Social Work for Sociologists: Theory and Practice

Bicultural Practice: Beyond Mere tokenism ● 113

Bicultural Positions and Bicultural Practices

In a New Zealand bicultural context, there are three possible cultural con-
figurations in human service work: Māori worker and Māori client, non-
Māori worker and Māori client, or Māori worker and non-Māori client.
Each of these requires the worker to have an understanding of the self
before embarking on work with service users. The first configuration, Māori
working with Māori, varies according to the worker’s cultural literacy and
fluency. There is a clear expectation that mihimihi, karakia, waiata, and
other Māori cultural practices are normal and not exotic. Their use again
depends on the cultural views and ability of the client and the worker, but a
Māori human service worker is expected to be able to lead in these situations.
There is a range of cultural literacy and fluency among individual Māori,
and cultural expectations may be problematic for those Māori human ser-
vice workers who identify as Māori but have little knowledge and skills
in Māori cultural practices. At the other end of the spectrum, there are
Māori human service workers who are completely committed and able to
undertake a Māori process from a position of being steeped in tradition and
involvement in the Māori community (Hollis-English 2012). Māori work-
ing with Māori will usually also have an awareness of tribal issues, dialects,
tribal governance structures, and the nuances of different interpretations of
knowledge and concepts.
The second configuration, of non-Māori worker and Māori client, has
similar issues in regard to cultural fluency and literacy. Basic skills and knowl-
edge in Māori language and cultural practices are a bare minimum if human
service workers want to use practice models that are relevant to Māori. Within
the authors’ own families, there are individuals who take various cultural
positions with regard to being Māori. If these individuals were in the situa-
tion of receiving human services, it is our hope that any qualified and reg-
istered social worker in Aotearoa/New Zealand would be able to work with
them in a confident manner. As with other Māori, it would come down to
their individual circumstances, with some requiring a Māori-speaking worker
just to engage in the first place. This would not mean they would have to be
Māori, but they would have to have the skills and knowledge to respect and
competently work with Māori.
The third configuration is that of a Māori worker with a non-Māori cli-
ent. One of the authors, when asked by a Pākehā colleague about his views
on bicultural practice, replied, “I can work with Pākehā!” This somewhat
antihegemonic comment was met by some resistance, as the colleague had
preconceived ideas that bicultural was about Pākehā attitudes to Māori and
not the other way around. Underpinning this comment from the author
was the awareness that Māori workers have always had to work biculturally