Journal of Social Work Practice, 2018

VOL. 32, NO. 1, 31–44

https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2017.1300877

Defining social work leadership: a theoretical and conceptual

review and analysis
S. Colby Peters
School of Social Work, University of Maryland, Annapolis, MD, USA

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
With the recent increase in social work leadership literature, a few Social work; leadership;
issues in research and practice have come to light. Social work research theory
employs leadership theory derived from military leadership principles
adjusted for application in corporate entities, which have decidedly
different goals and processes than social work organisations. These
models may be influencing the methods of social work leadership
research such that study outcomes reflect business-based rather
than human service processes and goals. A dearth of leadership
education in social work schools and in professional social work
settings contributes to a paucity of social workers in upper level
administrative roles. A systematic theoretical literature review on
social work leadership is conducted in order to generate a working
definition of social work leadership and a series of multi-level social
work leadership principles. Implications for future research and
practice are discussed.

Introduction
The concept of leadership has been thoroughly explored in the disciplines related to social
work, such as in education and nursing (Lawler & Bilson, 2013), and in the past five to ten
years, there has been a significant increase in social work leadership theoretical literature
and empirical articles (Ruch, 2012). With this burgeoning interest in the outcomes and
benefits associated with social work leadership, a few important issues in literature and
practice have yet to be resolved. Social work research employs leadership theories and mod-
els that were developed for corporate and military entities, which have decidedly different
goals and processes than social work organisations (Lawler & Bilson, 2013). Aside from a
misalignment between business-based leadership theory and social work practice, these
models may be influencing the methods of social work leadership research such that study
outcomes reflect corporate rather than human service processes and goals (Fawcett, 1999).
Moreover, a dearth of leadership education in social work schools and professional social
work settings contributes to a paucity of social workers in upper level administrative roles
(Knee & Folsom, 2012). When leadership education and training are offered in social work
settings, underlying assumptions about necessary power differentials and an approach to

CONTACT  S. Colby Peters  colbywpeters@gmail.com

© 2017 GAPS
32   S. COLBY PETERS

leadership from an exclusively individual perspective may undermine social workers’ ability
to facilitate positive client outcomes (Bresnen, 1996; Yliruka & Karvinen-Niinikoski, 2013).
This paper offers a new approach to social work leadership with a systematic literature
review of theoretical and conceptual articles on social work leadership in order to determine
what fundamental differences might exist between business-based leadership and social
work leadership. This review is also used to generate a working definition of social work
leadership. Finally, a series of social work leadership principles extracted from the literature
review is proposed as a starting point for the development of a leadership model rooted in
social work ethics, values and goals.

Background
Social work leadership research has not yet provided a systematic and purposeful evaluation
of available leadership models’ applicability to social work research and practice. Researchers
have tended to adopt the theories that have had the most success in business leadership, i.e.
transformational leadership (Elpers & Westhuis, 2008; Gellis, 2001; Mary, 2005; Tafvelin,
Armelius, & Westerberg, 2011) and leader–member exchange (Brimhall & Lizano, 2014;
Hopkins, 2002). While useful in many ways, business-based leadership theories and mod-
els may ultimately be incompatible with social work for several reasons. First, leadership
theories have been heavily influenced by a white male militaristic tradition based on strict
hierarchies (Lawler, 2007). These military-based leadership models encourage a culture
of competition and defeat rather than collaboration and empowerment. Second, in con-
trast to for-profit business models, the primary purpose of social work, to increase human
(The Policy, Ethics and Human Rights Committee, 2012; National Association of Social
Workers, 2008) and community (Council on Social Work Education [CSWE] Commission
on Accreditation, 2008) well-being, equates to essentially decreasing demand for services and
products (Lawler & Bilson, 2013). Moreover, the values of social work differ sharply from
those of business: social work emphasises the promotion of social justice (The Policy, Ethics
and Human Rights Committee, 2012; CSWE Commission on Accreditation, 2008; National
Association of Social Workers, 2008), while businesses harbour the primary objective of
continually increasing profits.
Third, there is a strong emotional aspect – both negative and positive – in social work
practice that does not exist to the same extent in the for-profit world. Social workers, espe-
cially those in direct service, may enter into potentially unsafe and emotionally wrenching
situations to work with individuals who may not want their help, and they do their job for
low pay and often insufficient benefits (Blome & Steib, 2014). Finally, leadership theories
that are currently popular in social work, most notably transformational leadership theory,
emphasise the importance of the individual characteristics of a leader without the relational
and organisational framework. In contrast, social workers are trained to assess their clients
in the context of their environment, and discouraged from attributing individuals’ prob-
lems to personal failings (The Policy, Ethics and Human Rights Committee, 2012; CSWE
Commission on Accreditation, 2008).
A potential underlying cause of the unqualified adoption of business-oriented leadership
models may be the lack of a clear definition of social work leadership. Moreover, attempts
to define social work leadership do not specify how definition elements connect to the
practice methods and goals of social work (i.e. Holosko, 2009; Webster, 2012). Specifically,
 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE   33

increases in human and community well-being may be best served with the adoption of a
model and definition of leadership that has been linked, at least theoretically, to leadership
actions that arise from and serve this purpose.
A mismatch between the leadership theories used in social work and core social work
values may make subtle, but significant, contributions to leadership challenges in social work
practice. Despite the clear need for strong leaders in the managerial and executive positions
of social work organisations, educational institutions, agencies and non-profits, social work
educational programmes in the US place little emphasis on leadership and management
curriculum in their schools (Knee & Folsom, 2012). In general, there are very few courses
that teach the social work leadership skills needed for the administration of social work in
the context of client needs, employee needs, organisational needs and changing political
climates (Austin, Regan, Samples, Schwartz, & Carnochan, 2011). In a survey by the CSWE
assessing the state of leadership education in the US, 36 social work institutions submitted 74
class syllabi for leadership and management courses, representing only 6.8% of all accredited
social work education programmes (Lazzari, 2007). According to the 2013 annual report
on social work education in the US (CSWE Commission on Accreditation, 2015), just 4%
of the total number of students from 204 reporting institutions – 1578 students – were pur-
suing administrative/management concentrations. Moreover, only 11.2% of programmes
even offered an administrative concentration (CSWE Commission on Accreditation, 2015).
Analyses of British social work education have also indicated significant deficits in lead-
ership training and education. The Social Work Task Force, formed in 2009 by the British
Government to examine and suggest reforms for social work education, found that missing
curriculum included classes in organisational leadership skills, such as “risk analysis, com-
munication skills, managing conflict and hostility, and working with other professionals
(Taylor, 2013; p. 499)”. Aside from gaps in the curriculum, British social work education
may be subject to subtle forces that usurp educators’ ability to lead the change to a more
consistent and effective curriculum. Taylor (2013) argues that allowing task forces formed
by the British Government, as opposed to those formed and led by the social work profes-
sion, may result in the “erosion of professional judgement and undermining of professional
confidence (p. 494)”.
In both countries, social worker competencies and proficiencies as required by regulat-
ing bodies (in England, the Health Care and Professions Council; in the US, the CSWE)
demonstrate an overwhelming focus on competencies related to treating clients, and very
little attention to professional leadership skills. None of the 15 general and 76 specific
proficiencies as prescribed by the Health & Care Professions Council (HCPC) include any
form of the word “lead”; the word “organisation” is included in just two (HCPC, 2017).
Though the CSWE competencies also do not include the word “lead” or “leadership”, they
do use the word “organisation” several times, and “leadership” is often used to describe
desirable behaviours of individuals in education administration (CSWE Commission on
Accreditation, 2015).
Examinations of underlying assumptions and sources of power in the development and
practice of leadership in social work may reveal significant issues of discrimination and
devaluation of social workers, especially those who work directly with clients. Few leadership
development and training programmes are available to social workers who practice direct
service, a set of circumstances that may be problematic, given that social workers in direct
service have the most contact and influence with clients. Yliruka and Karvinen-Niinikoski
34   S. COLBY PETERS

(2013) assert that social workers with the most contact with clients are often seen as a nec-
essary cost that can only be offset by finding ways to make them more productive, instead
of a source of expertise. Moreover, many of the most popular leadership theories (i.e. trans-
formational leadership, authentic leadership, servant leadership) harbour assumptions about
necessary power differentials between those who handle higher level administrative tasks
and those who work with clients; some of these assumptions come to light when terms like
front-line workers, coalface workers (Webster, 2012), worker capacity (Dickinson, 2014) and
subordinates are used. The use of frontline and coalface to refer to direct service social work-
ers both simultaneously demean the worker and her client by indicating that the worker is
expendable or interchangeable, and the client is an enemy or a harvestable resource. Even
as early as the 1990s, researchers began questioning the power differential highlighted by
the contemporary leadership language. Bresnen (1996) argued that simply using the terms
“leader” and “follower” places the power with the individual who leads and disempowers
the “follower”, leaving him or her helpless and dependent on the leader.
A systematic review of theoretical and conceptual articles that assess the utility of various
leadership theories for use in social work research and practice could illuminate differences
between traditional leadership theory and the needs of effective social work leadership.
Every theory acts as a filter through which researchers perceive empirical phenomena;
theories also present certain underlying assumptions that shape every aspect of the research
process, from the literature review to the development of the discussion and suggestions
for future research (Fawcett, 1999). Theories born of and developed for business may bring
with them inherent values that are associated with what have been successful outcomes in
business, and established business-based leadership theories could influence research meth-
odologies and analytical methods that contribute to the development and perpetuation of
knowledge that runs counter to the mission of social work. An analysis of leadership theory
that involves drawing specific links between social work theory and practice could establish
a strong foundation for a leadership model and definition that advances the mission, values
and goals of social work practice and research.
This theoretical and conceptual literature review was conducted with three objectives: (a)
to determine which theories and models presented in the literature fit best with the mission
and practice of social work, (b) to select or create a definition of social work leadership
and (c) to combine and consolidate the theoretical and model propositions into a set of
principles of social work leadership.

Method
Articles for the theoretical analysis of social work leadership were found using a systematic
review. Two databases managed by EbscoHost, PsychInfo and Socindex, and one database
managed by Web of Science, the Social Sciences Citation Index, were used to identify arti-
cles. Search terms for PsychInfo were determined using the PsychInfo thesaurus, and the
search string was as follows: (“leadership” OR “leadership qualities” OR “leadership style”
OR “transformational leadership”) AND (“social workers” OR “psychiatric social workers”);
the search results were then narrowed to peer-reviewed articles only. Socindex terms were
also identified using the thesaurus and the search string was as follows: “leadership” AND
“social workers”. Finally, the Social Sciences citation index was searched using the term
“leader*”. Results were then refined to the social work category and limited to journal articles
 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE   35

only. Search results from each of the three databases yielded 659 articles after duplicates
were removed from the lists. From the 659 articles yielded by the three databases, a search
was conducted for theoretical and conceptual articles about social work leadership pub-
lished between 2005 and 2015. In order to be included in the analysis, an article had to be
non-empirical, conduct a theoretical or conceptual analysis of leadership in the profession
of social work or social welfare and develop credible and evidenced connections between
theoretical propositions and social work values or challenges related to social work practice.
A credible and evidenced connection consists of a strong link made between the process or
outcome of the employment of a leadership model and a component, specific goal or value
of social work practice, either practical or conceptual. For example, in one of the articles
selected, Foster (2013) explores the process of group leadership using Bion’s (1970) model
that compels members to examine and address challenges within the group in order to focus
on goals outside of the group, i.e. client well-being. Foster draws the connection between
outcomes related to the failure of group leadership to social workers’ tendency to refrain
from making suggestions about how work processes might be improved. A total of eight
articles were identified that met the above criteria.
Each theory or model of leadership that was identified in an article as appropriate for use
in social work practice and research was extracted, along with all of the associated proposi-
tions listed or discussed. During the process of theory review for purposes of organisation,
the theories and theoretical propositions were assigned to one of the three theoretical types
(conceptual framework, theory or model; Carpiano & Daley, 2006) as well as one of the three
theoretical levels (organisational, relational individual; Fawcett, 1999).

Theoretical principles extracted from the articles

Given the large number of conceptual frameworks, theories and models – 19 in all – several
areas of overlap and under-identification were found. In some cases, the propositions of
one theory or model were completely encompassed by another theory or model. In other
cases, an author merely mentioned a theory or model with a brief description, as opposed
to the theory or model central to the article. Therefore, both of the conceptual frameworks
were retained, but only 2 of the 3 theories, and 4 of the 14 models were emphasised in
order to eliminate redundancy. Tables 1 through 3 display the final extracted, consolidated
and organised leadership principles on the organisational, relational and individual levels.

Results
During the course of this theoretical literature review, the interdependent nature of the
organisational, relational and individual levels of leadership became clear. Individuals can-
not be fully effective social work leaders unless they have the support of their colleagues
and their organisation. Conversely, organisations cannot enable and promote emergent
leadership unless employees are willing and able to take on leadership roles. Therefore,
in some cases, principles from conceptual frameworks, theories and models were spread
across multiple levels, as illustrated by the footnotes from Tables 1–3. Following is a descrip-
tion of the characteristics and outcomes of leadership on the organisational, relational and
individual levels.
 36 

Table 1. Principles of social work leadership on the organisational level.

Underlying discoursesa • Every individual is unconditionally accepted as a wholeb
• Successful outcomes depend on the integration of diverse experiences, perspectives and characteristics of every individualc
 S. COLBY PETERS

• Responsibility and accountability are shared throughout the organisationd

• Airing and processing positive and negative emotions related to work is acceptable and encouragede
• Well-being of employees is more important than any work task or projectb
• Every individual and/or team is capable of determining the method and process for achieving successful outcomesf

Characteristics • Operates with purpose of achieving the mission, not avoiding punishmentc
• Allows and enables emergent (informal) leadershipg
• Written mission of the organisation, employees’ perception of mission and the activities of the organisation are alignede
• Culture of collaboration, not compromisee

Practical aspects • Expertise is widely distributed across workforceg

• Decision-making process is transparentd
• Clinical supervision is regularly provided for employeese,f
• Policies allow employees to care for their families or friends when necessaryd
• Process for soliciting and incorporating client feedback is in placef
• Continually advocates for social justice, organisation, employees and clients across time and contextsd
• Provides educational opportunities that promote employee and organisational growthf
• Collaborates with other organisations and disciplinesd
a
Booker (2012) (Conceptual framework – Social constructionism).
b
Harbottle et al. (2014) (Conceptual framework – Attachment).
c
Foster (2013) and Ruch (2012) (Theory – Bion’s group dynamics).
d
Lazzari et al. (2009) (Model – Feminist).
e
Ruch (2012) (Model – Reflective and relationship-based).
f
Gray et al. (2010) (Model – Communities of practice).
g
Booker (2012) (Model – Distributed leadership).
Table 2. Principles of social work leadership on the relational level.
Team characteristics • Focus on mission (outward) not on group dynamics (inward)a,b
• Rotated leadership/power sharingc
• Collective ownership of responsibilityc
• Maintains a common visiona,d
• Team works interdependently towards a common goala,e

Relationship behaviours • Leaders’ behaviour and actions vary according to context and individuald
• Collaboration, not compromisee
• Reflect on and discuss emotions associated with conflictd,a
• Listens to and learns from each otherb
• Shares resourcese
• Supports each other, emotionally and cognitivelyb,f
• Openly discuss and question underlying aspects and dialogues of organisational life that create frustration and anxietya,c,g
• Engage in honest and regular peer evaluation and clinical supervisionh
a
Foster (2013) and Ruch (2012) (Theory – Bion’s group dynamics).
b
Gray et al. (2010) (Model – Communities of practice).
c
Webster (2012) (Model – Emergent social work management).
d
Gray et al. (2010) (Theory – Situational).
e
Lazzari et al. (2009) (Model – Feminist).
f
Harbottle et al. (2014) (Conceptual framework – Attachment).
g
Ruch (2012) (Model – Reflective and relationship-based).
h
Yliruka and Karvinen-Niinikoski (2013) (Model – Learning communities).
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE 
 37
38   S. COLBY PETERS

Table 3. Principles of social work leadership on the individual level.

• Focus on and practice for visionb
• Openly share knowledge and resources with othersa
• Make changes that support collaborative and empowering practicesb
• Honest with one’s self and othersc
• Give and solicit honest feedbackc
• Have internalised moral perspective/value set to which they compare decisions and actionsa
• Consistency between words and actionsa
• Willing to take risks to achieve missionc
• Accept other individuals as whole personsd
• Believe that every individual is fully capable, intelligent and worthy of respectd
• Non-judgmental and do not assign blamed
• Assume a collaborative, not supervisory, role when possiblee
• Have humility and willingness to step aside in order to allow others to fully participatee
• Engaged and responsive towards othersc
• Engages in regular self-care
• Engages in analytical self-reflection on emotional patterns and behaviourc
• Honestly express and process positive and negative emotionsd
• Advocate for self and otherse
• Take advantage of educational and growth opportunitiesc
• Comfortable with saying “I don’t know”b,c
a
Booker (2012) (Theory – Authentic).
b
Gray et al. (2010) (Model – Communities of practice).
c
Foster (2013) and Ruch (2012) (Theory – Bion’s group dynamics).
d
Harbottle et al. (2014) (Conceptual framework – Attachment).
e
Lazzari et al. (2009) (Model – Feminist).

Organisational leadership
Principles of organisational leadership were organised into three categories: underlying
discourses, characteristics and practical aspects. Underlying discourses describe generally
accepted beliefs that influence the culture and climate of the organisation; principles in
the characteristics category define general attributes and behaviours of the organisation
as a whole; and principles in the practical aspects category describe specific behaviours by
individuals and groups that are consistent across the organisation.
Every organisation has a set of underlying discourses that influence the organisational
climate and culture, and legitimate concordant action (Booker, 2012; Table 1). These dis-
courses are the filter through which all meaning-making processes on individual and group
levels flow. Leadership and leader behaviours influence and are influenced by discourses and
related underlying assumptions, and consequently contribute to the constructed meaning
in the organisation. Effective social work leadership can only be accomplished when cer-
tain organisational discourses are present (Table 1, Underlying Discourses). The first and
most important discourse includes the unconditional acceptance of every individual in,
or associated with, the organisation, including their assets and deficits (Harbottle, Jones,
& Thompson, 2014). Once the humanity of employees and clients, and their consequent
imperfections, is acknowledged and accepted, these individuals can begin to set aside their
insecurities in order to focus outward on the mission and vision of the organisation. Second,
the organisation should promote the idea that the path to the most successful outcomes
lies in the integration of the diverse experiences, perspectives and characteristics of every
individual in work processes (Foster, 2013). Although arriving at a truly diverse organisa-
tional culture by fully enabling and integrating the contributions of employees and clients
can be hard and conflict-ridden work, failure to do so can lead to organisational stagnation
and sub-par outcomes. The third discourse consists of the acceptance of responsibility
 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE   39

and accountability for organisational processes and outcomes throughout the organisation;
meaning that all take credit for positive results, and all shoulder the responsibility for fixing
mistakes (Lazzari, Colarossi, & Collins, 2009).
Fourth, the airing and processing of positive and negative emotions associated with work
should be accepted and encouraged (Ruch, 2012). Negative emotions are associated with
stressful and demanding environments and a lack of sufficient resources to accomplish mon-
umental goals. Rather than exhorting employees to always “stay positive” and avoid hearing
the anger and frustration associated with social work practice, supervisors and managers
should allow employees to feel comfortable talking about their feelings related to client
and organisational difficulties. Fifth, there should be a general trust of the wisdom of every
employee and belief that every individual or team is capable of determining the method
and process for achieving a successful outcome (Gray, Parker, Rutter, & Williams, 2010).
Finally, the well-being of every employee is absolutely essential for the safety and health of
clients, and should be a priority in every social work organisation (Harbottle et al., 2014).

Relational leadership
Relationships are, to a large extent, socially and individually constructed (Booker, 2012),
thus regular and clear communication across and between hierarchical levels in an organi-
sation is imperative for effective operation (Table 1). The alignment of individual construc-
tions of relationships paves the way for the development of a collective interest that each
individual can experience as self-interest (Booker, 2012). On the other hand, social work
leadership allows for the development and integration of others’ identities, so that a group
identity can be inclusive of all members and can also change as necessary. Good commu-
nication and acceptance of diversity – not just physical or cultural diversity, but diversity of
opinions, knowledge and experience – can help employees feel secure in a group or team
and will enable them to engage in social work leadership behaviours.
Characteristics of a team created by social work leadership (Table 3) include a focus on
the mission (i.e. outward), not a preoccupation with group dynamics (i.e. inward; Gray,
Parker, Rutter, and Williams, 2010; Foster, 2013); rotated leadership and power sharing; the
maintenance of a common vision; and the ability to work interdependently towards a com-
mon goal (Foster, 2013). Behaviours of individuals engaging in team leadership include the
ability to reflect on and discuss negative emotions associated with conflicts (Foster, 2013);
willingness to freely share resources and knowledge (Lazzari et al., 2009); mutual support
(Harbottle et al., 2014); openly discussing organisational discourses and aspects of culture
and climate that create anxiety and frustration (Ruch, 2012); and the engagement in honest
and regular peer evaluations and feedback (Webster, 2012).

Individual leadership
Principles of social work leadership on the individual level (Table 3) can be divided into
three broad categories: (a) focus on and practice for vision; (b) acceptance of individu-
als as whole persons; and (c) engagement in regular self-care. The first category, vision,
encompasses individual behaviours and characteristics that contribute to both a personal
and organisational mission. The second category, acceptance of individuals, encompasses
behaviours that are the basis for healthy and productive working relationships.
40   S. COLBY PETERS

The final category, self-care, contains behaviours that are necessary for regeneration and
maintenance of energy needed to be a leader. Running through all of the individual princi-
ples of social work leadership is continuous attention to personal growth and contribution
to positive change, objectives that compose the core of individual leadership in social work.

A proposed definition of leadership

Although leadership is a broad and elusive concept (Kelly, 2014) that is difficult to define,
most, if not all, definitions of leadership agree on a two points: first, that the purpose of
leadership is change, or some alteration of the status quo; second, that this change requires
the actions of one or more individuals (aside from the “leader”). The points on which
leadership theories and definitions differ tend to be the kinds of behaviours in which the
leader engages, where leadership occurs and whom (or what) the object of leadership is. This
theory review provided extensive information as to the context and key elements of social
work leadership that can be combined into a working definition. According to the current
interpretation of the elements of social work leadership from the eight articles identified
for this theory review, social work leadership can preliminarily defined as
a collection of organisational, relational, and individual behaviors that effect positive change
in order to address client and societal challenges through emotional competence and the full
acceptance, validation, and trust of all individuals as capable human beings.
This definition contains a key component of many other leadership definitions in that
the effect of leadership is change. The definition does, however, depart from many other
leadership definitions in three crucial areas. First, in this case, leadership behaviours can
emerge on different levels, in contrast to other definitions or models of leadership that focus
on one of the three levels, as in transformational leadership (individual), leader–member
exchange (relational) or complex leadership (organisational). Second, if the purpose of
social work is to increase human well-being through the pursuit of social justice (CSWE
Commission on Accreditation, 2015; National Association of Social Workers, 2008), then
it follows that the purpose of social work leadership should be to create changes (i.e. lead)
in order to address client and societal challenges. Finally, the third and fourth components
of the definition describe how social work leadership happens: through emotional compe-
tence and the acceptance, validation and trust of all individuals. Processing both positive
and negative emotions, validating and respecting all individuals regardless of personal
attributes and entrusting others with the power to make informed and creative decisions
provide a mechanism through which leadership can effect change.

Discussion
The purpose of this literature review was to collect and analyse the theoretical and concep-
tual literature related to leadership in social work and use the identified articles to begin to
address a few challenges in the current social work literature. First, the social work litera-
ture has adopted various leadership models from the business literature that have not been
analysed to determine whether they fit with social work mission and values and advance
the social work agenda. To the author’s knowledge, this review is the first to systematically
locate and analyse peer-reviewed articles that present theories and models of leadership
that are thoroughly described and linked to social work research and practice. As a result,
 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE   41

a collection of interrelated leadership principles that consider the practice, purpose and
mission of social work has been identified as a starting point for further development of a
definition of social work leadership.
Another issue in social work leadership research is a lack of consideration for the con-
text of leadership that considers the organisation and culture, despite the fact that social
work has a strong person-in-environment approach (The Policy, Ethics and Human Rights
Committee, 2012; CSWE Commission on Accreditation, 2008; National Association of
Social Workers, 2008). The articles in the review provided a significant amount of informa-
tion about the organisational context of social work leadership, as well as the interrelatedness
of organisational, interactional and individual levels of leadership. Clearly, individual lead-
ership behaviours depend upon the influence and support of co-workers, teams, adminis-
tration and the organisation as a whole, in addition to external conditions, such as policy
and availability of funding. The underlying discourses that shape the culture and climate
of an organisation, including its openness to emotional expression and the integration of
diverse knowledge and experience in order to effect positive change, play a large part in
determining the ability of individuals to be effective social work leaders.
In addition, this review has produced a preliminary working definition of social work
leadership that considers the organisational context as well as the importance of emotional
capability and consideration of others’ inherent humanity, including their assets and growth
opportunities. It could also be argued that leadership is not really leadership if it does not
result in change and growth, particularly human change and growth. An understanding
of others’ assets and deficits, the ability to be comfortable with and effectively process
emotions and an unconditional acceptance of others are fundamental first steps to strong
social work leadership.
Several implications for social work education, practice and research emerge from this
review. First, social work schools should evaluate the amount, quality and delivery of mac-
ro-education in their classes. Possibly, we are educating social workers to work well with
clients and families without a firm understanding of their organisational, societal and polit-
ical working environments. More than just an understanding, students should also have the
ability, confidence and drive to make changes to systems and culture within their organisa-
tions, as well as to communities and policy outside of their organisation. Further, educational
institutions must examine the way in which faculty deliver curriculum to assess whether
students are receiving underlying messages about the profession, other social workers and
client behaviour and expectations.
In terms of practice, social work agencies and organisations need to invest in leadership
training for their supervisors and employees in direct care. This leadership training should
not focus on specific skills, behaviours or characteristics, but instead focus on changing
how individuals approach their work and their professional relationships in order to create
the potential for cultural shifts that may pave the way for increased autonomy. In interpro-
fessional contexts, leadership training can be used to teach workers how to maintain their
role as a social worker and define their unique and critical contribution to client care while
collaborating with individuals from other human services professions.
Social work leadership researchers may need to move away from measuring character-
istics and specific behaviours that may indicate leadership, and focus more on the desired
effects of leadership, such as ability to make changes in an organisation, as indicators of
effective social work leadership. The requirement of certain characteristics of behaviours as
42   S. COLBY PETERS

prerequisites for the identification of somebody as a ‘leader’ may preclude some individuals
from being identified as such because of differences in personality or cultural background.
Researchers could start assessing the underlying assumptions in an organisation that may
prevent formal and informal leaders from effecting positive change or even attempting to
make changes in their behaviour, their relationships or their organisations.
Finally, the role that emotion plays on the individual, relational and organisational levels
needs to be acknowledged in social work education, research and practice. Certainly, the
place of emotion in client interactions, both on the part of the client and the worker, is
acknowledged in clinical education and practice, but not in macro-education and practice.
Emotion has the potential to drive much of a person’s behaviour, and ignoring emotion,
especially anger and fear, can have negative effects on worker well-being and organisational
climate, and possibly on client well-being. Instead of being disregarded, emotion could be
used as a tool to identify issues in practice, which could then be addressed logically and
rationally.
One limitation of this theoretical and conceptual literature review lies in the neglect of
literature outside of journal articles, including books and grey literature. There are several
books on social work leadership, including one very recent edition of a book by Lawler
and Bilson (2013), “Social Work Management and Leadership: Managing Complexity with
Creativity”, that reviews several leadership theories and analyses their relevance to social
work. A future review, or extension of this review, would benefit from the inclusion of books
such as Lawler and Bilson’s (2013), as well as other non-peer-reviewed literature.
A second limitation is the fact that only one person conducted the literature review, so
the conclusions, including major themes and the final leadership model, were not subject
to any additional assessment. In order to at least partially validate the results, an additional
analysis or review by one or more individuals is warranted.
Qualitative research and analysis, as in a focus group, would be useful in validating the
results of the review and the leadership principles. Investigating the way in which social
workers in various work environments and positions perceive and execute leadership, and
comparing the results with extrapolated theoretical propositions would be one way to val-
idate the results. Presenting the definition to social workers and allowing them to critique
and comment might also contribute to validation.
Quantitative analysis could be employed to test the interdependent nature of leadership
on organisational, interactional and individual levels, as well as whether emotional compe-
tence and acceptance of others are factors that are as important as the theoretical literature
might indicate. It would also be interesting to see if agency outcomes are correlated with
or influenced by individual leadership characteristics.
Finally, it would be interesting to explore the applicability of these leadership principles
to other human service professions, such as health care and education, which have goals
similar to those of social work. Following the further validation of the identified social
work leadership principles, qualitative and quantitative research with individuals from the
broader human services could be conducted to determine whether social work leadership
might be effective in varied professional settings.
This review of theoretical and conceptual social work leadership research has demon-
strated that potentially, social work leadership could look much different from traditional,
business-based models of leadership. Addressing leadership behaviours on the organisa-
tional, relational and individual levels expands the concept of leadership and creates a path
 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE   43

for a more inclusive and egalitarian approach to making positive change in social work
organisations. A multi-level model of leadership also accommodates and parallels social
workers’ focus on the individual within their environment. Identifying major leadership
themes in the theoretical literature validates and elucidates the unique nature of and chal-
lenges related to the social work profession. Finally, the development of a working defini-
tion of social work leadership, as well as the principles, provides a starting point to further
develop the social work leadership concept, associated behaviours and desired outcomes.

Disclosure statement
At this time, the author has a consulting business that may benefit from the application of the research.
However, the bulk of the manuscript was written and submitted when the author was a PhD candidate
and did not have a consulting business.

Notes on contributor
S. Colby Peters is the Program Director for a nonprofit in the United States that provides mentoring
and tutoring services for children from underserved communities. Dr. Peters also provides leadership
and organizational development training and consulting services for human service organizations.
She is interested in the impact of emotional competence, communication, and systems refinements
on organizational functioning, employees, and client well-being.

References
Austin, M. J., Regan, K., Samples, M. W., Schwartz, S. L., & Carnochan, S. (2011). Building managerial
and organizational capacity in nonprofit human service organizations through a leadership
development program. Administration in Social Work, 35, 258–281. doi:10.1080/03643107.201
1.575339
Bion, W. (1970). Attention and interpretation. London: Tavistock Publications.
Blome, W. W., & Steib, S. D. (2014). The organizational structure of child welfare: Staff are working
hard, but it is hardly working. Children and Youth Services Review, 44, 181–188. doi:10.1016/j.
childyouth.2014.06.018
Booker, R. (2012). Leadership in children’s services. Children & Society, 26, 394–405. doi:10.1111/
j.1099-0860.2011.00355.x
Bresnen, M. J. (1996). All things to all people? Perceptions, attributions, and constructions of
leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 495–513.
Brimhall, K. L., & Lizano, E. L. (2014). The mediating role of inclusion: A longitudinal study of the
effects of leader–member exchange and diversity climate on job satisfaction and intention to
leave among child welfare workers. Children and Youth Services Review, 40, 79–88. doi:10.1016/j.
childyouth.2014.03.003
Carpiano, R. M., & Daley, D. M. (2006). A guide and glossary on postpositivist theory building for
population health. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60, 564–570. pii:60/7/564
CSWE Commission on Accreditation. (2008). Educational policy and accreditation standards. Virginia:
Council on Social Work Education.
CSWE Commission on Education. (2015). Educational policy and accreditation standards. Virginia:
Council on Social Work Education.
Dickinson, N. S. (2014). Child welfare leadership development to enhance outcomes for children,
youth and families. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 38,
121–124.
44   S. COLBY PETERS

Elpers, K., & Westhuis, D. J. (2008). Organizational leadership and its impact on social workers’
job satisfaction: A national study. Administration in Social Work, 32, 26–43. doi:10.1080/
03643100801922399
Fawcett, J. (1999). ‘An overview of conceptual models, theories, and research’ and ‘Evaluating
conceptual-theoretical-empirical structures for research’. In The relationship of theory and research
(3rd ed. pp. 1–26, 85–118). London: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Foster, A. (2013). The challenge of leadership in front line clinical teams struggling to meet current
policy demands. Journal of Social Work Practice, 27, 119–131. doi:10.1080/02650533.2013.798147
Gellis, Z. D. (2001). Social work perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership in
health care. Social Work Research, 25, 17–25.
Gray, I., Parker, J., Rutter, L., & Williams, S. (2010). Developing communities of practice. Social Work
and Social Sciences Review, 14, 20–36.
Harbottle, C., Jones, M. R., & Thompson, L. M. (2014). From reactionary to activist: A model that
works. The Journal of Adult Protection, 16, 113–119. doi:10.1108/JAP-05-2013-0019
Health and Care Professions Council. (2017). Standards of proficiency: Social workers in England.
(Unpublished manuscript).
Holosko, M. J. (2009). Social Work Leadership: Identifying Core Attributes. Journal of Human
Behavior in the Social Environment, 19, 448–459.
Hopkins, K. M. (2002). Organisational citizenship in social service agencies. Administration in Social
Work, 26, 1–15. doi:10.1300/J147v26n02_01
Kelly, S. (2014). Towards a negative ontology of leadership. Human Relations, 67, 905–922.
doi:10.1177/0018726713503177
Knee, R. T., & Folsom, J. (2012). Bridging the crevasse between direct practice social work and
management by increasing the transferability of core skills. Administration in Social Work, 36,
390–408. doi:10.1080/03643107.2011.604402
Lawler, J. (2007). Leadership in social work: A case of caveat emptor? British Journal of Social Work,
37, 123–141. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch404
Lawler, J., & Bilson, A. (2013). Social work management and leadership: Managing complexity with
creativity. New York, NY: Routledge.
Lazzari, M. (2007). Final report on senior scholar activities related to the CSWE leadership initiative.
Virginia: Council on Social Work Education.
Lazzari, M. M., Colarossi, L., & Collins, K. S. (2009). Feminists in social work: Where have all the
leaders gone? Affilia, 24, 348–359. doi:10.1177/0886109909343552
Mary, N. L. (2005). Transformational leadership in human service organizations. Administration in
Social Work, 29, 105–118. (10.1300/J147v29n02_07).
NASW Delegate Assembly. (2008). Code of ethics of the national association of social workers.
Washington, DC: National Association of Social Workers.
Ruch, G. (2012). Where have all the feelings gone? Developing reflective and relationship-based
management in child-care social work. British Journal of Social Work, 42, 1315–1332. doi:10.1093/
bjsw/bcr134
Tafvelin, S., Armelius, K., & Westerberg, K. (2011). Toward understanding the direct and indirect
effects of transformational leadership on well-being: A longitudinal study. Journal of Leadership
& Organizational Studies, 18, 480–492. doi:10.1177/1548051811418342
Taylor, I. (2013). Discretion or prescription? Exploring confidence in qualifying social work education.
British Journal of Social Work, 45, 493–510.
The Policy, Ethics and Human Rights Committee. (2012). The code of ethics for social work.
Birmingham, AL: British Association of Social Workers.
Webster, M. (2012). Complexity approach to frontline social work management. Social Work and
Social Sciences Review, 14, 27–46.
Yliruka, L., & Karvinen-Niinikoski, S. (2013). How can we enhance productivity in social work?
Dynamically reflective structures, dialogic leadership and the development of transformative
expertise. Journal of Social Work Practice, 27, 191–206. doi:10.1080/02650533.2013.798157
Copyright of Journal of Social Work Practice is the property of Routledge and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.