Search results

This study aims to enhance understanding of the collaboration between chairs of nurse councils (CNCs) and members of executive hospital boards (BM) from a relational leadership perspective.

The authors used a qualitative and interpretive methodology. The authors study the daily interactions of BM and CNCs of seven Dutch hospitals through a relational leadership lens. The authors used a combination of observations, interviews and document analysis. The author’s qualitative analysis was used to grasp the process of collaborating between BM and CNCs.

Knowing each other, relating with and relating to are distinct but intertwined processes that influence the collaboration between BM and CNC. The absence of conflict is also regarded as a finding in this paper. Combined together, they show the importance of a relational process perspective to understand the complexity of collaboration in hospitals.

Collaboration between professional groups in hospitals is becoming more important due to increasing interdependence. This is a consequence of the complexity in organizing qualitative care. Nevertheless, research on the process of collaborating between nurse councils (NCs) and executive hospital boards is scarce. Furthermore, the understanding of the workings of boards, in general, is limited. The relational process perspective and the combination of observations, interviewing and document analysis proved valuable in this study and is underrepresented in leadership research. This process perspective is a valuable addition to skills- and competencies-focused leadership literature.

In this study, the authors look at the case of Ferdinand Marcos, President of the Philippines between 1965 and 1986. Documenting the life and career of Marcos on Wikipedia provides an excellent example of the pitfalls confronting those seeking to address disinformation without first reflecting deeply on the reasons why people subscribe to views deemed outlandish by the intellectual or cultural mainstream.

The authors sampled the version of the Marcos article on Wikipedia as it existed after the first edit of each year since its inception (2002). This resulted in 22 texts for analysis. Content and thematic analyses were conducted on these texts as well as on the entire body of talk page comments for the article.

The authors' work suggests that the basic elements of responsible encyclopedic writing have prevailed in the case of Wikipedia's biography of Marcos. However, this is not an unalloyed victory, as issues of polarization remain unaddressed.

Underlying revisionist or distorted claims about Ferdinand Marcos (and other controversial topics) lie very real grievances that give these claims traction for many people. Hence, it is not enough to “just present the facts” to readers. Rather, the authors argue that what is needed is a synthesis of positions that would allow for common ground to be found between them. This could be done in the case of Wikipedia by cultivating editors who are capable and willing to engage with the subject literature in a deeper and richer fashion.