Search results

Consumer satisfaction towards a brand is one of a firm’s important performance outcomes. However, building a strong green brand to foster consumers’ satisfaction is often challenging for firms. Drawing on the dynamic capability and mechanism-enabling perspectives of ambidexterity. The purpose of this research is to explore mechanisms of perceived brand performance and green trust through which green brand ambidexterity acts as a facilitator of consumer satisfaction.

The hypothesized relationships were tested by both partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM; symmetric approach) and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA; asymmetric approach) with data collected from a green consumer questionnaire survey in Hong Kong.

The results from PLS-SEM indicate that green brand ambidexterity affects consumer satisfaction through multiple mediating paths of perceived brand performance, green trust-consumer and the sequential integration of perceived brand performance and green trust. Results from fsQCA further reinforced these findings.

The present research provides a nuanced understanding of how ambidexterity enhances consumer satisfaction in the context of a green brand by identifying multiple mechanisms.

There is a lack of research on how green brand ambidexterity affects green brand outcomes from the perspective of value creation for consumers. The present research fills this gap by providing more comprehensive explanations of mechanisms for green brand ambidexterity to facilitate consumer satisfaction. It also offers a better understanding of how the effects of green brand ambidexterity are viewed on a path-dependency that is aligned with the dynamic capability perspective of ambidexterity and how green trust forms a critical path to enable green brand ambidexterity and perceived brand performance to enhance consumer satisfaction.

Partnership between people who use services, their carers, and professionals is seen as an increasingly important aspect of providing a quality service across health and social care. The concept is enshrined in national policy, but the application of it is patchy at best, and has partly been undermined by constant restructuring and organisational change ‐ both in partnership working and in the organisations set up to deliver health and social care. Partnership that recognises service user/survivor expertise and assets and promotes equal and reciprocal working between staff and users is being recast as ‘co‐production’ or ‘co‐creation’ in UK public policy. The Jersey Partnership Project demonstrates a co‐productive approach, which is being seen as a way forward for adult social care service development and design.The Partnership Project, which commenced in the summer of 2009, and which is reaching the conclusion of its first stage at the time of writing, brings together experts by experience and mental health professionals, including a number of the latter who use services themselves, in a way that is designed to map out a new way of working, in partnership, across services. The Project is due to complete its first stage in June 2010, and further stages, perhaps bringing in a wider range of community services, are under discussion, following a presentation to the Jersey Minister for Health in November 2009.This article explores the notion of partnership as both ‘truth‐telling’ and ‘walking on common ground’, allowing those who provide and those who make use of services to enter into a sharing of experiences and knowledge, and an integrated spirit, that provides a clearer direction for developing adult mental health services in Jersey. The article then goes on to consider some of the barriers to more inclusive ways of working and looks at the current discourse and practices around the ‘co‐production’ agenda. Finally, the article covers the practical operation of the Partnership Project looking at structure and learning points and concludes by looking to the final six months of the Project and beyond.

This paper is partly informed by lived experience. It briefly examines general lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) mental health and some of the factors that influence the engagement of LGB people with mainstream mental health services. It discusses areas for awareness‐raising and practice development, specificially those concerning the recognition of and provision for LGB people who are from black and minority ethnic (BME) backgrounds or who are seeking asylum in the UK.

The author provides a mental health service user's perspective on leadership, arguing that users should be empowered by services to lead their own lives. In order to do so, leaders in services should have human and emotional skills because their decisions have human and emotional consequences. She argues that leadership and power sharing should happen throughout the organisation, rather than being concentrated at the top. Related and responsible rather than remote leadership may be more likely to lead to better mental health services. User experience is valuable for leadership.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the changing meaning of personalisation from the New Labour era of bespoke, integrated family support to the more recent implementation of personal budgets for disabled children to deliver “choice and control”. The paper explores the discursive change from early help to “intervention”, the shifting conceptualisation of parents and the turn away from family support towards a focus upon individualised commissioning to meet needs.

In addition to a literature review of policy shifts, findings presented are taken from an ethnographic case study of one team of children’s disability social workers. Observations were undertaken of the team in the office space and at meetings, in addition interviews were conducted with all team members and with seven families. An interpretivist and qualitative approach was adopted throughout.

Findings reveal the frontline and familial challenges of delivering choice and control in a climate of austerity and child-centricism. Salient points for integration around families and between organisations as personalisation narrows in scope are also considered.

Findings are taken from one case study site; further research in different sites is required to consider the array of understandings and experiences across the social care landscape and to provide a strong empirical baseline.

The paper reports on one of the first ethnographic studies of personalisation in children’s services. The paper is of value to practitioners and managers in social care and the NHS. It is also of value to academics exploring the conceptual and practical issues of individualised care.

This paper aims to argue that the inflexible administration and funding silos which characterise a health and social care system focused on uniform provision is no longer working, particularly for those who require some support to live independent and fulfilled lives.

This paper details social care reform policy and the personalisation agenda, particularly self‐directed support and personal budgets. It considers the implications of these developments on personalisation, equity and integration and user‐determined standards and challenges service fragmentation and current commissioning practice.

Personalisation reforms in adult social care, which are being carried over to health services, are challenging traditional models of uniform or large‐scale care provision. Personalisation means putting people in control of their care and support and giving choices – which in turn means commissioning for local difference and personal preference, as well as bottom‐up pressure for services to integrate in a way that avoids funding or service boundary disputes and ensures individuals can choose and control their support.

It is argued that a focus on equality and fairness now needs to turn to equality of opportunity to exercise choice and control, and to the idea that everyone should expect locally appropriate, good‐quality services and support no matter where they are.

This paper aims to present a digest of the main discussion points and key findings from a recent Social Care Institute for Excellence report on risk enablement and safeguarding in the context of self‐directed support and personal budgets.

The paper explores how the personalisation agenda and adult safeguarding can work together in policy and practice and addresses some of the frontline concerns about empowerment and duty of care.

Evidence on how self‐directed support and personal budgets can be used to enable people to take positive risks while staying safe and emerging practice is examined. It suggests that person‐centred working in adult safeguarding, along with the mechanism of self‐directed support planning and outcome review, can support the individual to identify the risks they want to take and those they want to avoid in order to stay safe. It is clear that if frontline practitioners are overly occupied with protecting organisations and individuals from financial abuse, this will impact on the capacity of those practitioners exercising their duty of care at the front line. This means that practitioners are less able to engage with individuals to identify safeguarding issues and enable positive risk taking. Defensive risk management strategies or risk‐averse frontline practice may then result in individuals not being adequately supported to make choices and take control and, therefore, being put at risk. Practitioners need to be supported by local authorities to incorporate safeguarding and risk enablement in their relationship‐based, person‐centred working. Good quality, consistent and trusted relationships and good communication are particularly important for self‐directed support and personal budget schemes.

The use of “risk enablement panels” and “personalisation and safeguarding frameworks” are two ways to address some of the issues in practice.

Based on the experience of Wiltshire and Swindon Users' Network, this article presents findings from a small user‐controlled study of members' perceptions of their own organisation. Peer support, information provision and speaking with a ‘collective voice’ emerged as key aspects of their involvement which members valued. Although WSUN provided a range of opportunities for involvement in social care and health services, members identified training and recruitment of professionals and presentations as areas for greater involvement. The study calls for greater recognition of the important role that usercontrolled organisations can play in empowering users on a personal level, as well as bringing about change in social care and health services through effective user involvement.