was an
important prerequisite for employment in jobs involving active communication with other people,
for example, in nurseries or elderly homes. However, they strongly questioned the need to have
passed the oral test (at such a high level) in order to, for example, qualify for doing cleaning tasks.
To notice, for participants lacking in formal education and work experience, cleaning work was a
much appreciated work opportunity. As Katrine showed, an already vulnerable group of
participants were given fewer choices by municipalities implementing stricter language
requirements and therefore restricting participants’ employment oppourtunities. Consequently, the
official system seems to agree upon misrecognising.
Discussion and conclusion
16
Dignity may be constituted as a set of principles, covering values such as respect, a fundamental
aspect of democratic society (Mistal, 2012), and enhancement of legal rights (Nussbaum, 2006).
Sawyer (2011), on the other hand, argues that perceiving dignity along the lines of ‘worthiness or
that which is worthy of respect’ is rather meaningless. To conceptualise dignity, Honneth’s (1995)
thesis of recognition has been employed as an analytic approach in this article. Briefly, recognition
is characterised by three axes: love, rights and solidarity. Love takes the form of basic selfconfidence, fostered in a context of close relationships, originating from a loving mother-child
connection. Legal recognition, on the other hand, is labelled as self-respect, which enables a person
to exercise her rights. Solidarity reflects back to self-esteem expressed in relationships, which are
based on not just passive tolerance, but also on concern for the other person. Moreover, in a
discussion of recognition, it is of relevance to raise the question: ‘Recognition of what?’ Using the
interviews with QP participants and activation workers as a focal point, the answer points at
recognition of QP participants’ aims and needs. Furthermore, recognition is dependent on how
activation workers manage to discover and address these aims and needs. The process of discerning
recognition is illustrated in figure 1.
Figure 1. Discerning recognition.
Recognition of what?
Recognising QP participants' aims and needs
Activation workers' ability to discover and address QP
participants' aims and needs
In this context, the QP participants’ aims of participating are foremost linked to finding paid
employment, and for participants with a minority background, there is an additional aim of
increasing their level of Norwegian language skills. Accordingly, the QP participants’ activation
needs will be linked to these areas. Notably, structures also need to be in place to support
participants’ aims and needs. However, the data for this article are primarily analysed on an
individual level and therefore structural issues have not been closely addressed.
Based on the study, the following stances are perceived as signs of enhancing QP participants’
notions of recognition: having the right to choose; being empowered and treated with respect; and
17
being approached in an understanding way. Activation workers’ support, with the aim of
increasing participants’ agency, and applying tailor-made solutions are suggested as ways to grant
recognition. Furthermore, activation workers’ ability to critically reflect upon their practices and/or
presumptions is perceived to be a premise for enabling recognition. Without being critically
reflective, the activation workers may fall into a state of (mental) fatigue; as one activation worker
described it, ‘it is just my own tiredness speaking’. Based on the findings, there are also examples
of misrecognition; participants’ needs are ignored; they may be offered standardised solutions,
such as badly suited work placements that do not acknowledge their needs; and/or participants
may be met with belittling, normative or discriminative attitudes.
Applying Honneth’s three axes of recognition – love, rights, and solidarity – there are signs of
rights and solidarity in particular being granted, as well as questioned in terms of misrecognition.
Rights are employed, in terms of participants having the legal right to receive a qualification
benefit while participating, as well as the participants having a right to choose and to reject
mismatching activation offers. However, violations of legal rights may be found in occasions of
discrimination in the labour market, as discriminatory acts are forbidden according to Norwegian
law. Furthermore, the implementation of language requirements is presumably a legally acceptable
act, but it may be morally questionable. As argued, the language requirement excludes a certain
group of people from the labour market, and exclusion can hardly be argued as a sign of granting
recognition. Furthermore, the study shows examples of solidarity being enhanced. According to
Honneth, solidarity is ‘not just passive tolerance but felt concern for what is individual and
particular about that person’ (1995, 136). Tailor-made solutions, designed to meet individual
needs, are fine examples of enhancing solidarity. However, cases of misrecognition are also
illustrated by passive tolerance, for example, with the activation worker who shows a thoughtful
attitude towards the participant without being able to discover and/or address his aims and needs.
The presented findings are to a certain extent aligned with findings from previous studies. Other
studies also found that QP participants felt motivated and empowered from participating (Schafft
& Spjelkavik, 2011; Djuve et al., xxx). However, work placement may in some instances be
regarded as a source of frustration (Gubrium & Lødemel, 2013). As shown earlier, Schafft and
Spjelkavik’s study (2011) also highlights local variations in QP implementation, where richer
municipalities may be perceived as more resourceful in terms of offering more activation
18
alternatives. This study does not contain information to address such an issue, but the activation
centre is located in a more affluent municipality and therefore there may be more resources for QP
in that particular municipality than in others. Furthermore, the study by the Board of Health
Supervision (2015) addresses issues of gaps in employability assessments and a lack of user
involvement. These issues have not been studied in this article, but from a standpoint of
recognition, the lack of user involvement as well as gaps in assessment thus show signs of
misrecognition taking place.
In an international context, the presented findings show that the empowerment approach, which is
found in a Belgium (Raeymerckers & Dierckx, 2011), can also be applied to the Norwegian QP.
Furthermore, the English study, which highlights discretion as a main feature of social workers’
practices (Fletcher, 2011), may also be relevant for this study. If, for example, tailor-made
solutions are defined as discretionary decisions, then discretion is also a feature of QP. However,
such an assumption needs further exploration. Furthermore, this study does not align with Dunn’s
study (2013), showing clearly normative attitudes when activation workers used words such as
‘choosy’ and ‘unrealistic expectations’ to describe their users’ approaches.
Lastly, as Honneth argues, implementations and practices of recognition need to first be supported
and anchored by a structural framework, before recognition can be carried out on a practical level.
In the case of QP, the structural framework seems to large extent be in place in order to fulfil
recognition. Consequently, issues with recognition are found on foremost on an individual level,
in the meetings between the activation workers’ and participants. As shown, activation workers
manages fairly well to meet their participants’ aims and needs, but there are also room for
improvements highlighted by instances of misrecognition. To conclude, Honneth’s thesis of
recognition is one way of exploring what may characterise a dignity-based approach. Other
conceptualisations of dignity may prove useful to gain further knowledge.
However, to
conceptualise a dignity-based approach and enable discussions, there is a need to define the
concept and break it down. Otherwise, there is a risk that a dignity-based approach stays as an
honourable ideal without any real measurements for actually granting dignity, both within and
outside a welfare context.
19
References
Alexander, M. J. (2008). Capabilities and Social Justice. The Political Philosophy of Amartya
Sen and Martha Nussbaum. Hampshire: Ashgate.
Angelin, A. (2009). Den dubbla vanmaktens logik. En studie om långvarig arbetslöshet och
socialbidragande bland unga vuxna. The logic of double powerlessness. A study on longtermed unemployed and young social assistance recipients. Lund University Dissertation
in Social Work 38. Lund: University of Lund
Baumberg, B., Bell, K. & Gaffney, D. (2012). Benefits stigma in Britain. Retrieved from
http://www.turn2us.org.uk/PDF/Benefits%20Stigma%20in%20Britain.pdf
Biggerstaff, D., & Thompson, R.A. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA): A
qualitative methodology of choice in healthcare research. Qualitative Research in
Brink van der B., & Owen, D. (2007). Introduction. In Recognition and power, eds. Van der Brink
& Owen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Board of Health Supervision (2015). Kvalifisert til kvalifisering? Oppsummering av
landsomfattende tilsyn i 2014 og 2014 i kommunenes arbeid med
Kvalifiseringsprogrammet i NAV. Qualified for qualification? A summary national report,
reviewing municipalities’ implementation of the Qualification Programme, during the year
of 2013 and 2014. Oslo: Board of Health Supervision. Retrieved from:
https://www.helsetilsynet.no/upload/Publikasjoner/rapporter2015/helsetilsynetrapport2_2
015.pdf
Djuve, A.B., Nielsen, A.R., & Strand, H.A. (2012). Kvalifiseringsprogrammet og
sosialhjelpsutgiftene [The Qualification programme and social assistance expenditures].
Oslo: Fafo. Retrieved from http://www.fafo.no/~fafo/media/com_netsukii/20290.pdf
Duffy, K. (2010). Active inclusion: a comprehensive strategy for policy reduction. In D. BenGalim & A. Sachradja (eds). Now it’s personal: Learning welfare-to-work approaches
and the world. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
Dunn, A. (2013). Activation workers’ perceptions of their long-term unemployed clients’
attitudes towards employment. Journal of Social Policy, 42: 799-817.
Fletcher D. R. (2011). Welfare reform, jobcentre plus and the street-level bureaucracy: Towards
inconsistent and discriminatory welfare for severely disadvantaged groups? Social Policy
and Society, 10: 445–458.
Garrett, M., P. (2010). Recognizing the limitations of the political theory of recognition: Axel
Honneth, Nancy Fraser and social work. British Journal of Social Work, 40: 1517-1533
20
Gubrium, K. E. & Lødemel, I. (2014) ‘Not good enough’: Social assistance and shaming in
Norway. In E.K. Gubrium, S. Pellissery, & I. Lødemel (Eds.). (2014). The shame of it:
global perspectives on anti-poverty policies (pp. 85-110). Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
Honneth, A. (1995). The struggle for recognition. The moral grammar for social conflicts. Polity
Press.
Honneth, Axel (2007). Recognition as ideology. In Recognition and power, eds. Van der Brink
and Owen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jewell, C. (2007). Agents of the welfare state: how caseworkers respond to need in the United
States, Germany and Sweden. New York: Palgrave/Macmillan.
Lister, R. (2004). Poverty. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Lipsky, M. (1983). Street-level bureaucracy: the dilemmas of the individuals in public service.
New York: Russell Sage Foundation
Ministry of labour and social affairs [Arbeids- og sosialdepartementet]. (2014). The
Qualification programme [Kvalisifiseringsprogrammet]. Retrieved from
http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/asd/tema/velferdspolitikk/midtspalte/kvalifiseringspro
gram.html?id=575786
Marston, G. (2013). On ‘Activation workers’ perceptions’: A reply to Dunn (1). Journal of
Social Policy, 42: 819-827.
Misztal, A., B. (2012). The idea of dignity: Its modern significance. European Journal of Social
Theory, 16: 101-102.
NAV [Norwegian labour and welfare administration]. 2014. Kvalifiseringsprogrammet [The
Qualification programme]. Retrieved from
https://www.nav.no/no/Person/Flere+tema/Sosiale+tjenester/Kvalifiseringsprogrammet
Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Nussbaum, M. (2011) ‘Creating Capabilities’. The Human Development Approach. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
Reichborn-Kjennerud, K. (2009). En ny mulighet: Brukernes opplevelse av
Kvalifiseringsprogrammet i NAV [A new opportunity: Participants’ experiences of the
Qualification programme]. Oslo: Arbeidsforskningsinstituttet. Retrived from
http://www.hioa.no/Om-HiOA/Senter-for-velferds-ogarbeidslivsforskning/AFI/Publikasjoner-AFI/En-ny-mulighet-brukernes-opplevelse-avKvalifiseringsprogrammet-i-NAV
Raeymaeckers, P. & Dierckx, D. (2013). To work or not to work? The role of the organisational
context for social workers’ perceptions on activation. British Journal of Social Work, 43:
1170-1189
21
Sayer, A. (2011). Why things matter to people. Social values and ethical life. Cambridge
University Press.
Schafft, A. & Spjelkavik, Ø. (2011). Evaluering av Kvalifiseringsprogrammet: Sluttrapport
[Evaluation of the Qualficiation programme: Final report]. Oslo:
Arbeidsforskningsinstituttet. Retrived from
http://evalueringsportalen.no/evaluering/evaluering-av-kvalifiseringsprogrammetsluttrapport/AFI%20Kvalifiseringsprogr%202011-4.pdf/@@inline
Smith, A.J., & Osborn, M. (2007). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J.A Smith (Ed.),
Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to methods (2nd ed.) (pp. 53-80). London, UK:
Sage.
Thompson, A.R., Kent, G. & Smith, J.A. (2002). Living with vitiligo: Dealing with difference.
British Journal of Health Psychology, 7, 213 – 225.
Van Berkel, R., & Van der Aa, P. (2012). Activation work: Policy programme administration or
professional service provision? Journal of Social Policy, 41: 493-510.
Walker, R. (2014). The shame of poverty. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Walker, R., Kyomuhendo, B. G., Chase, E., Choudhry, S., Gubrium, K. E., Jo, Y.N., . . . Ming,
Y. (2013). Poverty in Global Perspective: Is shame a common denominator? Journal of
Social Policy 42, 215-233.
Wright, S. (2013). On ‘Activation workers’ perceptions’: A reply to Dunn (2). Journal of Social
Policy, 42: 829-837.
22