Search results

In this viewpoint article, the authors recognize the increased focus in health systems on co-design for innovation and change. This article explores the role of leaders and mangers in developing and enhancing a culture of trust in their organizations to enable co-design, with the potential to drive innovation and change in healthcare.

Using social science analyses, the authors argue that current co-design literature has limited focus on interactions between senior leaders and managers, and healthcare staff and service users in supporting co-designed innovation and change. The authors draw on social and health science studies of trust to highlight how the value-based co-design process needs to be supported and enhanced. We outline what co-design innovation and change involve in a health system, conceptualize trust and reflect on its importance within the health system, and finally note the role of senior leaders and managers in supporting trust and responsiveness for co-designed innovation and change.

Healthcare needs leaders and managers to embrace co-design that drives innovation now and in the future through people – leading to better healthcare for society at large. As authors we argue that it is now the time to shift our focus on the role of senior managers and leaders to embed co-design into health and social care structures, through creating and nurturing a culture of trust.

Building public trust in the health system and interpersonal trust within the health system is an ongoing process that relies upon personal behavior of managers and senior leaders, organizational practices within the system, as well as political processes that underpin these practices. By implementing managerial, leadership and individual practices on all levels, senior managers and leaders provide a mechanism to increase both trust and responsiveness for co-design that supports innovation and change in the health system.

Among healthcare professionals, burnout is one of the key challenges affecting organizational outcomes, employee productivity and quality of care. The knowledge of burnout and its root causes and primary contributors continues to grow yet remains limited. In many environments, an entrepreneurial orientation (EO) has been shown to dramatically improve organizational outcomes and performance. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate critical research areas at the intersection of organizational EO and employee burnout within the healthcare sector.

A conceptual model which considers how EO has the potential to provide an operational context that may negate, lessen or delay the negative effects of burnout among healthcare professionals, is advanced as a useful focal point to foster research exploring connections between organizational orientation and employee well-being.

Insights into how an opportunity-embracing EO characteristic of high-tech firms may shape how stress is experienced and address burnout when applied to healthcare organizations. A decrease in burnout stands to improve quality of care as well as the satisfaction of staff and patients alike, including a greater sense of autonomy, engagement, motivation and passion.

This research agenda proposes new insights and the need for additional research into how the manifestation of organizational EO may contribute to the field of medicine, influence burnout and enhance the well-being among healthcare professionals.

While the term “entrepreneurship” is not exclusively a private sector phenomenon, it is usually associated with private sector business activity and more specifically with small to medium enterprises. However, over the last two decades it has appeared in the public administration literature with increasing frequency. The recent research in public sector entrepreneurial activity makes an exploratory comparative analysis of the key components that are applicable from private sector entrepreneurship timely as the topic is emerging as an area of academic inquiry and research. The purpose of this paper is to provide a comparative analysis of private and public sector entrepreneurship using an analytical model from private and public sector entrepreneurship.

A clear understanding of the research issues involved requires an appreciation of the nexus between private sector entrepreneurship and the more limited research field of public sector entrepreneurship. The paper identifies and examines the historical and evolutionary research on entrepreneurship as a basis for analysis of public and private sector entrepreneurship.

The paper provides a comprehensive analysis that highlights key similarities, differences or a combination between public and private sector entrepreneurship and develops an existing model and framework for a systematic approach to the public sector entrepreneurial process.

Based on this exploration, new insights about public sector entrepreneurship are developed, practical implications for public sector entrepreneurs on how to approach public sector entrepreneurship more systematically and effectively are presented and opportunities for further research are identified.

The paper shows how sustainable value chain analysis (SVCA) can be used as a diagnostic tool to identify misalignment between resource allocation and consumer preferences, using a case study of the Oxford Landing wine chain, from South Australia to the UK.

The study incorporates a combination of value chain analysis (VCA) and life cycle analysis (LCA) in a single methodology to determine which activities, at each stage in the supply chain, create value (in the eyes of consumers) and the contribution of these activities to greenhouse gas emissions.

The case study demonstrates the value of comparing the consumer value associated with a particular activity with the emissions associated with that activity, as this draws the attention of managers, at each stage of the supply chain, to the potential trade‐offs that exist and the danger of focusing on either one (adding value or reducing emissions) in isolation.

The main limitation of the research methodology is that the study focuses on a single product (Oxford Landing) and a single chain to a single country (UK). Thus, it is difficult to generalise from the results of this single case study to the (South Australian) wine industry in general, without further information from other wineries and consumer perceptions of their brands in different parts of the world.

The case study highlights the importance of taking a holistic view when considering the sustainability of a product, process or chain – trade‐offs between environmental benefits and consumer perceptions of value can have significant commercial implications. It also illustrates the potential for SVCA to be used as a guide for the allocation of research and development expenditure (public and private) in pursuit of sustainable competitive advantage.

The study is the first to combine LCA with VCA in a context that allows researchers, practitioners and policymakers to identify areas for improvement, in what they do and how they do it.