Search

Grain & Graze was an innovative, multi-scale, multi-organisational, inter-disciplinary and triple bottom line research, development and extension (RD&E) program conducted to investigate and improve mixed-farming systems in Australia from 2003 to 2008. This paper reports on a sociological evaluation of the program’s institutional arrangements that was undertaken as one of a small number of social research projects within the program. Based on discourse analysis and investigation of participant experiences, it found the program was characterised by two competing views of what the program was or ought to be. Weaving across the program's formal and informal elements and national and regional scales of management, these 'narratives' reflect the program's coexisting 'revolutionary' aspirations and 'organisational' aspirations. Attention to the coexistence of these narratives and the way they were expressed within the program provides insight into the values, complexity and challenges of agricultural RD&E programs. It points to the significance the broader philosophical and governance context has for contemporary agricultural RD&E programs and other public science and sustainable development initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. The aim of this study was to determine how individual, group and leadership factors influence clinician engagement in safety and quality improvement work. Methods. The study was conducted through an online questionnaire. Participants were alumni of Australian healthcare safety and quality improvement capability development programs. Relationships between five factors influencing clinicians' perception of value for time and effort in safety and quality improvement work were explored. The five factors were psychological empowerment; task cohesion; social cohesion; transformational leadership behaviour of project leads and sponsors; and value for time and effort for self and patients. Correlation and regression analyses were used to explore the aspects of the hypothesised model. Moderation and mediation analysis was then used to explore the relationships further. Structural equation modelling was used to determine the path model. Results. All factors showed strong positive correlations, with psychological empowerment and transformational leadership having the strongest relationships with perceived value for effort for self and patient. The factorial structure of measures was examined, and all indicators loaded significantly on their corresponding latent constructs and the model showed a good fit to the data. Conclusions. The findings of this study suggest that the most crucial factor to clinician engagement in safety and quality improvement at the point of care is the leader's behaviour and how that influences team dynamics and individual motivation and empowerment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]