Trust, targets and teenagers : the negative impact of the audit culture combined with the medicalisation of adolescence on young people with diabetes

Objective: To examine the value of ‘trust’ in the delivery of patient centred care for young people with Type 1 diabetes. Design: A longitudinal, quantitative study using semi-structured interviews and observation of consultations using the constant comparative method. Setting: Seven clinical centres in three Health Boards in Scotland. Participants: Nineteen health care professionals and 65 young people. Results: Conclusions: Two distinct barriers (the audit culture and medicalisation) interfere with the establishment of long-term reciprocity between health care professionals and young people with diabetes, which diminishes the development of trust based relationships. To improve the reciprocity necessary for maintaining these long-term relationships requires both an appreciation of these barriers and a change in management strategy to nullify their impact

The contextual perspective of leader sensegiving : understanding the role of organizational leadership systems

Drawing on a longitudinal, multi-source exploratory study we investigate organizational leadership systems associated with sensegiving. We identified four elements of leadership systems: day-to-day interactive process, leadership metrics, leadership deployment and leadership development. Integrating these analyses across 37 multinational corporations, we show that the leadership system landscape is complex and ambiguous and, therefore, a trigger for leader sensegiving. Given the bounded rationality of individuals a complex and ambiguous leadership surrounding requires leaders to engage in sensegiving rather than in other influencing strategies

Group Supervision Attitudes: Supervisory Practices Fostering Resistance to Adoption of Evidence-Based Practices

The focus of this study was to qualitatively evaluate worker’s attitudes about clinical supervision. It is believed that poor attitudes toward clinical supervision can create barriers during supervision sessions. Fifty-one participants within a social services organization completed an open-ended questionnaire regarding their clinical supervision experiences. Results suggest four key areas which appear to be strong factors in workers’ experiences and attitudes regarding group supervision: a. facilitator’s skill level; b. creativity; c. utilization of technology; and d. applicability. For organizations interested in overcoming potential barriers to adopting best practices, effectively addressing workers’ negative attitudes toward group supervision would be a worthy endeavor

Scenario planning for the Edinburgh city region

This paper examines the application of scenario planning techniques to the detailed and daunting challenge of city re-positioning when policy makers are faced with a heavy history and a complex future context. It reviews a process of scenario planning undertaken in the Edinburgh city region, exploring the scenario process and its contribution to strategies and policies for city repositioning. Strongly rooted in the recent literature on urban and regional economic development, the text outlines how key individuals and organisations involved in the process participated in far-reaching analyses of the possible future worlds in which the Edinburgh city region might find itself

Exploring the use of strategic frameworks in dental practice

This paper explores the use of strategic frameworks in NHS and private dental practice. It reviews the policy context of dentistry and suggests the challenges in this context will require dental practices to prioritise understanding and engagement with a strategic approach. A strategic approach will be required in order to enhance and improve performance. Two specific strategic frameworks will be explored in terms of their relevance to NHS and private dental practic

Why we publish where we do: Faculty publishing values and their relationship to review, promotion and tenure expectations

Using an online survey of academics at 55 randomly selected institutions across the US and Canada, we explore priorities for publishing decisions and their perceived importance within review, promotion, and tenure (RPT). We find that respondents most value journal readership, while they believe their peers most value prestige and related metrics such as impact factor when submitting their work for publication. Respondents indicated that total number of publications, number of publications per year, and journal name recognition were the most valued factors in RPT. Older and tenured respondents (most likely to serve on RPT committees) were less likely to value journal prestige and metrics for publishing, while untenured respondents were more likely to value these factors. These results suggest disconnects between what academics value versus what they think their peers value, and between the importance of journal prestige and metrics for tenured versus untenured faculty in publishing and RPT perceptions