Health‐care and public sector institutions are high‐risk settings for workplace bullying. Despite growing acknowledgement of the scale and consequence of this pervasive problem, there has been little critical examination of the institutional power dynamics that enable bullying. In the aftermath of large‐scale failures in care standards in public sector healthcare institutions, which were characterised by managerial bullying, attention to the nexus between bullying, power and institutional failures is warranted. In this study, employing Foucault's framework of power, we illuminate bullying as (...) a feature of structures of power and knowledge in public sector institutions. Our analysis draws upon the experiences of a large sample (n = 3345) of workers in Australian public sector agencies – the type with which most nurses in the public setting will be familiar. In foregrounding these power dynamics, we provide further insight into how cultures that are antithetical to institutional missions can arise and seek to broaden the debate on the dynamics of care failures within public sector institutions. Understanding the practices of power in public sector institutions, particularly in the context of ongoing reform, has important implications for nursing. (shrink)

Workplace bullying is a significant issue confronting the nursing profession. Bullying in nursing is frequently described in terms of ‘oppressed group’ behaviour or ‘horizontal violence’. It is proposed that the use of ‘oppressed group’ behaviour theory has fostered only a partial understanding of the phenomenon in nursing. It is suggested that the continued use of ‘oppressed group’ behaviour as the major means for understanding bullying in nursing places a flawed emphasis on bullying as a phenomenon that exists only among nurses, (...) rather than considering it within the broader organisational context. The work of Foucault and the ‘circuits of power’ model proposed by Clegg are used to provide an alternative understanding of the operation of power within organisations and therefore another way to conceive bullying in the nursing workforce. (shrink)

In recent decades, debate on the quality and safety of healthcare has been dominated by a measure and manage administrative rationality. More recently, this rationality has been overlaid by ideas from human factors, ergonomics and systems engineering. Little critical attention has been given in the nursing literature to how risk of harm is understood and actioned, or how patients can be subjectified and marginalised through these discourses. The problem of assuring safety for particular patient groups, and the dominance of technical (...) forms of rationality, has seen the word ‘unavoidable’ used in connection with intractable forms of patient harm. Employing pressure injury policy as an exemplar, and critically reviewing notions of risk and unavoidable harm, we problematise the concept of unavoidable patient harm, highlighting how this dominant safety rationality risks perverse and taken‐for‐granted assumptions about patients, care processes and the nature of risk and harm. In this orthodoxy, those who specify or measure risk are positioned as having more insight into the nature of risk, compared to those who simply experience risk. Driven almost exclusively as a technical and administrative pursuit, the patient safety agenda risks decentring the focus from patients and patient care. (shrink)

In this article, we clarify and describe the nature of nursing expertise and provide a framework to guide its identification and further development. To have utility and rigour, concept‐driven research and theories of practice require underlying concepts that are robust, valid and reliable. Advancing understanding of a concept requires careful attention to explicating its knowledge, metaphors and conceptual meaning. Examining the concepts and metaphors of nursing expertise, and how they have been interpreted into the nursing discourse, we aimed to synthesise (...) definitions and similarities between concepts and elicit the defining characteristics and properties of nursing expertise. In clarifying the concept, we sought to move beyond the ambiguity that currently surrounds expertise in nursing and unravel it to make explicit the characteristics of nursing expertise from published peer‐reviewed studies and structured literature synthesis. Findings indicate a lack of clarity surrounding the use of the term expertise. Traditional reliance upon intuition as a way of explaining expert performance is slowly evolving. Emerging from the analysis is a picture of expertise as the relationship between networks of contextual reasoning, understanding and practice. Striking absences in the discourse include limited explication of ethical reasoning and theorising a broader interpretation of expertise reflective of contemporary forms of nursing. (shrink)