No abstract

The nature of Human Relationships (HR) within supply chains has received superficial attention in the drive for continuous improvement (CI). Persistent pressures impacting upon global engineering companies has limited the potential to address the HR element. Simply transferring mature western concepts and analytical tools does not capture the dynamics of the global production workforce. This paper proposes a new theoretical perspective, encompassing an evaluative tool, thus moving beyond formulaic implementations of initiatives that erroneously assume maturity of production practices and outcomes. The study helps advance organizations by adding contextualization to the human-centric perspectives of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) and discretionary effort (DE). Case-based data from engineering production workers in Thailand was factor analyzed to test the research hypotheses. This research reports on an alternative operationalization of these core ideas, whilst significantly extending empirical-base through validating the propositions. Further, it contributes and responds to extant literature identifying HR as the missing link in enacting CI programs in practice. The paper addresses this gap and data collected provides support for theorizing that the HR concepts proposed positively impact organizational CI interventions. Findings have important implications for such interventions encompassing practical and theoretical relevance for global engineering managers with local engineering production workforce.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to contribute to response to the 2013 health and welfare reform in the UK by looking specifically at how health research stakeholders in the East Midlands perceive reimbursements for their participation in research. Design/methodology/approach – In keeping with the government research agenda, a survey was distributed to patient and public involvement in research volunteers and other stakeholders in the East Midlands region. In total, 251 useful returns were statistically analysed using descriptive and frequency based statistics and factor analysis. Principal Component Analysis and Varimax Rotation with Kaiser Normalisation were used. This was supplemented by thematic analysis of the content of open questions. Findings – 29 per cent of respondents reported experience with payments and/or reimbursement of expenses for participation in research. Three main factors emerged from the exploratory factor analysis indicative of the values that underpin participants motivation to participate in research. These were “as an opportunity for self-development”, “volunteering”, and “work and market forces”. This revealed that local organisations were somewhat out of step with stakeholders motivations. Research limitations/implications – It is a small study, and therefore has limited power to predict. Wider societal factors were not taken into account and may also impinge on the responses given, especially if respondents are dependent on welfare benefits and vulnerable to shifting community attitudes. Practical implications – This study has got practical implications for policy makers, ethics committees, agencies promoting patient and public involvement, and research organisations. It should influence the design of health research, allow systems to be aligned with individual motivation, maximise recruitment to research and enhance the validity of research findings. Social implications – Genuine coproduction will enhance the quality of health and social care research, and will be strengthened by payment systems that respond the ethical position of participants rather than simply organise around welfare benefit regulations. This study also has the potential to influence guidance from major funders of health research. Originality/value – This study offers an unique contribution into a neglected, complex yet significant area of research practice.

No abstract