Emma Tonkin, Annabelle M. Wilson, John Coveney, Julie Henderson, Samantha B. Meyer, Mary Brigid McCarthy, Seamus O’Reilly, Michael Calnan, Aileen McGloin, Edel Kelly and Paul Ward
The purpose of this paper is to compare the perspectives of actors who contribute to trust in the food system in four high income countries which have diverse food incident…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to compare the perspectives of actors who contribute to trust in the food system in four high income countries which have diverse food incident histories: Australia, New Zealand (NZ), the United Kingdom (UK) and the Island of Ireland (IOI), focussing on their communication with the public, and their approach to food system interrelationships.
Design/methodology/approach
Data were collected in two separate studies: the first in Australia, NZ and the UK (Study 1); and the second on the IOI (Study 2). In-depth interviews were conducted with media, food industry and food regulatory actors across the four regions (n=105, Study 1; n=50, Study 2). Analysis focussed on identifying similarities and differences in the perspectives of actors from the four regions regarding the key themes of communication with the public, and relationships between media, industry and regulators.
Findings
While there were many similarities in the way food system actors from the four regions discussed (re)building trust in the context of a food incident, their perceptions differed in a number of critical ways regarding food system actor use of social media, and the attitudes and approaches towards relationships between food system actors.
Originality/value
This paper outlines opportunities for the regions studied to learn from each other when looking for practical strategies to maximise consumer trust in the food system, particularly relating to the use of social media and attitudes towards role definition in industry–regulator relationships.
Details
Keywords
Emma Tonkin, Julie Henderson, Samantha B. Meyer, John Coveney, Paul R. Ward, Dean McCullum, Trevor Webb and Annabelle M. Wilson
Consumers’ trust in food systems is essential to their functioning and to consumers’ well-being. However, the literature exploring how food safety incidents impact consumer trust…
Abstract
Purpose
Consumers’ trust in food systems is essential to their functioning and to consumers’ well-being. However, the literature exploring how food safety incidents impact consumer trust is theoretically underdeveloped. This study explores the relationship between consumers’ expectations of the food system and its actors (regulators, food industry and the media) and how these influence trust-related judgements that consumers make during a food safety incident.
Design/methodology/approach
In this study, two groups of purposefully sampled Australian participants (n = 15) spent one day engaged in qualitative public deliberation to discuss unfolding food incident scenarios. Group discussion was audio recorded and transcribed for the analysis. Facilitated group discussion included participants' expected behaviour in response to the scenario and their perceptions of actors' actions described within the scenario, particularly their trust responses (an increase, decrease or no change in their trust in the food system) and justification for these.
Findings
The findings of the study indicated that food incident features and unique consumer characteristics, particularly their expectations of the food system, interacted to form each participant's individual trust response to the scenario. Consumer expectations were delineated into “fundamental” and “anticipatory” expectations. Whether fundamental and anticipatory expectations were in alignment was central to the trust response. Experiences with the food system and its actors during business as usual contributed to forming anticipatory expectations.
Originality/value
To ensure that food incidents do not undermine consumer trust in food systems, food system actors must not only demonstrate competent management of the incident but also prioritise trustworthiness during business as usual to ensure that anticipatory expectations held by consumers are positive.
Details
Keywords
Moutasem A. Zakkar, Samantha B. Meyer and Craig R. Janes
Social media has made a revolutionary change in the relationship between the customers and business or service providers by enabling customers to publish and share feedback and…
Abstract
Purpose
Social media has made a revolutionary change in the relationship between the customers and business or service providers by enabling customers to publish and share feedback and views about product or service quality. This revolutionary change has not been echoed in some healthcare systems. This study analyses the social media policies of healthcare regulatory authorities in Ontario and explores how these policies encourage or discourage healthcare professionals' use of social media for collecting patient stories and understanding patient experience.
Design/methodology/approach
The study used qualitative content analysis to analyse the policy documents, focusing on the manifest themes in these documents. It used convenient sampling to select 12 organizations, including regulating and licensing bodies and health service delivery organizations in Ontario. The authors collected 24 documents from these organizations, including policies, practice standards and social media learning materials.
Findings
In Ontario's healthcare system, social media is perceived as a source of risks to the healthcare professions and professionals. Healthcare regulators emphasize that the codes of conduct and professional standards extend to social media. The study found no systematic recognition of patient stories on social media as a source of information on healthcare quality that can be useful for healthcare professionals.
Originality/value
The study identifies potential unintended consequences of social media policies in the healthcare system and calls for policy and cultural changes to enable the development of safe social media platforms that can facilitate interaction between healthcare providers and patients, when necessary, without the fear of legal consequences or privacy breaches.
Details
Keywords
Julie Henderson, Annabelle M. Wilson, Trevor Webb, Dean McCullum, Samantha B. Meyer, John Coveney and Paul R. Ward
The purpose of this paper is to explore the views of journalists, food regulators and the food industry representatives on the impact of social media on communication about food…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore the views of journalists, food regulators and the food industry representatives on the impact of social media on communication about food risk. The authors identify how journalists/media actors use social media in identifying and creating news stories arguing that food regulators need to maintain a social media presence to ensure that accurate information about food safety is disseminated via social media.
Design/methodology/approach
Data were collected through 105 semi-structured interviews.
Findings
While food regulators and representatives of the food industry identify advantages of social media including two-way communication and speed of transmission of information, they maintain concerns about information provided via social media fearing the potential for loss of control of the information and sensationalism. There is evidence, however, that media actors use social media to identify food stories, to find sources, gauge public opinion and to provide a human interest angle.
Practical implications
While there are commonalities between the three groups, concerns with social media reflect professional roles. Food regulators need to be aware of how media actors use social media and maintain a social media presence. Further, they need to monitor other sources to maintain consumer trust.
Originality/value
This paper adds to public debate through comparing the perspectives of the three groups of respondents each that have their own agendas which impact how they interact with and use social media.
Details
Keywords
Emma Tonkin, Annabelle M Wilson, John Coveney, Trevor Webb and Samantha B Meyer
Distrust of conventional food supply systems impacts consumer food choice. This in turn has implications for consumer nutrition outcomes and acceptance of expert advice regarding…
Abstract
Purpose
Distrust of conventional food supply systems impacts consumer food choice. This in turn has implications for consumer nutrition outcomes and acceptance of expert advice regarding food and health. The research exploring consumer trust is found across a broad range of research streams, and is not cohesive in topic or approach. The purpose of this paper is to synthesise the disparate literature exploring the interaction between food labelling and consumer trust to determine what is known, and gaps in knowledge regarding food labelling and consumer trust.
Design/methodology/approach
A systematic search of trust and food labelling literature was conducted, with study results synthesised and integrated. Studies were then critically analysed for the conceptualisation of the consumer, the label, and their interaction with a framework developed using social theories of trust.
Findings
In total, 27 studies were identified. It was found that not only is the current literature predominantly atheoretical, but the conceptualisation of labelling has been limited.
Research limitations/implications
Further empirical research is needed to enable a more comprehensive understanding of the role food labelling plays in influencing consumer trust in food systems.
Originality/value
This research develops a conceptualisation of the dual roles food labelling may play in influencing consumer trust in food systems. It distinguishes between trust in food labelling itself, and the trust consumers develop in the food supply system through food labelling. The novel theoretical model and synthesis provide a foundation upon which future research may be conducted.
Details
Keywords
Annabelle M Wilson, Samantha B Meyer, Trevor Webb, Julie Henderson, John Coveney, Dean McCullum and Paul R. Ward
The purpose of this paper is to report how food regulators communicate with consumers about food safety and how they believe consumers understand their role in relation to food…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to report how food regulators communicate with consumers about food safety and how they believe consumers understand their role in relation to food safety. The implications of this on the role of food regulators are considered.
Design/methodology/approach
In total, 42 food regulators from Australia, New Zealand and the UK participated in a semi-structured interview about their response to food incidents and issues of food regulation more generally. Data were analysed thematically.
Findings
Food regulators have a key role in communicating information to consumers about food safety and food incidents. This is done in two main ways: proactive and reactive communication. The majority of regulators said that consumers do not have a good understanding of what food regulation involves and there were varied views on whether or not this is important.
Practical implications
Both reactive and proactive communication with consumers are important, however there are clear benefits in food regulators communicating proactively with consumers, including a greater understanding of the regulators’ role. Regulators should be supported to communicate proactively where possible.
Originality/value
There is a lack of information about how food regulators communicate with consumers about food safety and how food regulators perceive consumers to understand food regulation. It is this gap that forms the basis of this paper.
Details
Keywords
William Attwood-Charles and Sarah Babb
Originally developed by the Japanese firm Toyota in the 1950s, the core innovation of lean production is to reorient all organizational activity around continuous improvement and…
Abstract
Originally developed by the Japanese firm Toyota in the 1950s, the core innovation of lean production is to reorient all organizational activity around continuous improvement and the elimination of waste. We use the case of lean production in two healthcare organizations to explore the process of translating management models into new environments (Czarniawska & Sevón, 1996; Mohr, 1998). We draw on insights from organizational sociology and social movement theory to understand the strategies of actors as they attempt to overcome opposition to model transfer (Battilana, Leca, & Boxenbaum, 2009; Friedland & Alford, 1991; Snow, Rochford, Worden, & Benford, 1986). We examine two attempts to export lean production to healthcare organizations: Riverside Hospital, a research and teaching institution, and Lakeview Associations, a managed health provider. We use these cases to illustrate two ways that management models can get lost in the process of institutional translation: model attenuation, and model decoupling.
Details
Keywords
Moutasem A. Zakkar, Craig Janes and Samantha Meyer
Patient experience (PE) evaluation can identify critical issues in healthcare quality. Various methods are used for PE evaluation in the healthcare system in Ontario; however…
Abstract
Purpose
Patient experience (PE) evaluation can identify critical issues in healthcare quality. Various methods are used for PE evaluation in the healthcare system in Ontario; however, evidence suggests that PE evaluation is not systematically performed and has not received substantial buy-in from healthcare providers. This study explores the perspectives of healthcare providers, managers and policymakers in Ontario on PE evaluation methods, barriers, utility and reliability.
Design/methodology/approach
The study used a qualitative descriptive design. Twenty-one semistructured interviews were conducted with healthcare providers, managers and policymakers in Ontario between April 2018 and May 2019. The authors used thematic analysis to analyze the data. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research quality criteria were used.
Findings
Barriers to PE evaluation include evaluation cost and the time and effort required to collect and analyze the data. Several factors affect the reliability of the evaluation, resulting in an unrealistically high level of patient satisfaction. These include the inclusivity of evaluation, the subjective nature of patient feedback, patients' concerns about health service continuity and the anonymity of evaluation. Participants were skeptical about the meaningfulness of evaluation because it may only yield general information that cannot be acted upon by healthcare providers, managers and policymakers for quality improvement.
Originality/value
This paper reveals that many healthcare providers, managers and policymakers do not see a tangible value in PE evaluation, regardless of Ontario's patient-centeredness and “patient first” rhetoric. An improvement in evaluation methods and a cultural change in the healthcare system regarding the value of PE are required to foster a better appreciation of the benefits of PE evaluation.
Details
Keywords
Cori McKenzie, Michael Macaluso and Kati Macaluso
The varying traditions, goals, paradigms, and discourses associated with English language arts (ELA) underscore the degree to which there is not one school subject English, but…
Abstract
The varying traditions, goals, paradigms, and discourses associated with English language arts (ELA) underscore the degree to which there is not one school subject English, but many “Englishes.” In a neoliberal context, where movements like standardization and accountability stake claims about what ELA should be and do in the world, teachers, especially beginning teachers, can struggle to navigate the tensions engendered by these many and contradictory “Englishes.” This chapter attends to this struggle and delineates a process by which English Educators might illustrate the field’s vast and ever-changing terrain and support beginning teachers as they locate themselves in ELA. In delineating this process, we argue that in order to see and navigate the field in a neoliberal era, ELA teachers should treat the field as a discursive construction, constantly re-constructed by the dynamic play of social, political, and economic discourses. We argue that in treating the field as a discursive construction and exploring and locating themselves within the terrain, ELA teachers, rather than feeling powerless in the face of neoliberal forces, can leverage these different discursive forces, and gain footing in their classrooms, schools, and extracurricular communities to navigate the coexistence of many “Englishes” and argue for their pedagogical choices.