Experience of Health Leadership in Partnering With University-Based Researchers in Canada – A Call to “Re-imagine” Research

Background: Emerging evidence that meaningful relationships with knowledge users are a key predictor of research use has led to promotion of partnership approaches to health research. However, little is known about health system experiences of collaborations with university-based researchers, particularly with research partnerships in the area of health system design and health service organization. The purpose of the study was to explore the experience and perspectives of senior health managers in health service organizations, with health organization-university research partnerships. Methods: In-depth, semi-structured interviews (n = 25) were conducted with senior health personnel across Canada to explore their perspectives on health system research; experiences with health organization-university research partnerships; challenges to partnership research; and suggested actions for improving engagement with knowledge users and promoting research utilization. Participants, recruited from organizations with regional responsibilities, were responsible for system-wide planning and support functions. Results: Research is often experienced as unhelpful or irrelevant to decision-making by many within the system. Research, quality improvement (QI) and evaluation are often viewed as separate activities and coordinated by different responsibility areas. Perspectives of senior managers on barriers to partnership differed from those identified in the literature: organizational stress and restructuring, and limitations in readiness of researchers to work in the fast-paced healthcare environment, were identified as major barriers. Although the need for strong executive leadership was emphasized, “multi-system action” is needed for effective partnerships. Conclusion: Common approaches to research and knowledge translation are often not appropriate for addressing issues of health service design and health services organization. Nor is the research community providing expertise to many important activities that the healthcare system is taking to improve health services. A radical rethinking of how we prepare health service researchers; position research within the health system; and fund research activities and infrastructure is needed if the potential benefits of research are to be achieved. Lack of response to health system needs may contribute to research and ‘evidence-informed’ practice being further marginalized from healthcare operations. Interventions to address barriers must respond to the perspectives and experience of health leadership

Work Mistreatment and Hospital Administrative Staff: Policy Implications for Healthier Workplaces

Research on work life quality in hospitals has focused on how nurses and physicians perceive or react to work conditions. We extend this focus to another major professional group – healthcare administrators – to learn more about how these employees experience the work environment. Administrators merit such attention given their key roles in sustaining the financial health of the hospital and in fulfilling management functions efficiently to support consistent, high-quality care. Specifically, we examined mistreatment in the workplace experienced by administrative staff from a hospital in a large Canadian city. Three dimensions of mistreatment – verbal abuse, work obstruction and emotional neglect – have been associated with diminished well-being, work satisfaction and organizational commitment, along with stronger intent to leave. In this paper, we provide additional support for interpreting these three dimensions as mistreatment and report on their frequencies in our sample. We then consider implications for policy development (e.g., communication and conflict resolution skills training, mentoring programs, respect-at-work policies) to make workplaces healthier for these neglected but important healthcare professionals.https://www.longwoods.com/content/2000

An examination of several in-basket scoring strategies and their effect on reliability and criterion-related validity

The in-basket exercise, a paper-and-pencil measure of administrative ability, is an assessment technique characterized by complex, often subjective scoring procedures which have limited wide-scale applications of this popular instrument. Because the literature affords no clear classification system for this and related exercises, a structure which clarified the definitions of and relationships among management games, management simulations, work sample tests, and in-basket exercises was introduced. The primary purpose of the present research was to investigate the cross-sample generalizability of several strategies for scoring the in-basket exercise, including a reduced-item scoring approach in which an optimal subset of items was identified for scoring. The preliminary studies upon which the present research is based are also discussed in the present work. In addition to examining the impact of these scoring strategies on reliability and criterion-related validity, consideration was given to addressing long-standing concerns of in-basket training- and scoring time demands. Three hundred and twenty-one entry-level employees from a large western Canadian utility company were administered the same in-basket exercise previously applied in a different Canadian utility company. Contrary to expectations, the shrinkage in validity using an empirically-based scoring key was substantial, pointing to the selection of a more logically-derived panel key as the method of choice. The introduction of a new cognitive-based measure of in-basket performance showed promising results. In addition, the reduced-item scoring approach did not result insignificant losses in reliability or criterion-related validity, thus allowing substantial reductions in training- and scoring-time. Implications for in-basket development are also considered.Arts, Faculty ofPsychology, Department ofGraduat

Organizational injustice and its resistance using voice and silence

This research is based on the premise that employees respond to dissatisfaction in general and organizational injustice in particular in two primary ways: by speaking up and/or by staying silent. This qualitative, theory-generating study examines the phenomenon of organizational injustice (including its antecedents and consequences) and employees' responses toward three research goals: 1) greater understanding of organizational injustice; 2) greater conceptual consensus through concept development of voice and silence; 3) a process model of organizational injustice, voice and silence. Also, new knowledge about voice and silence is linked to organizational practice by examining the availability of various voice systems and perceptions of their efficacy. The research design is influenced by several organizational research streams, as well as grounded theory and clinical methods. Thirty-two employees, each representing different organizations and occupying both managerial/professional positions and clerical/line positions participated in semi-structured, open-ended interviews in which they described 33 cases of workplace injustice. The interview design includes two methods: 1) a retrospective critical incident technique to discuss a workplace experience which participants defined as unjust; and 2) a projective exercise in which participants were asked to imagine that they could speak with impunity to the person(s) involved or responsible for their perceived injustice. Interview cases were supplemented by 30 archival cases of employees' voicing of discontent through a government-sponsored voice system. Significant results concerning the phenomenon of organizational injustice included the introduction of a four-category typology which departs from traditional classifications with its inclusion of interactional injustice (interpersonal mistreatment by a boss) as a distinct category, the systematic delineation and description of interactional injustice according to eight emergent behavioural dimensions, the identification of organizational antecedents to workplace injustice according to four emergent groupings (i.e., structural, procedural, cultural and global) and the identification of individual- and organizational-level consequences. In addition, the concepts of voice and silence emerged as forms of resistance to organizational injustice. Voice was found to encompass two distinct but related constructs: formal and informal voice. Specific strategies by which participants resisted injustice were identified for voice (formal and informal) and silence. A process model of voice and silence in organizational injustice was also introduced.Business, Sauder School ofGraduat

Faculty Recitals

Recital performed at UNT College of Music Recital Hall

Faculty Recitals

Recital presented at the UNT College of Music Recital Hall

Summer Chamber Music Festival

A faculty and guest artist recital performed at the UNT College of Music Recital Hall