JRF Social Work Internship | Recognizing "Conflict": Field Observations from a Social-Work Internship

Life is made up of a series of choices, and all of us have made decisions at crossroads. But as the days pass, how often do we stop to ask what those choices reveal about our own values? Put differently: do we actually act on what we believe? For legal professionals, once simple ideas of fairness and justice are no longer enough to guide every decision, we may need to pay closer attention to where the forces shaping our thinking come from and where they lead us. The next time uncertainty and hesitation return, I hope we can open our hands, look again at the values and convictions we have been holding tightly, and examine the principles that shape our decisions. During my internship at JRF, I spent nearly 100 hours searching for a focus for my field observation. I eventually chose "conflict" and completed this field report through qualitative observation and interviews with three staff members.

I. How the Question Emerged

During my internship, my university supervisor repeatedly reminded us that, as social-work students, we should remain alert to conflicts between our deeply held values and the work we were actually doing, and then examine how any gap between ideals and conduct appeared in practice. If that matters for interns, it matters even more for advocacy workers themselves. The process can help people untangle thoughts that otherwise remain confused and revisit the values guiding their decisions. Whether we hold firmly to principle or respond pragmatically, however, we still need to learn to see the world from another person's position. To me, that is one way social-work values take shape in different settings-and what I hope social workers can be.

So what kinds of value conflicts do advocacy workers actually encounter? Are they open disputes in which everyone insists on a different position? Or are they quieter conflicts-discovering that the nature or environment of the work differs from what one had imagined and needing time to adapt? I initially expected people to describe darker internal struggles behind difficult choices. In practice, the situations were less dramatic, but perhaps more revealing: they showed how individuals respond to the demands and pressures of their environment.

II. Where Does "Conflict" Come From?

Work in an advocacy organization is constantly interrupted by new events that suddenly "cut in line" and disrupt the original rhythm. That is part of JRF's character as a civil-society organization: it is not locked into a preexisting government budget plan and can respond quickly to urgent issues with concrete, credible action. People with different work histories experience that flexibility differently. For someone coming from a bureaucracy, suddenly being able to choose issues they care about and use their strengths can be liberating even when the change is deeply uncomfortable. For someone already accustomed to interruptions, the challenge is learning how to reorder priorities. Some tasks are time-sensitive and must be handled immediately, leaving focused work for later and creating tension between efficiency and the desire to do everything perfectly. Finding room to breathe often depends on social support.

JRF's flexibility gives staff room to adjust direction, but as the organization grows, that flexibility may need to be supported by clearer planning. JRF used to be relatively flat: members accommodated one another, spoke candidly during disagreements, valued consensus, and also tolerated different views. As the range of issues expanded and more resources were committed, small working groups developed into departments. Middle managers now have to allocate work, manage risks, and meet goals set by organizational leadership while also remaining attentive to the physical and emotional condition of frontline staff so that enthusiasm is not exhausted by reality. The tension between leadership's aspirations and frontline constraints is a newer kind of conflict. How middle managers balance those pressures and build systems suited to a more departmentalized organization will require considerable judgment.

III. Examining the Self

Structural pressures repeatedly test people's existing values, and workers inevitably have to find ways to resolve the resulting tensions. Yet direct conflicts between a person's own values and conduct seemed comparatively rare among the people I interviewed. Most people who choose to work at JRF arrive with relatively firm ideals and are not quick to abandon them. When an event or idea challenges those beliefs, they generally need to persuade themselves first; they are unlikely to follow a position blindly, much less try to persuade someone else of it.

Advocacy and social work may share one difficulty: everyday labor rarely produces immediate feedback. Knowing that many small tasks may eventually contribute to broader reform can sustain people who are exhausted by the work. Reality, however, often refuses to cooperate. Some workers run out of strength before they ever see a result, and no amount of motivation seems enough to keep them moving. At those moments, one useful question may be how our values are influencing the choices we make. Listening sincerely to one's own inner voice is difficult. So is finding the courage to accept that, sometimes, we may not like what we see in ourselves.