Search results1 – 2 of 2
When introducing new health technologies, decision makers must integrate research evidence with local operational management information to guide decisions about whether…
When introducing new health technologies, decision makers must integrate research evidence with local operational management information to guide decisions about whether and under what conditions the technology will be used. Multi‐criteria decision analysis can support the adoption or prioritization of health interventions by using criteria to explicitly articulate the health organization's needs, limitations, and values in addition to evaluating evidence for safety and effectiveness. This paper seeks to describe the development of a framework to create agreed‐upon criteria and decision tools to enhance a pre‐existing local health technology assessment (HTA) decision support program.
The authors compiled a list of published criteria from the literature, consulted with experts to refine the criteria list, and used a modified Delphi process with a group of key stakeholders to review, modify, and validate each criterion. In a workshop setting, the criteria were used to create decision tools.
A set of user‐validated criteria for new health technology evaluation and adoption was developed and integrated into the local HTA decision support program. Technology evaluation and decision guideline tools were created using these criteria to ensure that the decision process is systematic, consistent, and transparent.
This framework can be used by others to develop decision‐making criteria and tools to enhance similar technology adoption programs.
The development of clear, user‐validated criteria for evaluating new technologies adds a critical element to improve decision‐making on technology adoption, and the decision tools ensure consistency, transparency, and real‐world relevance.
This study aims to examine the relations between service employee blame attributions in response to customer incivility and revenge desires and revenge behavior toward…
This study aims to examine the relations between service employee blame attributions in response to customer incivility and revenge desires and revenge behavior toward customers, and whether employee empathy moderated these relations.
The authors used survey data based on the critical incident method provided by a sample of 431 customer service employees.
The results suggested that blaming a customer was positively associated with desire for revenge and revenge behaviors against the uncivil customer. In addition, the authors found that blame was less strongly associated with desire for revenge when employees empathized with customers. Finally, the results show that an employee who desired revenge against the uncivil customer and who empathized with the customer was more – not less – likely to engage in revenge.
The authors found that when employees experience mistreatment from customers, it increases the likelihood that they will blame the offending customer and behave in ways that are contrary to their organization’s interests. The results suggest several points of intervention for organizations to more effectively respond to customer mistreatment.
In this study, the authors make one of the first attempts to investigate the relationships between service employee attributions of blame when they experience customer incivility, desire for revenge and customer-directed revenge behaviors. The authors also examined whether empathy moderates the relations between blame attribution, desires for revenge and revenge behavior.