Search

Introduction Workplace social capital (WSC) has been shown to affect employees’ well-being and health, yet it is not clear how public managers can create WSC and which forms of WSC are most important. This study is the first prospective cohort study to examine the relationship between management behaviour, WSC, well-being and sickness absence. It uses a validated and detailed scale on WSC, which can distinguish between bonding, bridging, linking and organisational WSC over time. The study thereby provides rich data giving a much-needed detailed image of how WSC impacts on public employees’ well-being and health. Additionally, the study pays special attention to the fact that these relationships can be different for different types of employees and therefore tests a set of relevant employee and context-related variables.Methods and analysis Project preparations in terms of agreements and data preparation of existing data started in 2019. This prospective cohort study considers and collects organisational data from 2016 to 2025. Annual employee surveys of more than 8000 employees (in a large Danish municipality) will be combined with register data in all years. This generates a unique cohort of public employees in different professions that are traceable over several years. The annual surveys include information on the management behaviour, WSC and employee outcomes. Fine-grained information on sickness absences will be matched for all employees and years under study. Moreover, confounders and the nested nature of the data will be considered.Ethics and dissemination Approval has been obtained from The Regional Committee on Health Research Ethics from Southern Denmark and from the University of Southern Denmark. The results will be presented at conferences and published in international peer-reviewed journals and in a practice-oriented monography targeted at public managers. The result will furthermore be disseminated to the involved employees through seminars and workshops in the participating organisations.

This article describes a theoretical taxonomy of the structural features of social movements. We begin by using two classification criteria to analyze the types of relations that characterize the structure of social movements. From there, we look at how differences in structure relate to different goals and forms of action. We then derive a four-fold classification system based on formalization and hierarchy of relationships. For each classification we provide case descriptions of social movements (or parts thereof) using literature on how different movement structures support different types of goals and forms of action. Furthermore, we discuss the dynamics of social movements (or parts thereof) and how their classification may evolve. By doing so, we illustrate how changes in structure, goals, and forms of action mutually influence each other.RÉSUMÉCet article dresse une taxonomie théorique des caractéristiques structurelles des mouvements sociaux. Nous utilisons d’abord deux critères de classification pour analyser les types de relation propres à la structure des mouvements sociaux. Par la suite, nous observons comment des différences de structure coïncident avec des buts et des formes d’action différents. Nous développons ensuite un système de classification quadruple fondé sur la formalisation et l’hiérarchisation des relations. Pour chacune des classifications, nous fournissons des descriptions de cas de mouvements sociaux (ou de parties de ceux-ci) en recourant à des écrits sur la manière dont des structures de mouvement différentes entraînent des buts et des formes d’action différents. En outre, nous discutons des dynamiques des mouvements sociaux (ou de parties de ceux-ci) et comment leur classification pourrait évoluer. Par ce moyen, nous illustrons comment des changements de structure, de but et de forme d’action s’influencent réciproquement.

Background: To assess hospital performance, quality perceptions of various stakeholders are increasingly taken into account. However, because of substantial background differences, various stakeholder groups might have different and even contrasting quality perceptions., Purpose: We test the hypothesis that an overall perception gap exists between employees and patients with respect to perceived hospital quality. We additionally elaborate on how various employee groups differ from each other and from patients., Methodology: We use primary survey data on perceived hospital quality from 9,979 patients and 4,306 employees from 11 German hospitals. With a multilevel regression and variance analysis, we test the impact of respondent type (employee or patient) on quality perception scores and test the interaction with hospital size. We additionally contrast different employee groups and test differences for various quality dimensions., Results and Conclusion: Hospital employees score hospital quality consistently lower than patients and are also more heterogeneous in their assessments. This makes it from a managerial point of view relevant to subdivide employees in more homogeneous subgroups. Hospital size has no clear effect on the perception gap. Doctors compared to patients and other employee groups have substantially different perceptions on hospital quality., Practice Implications: Our findings fuel the practical and ethical debate on the extent that perception gaps could and should be allowed in the context of high-quality and transparent hospital performance. Furthermore, we recommend that the quality perception gap is a substantial part of the overall hospital evaluation for ethical reasons but also to enable managers to better understand the (mis)match between employees' priorities and patients' preferences. However, we do warn practitioners that perceptions are only to a limited extent related to the organizational level (in contrast to the individual level), and only minimal improvements can thus be reached by differentiating from other hospitals.