Search results

Foodborne illness remains high globally, with the majority of cases occurring in the domestic environment. Research in the safe food-handling domain is limited by the absence of an up-to-date and suitable measure of safe food-handling knowledge for use among consumers, with previous measures limited by questionnaire design features that increase participant burden and burnout and a lack of alignment with current safe food-handling guidelines. The purpose of this study is to develop a safe food-handling knowledge measure to capture a comprehensive understanding of consumers’ safe food-handling knowledge while minimising participant burden and burnout.

Items were developed and evaluated prior to administering them to participants. Data was collected among 277 participants who completed the measure online.

Results indicated that the measure had good acceptability among participants in the sample (mean = 5.44, SD = 0.77, range = 2.42–7) and that the measure had acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.60), item discrimination and item difficulty. These findings suggest that the safe food-handling knowledge measure would be suitable for use in future studies examining consumer safe food-handling.

This study provides an updated, acceptable and suitable safe food-handling knowledge measure for use among consumers to better understand consumers’ understanding of safe food-handling practices. Use of this measure in future research can improve the measurement of consumer safe food-handling knowledge to allow for better tailoring of future interventions and health campaigns for safe food-handling among consumers.

This paper identifies exigent factors that enable and constrain trust building in a science-based innovation ecosystem.

Set in the Northeast England, this study adopts a processual sensemaking approach to thematically analyse interviews with a diverse range of participants in six science-based SMEs.

The findings provide a unique exposition of trust building in an innovation ecosystem across geographic and platform relationships. In doing so, the findings highlight factors outside of contractual agreements that enable or constrain trust building in an innovation ecosystem.

Limitations centred on subjectivity in the use of thematic analysis, sample bias and size. Sampling limitations were mitigated through the research design and analysis.

The findings provide unique insights into understanding the exigent factors that enable or constrain trust building in a science-based innovation ecosystem.

The study identifies five exigent factors that constrain or enable trust building in science-based SMEs' innovation ecosystem at a micro-level – building network relationships, degree of novelty, protection of innovations, propensity for adding value, propensity for risk.

The research project is centred on examining how new technology comes to be used in certain ways and for certain purposes, by focusing on the pre‐installation stages.

Given a number of recent and ongoing changes to the role and responsibilities of executive and non‐executive board members of UK social housing organisations, the paper aims to offer a literature review which explores the development provision for board members within such organisations. The paper's key question is: “How are executive and non‐executive board members being prepared for these changes?”

A systematic literature review was undertaken, based on the main business and management databases. This was followed by a thematic analysis to uncover what we know about executive and non‐executive board member training and development within the public and voluntary sectors, in particular within UK social housing organisations.

Despite the increasingly important role of boards in the not‐for‐profit sector, only a limited number of publications focusing on human resource development (HRD) issues were found. The literature did provide some insight into the HRD experiences of executive and non‐executive board members. The majority of papers centred on leadership and governance matters, mainly board effectiveness, performance and “board capital”, rather than human capital. In so far as board member development is discussed, it is mainly in relation to their recruitment to the board and the sort of skills required, with little attention given to matters such as succession planning and member development.

Given the limited extent of research to date into executive and non‐executive board development in social housing organisations, it follows that there is limited knowledge of what is – or is not – happening in practice. This highlights the need for more empirical research, on the basis of which it should be possible to offer suggestions for changes to/improvements in board member development activities.

The paper reviews the current state of knowledge relating to executive and non‐executive board member development in not‐for‐profit and social housing organisations.

There has been a steady increase in the number of children diagnosed as having an autistic spectrum disorder (ASD). Consequently, demand for services to meet the needs of these children and their families has increased. Northamptonshire County Council's approach to addressing the needs of this group has been through the development of multi‐agency services united by a common approach: the TEACCH model. This paper outlines developments in the area of the provision of short‐term breaks. This approach has been considered successful by parents, service users and external audit. Factors that have been helpful in providing services are discussed, as are areas requiring further development.

Given the inherent flexibility of new technology, there is a range of possibilities for its utilisation in organisations. This implies, for example, that alternatives for organisation (re)structuring and job (re)design should be considered. Decisions and actions taken before the new technology actually gets introduced into the organisation also become critical. Unfortunately, this is a neglected research area. This pre‐introduction phase is termed the adoption phase of new technology. The article examines each of these two major phases, and argues that time and effort put into adoption can pay off in terms of a less‐problematic, and, hence time‐consuming and costly, introduction.

Quality measurements and techniques ‐ for example SPC ‐ can play an important role in achieving high levels of quality. However, in practice, the methods sometimes fail to deliver the expected benefits, for a variety of human and organizational reasons. Draws on three case studies to explore some of these practical problems. Concludes by making a number of suggestions for improving the effectiveness of quality measurements in organizations.

Following extensive research at a company in the printing industry, management is concluded to have operated in an unimaginative way towards the introduction of new technology. Conversely, recent publications on the subject have emphasised its flexibility, and the extent to which there is some degree of choice inherent in the redesign of work in such circumstances. Moreover, workers may also resist managerial changes — especially those which attempt to deskill their jobs — at the point of production.

Two recent empirical studies of new technology adoption, one focusing on employee resourcing aspects and the other on employee relations, have concluded as follows: in many instances, it may well be “that on balance it is employment policies that are more likely to determine the way in which technological change is implemented” (rather than the other way around); and “it is more sensible to talk of the impact of industrial relations on technological change than the reverse…”. These findings are supportive of the work of Buchanan and Boddy, who have argued that “the changes to structure that accompany technological change reflect strongly and directly the expectations and objectives of management, and weakly and indirectly the characteristics of the technology”. We broadly concur with these views, and, given that there is potentially a good deal of space within which managers and others can decide and act when new technology is adopted, we focus on the part that personnel specialists have played here, on the basis of case studies both authors have conducted of new technology adoption and implementation. But first, we need to review what the relevant social science literature can tell us about this matter.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of the privatisation and restructuring of social housing provision upon union leadership in the sector. The paper explores how local union leaders have adapted to radical reforms in the nature and organization of social housing provision in the UK.

The paper draws upon empirical material collected by the authors from social housing associations, informed by the union leadership literature and Habermas’ concepts of “communicative action” and “colonization”, drawing in particular upon the recent work of Edwards.

There are indications of moves to a more formalised relationship between management and local union leaders/staff representatives, with management keen to promote more “openness, partnership and collaboration” in working with the union leaders and staff reps. There was some evidence of senior managers involving local union leaders at earlier stages of policy and procedural initiatives, and of senior managers being more explicitly incorporated in the management‐union leader nexus.

Given the limited amount of research to date on union leadership in social housing organizations, and the exploratory nature and limited scope of this study (which, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, is the first to look at these matters), it follows that we still have limited knowledge of practice. Amongst other considerations, it is necessary to broaden the scope of future studies to take in a larger number of UK social housing providers, and to gather data from union/staff association members as well as managers and local union leaders.

The paper examines a matter which has been neglected by researchers to date, that is the changing nature and role of union leadership in social housing organizations, and it does this through an examination of the changing intra‐ organizational contexts within which this is taking place.