Constituting best practice in management consulting

This paper offers critical reflections on the construction and propagation of ‘best practice’: a concept which has become increasingly important in the business world and in civic life more generally. Focusing upon the activities of the Management Consultancies Association (MCA) we offer an analysis of the awards process instituted to applaud ‘best practice’ in the arena of consulting. Departing from existing academic representations of the advice industry which generally exclude this trade body from the analytical frame we consider the role which the MCA performs in the field of consulting. Situating the MCA’s attempt to constitute best practice within the work of Bruno Latour we argue that this construct depends upon the mobilization of an extended network of allies, advocates and spectators whose interactions have been written-out of academic analysis. The paper concludes by proposing the need for further research designed to explore, both, the heterogeneity and the porosity of the networks that construct, convey and applaud key knowledge products such as ‘best practice’

Re-Evaluating Competence to Stand Trial

The current federal law governing a defendant’s competence to stand trial is substantially contained in 18 U.S.C. § 4241 that can be traced to a 1949 statute and, in Dusky v. United States, a three paragraph opinion of the Supreme Court, delivered in 1960. The federal statute was initially drafted by a committee of the Judicial Conference of the United States. Thus, material aspects of the federal tests for assessing a defendant’s competence to stand trial were composed by federal judges. This paper explains why the current federal law concerning a defendant’s competence to stand trial is antiquated and no longer fit for purpose. The deficiencies in the current law primarily stem from the fact that the legislative test is confined to defendants who suffer a “mental disease or defect” that renders them incompetent and fails to address the circumstances of defendants whose incompetence is caused by other factors, including psychological and neurological conditions. The Dusky test, while more broadly based than 18 U.S.C. § 4241 also suffers from a number of limitations and has led to conflicting decisions from the Supreme Court and significant uncertainty about its scope. As responsibility for the deficiencies in the current federal law rests almost entirely with the federal judiciary, this paper suggests that federal judges should address the errors of their predecessors and reform the way a defendant’s competence to stand trial is assessed. This can be achieved by the Supreme Court, in an appropriate case, revisiting its decision in Dusky and adopting a test that focuses upon a defendant’s ability to effectively participate in their trial. The effective participation test is derived from jurisprudence from the European Court of Human Rights, and has recently been endorsed by the Law Commission of England and Wales. It is a test that is gaining international traction and is one that would enhance the way the law responds to a significant cohort of defendants in the federal criminal justice system

Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Reauthorization Proposals in the 113th Congress: Comparison of Major Features of Current Law and S.1356

The Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA; P.L. 105-220) is the primary federal program that supports workforce development activities, including job search assistance, career development, and job training. WIA established the One-Stop delivery system as a way to co-locate and coordinate the activities of multiple employment programs for adults, youth, and various targeted subpopulations. The delivery of these services occurs primarily through more than 3,000 One- Stop career centers nationwide. WIA includes four main titles that cover employment and training services, adult education and literacy services, the employment service, and vocational rehabilitation services for individuals with disabilities. The authorizations for appropriations for most programs under WIA expired at the end of FY2003. Since that time, WIA programs have been funded through the annual appropriations process. The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) held a markup of S. 1356 (the Workforce Investment Act of 2013) on July 31, 2013, and ordered the bill reported by a vote of 18 to 3. S. 1356 would reauthorize WIA through 2018. S. 1356 would maintain the One-Stop delivery system established by WIA but would make changes to the programs, services, and governing structure of WIA, through changes to Workforce Investment Boards (WIBs), state plan requirements, national programs, and alignment and coordination provisions across all titles. Some of the major changes include the adoption of primary indicators of performance across all WIA titles, the requirement of a Unified State Plan that includes all core programs, the authorization of innovation and replication grants, greater emphasis on economic and employment outcomes for adult education programs, and expanded services for youth and students with disabilities. This report provides a comparison of major themes in current WIA and in S. 1356