Search results

This paper aims to report on the findings of a qualitative study that explored the views of 53 service providers assisting Indigenous young people (known in Australia as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth) transitioning from out-of-home care (OOHC) in Australia.

A qualitative approach was adopted involving semi-structured interviews and focus groups with 53 representatives of state and territory government departments, non-government organisation service providers and Aboriginal community-controlled organisations (ACCOs) across Australia. The project was designed to gain the perspectives of those working within the system and their views on how it interacts with Indigenous care leavers. Interview questions aimed to ascertain the strengths and weaknesses of the leaving care support systems available to this cohort, as well as the key challenges facing service providers in supporting them. Finally, the study aimed to make recommendations for policy development in this area and identify potential best practice service responses.

The study found that the OOHC service systems continue to fail Indigenous care leavers, their families and communities. Study findings revealed that Indigenous care-leavers face substantial challenges and that the support systems for those leaving OOHC are often culturally insensitive and ineffective. Many Indigenous OOHC leavers lacked the supports they needed to develop safe and ongoing relationships with their traditional Country, family and communities. To promote more positive transitions and outcomes, effective practice responses were identified, including culturally safe programmes and proportional funding for ACCOs to advance greater self-determination.

This research is the first national study in Australia to examine the specific transition from care pathways and experiences of Indigenous young people. The findings add to the limited existing knowledge on Indigenous care leavers globally and should inform practice and policy innovations with this cohort in Australia and beyond.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the improvements in technology that enhance community understanding of the frequency and severity of natural hazards also increased the risk of potential liability of planning authorities in negligence. In Australia, the National Strategy imposes a resilience-based approach to disaster management and stresses that responsible land-use planning can reduce or prevent the impact of natural hazards upon communities.

This paper analyses how the principles of negligence allocate responsibility for loss suffered by a landowner in a hazard-prone area between the landowner and local government.

The analysis in this paper concludes that despite being able to establish a causal link between the loss suffered by a landowner and the approval of a local authority to build in a hazard-prone area, it would be in the rarest of circumstances that a negligence action may be proven.

The focus of this paper is on planning policies and land development, not on the negligent provision of advice or information by the local authority.

This paper identifies the issues a landowner may face when seeking compensation from a local authority for loss suffered because of the occurrence of a natural hazard known or predicted to be possible in the area.

The paper establishes that as risk managers, local authorities must place reliance upon scientific modelling and predictive technology when determining planning processes to fulfil their responsibilities under the National Strategy and to limit any possible liability in negligence.

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the methodological importance of how researchers exit fieldwork to draw attention to implications for participant and researcher well-being.

Reflecting in detail on one researcher’s final six-months exiting fieldwork at a retirement village, this paper critically examines the unintended consequences of participant observation and researcher-participant relationships.

The paper illustrates that difficulties to exit fieldwork can be unintended consequences of participant observation activities and developing researcher-participant relationships. The findings also discuss how fieldwork exit can impose upon participant and researcher well-being.

The findings are built upon fieldwork at a retirement village where the researcher served as a volunteer. Thus, the discussion focusses on participant observation activities that are likely to lead to close researcher-participant relationships. However, this paper aims to serve as a useful resource for researchers when considering how to exit their unique fieldwork contexts “with grace”.

The paper provides practical suggestions to help marketing researchers such as ethnographers, manage fieldwork exits with participant and researcher well-being concerns in mind.

The practical suggestions provided by this paper aim to enable marketing researchers to exit fieldwork contexts “with grace” through reflection and proactive management of the social impacts of their research activities.

Even though researchers acknowledge fieldwork is social and personal by nature, little research attention has been paid to the management of researcher-participant relationships and the exit stage of fieldwork. This paper discusses and addresses this blind-spot in marketing research.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how public relations practitioners view their role in guiding their organizations’ frontline (nonnominated) employees’ social media use and the tensions that organizations must navigate when they interact with their employees online.

This study utilizes in-depth interviews with 24 PR practitioners in the USA. Data were analyzed via grounded theory’s approach to open, axial, and select coding.

PR practitioners engage in three activities to guide employees’ social media use: serving as a reactive-technical resource; supporting employee communities; and responding to incidental monitoring of social media posts.

The study extends stakeholder theory by describing the normative expectations that are placed on employees when it comes to discussing the organization online.

Recommendations are offered for PR practitioners regarding the boundary-respecting management of nonnominated employees’ social media use.

Findings point to a greater understanding about frontline workers’ roles in supporting their organizations and the need for organizations to carefully explain social media policies.

Scholars have not fully explored the challenges that firms face when they seek to influence employees’ personal social networking activities. There is new insight about the ways in which organization can ethically engage with employees in digitally mediated spaces.