Search results

We aim to advance our understanding by examining voices related to employees’ own interests and associated outcomes for employees and healthcare organizations. Patient safety reviews do not explore contextual factors such as organizational or professional cultures and regulatory environments in depth, and arguments for overcoming barriers to voice in health are underdeveloped. The research has largely developed in separate literature (various subdisciplines of management and the health field), and we outline the divergent emphases and opportunities for integration with the aim of investigating all relevant contextual factors and providing guidance on best practice informed by multiple disciplines.

A systematic approach was taken to gathering and reviewing articles, and coding and reporting are in line with the most recent Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (Rethlefsen et al., 2021).

We identified a range of facilitators, barriers and outcomes of employee interest voice at different levels (organizational, leadership, team or individual) in a healthcare context. We identify various theoretical, methodological and knowledge gaps, and we suggest several ways in which these can be addressed in future research efforts.

We make multiple contributions to both theory and practice, including highlighting the importance and implications of integrating disciplinary approaches, broadening context, improving research design and exploring under-researched samples and topics. This information is essential in providing a more comprehensive model of healthcare voice and to shifting management focus to include all forms of employee voice in healthcare for the benefit of staff and patients.

We make multiple contributions to both theory and practice including highlighting the importance of integrating disciplinary approaches, broadening context to include employee interest issues, improving research design and exploring under-researched samples and topics. This information is essential in providing a more comprehensive model of health care voice and to shifting management focus to take a more inclusive view of employee voice in healthcare for the benefit of staff as well as patients.

Taking the dialogic organizational development perspective, this study aims to investigate the framing processes when engaging in dialogue for strategy implementation and how these enable the evolution of implementation opportunities.

Through a qualitative exploratory study conducted in a large multinational, the authors analyse the dialogue and interactions among 25 dyads when identifying opportunities to contribute to strategy implementation. The data analysis relies on a process-coding approach and linkography, a valuable protocol analysis for identifying recursive interaction schemas in conversations.

The authors identify four main framing processes – shaping, unveiling, scattering and shifting – and provide a framework of how these processes affect individuals’ mental models through increasing the tangibility of opportunities or elevating them to new value hierarchies.

From a theoretical perspective, this study contributes to the strategy implementation and organizational development literature, providing a micro-perspective of how dialogue allows early knowledge structures to emerge and shape the development of opportunities for strategy implementation.

From a managerial perspective, the authors offer insights to trigger action and change in individuals to contribute to strategy when moving from formulation to implementation.

Rather than focusing on the structural control view of strategy implementation and the role of the top management team, this study considers strategy implementation as a practice and what it takes for organizational actors who do not take part in strategy formulation to enact and shape opportunities for strategy implementation through constructive dialogue.

This paper aims to explore how accounting is fostering neoliberal citizenship through the participants of Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). More specifically, this paper aims to understand how accounting discourse and the management accounting technique of budgeting, when intertwined with automated administrative processes of the NDIS, are giving rise to a pastoral form of power that directs people’s behaviour toward certain ends.

Publicly available data has been crafted into an autoethnographic case study of one fictitious person’s experiences with the NDIS – Mina. Mina is an amalgam created from material submitted to the Joint Parliamentary Standing Committee on the NDIS. Mina’s experiences are then analysed through the lens of Foucault’s concept of pastoral power to explore how accounting has contributed to marketising and digitising public disability services.

Accounting rhetoric appears to be a central part of rationalising the decision to shift to individualised disability funding. Those receiving payments are treated as self-governable, financially responsible subjects and are therefore expected to have knowledge of management accounting techniques and budgeting. However, NDIS’s strong reliance on the accounting concepts of funds, budgets, cost and price is limiting people’s autonomy and subjecting them to intervention and control.

This paper addresses calls to explore the interplay between accounting and current disability policies. The analysis shows that incorporating accounting into the NDIS’s algorithms serves to conceal the underlying ideology of the programs, subtly driving behaviours towards neoliberal objectives. Further, this research extends the Foucauldian accounting literature by revealing the contribution of accounting to reinforcing the authority of digital pastors in contemporary times.