Coping with Tensions That Arise from Professional Collaboration Among Street-Level Bureaucrats in the Context of Public Sector Reform

Abstract

This study examines the tensions arising from collaboration among street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) in Finland’s nationwide reform of social and health services, with a particular focus on student welfare. While the reform aims to integrate services, it risks creating gaps between education and health professionals across different jurisdictions. We employed mixed methods, including document analysis, surveys, and a Delphi panel, to explore how collaborative tensions manifest and how SLBs utilize discretionary practices to cope. Our analysis identifies four key tensions: the balance between privacy protection and effective collaboration, the hierarchical structuring of welfare planning versus local discretion, sectoral boundaries versus shared responsibility, and children’s rights versus ensuring support. The findings indicate that coping strategies based on an either-or approach, which separates competing demands, offer limited capacity for addressing the complexities of the implementation of reform. A both-and approach enables SLBs to acknowledge competing demands and balance them in practice, but may stabilize tensions without transforming collaboration. The study underscores the relevance of a more-than approach as a reflexive and generative mode of coping. The approach enables SLBs to further student welfare by interpreting their responsibilities, negotiating meanings, and co-producing support across organizational and sectoral boundaries rather than merely adhering to rules.