IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v67y2018icp113-121.html

Using benchmarking to assist the improvement of service quality in home support services for older people—IN TOUCH (Integrated Networks Towards Optimising Understanding of Community Health)

Author

Listed:
  • Jacobs, Stephen P.
  • Parsons, Matthew
  • Rouse, Paul
  • Parsons, John
  • Gunderson-Reid, Michelle

Abstract

Service providers and funders need ways to work together to improve services. Identifying critical performance variables provides a mechanism by which funders can understand what they are purchasing without getting caught up in restrictive service specifications that restrict the ability of service providers to meet the needs of the clients. An implementation pathway and benchmarking programme called IN TOUCH provided contracted providers of home support and funders with a consistent methodology to follow when developing and implementing new restorative approaches for service delivery. Data from performance measurement was used to triangulate the personal and social worlds of the stakeholders enabling them to develop a shared understanding of what is working and what is not. The initial implementation of IN TOUCH involved five District Health Boards. The recursive dialogue encouraged by the IN TOUCH programme supports better and more sustainable service development because performance management is anchored to agreed data that has meaning to all stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacobs, Stephen P. & Parsons, Matthew & Rouse, Paul & Parsons, John & Gunderson-Reid, Michelle, 2018. "Using benchmarking to assist the improvement of service quality in home support services for older people—IN TOUCH (Integrated Networks Towards Optimising Understanding of Community Health)," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 113-121.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:67:y:2018:i:c:p:113-121
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.12.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718917301829
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.12.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karl E. Weick & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe & David Obstfeld, 2005. "Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 409-421, August.
    2. Jim Sheffield, 2004. "The Design of GSS-Enabled Interventions: A Habermasian Perspective," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(5), pages 415-435, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dean A. Shepherd & Holger Patzelt & Trenton A. Williams & Dennis Warnecke, 2014. "How Does Project Termination Impact Project Team Members? Rapid Termination, ‘Creeping Death’, and Learning from Failure," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(4), pages 513-546, June.
    2. Carlos Martin-Rios, 2016. "Innovative management control systems in knowledge work: a middle manager perspective," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 181-204, May.
    3. Verena Brinks, 2016. "Situated affect and collective meaning: A community perspective on processes of value creation and commercialization in enthusiast-driven fields," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 48(6), pages 1152-1169, June.
    4. Maria Fotaki & Spyros Lioukas & Irini Voudouris, 2020. "Ethos is Destiny: Organizational Values and Compliance in Corporate Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 19-37, September.
    5. Elisabeth Nöhammer & Robert Schorn & Nina Becker, 2023. "Optimizing the Organizational Crisis Communication Portfolio," Corporate Reputation Review, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(4), pages 304-319, November.
    6. Francesca Torlone, 2020. "Lo specialista del trattamento per l?apprendimento trasformativo nei contesti penitenziari: la costruzione di identit? del funzionario giuridico-pedagogico," QUADERNI DI ECONOMIA DEL LAVORO, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2020(112), pages 103-127.
    7. Stefan Gröschl & Patricia Gabaldón & Tobias Hahn, 2019. "The Co-evolution of Leaders’ Cognitive Complexity and Corporate Sustainability: The Case of the CEO of Puma," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 741-762, March.
    8. Elena Antonacopoulou, 2018. "Energising critique in action and in learning: The GNOSIS 4R Framework," Action Learning: Research and Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 102-125, May.
    9. Scott Sonenshein, 2009. "Emergence of Ethical Issues During Strategic Change Implementation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 223-239, February.
    10. Healy John & Clarke Madeleine, 2020. "Implementing choice-based models of social service: The importance of involving people who use services in reform processes," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 68(4), pages 181-199, December.
    11. Guiette, Alain & Vandenbempt, Koen, 2017. "Change managerialism and micro-processes of sensemaking during change implementation," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 65-81.
    12. Llopis, Oscar & DâEste, Pablo & Adrián A. Díaz-Faes, 2018. "Connections matter: the influence of network sparseness, network diversity and a tertius iungens orientation on innovation," INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series 201801, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV), revised 28 Oct 2019.
    13. Hoey, Lesli, 2015. "“Show me the Numbers”: Examining the Dynamics Between Evaluation and Government Performance in Developing Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1-12.
    14. Cristofaro, Matteo, 2022. "Organizational sensemaking: A systematic review and a co-evolutionary model," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 393-405.
    15. Martina Linnenluecke & Andrew Griffiths & Peter Mumby, 2015. "Executives’ engagement with climate science and perceived need for business adaptation to climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 321-333, July.
    16. Per Engelseth & Richard Glavee-Geo & Artur Janusz & Enoch Niboi, 2020. "The Emergent Nature of Networked Sustainable Procurement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18, December.
    17. Femke Hilverda & Margôt Kuttschreuter, 2018. "Online Information Sharing About Risks: The Case of Organic Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1904-1920, September.
    18. Jeffery S. McMullen & Dimo Dimov, 2013. "Time and the Entrepreneurial Journey: The Problems and Promise of Studying Entrepreneurship as a Process," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(8), pages 1481-1512, December.
    19. Emil Evenhuis, 2017. "Institutional change in cities and regions: a path dependency approach," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 10(3), pages 509-526.
    20. Manfred Auer & Gabriela Edlinger & Andreas Mölk, 2021. "How do Potential Applicants Make Sense of Employer Brands?," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 47-73, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:67:y:2018:i:c:p:113-121. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.