Search results

The purpose of this study is to describe and interpret the interpersonal and intragroup conflict experiences of staff-level employees and leaders in the medical imaging technology field, working in US tertiary care centers to extract mitigation and management strategies.

A total of 13 medical imaging technologists, who were employed in leadership and staff positions throughout the USA, offered their in-depth accounts of workplace conflict in this interpretive phenomenological investigation.

Conflict avoidance was a predominant conflict management style. This style did little to effectively manage workplace conflict. In some cases, it led to deleterious effects on individuals and organizations and created conflict perpetuation. With proper conflict mitigation and management, the conflict perpetuation cycle can be broken.

Generalization beyond the group being studied is not applicable, as it is not the intent of phenomenological research. Four leaders participated in the research study. To examine this population more completely, a greater sample size is required. This recommendation also applies to the staff technologist roles. Another limitation involved the leader/staff-level representation inequality, as well as the male–female representation. These imbalances made it difficult to effectively make comparisons of the experiences of leaders with staff-level technologists, and males with females.

Offering the medical imaging workforce emotional intelligence training, health-care administrators can invest in their leaders and staff technologists. Medical imaging schools can incorporate emotional intelligence training into their curricula. Clear policies may decrease the ill effects of change when unforeseeable occurrences result in schedule modifications. Making technologists fully aware of who is responsible for shift coverage when these events occur may reduce negative impact. Trainings in organizational change, collaboration or positivity may be warranted, depending on findings of cultural assessments. Team-building events and opportunities for employees to intermingle may also be used to improve a departmental or organizational culture.

Mitigating and managing health-care workplace conflict more effectively may prevent patient harm, thus improving the health of members of society.

According to recent studies, conflict, and the incivility that often accompanies it, has been on the increase in US organizations overall, and in health care specifically. Conflict that perpetuates can adversely affect health-care organizations and its employees. This paper offers mitigation and management strategies to prevent such consequences.

Hospital waiting lists are a feature of publicly funded health services that result when demand appears to exceed supply. While much has been written about surgical waiting lists, little is known about the dynamics of radiology waiting lists, which is surprising given that rational treatment, and indeed the medical profession's claim to expertise, rests on establishing a diagnosis. This paper reports the findings of a case study of a problematic ultrasound waiting list. In particular, this paper highlights how the management of the ultrasound waiting list served to subordinate the needs of waiting patients and their general practitioners to the interests and values of radiologists. Radiologist concern to protect specialist expertise from encroachment by outpatient clinicians and sonographers is implicated in the growth of the ultrasound waiting list. It is argued that an adequate understanding of ultrasound waiting lists depends on grasping how radiologists are successful in structuring problems of access in ways that enhance radiologist control over ultrasound imaging. The case study reported helps to shed light on why increasing funding to clear waiting lists proves ineffective.

The purpose of this paper is to answer the question of how continuity and change coexist in the work of institutional actors who can combine maintenance, disruption and/or creation. Past studies mention this coexistence without an explanation.

The paper develops a perspective through literature review.

Institutional actors are both socialized into the norm-oriented space of continuity and maintenance through their reciprocal relations and associated social knowledge and roles and disciplined into the goal-oriented space of change and disruption/creation through their power relations and associated expert discourse and subject positions. Their institutional existence indicates a particular combination of reciprocity and power and thus their work includes changing degrees of maintenance, disruption and creation, depending on the nature of this combination.

The paper points out research directions on the relational conditions of the actors, which facilitate or constrain their work toward institutional continuity or change.

Organizations whose concern is to continue the existing practices in a stable environment should emphasize reciprocal relations whereas organizations whose concern is to change those practices for more effectiveness in a dynamic environment should emphasize power relations. Also, too much emphasis on either relations leads to inflexibility or instability.

The paper provides an explanation on the sources of coexistence of continuity and change in institutional work. It also contributes to the discussions on contingency of institutions, resistance productive of institutional change, reflexivity of institutional actors and intersubjective construction of institutional work.

A distinction must be drawn between a dismissal on the one hand, and on the other a repudiation of a contract of employment as a result of a breach of a fundamental term of that contract. When such a repudiation has been accepted by the innocent party then a termination of employment takes place. Such termination does not constitute dismissal (see London v. James Laidlaw & Sons Ltd (1974) IRLR 136 and Gannon v. J. C. Firth (1976) IRLR 415 EAT).

This paper seeks to consider the collaborative efforts of developing a grid computing infrastructure within problem‐focused, distributed and multi‐disciplinary projects – which the authors term interventionist grid development projects – involving commercial, academic and public collaborators. Such projects present distinctive challenges which have been neglected by existing escience research and information systems (IS) literature. The paper aims to define a research framework for understanding and evaluating the social, political and collaborative challenges of such projects.

The paper develops a research framework which extends Orlikowski and Gash's concept of technological frames to consider two additional frames specific to such grid projects; bureaucratic frames and collaborator frames. These are used to analyse a case study of a grid development project within Healthcare which aimed to deploy a European data‐grid of medical images to facilitate collaboration and communication between clinicians across the European Union.

That grids are shaped to a significant degree by the collaborative practices involved in their construction, and that for projects involving commercial and public partners such collaboration is inhibited by the differing interpretive frames adopted by the different relevant groups.

The paper is limited by the nature of the grid development project studied, and the subsequent availability of research subjects.

The paper provides those involved in such projects, or in policy around such grid developments, with a practical framework by which to evaluate collaborations and their impact on the emergent grid. Further, the paper presents lessons for future such Interventionist grid projects.

This is a new area for research but one which is becoming increasingly important as data‐intensive computing begins to emerge as foundational to many collaborative sciences and enterprises. The work builds on significant literature in escience and IS drawing into this new domain. The research framework developed here, drawn from the IS literature, begins a new stream of systems development research with a distinct focus on bureaucracy, collaboration and technology within such interventionist grid development projects.

In the competitive environment of the 1980s, business and technological innovation must be more closely linked than ever before. The author examines the reasons why and explores some ways to ensure closer coordination.

Sociologists have paid little attention to what people mean when they call themselves “professionals” in their everyday talk. Typically, when occupations lack the characteristics of self-control associated with the established professions, such talk is dismissed as desire for greater status. An ethnography of speaking conducted among several technicians’ occupations suggests that dismissing talk of professionalism may have been premature. The results of this study indicate that among technicians, professional talk highlights dynamics of respect, collaboration, and expertise crucial to the horizontal divisions of labor that are common in postindustrial workplaces, but have very little to do with the desire for occupational power.

This paper aims to inform policymakers about key artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, risks and trends in national AI strategies. It suggests a framework of social governance to ensure emergence of safe and beneficial AI.

The paper is based on approximately 100 interviews with researchers, executives of traditional companies and startups and policymakers in seven countries. The interviews were carried out in January-August 2017.

Policymakers still need to develop an informed, scientifically grounded and forward-looking view on what societies and businesses might expect from AI. There is lack of transparency on what key AI risks are and what might be regulatory approaches to handle them. There is no collaborative framework in place involving all important actors to decide on AI technology design principles and governance. Today's technology decisions will have long-term consequences on lives of billions of people and competitiveness of millions of businesses.

The research did not include a lot of insights from the emerging markets.

Policymakers will understand the scope of most important AI concepts, risks and national strategies.

AI is progressing at a very fast rate, changing industries, businesses and approaches how companies learn, generate business insights, design products and communicate with their employees and customers. It has a big societal impact, as – if not designed with care – it can scale human bias, increase cybersecurity risk and lead to negative shifts in employment. Like no other invention, it can tighten control by the few over the many, spread false information and propaganda and therewith shape the perception of people, communities and enterprises.

This paper is a compendium on the most important concepts of AI, bringing clarity into discussions around AI risks and the ways to mitigate them. The breadth of topics is valuable to policymakers, students, practitioners, general executives and board directors alike.

This paper aims to present recently published resources on library instruction and information literacy, providing an introductory overview and a selected annotated bibliography of publications covering various library types, study populations and research contexts.

This paper introduces and annotates English-language periodical articles, monographs, dissertations, reports and other materials on library instruction and information literacy published in 2019.

The paper provides a brief description of all 370 sources and highlights sources that contain unique or significant scholarly contributions.

The information may be used by librarians, researchers and anyone interested as a quick and comprehensive reference to literature on library instruction and information literacy.