Search results

The purpose of this study is to provide current state of knowledge on how the COVID-19 emergency situation necessitated the behaviour influencing use and acceptance of telehealth. This study interlinks the health belief model (HBM) and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) to highlight the challenges and opportunities as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic in the public health sector.

This study used three online databases (Emerald publishing, Science Direct and Taylor and Francis) that enabled the authors to access electronic journal articles. Search strategy was used to extract articles based on the relevance of this study.

The key findings from this study suggested that the COVID-19 emergency forced health-care workers and their patients to rapidly use and rely on telehealth to reduce the rate of COVID-19 transmissions. The key benefits of telehealth use highlighted an expansive cost effective and convenient access to health-care services irrespective of geographical local and levels of physical impairment. Moreover, telehealth inhibited in person human interaction, which was perceived as impersonal and not ideal for new patient consultations. The barriers outweighed the benefits; as a result, it is unlikely that there will be a wide use of telehealth beyond the COVID-19 emergency situation.

The research findings are limited to discussions drawn from available secondary data. The criteria within telehealth for policymakers to note the technology acceptance and use for both health-care and outpatient stakeholders and their health seeking behaviour. Health-care sectors (private and public) and government need to understand enablers of effective telehealth in policymaking to ease the barriers during an emergency situation like a pandemic.

This study contributes to the emerging literature on how COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted and accelerated telehealth by extending both the UTAUT and HBM theories. This study is expected to contribute and expand literature on telehealth during emergency situations, given the novice nature of COVID-19 and limited literature surrounding it.

This paper aims to explore how accounting is fostering neoliberal citizenship through the participants of Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). More specifically, this paper aims to understand how accounting discourse and the management accounting technique of budgeting, when intertwined with automated administrative processes of the NDIS, are giving rise to a pastoral form of power that directs people’s behaviour toward certain ends.

Publicly available data has been crafted into an autoethnographic case study of one fictitious person’s experiences with the NDIS – Mina. Mina is an amalgam created from material submitted to the Joint Parliamentary Standing Committee on the NDIS. Mina’s experiences are then analysed through the lens of Foucault’s concept of pastoral power to explore how accounting has contributed to marketising and digitising public disability services.

Accounting rhetoric appears to be a central part of rationalising the decision to shift to individualised disability funding. Those receiving payments are treated as self-governable, financially responsible subjects and are therefore expected to have knowledge of management accounting techniques and budgeting. However, NDIS’s strong reliance on the accounting concepts of funds, budgets, cost and price is limiting people’s autonomy and subjecting them to intervention and control.

This paper addresses calls to explore the interplay between accounting and current disability policies. The analysis shows that incorporating accounting into the NDIS’s algorithms serves to conceal the underlying ideology of the programs, subtly driving behaviours towards neoliberal objectives. Further, this research extends the Foucauldian accounting literature by revealing the contribution of accounting to reinforcing the authority of digital pastors in contemporary times.

The purpose of this empirical study was to test whether presenting organizational change in a way that enhances employee self-worth will result in increased employee support for the identified change. In doing so, we developed a new measure, which includes a novel baseline element.

Items were developed, and then categorical validation data were collected through an online cross-sectional survey in which 222 respondents (adults over 18 years of age, and at least 6 months tenure) participated.

Within the items, we framed the activation of self-worth bias as requests for employee comments regarding change efforts. Results indicate there is a difference between asking for employee comment on change efforts, compared to asking for employee comment on change efforts and also providing feedback considerate of that input.

This study explores and presents a convergence between behavioral economics, management and applied psychology research – using both self-worth bias, and organizational change management communications; no other such comparable study or analysis could be found during the preparation of this research effort. Furthermore, a novel measure and innovative method is presented for developing and measuring self-worth bias during organizational change management communications.