This article explores the relationship between management strategy, technological change and collective bargaining in the British commercial television industry. The demanning and deskilling potential of digital production technologies remained largely untapped until the second half of the 1980s. The termination of national collective bargaining that had regulated minimum crewing levels was the watershed in terms of work organisation.Despite the huge academic interest in the meaning of the media industries and the importance of consumption in the formation of, for instance, popular culture and national identity, comparatively little has been written about the nature of work and employment in broadcasting (McRobbie 1996). The emerging literature on management and labour in broadcasting employment has focused on the disintegration of internal labour markets and the rapid casualisation of employment that has dominated the industry in the last decade. Our concern is to explore the dynamic between corporate strategy, work organisation and shopfloor trade unionism in commercial television over the last twenty years. In particular, we will be concerned with Scottish Television (STV) which has transformed itself from a minor regional broadcaster to an aggressively acquisitive media conglomerate. Drawing on interviews with STV production staff and managers and internal documents we trace the development of corporate strategy and work organisation as STV shifted from being a cultural bureaucracy to something akin to the 'flexible firm'.Critics of the radical changes in the structure and management of the UK television industry point to the loss of programme quality and innovation and to the pervasive casualisation of employment in the sector. Advocates, on the other hand, depict an industry which is both flexible and specialised, populated by freewheeling, imaginative cultural entrepreneurs linking a vibrant archipelago of production and ancillary services to the broadcasters ( Barnatt and Starkey 1994;Starkey and Barnatt 1997;Shapiro et al. 1992). Both analyses are fatally flawed: the first from a myopic nostalgia Ì Alan McKinlay is Professor of Management at St. Andrews University. Brian Quinn is a Doctoral Student in the Department of Management, St. Andrews University.

A design change that reduced the openness of the unit resulted in the reduction of seclusion and restraint.

Background Arkansas is a rural state of 3 million people. It is ranked fifth for poverty nationally. 1 The first case of COVID‐19 in Arkansas occurred on March 11, 2020. Since then, approximately 8% of all Arkansans have tested positive. Given the resource limitations of Arkansas, COVID‐19 convalescent plasma (CCP) was explored as a potentially life‐saving, therapeutic option. Therefore, the Arkansas Initiative for Convalescent Plasma was developed to ensure that every Arkansan has access to this therapy. Study Design and Method This brief report describes the statewide collaborative response from hospitals, blood collectors, and the Arkansas Department of Health (ADH) to ensure that COVID‐19 convalescent plasma was available in a resource‐limited state. Results Early contact tracing by ADH identified individuals who had come into contact with “patient zero” in early March. Within the first week, 32 patients tested positive for COVID‐19. The first set of CCP collections occurred on April 9, 2020. Donors had to be triaged carefully in the initial period, as many had recently resolved their symptoms. From our first collections, with appropriate resource and inventory management, we collected sufficient CCP to provide the requested number of units for every patient treated with CCP in Arkansas. Conclusions The Arkansas Initiative, a statewide effort to ensure CCP for every patient in a resource‐limited state, required careful coordination among key players. Collaboration and resource management was crucial to meet the demand of CCP products and potentially save lives. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

No abstract