Drømmen om datadrevet velfærd
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/politica.v55i3.140316Keywords:
offentlig sektor, kunstig intelligens, data, skøn, frontlinjemedarbejderAbstract
Hvordan formes drømmen om potentialet i data og kunstig intelligens blandt ledere i den offentlige forvaltning, og hvilke roller tildeles frontlinjemedarbejderen i den datadrevne velfærd? Baseret på observationer af kommunale ledere og konsulentoplæg undersøger artiklen de datadrømme, som omgærder udviklingsarbejdet med at introducere kunstig intelligens i kommunale beskæftigelsesindsatser. Deres datadrømme indebærer en kritik af frontlinjemedarbejderen, som mimer den etablerede ledelses- og professionsforskning, hvor frontlinjemedarbejderens praksis problematiseres: I datadrømmene kritiseres frontlinjemedarbejderens dømmekraft for i udstrakt grad alene at være baseret på menneskelig erfaring, individuelle mestringsstrategier eller professionsbårne interesser og derfor ikke varetage borgerens behov, hvilket gør, at den organisatoriske værdiskabelse forringes.
References
Abbott, Andrew Delano (1988). The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Andersen, Niels Åkerstrøm og Justine Grønbæk Pors (2014). Velfærdsledelse: Mellem styring og potentialisering. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag
Brodkin, Evelyn Z. (2011). Policy work: Street-level organizations under new managerialism. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21(Supp 2): 253-277.
Buffat, Aurélien (2015). Street-level bureaucracy and e-government. Public Management Review, 17 (1): 149-161.
Bullock, Justin B. (2019). Artificial intelligence, discretion: A systematic literature review. Public Administration 49 (7): 751-756.
Clarke, Adele E. (2005). Situational analyses: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Considine, Mark, Michael McGann, Sarah Ball og Phuc Nguyen (2022). Can robots understand welfare? Exploring machine bureaucracies in welfare-to-work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Digitaliseringsstyrelsen (2021). Temperaturmåling af signaturprojekterne. København: Digitaliseringsstyrelsen.
du Gay, Paul (2000). In praise of bureaucracy: Weber, organization, ethics. London: SAGE Publications.
du Gay, Paul (2008). Without affection or enthusiasm: Problems of involvement and attachment in responsive public management. Organization 15 (3): 335-353.
du Gay, Paul og Kirstine Zinck Pedersen (2020). Discretion and bureaucracy, pp. 221-236 i Tony Evans og Peter L. Hupe (red.), Discretion and the quest for controlled freedom. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Emerson, Robert M., Rachel I. Fretz og Linda L. Shaw (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Eriksson, Päivi og Anne Kovalainen (2008). Qualitative methods in business research. London: SAGE Publications.
Evans, Tony (2011). Professionals, managers and discretion: Critiquing street-level bureaucracy. British Journal of Social Work 41 (2): 368–86.
Finansministeriet og Erhvervsministeriet (2019). National strategi for kunstig intelligens. København. Regeringen.
Flügge, Asbjørn Ammitzbøll, Thomas Hildebrandt og Naja Holten Møller (2021). Street-level algorithms and AI in bureaucratic decision-making: A caseworker perspective. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5 (5): 1-23.
Freidson, Eliot (1970). Profession of medicine: A study of the sociology of applied knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Freidson, Eliot (2001). Professionalism, the third logic: On the practice of knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago press.
Glynos, Jason og David Howarth (2007). Logics of critical explanation in social and political theory, 1. udg. Abingdon: Routledge.
Harrits, Gitte Sommer (2019). Using vignettes in street-level bureaucracy research, pp. 392-408 i Peter L. Hupe (red.), Research handbook on street-level bureaucracy: The ground floor of government in context. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Hupe, Peter L. og Michael J. Hill (2019). Positioning street-level bureaucracy research, pp. 15-30 i Peter L. Hupe (red.), Research handbook on street-level bureaucracy: The ground floor of government in context. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Høybye-Mortensen, Matilde (2019). Street-level bureaucracy research and the impact of digital office technologies, pp. 157-171 i Peter L. Hupe (red.), Research handbook on street-level bureaucracy: The ground floor of government in context. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Jorna, Frans og Pieter Wagenaar (2007). The iron cage strengthened? Discretion and digital discipline. Public Administration 85 (1): 189-214.
Kirkegaard, Line, Anders Raastrup Kristensen og Thomas Skov Lauridsen (2023). The organization of ignorance: An ethnographic study of the production of subjects and objects in an artificial intelligence project. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization 23 (1): 161-187.
Kristensen, Kenneth (2022). Hvorfor Gladsaxemodellen fejlede – om anvendelse af algoritmer på socialt udsatte børn. Samfundslederskab i Skandinavien 37 (1): 27-49.
Lipsky, Michael (2010/1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Maynard-Moody, Steven og Michael Musheno (2000). State agent or citizen agent: Two narratives of discretion. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 10 (2): 329-358.
Maynard-Moody, Steven og Michael Musheno (2003). Cops, teachers, counsellors: Stories from the front lines of public service. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Mintzberg, Henry (1979). The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Møller, Anne Mette, Kirstine Zinck Pedersen og Anja Svejgaard Pors (2022). The bureaucratic ethos in street-level work: Revitalizing Weber’s ethics of office. Perspectives in Public Management & Governance 5 (2): 151-163.
Møller, Naja Holten, Irina Shklovski og Thomas Hildebrandt (2020). Shifting concepts of value: Designing algorithmic decision-support systems for public services. Proceedings of the 11th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Shaping Experiences, Shaping Society, 1-12.
Pallesen, Trine og Kirstine Zinck Pedersen (2023). Model of human fallibility: Travelling behavioral assumptions in public governance. Perspectives in Public Management & Governance. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvad001
Parsons, Talcott (1947). Introduction, i Alexander Morell Henderson og Talcott Parsons (red.), Max Weber, theory of social and economic organization. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pedersen, Kirstine Zinck (2022). The public encounter and the ethics of public office, pp. 333-351 i Peter Hube (red.), The politics of the public encounter: What happens when citizens meet the state. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Pedersen, Kirstine Zinck og Anja Svejgaard Pors (2023). Discretionary responses in frontline encounters: Balancing standardization with the ethics of office. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 33: 80-83.
Petersen, Anette C., Marisa Leavitt Cohn, Thomas Troels Hildebrandt og Naja L. Holten Møller (2021). Thinking problematically’ as a resource for AI design in politicised contexts. CHItaly 2021: 14th Biannual Conference of the Italian SIGCHI. 1-8.
Pors, Anja Svejgaard (2012). Iværksættelse af kommunikation: Patientfigurer i hospitalets strategiske kommunikation. Ph.d. Serie Nr. 16. 2012. København: Copenhagen Business School.
Pors, Anja Svejgaard (2015). Becoming digital: Passages to service in the digitized bureaucracy. Journal of Organizational Ethnography 4 (2): 177-192.
Pors, Anja Svejgaard (2018). Digital displacements in patient-professional relations. Journal of Health Organization and Management 32 (4): 603-617.
Prior, Lindsay (2003). Using documents in social research. New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Ranerup, Agneta (2023). ICT and discretion: An “up-to-date” view of what we want to know and how it can be studied. Paper, 20th Scandinavian Workshop on E-Government (SWEG): From Government automation to AI, 1.-2. februar, Örebro University.
Ratner, Helene Friis (2021). Prædiktive algoritmer: Den forebyggende stat og den risikoscorede borger, pp. 93-117 i Kim Escherich og Michael Jarlner (red.),Fra velfærdsstat til overvågningsstat: Algoritmernes magt i den offentlige forvaltning. København: Djøf Forlag
Regeringen, Danske Regioner og KL (2013). Fællesoffentlig strategi for digital velfærd 2013-2020: digital velfærd – en lettere hverdag, Digitaliseringsstyrelsen.
Regeringen, Danske Regioner og KL (2016). Et stærkere og mere trygt digitalt samfund: Den fællesoffentlige digitaliseringsstrategi 2016-2020, Digitaliseringsstyrelsen.
Thomann, Eva, Peter L. Hupe og Fritz Sager (2018). Serving many masters: Public accountability in private policy implementation. Governance 31 (2): 299-319.
Tummers, Lars L. G., Victor Bekkers, Evelien Vink og Michael Musheno (2015). Coping during service delivery: A conceptualization and systematic review of literature. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 25: 1099-126.
Tversky, Amos og Daniel Kahneman (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185: 1124-1131.
Vaaben, Nana Katrine, Pia Rose Böwadt og Rikke Pedersen (2021). Når finansministeriet drømmer: økonomiske og pædagogiske utopier om fremtiden, pp. 161-186 i Mia Husted og Ditte Tofteng (red.), Utopier i arbejdslivet. Aarhus: Klim.
Weber, Max (2019). Economy and society. A new translation. Keith Tribe (red.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Zacka, Bernardo (2017). When the state meets the street: Public service and moral agency. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
