Samenvatting

Personalisation is increasingly valued as a counterbalance to bureaucratic standardisation in European welfare states. Instead of checklists, personalised solutions emphasise responsiveness and horizontal relationships with citizens. The Dutch Social Support Act 2015 operationalises this through ‘kitchen table conversations’ aiming for personalised services in close cooperation with citizens. However, this policy ideal is increasingly criticised for lacking an equal dialogue.
Yet, the question of how interactions in this unequal setting influence personalised decision-making is underexplored. Drawing on boundary work theory, our ethnographic study, observed ‘face-to-face’ interactions at the ‘kitchen table,’ between professionals and citizens seeking home care. In Rotterdam this is outsourced to the private sector. By formulating administrative decisions as an outcome, citizens are entitled to ‘a clean and liveable house’, yet citizens are uncertain about the specifics of the provision. This is prime example of a case for which the necessary boundary work will need to be done before arriving at the final arrangements.
The research on the impact of boundary work provides three important reflections for personalised services. Firstly, it highlights professional-imposed boundaries, limiting the influence of citizens on how personalisation is operationalised. Secondly, personalisation of (social) support often remains invisible because it falls outside the provider’s tasks. Finally, important cues for personalisation are missed due to a strong demarcation of support as mere cleaning. These are missed opportunities for personalisation. Reflection is therefore needed on how the kitchen table conversation can be transformed into a valuable rather than bureaucratic process to better utilise the potential for personalisation for citizens.