GAME PLANS, BUZZES, AND SHEER LUCK - DOING WELL IN SOCIAL-WORK

This article used narrative accounts by social work practitioners to i dentify the evidence they used to decide whether work had ''gone well. '' Evaluation strategies were constructed from a ''game plan,'' the su ccess of which was viewed as partly contingent on the untoward operati on of ''sheer luck.'' The social workers judged their practice accordi ng to whether their work produced emotional awards; the case was ''mov ing''; intervention won steady, incremental change; practice was accom plished without inflicting harm through the operations of the welfare system; and confirming evidence was available from fellow professional s. These practitioners were preoccupied with causes and reasons for ou tcomes of their work, held strongly worked views about the complexity and ambiguity of social work evidence, and were acutely aware of the c onstant interplay of knowing and feeling in practice. practitioners' e xisting evaluation practices provide the starting point from which soc ial workers can begin to develop a method of practice evaluation that avoids a decontextualized imposition of ideal models. To move forward the debate about evidence-based practice, social workers need to refle ct on the significance of practitioners' day-to-day evaluating.