Search results

Notwithstanding the rising magnitude of system factors in patient safety improvement, “human factors” such as idiosyncratic deals (i-deals) which also contribute to the adjustment of system deficiencies should not be neglected. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the role of value-based HR practices in catalyzing i-deals, which then influence clinical error control. The research further examines the moderating role of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on the effect of value-based HR practices on i-deals.

The data were collected from middle-level clinicians from hospitals in the Vietnam context.

The research results confirmed the effect chain from value-based HR practices through i-deals to clinical error control with CSR as a moderator.

The HRM literature is expanded through enlisting i-deals and clinical error control as the outcomes of HR practices.

The purpose of this paper is to review the challenges of teaching values and ethics in mental-health, explore the differing perspectives of the key stakeholders and stimulate further questions for debate in this area; leading to a proposal of an alternative approach to educating mental-health professionals on values and ethics.

In current mental-health care settings, very few professionals work with homogeneous populations. It is imperative that mental-health education and training ensures health professionals are competent to practice in diverse settings; where ethics and values are bound to differ. Establishing professional practice not only involves considering concepts such as values and ethics, but also equality, diversity and culture. Incorporating values-based practice and cultural diversity training holds promise to education and training, that is truly reflective of the complexity of clinical decision making in mental-health. Further research is needed as to how these two frameworks can be unified and taught.

Mental health education aims to develop valuesbased practice to support practitioners in clinical decision‐making. Values‐based practice requires high levels of cultural competence achieved through service user participation in professional preparation. The degree of service user participation remains dependent on the values of programme providers.In this paper, we consider whether strategies to involve service users in mental health professional education can support the principles of valuesbased practice. To do this, we have drawn on the findings from qualitative studies of educators' practices and their views regarding service user involvement. Values‐based practice requires self‐awareness of values impacting on decisions and knowledge derived from service users' personal accounts. The studies suggest that while opportunities exist for service users to present their accounts, few examples of service user involvement facilitated deeper examination of values underpinning decision‐making. Enabling service users to influence values‐based practice development requires more authentic participatory approaches. Educators valued the contribution of service users' experiential knowledge to the learning process, but there was less evidence of educators' values base that would model commitment to the empowerment of service users.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the development and proposal of a values evidence-based model of clinical supervision (CS) for the implementation by nursing staff (registered and non-registered nurses) within a forensic intellectual disability service.

This is a conceptual and technical paper providing a descriptive account for a service provision with nursing staff.

The paper does not present any research findings but does demonstrate a novel and innovative approach to the conceptualisation and implementation of CS.

The paper examines the dominant concepts that shape existing thinking around CS and suggests a new interpretation that involves greater pragmatism through a values evidence-based approach.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how clinical nurse education and nursing students’ care practices are shaped by different logics of care.

Inspired by Mol’s work on care, the paper explores care practices connected to the clinical education of nurses. The empirical data were generated from longitudinal, multi-sited ethnographic fieldwork among nursing students in clinical practice combined with follow-up interviews with the students and their supervisors.

The paper illustrates how three logics of care shape clinical education: the logic of relational care, the logic of care education and the logic of care production. The paper demonstrates how the logics unfold and entangle in everyday clinical education. On the one hand, care of patients based on the relationship between patient and nurse is highly valued. On the other hand, this logic is not institutionalized in the same way as practices induced by the logic of care production and the logic of care education.

The paper may be of value to scholars and practitioners in clinical education, as well as to health educational policy makers. The findings focus on paradoxes produced by conflicting logics in practice, thus offering new reflections and alternative sensemaking of well-known problems connected to clinical education.

The purpose of this article is to advance critical debate in relation to a very critical issue in current healthcare management – namely “patient safety”. This is currently a very high profile issue. In its various guises such as clinical governance, integrated governance and healthcare governance the question of avoiding or at least minimising harm to patients is attracting a huge amount of attention. Considerable resources especially within the acute sector are allocated to the problem. But, despite the systematic attention, progress in healthcare compared with certain other sectors is slow and mistakes continue to occur. Hospital acquired infections and clinical errors have become a matter of acute public concern. Evaluations of the health service are critically influenced by adverse judgements on this dimension of care.

The authors draw primarily upon relevant literature in order to make sense of recent empirical research in eight acute hospital trusts in the UK. The analysis, however, is relevant to healthcare systems around the world.

The authors reveal how the massive investment in systems, service improvement mechanisms and clinical government regimes may not in themselves be enough. One reason why they may not be enough is that there can be a problem of gaining acceptance and legitimacy. Staff may see such managers as “policing” and “interfering”. There is then the danger of a vicious circle – more control but less effective control because of a feeling of alienation. The policing element is at best a final safety net not the prompt for improvement. They then identify six barriers and each is accompanied by a recommendation for its resolution.

There are a number of implications for practice and for systems reform, which stem from the analysis. Two main recommendations stand out: they need to be handled together. First, the traditional model of the autonomous professional needs to be challenged by subjecting clinical practice to shared clinical governance procedures. Second, and simultaneously, there is a need to attend to underlying values. There is a need to revisit the issue of underpinning values so that clinical values and system‐wide/managerial values are congruent rather than separate or even in conflict. At this point, governance and leadership should come together.

This paper provides useful information from the literature on current healthcare management.

This qualitative study aims to examine key stakeholders' perspectives of primary care group/trust prescribing strategies. Within the context of general practice prescribing, the paper also debates the wider issue of whether GPs' prescribing autonomy is under threat from managerial expansion following recent organisational changes in primary care.

Data were obtained from focus groups and a series of individual semi‐structured interviews with GPs and key primary care organisation stakeholders.

The data underlie a tension between the managerial objective of cost‐restraint and GPs' commitment to quality improvement and individual clinical patient management. In presenting both managerial and medical narratives, two divergent and often conflicting discourses emerge, which leads to speculation that managerial attempts to constrain prescribing autonomy will achieve only limited success. The contention is that GPs' discourse features as a challenge to a managerial discourse that reflects attempts to regulate, standardise and curtail clinical discretion. This is due not only to GPs' expressed hegemonic ideals that clinical practice centres on the interests of the individual patient, but also to the fact that the managerial discourse of evidence‐based medicine encapsulates only a limited share of the knowledge that GPs draw on in decision making. However, while managers' discourse presented them as unwilling to impose change or directly challenge clinical practice, evidence also emerged to suggest that is not yet possible to be sufficiently convinced of the future retention of prescribing autonomy. On the other hand, the use of peer scrutiny posed an indirect managerial influence on prescribing, whilst the emergence of prescribing advisors as analysts of cost‐effectiveness may threaten doctors' dominance of medical knowledge.

There is a continuing need to analyse the impact of the new managerial reforms on primary care prescribing.

This study provides a snapshot of managerial and GP relations at a time of primary care transition.

Adopting an agentic positioning, we question and compare competing logics hybridization within French hospitals and universities facing major reforms inspired by new public management. In addition to the resulting forms of hybridization exposed in the literature (accepted or refused), we observe four additional modes: instrumentalized, uncomfortable, reformulated, and suffered. They all reveal the varied manner with which each professional faces reform. However, we develop a new argument: the ways professionals hybridize (or do not) their prevailing logic depends on an overarching mode of hybridization that characterizes the way their organization deals with reform. We identify two contrasting modes: overarching strategic logics hybridization and overarching enforced logics hybridization. They give insight into how actors decouple structure from practices. We contribute to the literature on logics hybridization by first analyzing the role of specific actors who act as either a translator-actor or a closure-actor to respectively facilitate appropriation of the reforms or to protect professionals against the growing dominance of the new logic introduced by the law; and secondly by discussing importance of articulating higher and lower organizational levels all involved in hybridization.

Professionals subscribe to a given set of shared core values which define their profession. In medicine they relate to the saving of life and healing of the sick. Autonomy is concerned with the extent to which the professional body can set its own rules and standards which illustrate the ethos of the profession and define its character. It is the professionals collectively who monitor the profession in terms of procedures, practice, entry requirements and licences. Society′s role is to determine what is appropriate or acceptable behaviour by professionals and it is increasingly asking about medical activities from a standpoint of priorities of need, appropriateness and value for money. There have traditionally been two types of professional group, random and clustered but we are now beginning to see the emergence of a third type, the managed group. The management of clustered professional groups is extremely difficult. Professional and academic freedoms are jealously guarded while organizational goals are relegated in comparison. The task facing managers in health care is daunting but there are signs of progress. We are beginning to see the emergence of a new partnership between clinicians and managers with agreement on collective interpretation of clinical values leading to the development of an enhanced ethos of health care which is better suited to the needs of the patients.

The paper contributes to the discussion on valuation in organization studies and strategic management literature. The nascent literature on valuation practices has examined established markets where producers and consumers are known and rivalry in the market is a given. Furthermore, previous research has operated with a narrow meaning of value as either a financial profit or a subjective consumer preference. Such a narrow view on value is problematic and insufficient for studying the interlacing of innovation and value creation in emerging technoscientific business domains.

The authors present an empirical study about value creation in an emerging technoscience business domain formed around personalized medicine and digital health data.

The results of this analysis show that in a technoscientific domain, valuation of innovations is multiple and malleable, entails pursuing attractiveness in collaboration and partnerships and is performative, and due to emphatic future orientation, values are indefinite and promissory.

As research implications, this study shows that valuation practices in an emerging technoscience business domain focus on defining the potential economic value in the future and attracting partners as probable future beneficiaries. Commercial value upon innovation in an embryonic business milieu is created and situated in valuation practices that constitute the prospective market, the prevalent economic discourse, and rationale. This is in contrast to an established market, where valuation practices are determined at the intersection of customer preferences and competitive arenas where suppliers, producers, service providers and new entrants to the market present value propositions.

The study findings extend discussion on valuation from established business domains to emerging technoscience business domains which are in a “pre-competition” phase where suppliers, customers, producers and their collaborative and competitive relations are not yet established.

As managerial implications, this study provides insights into health innovation stakeholders, including stakeholders in the public, private and academic sectors, about the ecosystem dynamics in a technoscientific innovation. Such insight is useful in strategic decision-making about ecosystem strategy and ecosystem business model for value proposition, value creation and value capture in an emerging innovation domain characterized by collaborative and competitive relations among stakeholders. To business managers, the findings of this study about valuation practices are useful in strategic decision-making about ecosystem strategy and ecosystem business model for value proposition, value creation and value capture in an emerging innovation domain characterized by collaborative and competitive relations among stakeholders. To policy makers, this study provides an in-depth analysis of an overall business ecosystem in an emerging technoscience business that can be propelled to increase the financial investments in the field. As a policy implication, this study provides insights into the various dimensions of valuation in technoscience business to policy makers, who make governance decisions to guide and control the development of medical innovation using digital health data.

This study's results expand previous theorizing on valuation by showing that in technoscientific innovation all types of value created – scientific, clinical, social or economic – are predominantly promissory. This study complements the nascent theorizing on value creation and valuation practices of technoscientific innovation.