Search results

The problem of how to weight technical expertise is familiar to anyone concerned with the design and implementation of company job evaluation schemes, and nowhere is this problem more acute than in Research and Development (R & D) departments. Here, typically, there are large numbers of highly qualified technical specialists who both deserve and demand promotion on the basis of their technical contribution. Yet, because technical staff have relatively few of the kind of responsibilities which carry high weighting on most job evaluation schemes, they rarely warrant higher grading on conventional criteria. And where they are promoted, their excellence as scientists wins them promotion into research management. In a recent study conducted by the author, concerning the reasons why R&D staff in a large UK company sought posts elsewhere in the organisation, the belief that promotion was easier to get outside R&D was one of the most important factors. A dual ladder system may offer a partial solution to this problem. By a dual ladder is meant the establishment of two parallel hierarchies within R & D: a management ladder and a ladder for technical specialists. The two ladders carry different responsibilities but equivalent rewards and status. In theory, at least, a distinction is made between responsibility for resources, located on the management ladder, and responsibility for technical merit, located on the technical ladder.

To understand how people using community public mental health services conceptualize community and their place within it within the post-deinstitutionalization era.

Two hundred ninety-four service users completed structured interviews in two urban, outpatient, public, and community mental health facilities in the Northeast. Quantitative and qualitative responses to the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status, Community Ladder version, were analyzed to understand perspectives on community.

Mean subjective community status ladder score among participants was five (SD = 2.56). Participants identified four broad categories of definitions of community: geographic community; community related to social definitions; contributing to society; and mental health service-user communities. Explanations for the location of their placement on the ladder (subjective community status) include comparisons to self and others, contributions to community, and social relationships. There was also a set of explanations that spoke to the intersection of multiple marginalizations and structural constraints. Finally, we explore relationships among understandings of community and perceptions of place within community.

Community integration is a critical concept for community public mental health services, but little research has explored how mental health service users conceptualize their communities and their roles within them. Understandings of community are crucial to appropriately support peoples’ needs within their communities. Furthermore, participants identify mechanisms that facilitate their personal community standing, and these are areas for potential intervention.

June 15, 1967 Building — Safety regulations — Technical breach — Regulation requiring top of ladder to be lashed before used — Access to top of ladder by staircase — Scaling of ladder by workman to lash it — Fall of ladder Whether workman solely to blame No instruction to use staircase — Whether workman would have obeyed such instruction — Liability of employers — Oil storage tank — Whether a “building” — Building (Safety, Health and Welfare) Regulations, 1948 (S.I. 1948, No. 1145), regs. 4, 29(4).

The Smith Ladder Limpit Safety System has transformed the ladder from a precarious and rather limited instrument of instability to a solid, stable and safe working station. Its combination of effectiveness and simplicity is comparable with that of the paper clip and, like most clever designs, seems so obvious that it is surprising no one thought of it earlier — ironically, in this instance, they did. John Smith, an owner of a contractor cleaning company, concerned with improving the safety and effectiveness of the ladder, had designed his prototype many years before it was recognised, but until the establishment of the Health & Safety Executive and the British Safety Council, no one was interested in investing in safety. Both of these bodies recognised the potential of the Smith Ladder Limpit System immediately and were of great assistance during the early stages of launching the product. The Health & Safety Executive is currently monitoring the progress of the system and to date, has found nothing to question its integrity.

April 29, 1969 Building — Safety regulations — Technical breach — Regulation requiring top of ladder to be lashed before use — Staircase giving access to top of ladder — Scaling of ladder by workman to lash it — No instruction to use staircase — Fall of ladder causing injury to workman — Liability of employers — Whether workman wholly to blame — Whether oil storage tank a “building” — Applicability of safety regulations — Building (Safety, Health and Welfare) Regulations, 1948 (S.I. 1948, No. 1145), regs. 4, 29(4).

This paper seeks to provide a discourse‐based critique of the laddering interviewing technique, and to make academics as well as practitioners aware of some of the limitations in applying this particular consumer interviewing technique.

The paper first describes the laddering interviewing technique, which traditionally has been conceptualised within a cognitively‐oriented perspective, i.e. the laddering interview is seen as a cognitive task. Then a critical discussion of some of the problems inherent in this view follows. After this, an alternative conceptualisation of the laddering interview is proposed, namely, that it is a discursive event. On the basis of insights from Wittgenstein and Austin it is suggested that the laddering interview is a room for social actions where both interviewer and interviewee are “doing things with words”. An example of applying the discursive approach to a sample sequence from a laddering interview is also provided. Finally, it seeks to evaluate the laddering interviewing technique in terms of its capacity to tap into “the voices in the marketplace”.

Finds that the laddering interviewing technique has its raison d'être as a quick and structured way of tapping into the voices and institutionalised rationales of the consumers in the marketplace. However, it is also found that the laddering interviewing technique “locks” the interviewee into one particular consumer identity; it prompts only answers that are valid with perfect strangers; it prevents the interviewee from unfolding his arguments fully; and it has a constant focus on personal preferences excluding the possible dissociations from other consumers – all of this making the data less rich and varied.

The unique value of this paper is that it sums up and provides a theoretically‐based critique of the laddering interviewing technique. It is believed that this critique will lead to a more appropriate appreciation of what is going on in a laddering interview and of the utterances that the consumers make in such an interview.

This paper aims to outline the fundamental assumptions regarding the laddering methodology (Reynolds and Gutman), examine how some “hard” laddering approaches meet or violate these assumptions, provide a review and comparison of a series of studies using “soft” and “hard” laddering approaches to examine the hierarchical structure of means‐end theory, and assess if the discrepant conclusions from this series of studies may be attributed to violations of the fundamental assumptions of the laddering methodology.

A series of published empirical works using “hard” and “soft” laddering approaches, which aim to examine the hierarchical structure of means‐end theory (Gutman), are reviewed and compared to integrate research findings and to examine discrepancies. Discrepant conclusions, which appear to be attributable to violations of the assumptions underlying the laddering methodology, are explored through a reanalysis and reclassification of the content codes.

The paper validates the case for laddering and the care needed to gauge how conclusions can be affected when violations of fundamental assumptions of the laddering methodology occur.

Means‐end chain research and, more specifically, the laddering methodology are in need of investigations that assess the importance of its underlying assumptions. Additional work validating both the “hard” and “soft” laddering approaches is also needed.

Results of means‐end research are more interpretable and less ambiguous when the fundamental assumptions of the laddering methodology are met. In practice, means‐end theory benefits managers by providing a useful structure to aid in the interpretation of laddering data.

This paper outlines the fundamental assumptions regarding the laddering methodology to provide methodological guidelines for laddering researchers. This paper also reviews the academic literature examining the hierarchical structure of means‐end theory and explores how violations of the fundamental assumptions of the laddering methodology may impact research findings.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the nature of complaint satisfaction, specifically to examine how contact employees should behave and which qualities they should possess. The study also aims to explore the comparability of results obtained from two laddering methods, as the alternative techniques may lead to different sets of attributes.

An exploratory study using the means‐end approach and two laddering techniques (personal interviews and questionnaires) was conducted.

While the personal interviews produced more depth in understanding, the results of the two laddering methods are broadly similar. The research indicates that being taken seriously in the complaint encounter and the employee's listening skills and competence are particularly important.

Owing to the exploratory nature of the study and the scope and size of its student sample, the results outlined are tentative in nature.

If companies know what customers expect, contact employees may be trained to adapt their behavior to their customers' underlying expectations, which should have a positive impact on customer satisfaction. For this purpose, the paper gives suggestions to managers to improve active complaint management.

The study was the first to successfully apply the means‐end approach and two laddering techniques to the issue of complaint satisfaction. The paper has hopefully opened up an area of research and methodology that could reap considerable further benefits for researchers interested in the area of customer complaint satisfaction.

The purpose of this paper is to thoroughly explain how qualitative researchers can design and conduct online interviews to investigate interesting consumer phenomena.

A semi‐standardized qualitative technique called laddering was applied successfully to an online environment. Laddering allows researchers to reach deeper levels of reality and to reveal the reasons behind the reasons. A web survey that included an opinion leadership scale filled in by 2,472 people served as a springboard for identifying possible participants for the online laddering interviews. In total, 22 online interviews were conducted with opinion leaders in the specific product field of digital music players such as Apple's iPod.

Conducting online interviews enabled information to be gathered from an interesting group of respondents that would have been difficult to contact otherwise. The whole online interviewing process was convenient for respondents who did not have to leave their homes and offices for the interviews. In general, respondents enjoyed the online laddering interviewing experience and in particular the relaxed and friendly atmosphere. The most valued attributes of Apple's iPod are “control elements” and “design”, which are linked to values such as hedonism and individuality.

The paper is the first to systematically describe how qualitative researchers can conduct laddering interviews online. By explaining the online interviewing process in detail, the authors dispel criticism that qualitative research reports are often unclear, ambiguous and unstructured. Based on the detailed description of the online laddering process, other researchers can use the technique to get deeper insights into interesting consumer phenomena.