All four perspectives can be regarded as ways of operationalizing the service value. Social justice is explicitly recognized in both the multiple perspectives approach and in the NASW values. Shared power seems to encompass several values: importance of human relationships, dignity and worth of the client, integrity and competence. The one perspective that is not as obviously tied to the NASW values is that concerned with evidence-based practice. However, evidence-based practice could be considered an over-arching perspective if the social worker insists that there be empirical evidence, obtained before the intervention or practice occurs, that it will effectively serve the client. That is, it shows promise of meeting the client's needs in a manner that attends to his network of relationships and recognizes his dignity and worth. In this light, it would seem that evidence-based practice is especially relevant to the NASW values of service and competence.

Strengths and Challenges

Major strengths of the multiple perspectives approach are that it:

Anticipates potential blind spots on the part of the social worker

Aligns with the NASW Code of Ethics

Provides a guide for initial assessment

Can offer alternatives when a satisfactory outcome cannot be reached by one strategy or technique

Benefits the social worker as well as the client (most obviously in the shared power perspective)

Some of the major challenges to the approach are:

Keeping all perspectives in constant view. It would be easy to drift into a mode of practice that emphasizes some perspectives and ignores others.

Overcoming any tendency to focus on problems of the client rather than his or her strengths and potential.

Finding empirical evidence relevant to the situation at hand. This...

(This seems like a good opportunity for collaboration among staff. One who thrives on research might trade tasks with a colleague who would rather interact with the public.)
Overcoming barriers imposed by settings or agencies stemming from funding arrangements, hierarchical (top-down) structure, weak or authoritarian leadership, etc. It is noteworthy that when DiFranks (2008) surveyed a national sample of 206 social workers, she found that there was more conflict between setting requirements and social workers' ethics and values in public agencies and managed care settings than in private agencies.)

With respect to the last-mentioned and possibly the most formidable challenge, Mattaini and Lowery cited a finding that these setting-imposed barriers "... could be counterbalanced to a substantial degree through empowerment-oriented staff development, a culture of shared power within the organization, and strong administrative leadership for empowerment practice " Applying the shared power perspective, Mattaini and Lowery added that, "Social workers who recognize their own power and the potential power of those around them can often marshal support for important shifts in agency practices." (p. 48).

References

DiFranks, N.N. (2008). Social workers and the NASW Code of Ethics: Belief, behavior, disjuncture. Social Work, 52( 2), 167-176.

Mattaini, M.A. & Lowery, C.T. (2007). Perspectives for practice. In M. Mattaini & C. Lowery (Eds.), Foundations of social work practice: a graduate text (4th ed.), 31-63. Washington D.C. NASW Press.

National Association of Social Workers. (2008). Code of ethics of the National Association of Social Workers. Retrieved from http://www.socialworkers.org/pub/code/code.asp.