Abstract
Purpose
– Better Health, Better Care Action Plan (Scottish Government, 2007) sets out how the Scottish Government intends to strengthen public ownership of the National Health Service in Scotland. The purpose of this paper is to advance extant knowledge by understanding how a state-led mutual health policy may be interpreted, and importantly, communicated.
Design/methodology/approach
– The definitional problem of mutuality will be discussed and analysed in terms of how it is (or perhaps should be) communicated? will be offered.
Findings
– It actually may be more instructive to think of, and communicate, mutuality as a metaphor to aid understanding of the openness and fluidity found in NHS Scotland.
Research limitations/implications
– The existence of paradox and ambiguity does not, however, negate the usefulness of the term “mutuality”. Quite the opposite in fact: it is precisely by examining healthcare and its delivery through the lens of mutuality (rather than rejecting its complexity as a failure) that this amorphousness can be better appreciated.
Practical implications
– There is a need for more public, professional, and academic debate to explore and clarify its implementation, and how it is to be led. This must be provided whilst recognising the daily imperatives that NHS leaders must face. This would suggest, therefore, that a dual development path may help.
Originality/value
– Although Better Health, Better Care Action Plan was published in 2007, some eight years on there is still confusion and misunderstanding as to what mutuality in healthcare is, not only in policy and theory, but also in practice. It is hoped that this analysis will help address, in part, some of this confusion and misunderstanding.
Subject
Health Policy,Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)
Reference23 articles.
1. Alcock, P.
(2010), “A strategic unity: defining the third sector in the UK”,
Voluntary Sector Review
, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 5-24.
2. Barnes, M.
,
Newman, J.
,
Knops, A.
and
Sullivan, H.
(2003), “Constituting ‘the public’ in public participation”,
Public Administration
, Vol. 81 No. 2, pp. 379-399.
3. Beswick, E.
(2012), “A mutual NHS in Scotland: what are the leadership implications?”, Unpublished MSc coursework assignment, Stirling Management School, University of Stirling, Stirling.
4. Billis, D.
(2010), “Towards a theory of hybrid organizations”, in
Billis, D.
(Ed.),
Hybrid Organizations and the Third Sector: Challenges for Practice, Theory and Policy
, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hampshire, pp. 46-69.
5. Birchall, J.
(2011), “The big society and the ‘Mutualisation’ of public services: a critical commentary”,
The Political Quarterly
, Vol. 82 No. S1, pp. 145-157.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献