Diversity and Emotion: The New Frontiers in Organizational Behavior Research

This article provides a review of recent developments in two topical areas of research in contemporary organizational behavior: diversity and emotions. In the section called “Diversity,”we trace the history of diversity research, explore the definitions and paradigms used in treatments of diversity, and signal new areas of interest. We conclude that organizational behavior in the 21st century is evolving to embrace a more eclectic and holistic view of humans at work. In the section called “Emotions,” we turn our attention to recent developments in the study of emotions in organizations. We identify four major topics: mood theory, emotional labor, affective events theory (AET), and emotional intelligence, and argue that developments in the four domains have significant implications for organizational research, and the progression of the study of organizational behavior. As with the study of diversity, the topic of emotions in the workplace is shaping up as one of the principal areas of development in management thought and practice for the next decade. Finally, we discuss in our conclusion how these two areas are being conceptually integrated, and the implications for management scholarship and research in the contemporary world.

Research, knowledge and design

The discussion about relations between research and design has a number of strands, and presumably motivations. Putting aside the question whether or not design or “creative endeavour” should be counted as research, for reasons to do with institutional recognition or reward, the question remains how, if at all, is design research? This question is unlikely to have attracted much interest but for matters external to Architecture within the modern university. But Architecture as a discipline now needs to understand research much better than in the past when ‘research’ was whatever went on in building science, history or people/environment studies. In this paper, I begin with some common assumptions about design, considered in relation to research, and suggest how the former can constitute or be a mode of the latter. Central to this consideration is an understanding of research as the production of publicly available knowledge. The method is that of conceptual analysis which is much more fruitful than is usually appreciated. This work is part of a larger project in philosophy of design, in roughly the analytical tradition.

Breastfeeding and the responsibilities of GPs: a qualitative study of general practice registrars

The most recent National Health Survey reports that more than 80% of women initiate breastfeeding, while recent studies describe initiation rates of more than 90%. Yet fewer than 50% of women continue to breastfeed for 6 months or longer. This is at odds with National Health and Medical Research Council recommendations that 80% of infants be exclusively breastfed for the first 6 months of life. Women are more likely to initiate and continue to breastfeed if their doctor supports and encourages them to do so. Conversely, women perceive a neutral attitude by doctors toward breastfeeding to be similar to a negative attitude. Therefore, while doctors may not perceive their support or encouragement to be a determining factor in a woman’s breastfeeding decisions, women often place great emphasis on their GP's attitude to breastfeeding and are much more likely to think that information provided by a doctor is important. No previous research in Australia has addressed the issue of how GPs perceive their roles and responsibilities regarding breastfeeding. As part of a larger research project investigating the breastfeeding skills and knowledge of general practice registrars, this article reports the results of qualitative interviews with eight general practice registrars and their views and beliefs about GPs’ responsibilities to breastfeeding women.

Mental health nursing standards and practice indicators for Australia: a review of current literature

There are many changes and challenges facing the mental health care professional working in Australia in the 21st Century. Given the significance of their number and the considerable extent to which care is delivered by them, mental health nurses in particular must be at the forefront of the movement to enhance and improve mental health care. Mental health nurses in Australia must not only keep up with the changes, we should be setting the pace for others across the profession worldwide. The increasingly complex field of mental health nursing demands nurses who are not only equipped to face the challenges but are confident in doing so. Definitive guidelines for practice, clear expectations regarding outcomes and specific means by which to evaluate both practice and outcomes are vital. Strengthening the role and vision of mental health nursing so that there is clarity about both and highlighting core values by which to perform will enable us to become focused on our future and what we can expect to both give to and receive from our chosen profession and how we can, and do, contribute to mental health care. The role of the mental health nurse is undergoing expansion and there are new hurdles to overcome along with the new benefits this brings. To support this, nationally adopted, formalised standards of practice and means by which to measure these, i.e., practice indicators formerly known as clinical indicators, are required. It is important to have national standards and practice indicators because of the variances in the provision of mental health across Australia – different legislation regarding mental health policies and processes, different nursing registration bodies and Nursing Councils, for example – which create additional barriers to cohesion and uniformity. Improvements in the practice of mental health nursing lead to benefits for consumer outcomes as well as the overall quality of mental health care available in Australia. The emphasis on rights-based care, particularly consumer and carer rights, demands evidence-based, up-to-date mental health care delivered by competent, capable professionals. Documented expectations for performance by nurses will provide all involved with yardsticks by which to evaluate outcomes. Flowing on from these benefits are advances in mental health care generally and enhancements to Australia’s reputation and position within the health care arena throughout the world. Currently, the ‘Standards for Practice’ published by the Australian New Zealand College of Mental Health Nurses (ANZCMHN) in 1995 and the practice indicators developed by Skews et al. (2000) provide a less formal guide for mental health nurses working in Australia. While these earlier standards and practice indicators have played some role in supporting mental health nurses they have not been nationally or enthusiastically adopted and there are a multitude of reasons for this. This report reviews the current literature available on practice indicators and standards for practice and describes an evidence-based rationale as to why a review and renewal of these is required and why it is important, not just for mental health nurses but to the field of mental health in general. The term ‘practice indicator’ is used, except where a quotation utilises ‘clinical indicator’, to more accurately reflect the broad spectrum of nursing roles, i.e. not all mental health nursing work involves a clinical role.

The nurse lecturer role in clinical practice conceptualized: helping clinical teachers provide optimal student learning

Despite the fairly wide reporting in the literature of the ma ny roles of clinical supervision by the nursing teacher, little attention has been given to conceptualizing the relative priorities these roles take during the process of supervising nursing students in clinical practice. The purpose of this paper is to consider the manifestations and implications of conflicting roles when nurse lecturers undertake clinical supervision. Previously published research will provide working examples of issues in a conceptual framework for clinical teaching.

Applying the results of a systematic review in general practice

Objective: To assess how general practitioners might interpret and apply the results of a systematic review relevant to general practice. Design: Cross-sectional postal survey of general practitioners in August 1997. Participants: 51 general practitioners in the Southern Division of General Practice in Adelaide and 11 professors or heads of departments of general practice. Main outcome measures:Extent to which comments on the implications for practice and implications for research coincided with the evidence presented in a systematic review of antibiotics for the treatment of acute otitis media in children; and reported probability that respondents would prescribe antibiotics in three brief case scenarios. Results: There was considerable variation in the comments made by general practitioners on the implications of the review for clinical practice. After reading the review, respondents with training in critical appraisal were more likely to state that children with acute otitis media would usually recover spontaneously and reported a lower probability of prescribing antibiotics in two of the three case scenarios. Conclusions: Providing systematic reviews is not sufficient for the results of such evidence to be translated:into clinical practice. There is an association between critical appraisal skills and the application of evidence-based practice.

The case for a new system for oversight of research on human subjects

The increasing emphasis on evidence-based clinical practice has thrown into sharp focus multiple deficiencies in current systems of ethical review. This paper argues that a complete overhaul of systems for ethical oversight of studies involving human subjects is now required as developments in medical, epidemiological and genetic research have outstripped existing structures for ethical supervision. It shows that many problems are now evident and concludes that sequential and piecemeal amendments to present arrangements an inadequate to address these. Ar their core present systems of ethical review still rely on the integrity and judgement of individual investigators. One possible alternative is to train and license research investigators, make explicit their responsibilities and have ethics committees devote much more of their time to monitoring research activity in order to detect those infringing the rules.