Social media governance

This short article proposes an institutional framework for understanding questions of social media governance, based around the four axes of formal and informal institutions, national and supranational governance, public and private, and large-scale and smaller scale governance.

Anti-bribery disclosures: A response to networked governance

This study examined the posited link between networked governance (the activities of NGOs and the media) and the anti-bribery disclosures of two global telecommunication companies. Based on a joint consideration of legitimacy theory, media agenda setting theory and responsive regulation, the findings show that anti-bribery disclosures are positively associated with the activities of the media and NGO initiatives. The findings also show that companies make anti-bribery disclosures to maintain symbolic legitimacy but are less prominent in effecting a substantive change in their accountability practices.

The skin safety model: Reconceptualizing skin vulnerability in older patients

Purpose: To develop a unique skin safety model (SSM) that offers a new and unified perspective on the diverse yet interconnected antecedents that contribute to a spectrum of potential iatrogenic skin injuries in older hospitalized adults. Organizing Construct: Discussion paper. Methods: A literature search of electronic databases was conducted for published articles written in English addressing skin integrity and iatrogenic skin injury in elderly hospital patients between 1960 and 2014. Findings: There is a multiplicity of literature outlining the etiology, prevention, and management of specific iatrogenic skin injuries. Complex and interrelated factors contribute to iatrogenic skin injury in the older adult, including multiple comorbidities, factors influencing healthcare delivery, and acute situational stressors. A range of injuries can result when these factors are com- plicated by skin irritants, pressure, shear, or friction; however, despite skin injuries sharing multiple ntecedents, no unified overarching skin safety conceptual model has been published. Conclusions: The SSM presented in this article offers a new, unified framework that encompasses the spectrum of antecedents to skin vulnerability as well as the spectrum of iatrogenic skin injuries that may be sustained by older acute care patients. Current skin integrity frameworks address prevention and management of specific skin injuries. In contrast, the SSM recognizes the complex interplay of patient and system factors that may result in a range of iatrogenic skin injuries. Skin safety is reconceptualized into a single model that has the potential for application at the individual patient level, as well as health-care systems and governance levels. Clinical Relevance: Skin safety is concerned with keeping skin safe from any iatrogenic skin injury, and remains an ongoing challenge for healthcare providers. A conceptual framework that encompasses all of the factors that may contribute to a range of iatrogenic skin injuries is essential, and guides the clinician in maintaining skin integrity in the vulnerable older patient.

Communication and Political Crisis: Media, Politics and Governance in a Globalized Public Sphere

Communication and Political Crisis explores the role of the global media in a period of intensifying geopolitical conflict. Through case studies drawn from domestic and international political crises such as the conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine, leading media scholar Brian McNair argues that the digitized, globalized public sphere now confronted by all political actors has produced new opportunities for social progress and democratic reform, as well as new channels for state propaganda and terrorist spectaculars such as those performed by the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. In this major work, McNair argues that the role of digital communication will be crucial in determining the outcome of pressing global issues such as the future of feminism and gay rights, freedom of speech and media, and democracy itself.

Governance of enterprise Information and Technology: A new core competency for boards of directors

With the level of digital disruption that is affecting businesses around the globe, you might expect high levels of Governance of Enterprise Information and Technology (GEIT) capability within boards. Boards and their senior executives know technology is important. More than 90% of boards and senior executives currently identify technology as essential to their current businesses, and to their organization’s future. But as few as 16% have sufficient GEIT capability. Global Centre for Digital Business Transformation’s recent research contains strong indicators of the need for change. Despite board awareness of both the likelihood and impact of digital disruption, things digital are still not viewed as a board-level matter in 45% of companies. And, it’s not just the board. The lack of board attention to technology can be mirrored at senior executive level as well. When asked about their organization’s attitude towards digital disruption, 43% of executives said their business either did not recognise it as a priority or was not responding appropriately. A further 32% were taking a “follower” approach, a potentially risky move as we will explain. Given all the evidence that boards know information and technology (I&T***) is vital, that they understand the inevitably, impact and speed of digital change and disruption, why are so many boards dragging their heels? Ignoring I&T disruption and refusing to build capability at board level is nothing short of negligence. Too many boards risk flying blind without GEIT capability [2]. To help build decision quality and I&T governance capability, this research: • Confirms a pressing need to build individual competency and cumulative, across-board capability in governing I&T • Identifies six factors that have rapidly increased the need, risk and urgency • Finds that boards may risk not meeting their duty of care responsibilities when it comes to I&T oversight • Highlights barriers to building capability details three GEIT competencies that boards and executives can use for evaluation, selection, recruitment and professional development.

Leading Digital Transformation: Building Technology and Information Governance Capability in Boards of Directors and the C-Suite

Information and technology and its use in organisation transformation presents unprecedented opportunities and risks. Increasingly, the Governance of Enterprise Information and Technology (GEIT) competency in the board room and executive is needed. Whether your organization is small or large, public, private or not for profit or whether your industry is not considered high-tech, IT is impacting your sector – no exceptions. But there is a skill shortage in boards: GEIT capability is concerningly low. This capability is urgently needed across the board, including those directors who come from finance, legal, marketing, operations and HR backgrounds. Digital disruption also affects all occupations. Putting in place a vision will help ensure emergency responses will meet technology-related duty of care responsibilities. When GEIT-related forward thinking and planning is carried out at the same time that you put your business strategy and plan in place, your organization has a significantly increased chance of not only surviving, but thriving into the future. Those organizations that don’t build GEIT capability risk joining the growing list of once-leading firms left behind in the digital ‘cloud of smoke’. Those organizations that do will be better placed to reap the benefits and hedge against the risks of a digital world. This chapter provides actionable, research-based considerations and processes for boards to use, to build awareness, knowledge and skills in governing technology-related organization strategy, risk and value creation.