Search results

With permission, this paper is an edited and abridged version of an article written by Richards, Doyle and Cook for The British Journal of Forensic Practice (Richards et al, 2009), detailing their literature review on family interventions in dual diagnosis and with reference to forensic mental health care. There appeared to be limited direct evidence, therefore various domains were examined and extrapolated to a forensic setting as appropriate. The review indicates the potential for positive outcomes for families following family interventions in dual diagnosis, which may be beneficial in a forensic setting in lowering risk.

Despite an apparent increase in investment and commitment over the last ten years, more recent studies now give grounds for reservations about overall ability of management development to meet the challenges of radical change and fulfil its strategic potential. Argues that the constraints imposed by a complex array of contextual influences emanating from an increasingly turbulent organisational system pose risks to investment and commitment in development. Unless these influences can be managed effectively, management development may start to lag behind or fall out of synchronisation with the needs and demands of managers and their employing organisations. Examines the case for a shift towards a more situated and contextual view of management development where the complex dynamics induced by radical change are considered and managed alongside or even ahead of development strategies and approaches. Posits a framework for a more relational approach and explores some of the issues this raises.

An increasing number of organisations are experiencing high velocity discontinuous change. To facilitate their adaptation and transformation, many are introducing more empowering structures and cultures. This has led them to disperse change agency to a more diverse “cast of characters” with implications for the way change agents are managed in the future. Draws on the findings of an ongoing empirical study into the experiences of those managers and employees with responsibility for implementing and managing change. Examines the way in which they are trained and developed to make the transition from change “novice” to change “expert”. Identifies some of the psycho‐social stresses and traumas associated with managing change. Explores the level of organisational support afforded to those who find that change responsibilities are now a significant part of their professional or operational role. Concludes with a discussion of the theoretical and practical implications facing those who have responsibility for “managing the change managers”, with a particular focus on HR strategies and policies.

Dual‐diagnosis strategies are developing in medium secure services in response to both government policies and clinical need and there has been a move towards integrated services for this patient group. Substance use that has been a feature of the index offence must be taken into account as much as psychosis or the offending behaviour. Treatment of dual diagnosis relies heavily on cognitive‐behavioural therapies. Relapse in either psychosis or substance use increases risk and re‐admission rates to medium security. This paper reviews the literature on family interventions in dual diagnosis and its applicability to forensic mental health inpatient services. As there appeared to be limited direct evidence, various domains were examined and extrapolated to a forensic setting as appropriate. The review indicates the potential for positive outcomes for families following family interventions in dual diagnosis, which may be beneficial in a forensic setting in lowering risk.

Across the UK organisations are experiencing high‐velocity, discontinuous, radical change scenarios. As part of their strategic response, many are introducing more flexible and empowering structures and cultures. One outcome of this strategy has been the dispersal of change agency to a more diverse “cast of characters”. Traditional models of the singular, mandated change agent are now juxtaposed with the notion that “everybody is/can be a change agent”. Reveals some of the wider issues associated with change agency dispersal. Argues that the dispersal of change agency to a wider “cast of characters” creates strategic risk for organisations and has implications for strategic leadership and the way change agents are managed in the future. Discusses some of the dilemmas facing those seeking to control and manage change agents. Concludes with a discussion of the theoretical and practical implications facing those who have responsibility for managing those who find themselves cast in the role of “change agent”.

Argues that the claims of empowerment to offer “win‐win” outcomes for organizations and their employees involve the elision of conflicting ethical frames of reference which in turn reflect the structured antagonism of employment relationship. Uses case study‐based research findings to explore, first, how this is reflected in the various motives and meanings underlying empowerment as it is represented in managerial discourses, and second, how the tensions and contradictions contained within the concept of empowerment render it problematic in practice. Concludes that empowerment discourse re‐expresses rather than resolves the contradictory nature of the employment relationship and that positive impact is likely to be limited, particularly in the context of the UK’s preoccupation with cost cutting and short‐term profit maximization.

This chapter focuses on the selective news coverage and propaganda that preceded and followed the 9/11/01 event, using a model of news coverage or War Programming developed by the first author in earlier work. The ordered sequence of activities in War Programming begins from reportage and visual reports on the most recent war to the reports on the next war. The model is applied to the Iraq war to enhance our theoretical capacity to explain modern propaganda and the resultant lack of focus on human rights. By analyzing the news media context and organizational reasons for propaganda, the authors find a predictable war story was told by mainstream media, which omitted from the story a focus upon human rights violations. The authors develop the contention that a new approach is needed to offer critique before the event of war. Media framing and formats must change if future wars, aided by propaganda, are to be avoided.

Existing literature has begun to identify the agonistic and contested aspects of the ongoing development of accountability systems. These “contests” are particularly important during periods of change when an accountability “deficit” has been identified, that is, when existing accountability systems are deemed inadequate and requiring revision. The purpose of this paper is to explore one such set of contests in the case of large technology and social media firms: the so-called “big tech”. The authors focus specifically on “big tech” because of increasing societal concerns about the harms associated with their products, services and business practices.

The authors analysed four US Congressional hearings, in which the CEO of Facebook was held to account for the company's alleged breaches and harms. The authors conducted a discourse analysis of the dialogue between the account giver (Mark Zuckerberg) and account holders (Members of Congress) in the oral testimony at the four hearings.

Two areas of contestation in the dialogue between the account giver and account holders are identified. “Epistemic contests” involved contestation about the “facts” concerning the harms the company had allegedly caused. “Responsibility contests” involved contestation about who (or what) should be held responsible for these harms and according to what standards or criteria.

The study advances critical dialogical accountability literature by identifying two areas of contestation during periods of change in accountability systems. In so doing, they advanced the theory by conceptualising the process of change as underpinned by discursive contests in which multiple actors construct and contest the “problem” with existing accountability systems. The outcomes of these contests are significant, the authors suggest, because they inform the development of reforms to the accountability system governing big tech firms and other industries undergoing similar periods of contestation and change.

Risk assessment is a fundamental part of clinical practice in mental health and learning disability services in the UK. Most services use a tool or framework to structure their clinical judgments, but there does not appear to be a consensus on which risk assessment tool should be used. This paper aims to describe the development, implementation and evaluation of an evidence-based formulation informed risk management (FIRM) framework in mental health and LD services.

The development of FIRM and evaluation was based on the model for improvement, with an emphasis on co-production broken down into three distinct yet interdependent phases of co-production: co-design, co-create and co-deliver. Following the implementation of the FIRM framework, a post-implementation survey was distributed to a sample of clinical staff to capture experiences in the first three months post-implementation.

The three co-production stages were pivotal for successful implementation in clinical practice. The key ingredients for success seemed to be acknowledging human factors and varied responses to change, communication, engagement and involvement of stakeholders. Early evaluation post-implementation demonstrated the benefits in terms of confidence in use, formulation of risk, risk management and communication. Further quality improvement initiatives are underway to evaluate impact up to 12 months post-implementation and to improve the quality of FIRM in practice. Future research is planned to look at enhancing personalised risk assessment and management.

This paper describes and demonstrates the value of co-production with clinicians and stakeholders in service development. The FIRM has improved the clinical practice of risk assessment, formulation and management and use of digital technology.