Four Different Ways to View Wicked Problems

Hujala, Anneli; Laulainen, Sanna; Brookes, Andy; Lammassaari, Maarit; Mulherin, Tamara

doi:10.4324/9781315102597-19

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus cross-boundary collaboration was part of their work. In the overall project, collaboration was approached from four meta-theoretical approaches: social constructionism, a practice-based approach, phenomenology and critical realism (see Hujala et al , 2019). The study presented here was based on the first of these approaches, social constructionism and the discursive turn.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourses of middle managers' cross-boundary collaboration in health and social care

Hujala

Taskinen

Laulainen

et al. 2022

JICA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeIn the implementation of integrated care, the role of managers is important and their mutual collaboration should be addressed more visibly. The purpose of this study was to investigate how cross-boundary collaboration is constructed in the discourse of middle-level managers in health and social care.Design/methodology/approachThe study was based on a discursive approach. Group discussions with three groups of Finnish middle managers (n = 39) were analyzed using discourse analysis.FindingsFive ways of talking about cross-boundary collaboration were identified, labeled “ideal”, “structure”, “defence”, “money” and “support” discourses. In the ideal discourse, cross-boundary collaboration appeared as a “good thing” and is self-evident. Structural discourse defined managers as passive actors in self-sustaining entities. Defensive discourse highlighted the problems of cross-boundary collaboration and the hierarchy within the health and social sectors. Financial discourse constituted the ultimate obstacle to successful cross-boundary collaboration, and both strengthened and explained defensive discourse. Supportive discourse portrayed other managers as partners and as an important resource.Research limitations/implicationsCross-boundary collaboration can be experienced as a resource, helping managers cope with their workload. However, identification of and continuous attention to challenges at macro, meso and micro levels of integrated care is crucial for successful collaboration. Thus, critical discussion of collaboration needs to be given space.Originality/valueThe study design and discursive approach highlights the power of language and give voice to middle managers who are key actors when implementing integrated care.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%