In Sweden, the social services sector is subject to extensive monitoring, including the use of systematic follow-up. This article investigates how systematic follow-up is perceived within municipal social services by civil servants responsible for monitoring practices, addressing the following research question: How do administrative-level officials conceptualize systematic follow-up in social services, and what variations can be observed in their understanding? Drawing on empirical data from six municipalities, the study identifies five types of perceptions and examines their possible origins. A recurring finding is that many officials experience uncertainty regarding the purpose of systematic follow-up. The article further explores how divergent perspectives may generate a range of negative outcomes. In conclusion, we propose strategies for managing these differing interpretations, introducing the concept of the boundary object as a theoretical and practical tool for bridging varying understandings of systematic follow-up.