From the Traditional Interview to Dialogical Conversation in the Collaborative Practice of Social Work

Abstract

While the terms 'interview' and 'dialogue' are sometimes used interchangeably, in the context of social action it is important to distinguish between them. The interview can be seen as a more structured form of information gathering, although, as we shall see, it is not, whereas dialogue represents a more open and collaborative approach to co-constructing meaning and exploring new possibilities. The interview can be characterised by an imbalance of power, with the interviewer in the role of expert and the interviewee in a subordinate position.

The classical interview in social work, influenced by the medical-clinical model and casework, focused mainly on the search for behavioral change and the adaptation of the subject to the environment. From a more pragmatic point of view, the interview is considered as a technique for gathering information to make diagnoses and develop action plans.

Dialogue from a collaborative practice is characterized by the participation of both professionals and citizens in the joint construction of meanings. It is not a mere transmission of information, but a process of co-creation of new perspectives and possibilities. Dialogue seeks a horizontal and egalitarian relationship in which the voices of both participants are heard with respect. There is recognition of each other's experience and knowledge.

It is these differences of complementary contrasts that are addressed in this text for reading, analysis and open debate.