Pierre Mazet and François Sorin report in an article published by the journal Terminal on a survey conducted in the context of the delivery of professional training to more than 200 professionals in the field of social work (community agents, social workers).
They point out the " disturbances imported into the professionalism of social workers by the demand for digital assistance (...) The obligation of connectivity imposed on users of public services by dematerialization has thus come to impact the daily work of social workers, by importing a digital dimension into the relationship of assistance and social support (who) must now deal with a strong and recurrent external demand for digital assistance from the users they accompany in the context of their intervention (.... They are thus forced to take on a new dimension, which is in fact unavoidable if they want to be able to carry out their missions of access and support towards rights, but which has not, however, been the subject of any clear definition by their institution" .
Agents may find themselves in the same situation as users
The two researchers point to a series of difficulties:- " Digital assistance is not part of the social work reference system, and digital support has not, for the time being, given rise to a specific theme within social work interventions.
- "Social workers do not have in their curriculum, learning or approach to digital issues, which would allow them to situate requests for help in the broader framework of "digital cultures".
- "The agents are not involved in the production of the interfaces they have to deal with, and these interfaces are imposed on them by the users' requests for rights. More often than not, it is in and through their daily work, during requests for assistance, that they discover the sites, the interfaces and their functionalities, the different access and navigation paths, their new features and developments.
The two researchers thus distinguish two levels of disorders in practice.
Digital help is becoming a non-choice in the helping relationship
A large number of the professionals we met questioned the appropriateness of taking charge of people's digital difficulties in the context of the aid relationship: "should we help? Shouldn't it rather be up to the social administrations, communities and state services that are massively dematerializing to assume this task?" "And if social work has to play its part in assisting with administrative procedures, for what type(s) of needs, situations, or publics is it appropriate or legitimate to get involved? It is the perimeter of the professional activity that is questioned here by the professionals."In most situations, digital assistance is described as time-consuming and many professionals deplore the growing importance in their activity of preventing the risk of a breakdown in social rights and managing the situations of people who have lost their "administrative autonomy". "Carrying out or assisting with online administrative procedures takes up the time available, to the detriment of a more global approach to people's situations".The question of resources is the second recurring reason for questioning by professionals: computer resources that restrict digital practice (fixed workstations, immovable screens, browsing restrictions, etc.); but also unsuitable reception or interview areas that do not allow "digital practice together" or guarantee the confidentiality of exchanges and information on the screen.
"Despite these constraints and uncertainties, professionals can hardly remain deaf to the requests of the users they receive. Access to rights and the prevention of non-use are an integral part of their missions and role. Without a clear mandate or explicit institutional positioning, the decision to take charge of digital difficulties therefore rests essentially with the professionals."The pressure that is exerted in their concrete work situation is all the stronger because a refusal or inability to respond to this request for digital assistance would have the immediate effect of leaving the user without a response, and most often outside of his or her rights."If the realization of the digital help has a cost, not answering the request also has a cost for the professional who can have the feeling of abandoning the user to his difficulties and failing in his function and mission ".In this sense, conclude Pierre Mazet and François Sorin, "the help relationship engages social workers and the handling of digital difficulties often appears as a non-choice".
Hijacking and tinkering in the context of shared digital practices
The second level of questioning concerns the effective implementation of digital aid: how to help, what postures to adopt, what methods and means to mobilize, and for what objectives.The digital help provided by social workers can, in fact, take several forms.
It can be to carry out an administrative procedure in the place of a third party, under his control or under his guidance, to explain "how to do it", to familiarize or reassure the user through a demonstration or to "make the person do it", to bring him to carry out "himself" the procedure, following the advice or instructions of the helper.
"In each of these cases, digital assistance requires looking at a common screen together, and therefore being able to move the screen (turn it) or to be able to move oneself in the interview space, while taking care to keep the information displayed confidential. This is not always easy or even possible when the help is provided in busy or public spaces. "Today, however, neither the hardware configurations nor the design of the platforms to which professionals connect lend themselves to shared use."In the same way, the digital spaces that must be accessed to carry out an online procedure are individual, secure spaces, which are accessed via an identification process and which do not provide for the intervention of a third party."Professionals can thus put themselves in a position of strong responsibility with regard to the administrative situation of the user, while increasing a situation of dependence which they know is antinomic to the ideal of autonomy which they must nevertheless work towards."Faced with requests for digital aid, professionals often appear to be caught up in the tensions of doing: "they know that they should not "do instead", but "do with" or even "let the users do"".Until when, how far should we help?
For social workers, "it is a question of positioning themselves professionally in the face of a phenomenon (the increase in requests for digital assistance), in the absence of instructions or a clearly established mandate; and of adopting a professional practice (the implementation of digital assistance) without these objectives (to make people feel secure or to make them independent) being clearly defined. In this respect, digital assistance appears to be largely undefined, in both senses of the word: it seems to have no end in sight (until when/until where should it be provided?), but also without a specific purpose (what should digital assistance aim to achieve?)."Although it has come to impact and upset the terms of support for many, the "digital" does not manage to emerge as an institutional subject that must be defined and framed in general terms - contrary to the constant announcements of the necessary "digital transition" in public organizations.Référence :
