Search results

Spoken service language is critical for service experiences and human welfare in many service settings. However, little is known about how spoken service language can enhance customer well-being in transformative service contexts. This paper explores spoken service language and well-being for customers experiencing vulnerability in a transformative service context, informed by an empirical account of the human welfare service of residential aged care.

Situated within transformative service research (TSR), this study was guided by a theoretical framework of service language and adopts a strengths-based approach to customer experiences of vulnerability. A qualitative multiple case study methodology was applied to explore carers’ perspectives on spoken service language and well-being from three residential aged care homes in Australia.

The findings demonstrate five spoken service language practices and four principles of spoken service language for well-being that co-create customer well-being and support the alleviation of customer experiences of vulnerability. Conceptualised as transformative spoken service language, the spoken service language practices and principles collectively recognise, support and leverage residents’ capabilities and uplift customer well-being, by enacting a process of mattering highly salient to transformative service contexts.

This study is the first to conceptualise how employee spoken service language can be used to support customer well-being and enhance transformative value for customers experiencing vulnerability to align with the goals of TSR. Practically, the study advocates for a greater awareness and more considered use of transformative spoken service language in human welfare and other transformative service contexts.

This study aims to investigate Australian civil tribunal decisions to ascertain compliance with decisional quality standards in Australian law, with a particular focus on strata and community title cases.

An orthodox doctrinal legal analysis and assessment of cases and tribunal policies was adopted. All Australian jurisdictions were surveyed, including federal, state and territory jurisdictions. The case law in each jurisdiction was screened to identify whether the principles applicable to decisional quality were engaged and then analysed as to the extent of that engagement.

Where a party presents a substantial, clearly particularised argument relying upon established facts, tribunals are obliged to address those facts and the arguments by way of an active intellectual process. However, appellate decisions disclose a degree of deference not often accorded to judicial officers, and there is a need for a more disciplined approach to ascertain whether any errors have been made by a tribunal lie on the critical path to the decision. As strata and community title disputes become more complex, the importance of decisional quality standards can only increase.

Up to date as of 1 March 2023.

The present position would appear to be that where a party presents a substantial, clearly particularised argument relying upon established facts, a tribunal must address its mind to those facts and the arguments by way of an active intellectual process. The requirement is limited to circumstances prescribed by a statute and factual and legal issues which are necessary to be determined in order for the tribunal to be satisfied as to circumstances prescribed by a statute. However, where the errors are not gross and plainly obvious, appeals from defective tribunal decisions are unlikely to succeed. There is a degree of deference not often accorded to judicial officers. That deference is unfortunate when tribunals are allocated jurisdiction over what quite often are significant property disputes.

The impact on community living of uncorrected poor quality tribunal decisions can be immense, depending on the degree of error. For example, water ingress into people’s homes might remain unremedied for many years, as, for example, occurred in the Marinko case.

The research and analysis is entirely original. A search of journals and textbooks did not identify any prior analysis, at least in the Australian context, relating to decisional quality standards of tribunals.

In October 2016, Timothy Sloan, the newly appointed CEO of American banking giant Wells Fargo, faced a massive public-relations crisis. A few weeks earlier, a United States government agency had announced the results of its regulatory review of the bank and exposed a shocking practice common in the retail division, in which aggressive community bankers had created more than a million fraudulent accounts and credit card applications on behalf of unaware customers for the past several years. Over the next few weeks, the bank—and Sloan's predecessor, John Stumpf, in particular—suffered from harsh criticism from politicians, journalists, and former employees alike, ultimately forcing Stumpf's resignation. As Sloan sought to minimize the public-image backlash and restore general trust in Wells Fargo, he struggled to construct the best communication strategy for the bank's next chapter.