社會工作一向具有國際性的特質，隨著全球化的趨勢，國際社會工作的發展將被更加重視，而Gray與Fook兩位學者在思考國際社會工作時提出應顧及四方面的緊張狀況，下列何者並非其緊張狀況之一？
(A)專業化與非專業化：專業發展與非專業之間的衝突
(B)西方化與本土化：西方與對立的實務想法間之平衡
(C)多元主義與普世主義：對於內在的文化偏誤之意涵與回應
(D)全球化與在地化：全球化與在地化的趨勢同時發生

批判社會工作 對標準化的質疑

1. The globalisation–localisation debate was well articulated by Jim Ife in the Eileen Younghusband address at the Joint IFSW/IASSW International Congress in Montreal in 2000, where he argued strongly that alongside the process of globalisation was a counter tendency towards the development of locally based solutions. 2. The Westernisation–indigenisation debate concerns the relevance of Western social work to third world or developing contexts, such as Africa and Asia. There are those who believe that social work is a modern invention that fits developed Western contexts and is not geared to the problems of developing countries, such as poverty, AIDS/HIV, hunger, drought, and war. This then begs the question ‘what is Western social work’, and how relevant is it in diverse and multiple contexts. 3. The multicultural–universalisation debate concerns the ‘implications of built-in cultural biases’ (Goldstein, 1986, p. 149) within social work’s multicultural or culturally sensitive perspective, the notion that its values are universalisable and the potential conflict with non-Western and traditional cultures with collectivist values based inter alia on kinship, community networks and the extended family system. 4. The universal–local standards debate may or may not be relevant to the notion of ‘universal social work’ since it might be acceptable to think philosophically about an international orientation without necessarily attempting to attain universal agreement on definitions of, or standards for, professional social work education and practice. The latter concerns behavioural competencies and relates to a broader philosophical issue of whether social work is seen as a technical-rational or artistic-humanistic enterprise (Goldstein, 1992; Gray & Aga Askeland, 2002).