DOCSLIB.ORG

Handouts and Reading List HOW GOOD DO YOU THINK YOU ARE ?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Handouts and Reading List HOW GOOD DO YOU THINK YOU ARE ? Handouts and Reading List HOW GOOD DO YOU THINK YOU ARE ? Legal, ethical and practical aspects of standards and quality improvement _______________________________________________________________________________ Throughout our lives we all accumulate new knowledge and skills. In an ever-changing and fast- evolving field like dentistry this becomes a crucial aspect of any professional career. The quality of the care and treatment we provide is continuously judged by patients and many complaints relate directly to this. But colleagues, regulators such as the GDC and CQC and the law itself also have a view and all these perspectives are often surprisingly different. This presentation explores the clinical, legal and ethical aspects of professional development and the quality and standards expected of us. It examines how we acquire new skills and keep them updated, and who decides when each member of the dental team can use them safely, successfully, to an appropriate standard and within the law. Kevin Lewis BDS FDS RCS(Eng) FFGDP(UK) Having qualified from The London Hospital in 1971, Kevin spent 20 years in full time general dental practice and 10 further years practising part time. He was the Dental Director of Dental Protection for 18 years up to 2016 and also an Executive member of the Council (Board of Directors) of the Medical Protection Society. Kevin has been writing a regular column in the dental press for 38 years – originally as the Associate Editor of Dental Practice and since 2006 as the Consultant Editor of Dentistry magazine. He still writes and lectures regularly all over the world, and provides advisory and consultancy services to various organisations working in and around healthcare, including the BDA. Kevin has been awarded honorary membership of the British, Irish and New Zealand Dental Associations, and also of the British Society for Restorative Dentistry. In 2017 he became a member of the Transition Board of Directors tasked by FGDP(UK) to establish a College of General Dentistry, serving as a collegiate home for UK primary care dentistry. 1 ABILITY, COMPETENCE & INSIGHT The presentation approaches this topic from seven perspectives as follows :- 1. STANDARDS and THE LAW 2. SCOPE OF PRACTICE 3. WHAT PATIENTS THINK 4. QUALITY ASSURANCE & IMPROVEMENT 5. ABILITY, COMPETENCE & INSIGHT 6. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 7. FUTURE DIRECTION ? _____________________________________________________________________ 1. STANDARDS and THE LAW The thought process for the opening section of this presentation began 8 or 9 years ago with an article that I wrote in Dental Protection’s publication for its UK members [Riskwise UK 38 – December 2010] and it was rekindled in 2015 with an article published in the British Dental Journal [Professional standards and their escalating impact on the dental profession. K.Lewis B.Dent.J 2015; 218 : 381-383] The intention was to engage the profession, all those bodies which set and publish standards, those individuals who become involved in that process, those who act as experts and express opinions based upon them - and not least, those who sit on committees and tribunals which have a role in enforcing them. Expectations Most complaints and litigation can be traced back to some kind of unmet expectation on the part of the patient. Sometimes it is simply an adverse clinical outcome – perhaps through no fault of the dentist – but sometimes we might allow patient expectations to become unrealistic and/or not do enough to stop this happening. 2 Third parties (like the NHS) don’t always help when they promise or lead patients to expect more than dentists are likely to be able to deliver, on each and every occasion. The NHS Choices description of what treatment is available under the NHS (and what patients therefore have a right to expect) is dangerously – and no doubt, deliberately – ambiguous. NHS England says it commissions “high quality” treatment and NHS Scotland assures patients that they can expect “the best care possible”. Without the funding to back up these promises, language like this is setting dentists up for confrontation with patients, and planting the seeds for complaints. But after years of economic downturn and a desperately slow and protracted recovery, dentists have often fallen into the trap of “overpromising and under-delivering”. Some of the statements made and images used on practice websites and in marketing material is an accident waiting to happen too, and this provides plenty of raw material for the GDC and the “no win- no fee” law firms. Standards But right at the heart of the relentless increase in complaints, litigation and regulatory challenges by the GDC over the past decade, is something that becomes blindingly obvious once we know where to look. It has been happening right under our noses, gradually and silently, and sadly it is still happening today. Dentists in the UK are being judged against wholly inappropriate standards and are facing criticism and challenge for providing care and treatment that in most other countries in the world would be considered perfectly acceptable. This was getting progressively worse, year after year, because each new set of guidelines and each new standards document seemed to move the “bar” further and further away from the ‘Bolam’ standard (see below). Not many new sets of guidelines published over the years have moved the goalposts back in the other direction - although we will shortly discuss one welcome exception to this rule. What the law expects of us : what the GDC expects of us Clinical negligence and the courts “Bolam” refers to the landmark case of Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957), in which principles of clinical negligence were established in British law that would endure for over half a century and still apply today. Scotland, Ireland and many other jurisdictions around the world that are based on or similar to British law, have their own equivalent cases, but the time- honoured Bolam principle still applies in that a practitioner is not negligent if s/he has acted in a manner which is considered to be appropriate by a responsible body of opinion amongst people working in the same field and professing to have the same skills as the practitioner in question. Furthermore, the Bolam judgment made it clear that a clinician’s failure to follow a practice which one particular ‘reasonable body of opinion’ might consider appropriate, does not necessarily mean that the clinician has acted negligently. The practitioner’s defence in law, in such a situation, is that s/he has followed an alternative body of ‘responsible opinion’ that happens to hold a (reasonable) contrary view about what is ‘appropriate’. The challenge, of course, is to persuade a court of law that the body of opinion that you are following is not only responsible, but also respectable, reasonable, logical and (when the context 3 demands) seeks an appropriate balance between potential risks and benefits. This facet of the professional opinion that the clinician has chosen to follow, was described in the much later case of Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority [1997] (finally determined on appeal in the House of Lords) and subsequently confirmed in several other UK cases. In the arena of clinical negligence in the UK, professional indemnity providers currently face many challenges. Not least amongst them is that of ensuring that general practitioners are genuinely being measured against a reasonable peer group, rather than against the standard of a specialist carrying out the same procedure(s). The GDC For many years the threshold standard for Fitness to Practise cases coming before the GDC was that of “serious professional misconduct”, flowing from the 30 year old case of Doughty (determined on Appeal) Doughty v GDC [1988] AC 164 PC Expressed simply, this meant that the GDC must have made one or more findings of fact, which individually or collectively must not only have shown the registrant to have fallen short of an acceptable professional standard (this amounting to a peer standard of reasonableness not unlike that expressed in Bolam), but such ‘falling short’ must have been to a serious degree. In summary, simply falling short of a reasonable professional standard was not sufficient to justify a finding of serious professional misconduct (SPM). Simply falling short of what a single body of professional opinion might consider to be reasonable, was even further from satisfying the test of SPM. Since 2005 a number of things have happened to change the fitness to practise landscape. The concept of “SPM” has been overtaken by a two-stage test. o Misconduct o Impairment of the registrant’s fitness to practise (A further important practical effect of this separation of these two issues will be discussed below) 4 The evidential burden has been reduced by the move from the previous ‘criminal standard’ of proof (the requirement to find the facts proved “beyond reasonable doubt”) to the much lower civil standard of proof (the “balance of probabilities”). The removal of the requirement for a statutory declaration (sworn and witnessed affidavit) when reporting information to the GDC for consideration. Such information and notifications can now be made anonymously. Erasures are now for a minimum of five years (previously 10 months) The term “Misconduct” appears at first sight to suggest a standard that is different to “serious professional misconduct” - and perhaps a less deficient standard - but this point has since been clarified by a Judicial
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Loss of Memory As a Cause of Failure of Foresight in Safety
    Chapter 4 Loss of Memory as a Cause of Failure of Foresight in Safety Miloš Ferjenčík Nicolas Dechy Table of contents 4.7.4 Learning acts against the loss of memory . 96 4.7.5 Role of safety management system functions . 98 4.7.6 Safety management against the loss of memory. 99 4.1 Executive Summary ............................................ 84 4.8 Conclusions ................................................... 100 4.2 Key Messages .................................................. 84 4.9 Acknowledgments.............................................. 100 4.3 Introduction ................................................... 84 4.10 References ................................................... 100 4.4 Loss of Memory Relates to Learning and Knowledge . 86 4.4.1 Failures of foresight in safety due to a loss of memory . 86 4.4.2 Early warning signs and foresight in safety . 87 4.4.3 Four aspects of memory useful for foresight in safety . 87 4.4.4 Applied example: the kitchen dangers . 88 4.4.5 Other examples from industry . 88 4.4.6 The four aspects of LoM: description related to hazards . 88 4.5 The Process of Loss of Memory.................................. 89 4.5.1 Memory and forgetting . 89 4.5.2 The process of memorising: three key faculties. 90 4.5.3 The process of loss of memory useful for foresight in safety . 90 4.5.4 Twelve categories of loss of memory . 90 4.5.5 Applied example: loss of memory in the kitchen. 91 4.6 Loss of Memory and Organisational Memory .................... 91 4.6.1 Extension from human to organisational memory . 91 4.6.2 Nature of organisational memory . 92 4.6.3 Extension accords with nature of organisational memory .
    [Show full text]
  • TOOLKIT Exchanges of Practices
    “Exchange of learning and teaching strategies: media literacy in adult education” Erasmus+ Strategic Partnerships for adult education (2016-2018) Project number: 2016-1-FR01-KA204-024220 TOOLKIT Exchanges of Practices This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use, which may be made of the information contained therein. Content Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………….3 “Media bias, fallacies and social representations definitions” workshop…………….4 Social representation……………………………………………………………………………7 “Recognizing Fallacies” workshop…………………………………………………………..9 “Recognizing Appeals to Emotion” workshop……………………………………………21 ”Text analysis” workshop………………………………………………………………….....25 Text for analysis………………………………………………………………………………...30 Critical Thinking workshop "The Logical Fallacies of Nationalism"………………….33 Workshop on writing: “Traditional and inverted pyramids”……………………………36 Deconstructing image………………………………………………………………………....40 Project poster…………………………………………………………………………………...44 Introduction "Exchange of learning and teaching strategies: media literacy in adult education" is an Erasmus+ Strategic Partnerships project for six partners from France, Estonia, Italy, Malta, Spain and Sweden. The coordinator of this project is MITRA FRANCE non-governmental organization from France. The project is funded by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Commission. It seeks to develop initiatives addressing spheres of adult education, gathering and exchanges of experience and best practices in media literacy. This initiative contributes to strengthening media literacy as a mean of countering online and ordinary radicalisation and stigmatisation. As one of the results of this partnership the consortium has compiled a Toolkit with several good practices exchanged and tested during this project. This Toolkit is designed for adult educators, trainers and support staff who are interested in using media literacy in their daily work.
    [Show full text]
  • A Hierarchy of Limitations in Machine Learning
    A Hierarchy of Limitations in Machine Learning Momin M. Malik Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University momin [email protected] 29 February 2020∗ Abstract \All models are wrong, but some are useful," wrote George E. P. Box(1979). Machine learning has focused on the usefulness of probability models for prediction in social systems, but is only now coming to grips with the ways in which these models are wrong|and the consequences of those shortcomings. This paper attempts a comprehensive, structured overview of the specific conceptual, procedural, and statistical limitations of models in machine learning when applied to society. Machine learning modelers themselves can use the described hierarchy to identify possible failure points and think through how to address them, and consumers of machine learning models can know what to question when confronted with the decision about if, where, and how to apply machine learning. The limitations go from commitments inherent in quantification itself, through to showing how unmodeled dependencies can lead to cross-validation being overly optimistic as a way of assessing model performance. Introduction There is little argument about whether or not machine learning models are useful for applying to social systems. But if we take seriously George Box's dictum, or indeed the even older one that \the map is not the territory' (Korzybski, 1933), then there has been comparatively less systematic attention paid within the field to how machine learning models are wrong (Selbst et al., 2019) and seeing possible harms in that light. By \wrong" I do not mean in terms of making misclassifications, or even fitting over the `wrong' class of functions, but more fundamental mathematical/statistical assumptions, philosophical (in the sense used by Abbott, 1988) commitments about how we represent the world, and sociological processes of how models interact with target phenomena.
    [Show full text]
  • Escaping the Mcnamara Fallacy: Towards More Impactful Recommender Systems Research
    Escaping the McNamara Fallacy: Towards more Impactful Recommender Systems Research Dietmar Jannach1 and Christine Bauer2 1University of Klagenfurt, [email protected] 2Utrecht University, [email protected] This is the accepted version of the paper appearing in the AI Magazine. The final publication is available at: https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/aimagazine/article/view/5312 Jannach, Dietmar & Bauer, Christine (2020). Escaping the McNamara Fallacy: Toward More Impactful Recommender Systems Research. AI Magazine, 41(4), pp 79–95. DOI: 10.1609/aimag.v41i4.5312 Abstract Recommender systems are among today’s most successful application areas of AI. However, in the recommender systems research community, we have fallen prey of a McNamara fallacy to a worrying extent: In the majority of our research efforts, we rely almost exclusively on computational measures such as prediction accuracy, which are easier to make than applying other evaluation methods. However, it remains unclear whether small improvements in terms of such computational measures actually matter a lot and whether they lead us to better systems in practice. A paradigm shift in terms of our research culture and goals is therefore needed. We cannot focus exclusively on abstract computational measures any longer, but must direct our attention to research questions that are more relevant and have more impact in the real world. In this work, we review the various ways of how recommender systems may create value; how they, positively or negatively, impact consumers, businesses, and the society; and how we can measure the resulting effects. Through our analyses, we identify a number of research gaps and propose ways of broadening and improving our methodology in a way that leads us to more impactful research in our field.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Developments in Language Testing. Anthology Series 25
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 365 144 FL 021 757 AUTHOR Anivan, Sarinee, Ed. TITLE Current Developments in Language Testing. Anthology Series 25. INSTITUTION Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (Singapore). Regional Language Centre. REPORT NO ISBN-9971-74-037-0; ISSN-0129-8895; RELCP383-91 PUB DATE 91 NOTE 271p.; Selected papers presented at the Regional Language Centre Seminar on Language Testing and Language Programme Evaluation (April 9-12, 1990). For selected individual papers, see also ED 328 072; ED 350 819, ED 322 725, ED 342 211, ED 317 073, ED 322 729. PUB TYPE Collected Works General (020) Collected Works Serials (022) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC11 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Communicative Competence (Languages); Comparative Analysis; Computer Assisted Testing; Cues; English (Second Language); Evaluation CriterCa; Instructional Materials; International Programs; Interviews; Item Response Theory; Language Aptitude; *Language Proficiency; Language Research; *Language Tests; *Second Languages; Simulation; Sociocultural Patterns; Speech Skills; Teacher Developed Materials; *Test Format; *Testing; Testing Programs; Test Validity; Trend Analysis; Writing Evaluation; Writing Exercise IDENTIFIERS *Oral Proficiency Testing ABSTRACT The selection of papers on language testing includes: "Language Testing in the 1990s: How Far Have We Come? How Much Further Have We To Go?" (J. Charles Alderson); "Current Research/Development in Language Testing" (John W. 011er, Jr.); "The Difficulties of Difficulty: Prompts in Writing Assessment" (Liz Hamp-Lyons, Sheila Prochnow); "The Validity of Writing Test Tasks" (John Read); "Affective Factors in the Assessment of Oral Interaction: Gender and Status" (Don Porter); "Authenticity in Foreign Language Testing" (Peter Doye); "Evaluating Communicative Tests" (Keith Morrow); "Materials-Based Tests: How Well Do They Work?" (Michael Milanovic); "Defining Language Ability: The Criteria for Criteria" (Geoff Brindley); "The Role of Item Response Theory in Language Test Validation" (T.
    [Show full text]
  • Accepted Manuscript1.0
    Nonlinear World – Journal of Interdisciplinary Nature Published by GVP – Prof. V. Lakshmikantham Institute for Advanced Studies and GVP College of Engineering (A) About Journal: Nonlinear World is published in association with International Federation of Nonlinear Analysts (IFNA), which promotes collaboration among various disciplines in the world community of nonlinear analysts. The journal welcomes all experimental, computational and/or theoretical advances in nonlinear phenomena, in any discipline – especially those that further our ability to analyse and solve the nonlinear problems that confront our complex world. Nonlinear World will feature papers which demonstrate multidisciplinary nature, preferably those presented in such a way that other nonlinear analysts can at least grasp the main results, techniques, and their potential applications. In addition to survey papers of an expository nature, the contributions will be original papers demonstrating the relevance of nonlinear techniques. Manuscripts should be submitted to: Dr. J Vasundhara Devi, Associate Director, GVP-LIAS, GVP College of Engineering (A), Madhurawada, Visakhapatnam – 530048 Email: [email protected] Subscription Information 2017: Volume 1 (1 Issue) USA, India Online Registration at www.nonlinearworld.com will be made available soon. c Copyright 2017 GVP-Prof. V. Lakshmikantham Insitute of Advanced Studies ISSN 0942-5608 Printed in India by GVP – Prof. V. Lakshmikantham Institute for Advanced Studies, India Contributions should be prepared in accordance with the ‘‘ Instructions for Authors} 1 Nonlinear World Honorary Editors Dr. Chris Tsokos President of IFNA, Executive Director of USOP, Editor in Chief, GJMS, IJMSM, IJES, IJMSBF Dr. S K Sen Director, GVP-LIAS, India Editor in Chief Dr. J Vasundhara Devi Dept. of Mathematics, GVPCE(A) and Associate Director, GVP-LIAS, India Editorial Board Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Threat Assessment and Its Perils an Interview with Cecil D
    Issue 83, 4th Quarter 2016 Threat Assessment and Its Perils An Interview with Cecil D. Haney Commentary on JOINT FORCE QUARTERL Chinese Military Reforms Y ISSUE EIGHTY -THREE, 4 TH QUARTER 2016 Joint Force Quarterly Founded in 1993 • Vol. 83, 4th Quarter 2016 http://ndupress.ndu.edu Gen Joseph F. Dunford, Jr., USMC, Publisher MajGen Frederick M. Padilla, USMC, President, NDU Editor in Chief Col William T. Eliason, USAF (Ret.), Ph.D. Executive Editor Jeffrey D. Smotherman, Ph.D. Production Editor John J. Church, D.M.A. Internet Publications Editor Joanna E. Seich Book Review Editor Dr. Frank G. Hoffman Art Director Marco Marchegiani, U.S. Government Printing Office Advisory Committee COL Michael S. Bell, USA (Ret.), Ph.D./College of International Security Affairs; Brig Gen Christopher A. Coffelt, USAF/ Air War College; Col David J. Eskelund, USMC/Marine Corps War College; COL (P) Paul H. Fredenburgh III, USA/Dwight D. Eisenhower School for National Security and Resource Strategy; Brig Gen Darren E. Hartford, USAF/National War College; Brig Gen (Sel) Brian E. Hastings, USAF/Air Command and Staff College; RADM P. Gardner Howe III/U.S. Naval War College; LTG Michael D. Lundy, USA/U.S. Army Command and General Staff College; LTG William C. Mayville, Jr., USA/The Joint Staff; Col William McCollough, USMC/Marine Corps Command and Staff College; MG William E. Rapp, USA/U.S. Army War College; RDML Jeffrey Ruth/Joint Forces Staff College; VADM Kevin D. Scott/The Joint Staff Editorial Board Richard K. Betts/Columbia University; Stephen D. Chiabotti/ School of Advanced Air and Space Studies; Eliot A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Best of the Rest Great Ideas for Managers Section
    The Best of the Rest Great Ideas for Managers Section Ten Learner Support Handbook Contents: Introduction How Great Ideas for Managers Theory 81 The Pareto principle Theory 82 The Eisenhower Principle Theory 83 Thomas and Kilmann’s Conflict Resolution Model Theory 84 Grinder and Bandler’s Neuro Linguistic Programming (Nlp) Filtering Theory Theory 85 Goleman’s Theory of Emotional Intelligence Theory 85 Boyd’s Ooda Loop Theory 85 Luft and Ingram’s Johari Windows Theory 85 Smart Goals Theory 85 The McNamara Fallacy Introduction This section contains nine great theories each of which could have been squeezed into one of the other sections. But I wanted to end with a selection of theories that transcend neat classification. Why? Because management transcends neat classification. For example, there are nine theories of motivation discussed in this book. Does that mean that as a manager you can only motivate staff when you use one of those theories? Of course not. Your personality and style of management, how you talk to people and take account of their needs when planning or managing change all impact on their motivational levels. This section is intended to remind you that the knowledge gained from one theory can often be applied in numerous situations, so don’t build arbitrary walls between theories. The Pareto Principle, which kicks off this section, is a great example of how one theory can be applied in numerous situations and help managers identify where they should concentrate their efforts. Others, such as the Eisenhower principle, will help you identify what tasks you should be doing and which you should either bin or delegate, and some provide insights into your personality and the personalities of those you work with.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Fallacies
    List of fallacies For specific popular misconceptions, see List of common if>). The following fallacies involve inferences whose misconceptions. correctness is not guaranteed by the behavior of those log- ical connectives, and hence, which are not logically guar- A fallacy is an incorrect argument in logic and rhetoric anteed to yield true conclusions. Types of propositional fallacies: which undermines an argument’s logical validity or more generally an argument’s logical soundness. Fallacies are either formal fallacies or informal fallacies. • Affirming a disjunct – concluding that one disjunct of a logical disjunction must be false because the These are commonly used styles of argument in convinc- other disjunct is true; A or B; A, therefore not B.[8] ing people, where the focus is on communication and re- sults rather than the correctness of the logic, and may be • Affirming the consequent – the antecedent in an in- used whether the point being advanced is correct or not. dicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent is true; if A, then B; B, therefore A.[8] 1 Formal fallacies • Denying the antecedent – the consequent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be false because the antecedent is false; if A, then B; not A, therefore Main article: Formal fallacy not B.[8] A formal fallacy is an error in logic that can be seen in the argument’s form.[1] All formal fallacies are specific types 1.2 Quantification fallacies of non sequiturs. A quantification fallacy is an error in logic where the • Appeal to probability – is a statement that takes quantifiers of the premises are in contradiction to the something for granted because it would probably be quantifier of the conclusion.
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19 and Justice Doi:10.1136/Medethics-2020-106877 John Mcmillan, Editor in Chief
    Concise argument J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/medethics-2020-106877 on 23 September 2020. Downloaded from COVID-19 and justice doi:10.1136/medethics-2020-106877 John McMillan, Editor in Chief John Rawls begins a Theory of Justice arrives at a fair outcome (what Rawls calls following summarises one of the key argu- with the observation that 'Justice is the perfect procedural justice, p. 85) there is ments in their article.7 first virtue of social institutions, as truth little prospect of that. As they observe, 1. COVID-19 immunity passports are a is of systems of thought… Each person reasonable people can disagree about way of demonstrating low personal possesses an inviolability founded on the outcomes we should aim for in allo- and social risk. justice that even the welfare of society cating health resources and ICU triage for 2. Those who are at low personal risk as a whole cannot override'1 (p.3). The COVID-19 is no exception. Instead, we and low social risk from COVID-19 COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in should work toward a transparent and should be permitted more freedoms. lock- downs, the restriction of liberties, fair process, what Rawls would describe as 3. Permitting those with immunity pass- debate about the right to refuse medical imperfect procedural justice (p. 85). His ports greater freedoms discriminates treatment and many other changes to the example of this is a criminal trial where against those who do not have pass- everyday behaviour of persons. The justice we adopt processes that we have reason to ports.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Data-Driven Practices in Civil Society Organisations
    Campaigning by Numbers: The Role of Data-Driven Practices in Civil Society Organisations Amber Macintyre Royal Holloway, University of London Department of Politics and International Relations Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science !"# $orrections submitted 2020 Declaration I, %mber &acintyre, hereby declare that this thesis and the work presented in it is entirely my own. Where I have consulted the work of others, this is always clearly stated. %mber Macintyre 23rd December, 2020 2 Acknowledgements I am incredibly grateful to the amount of people who have believed in me and supported me over the last few years( Due to a few circumstances, I have had the opportunity to work with +ve supervisors over the period, and each has contributed a di,erent perspective to this project( I am grateful for the +rst two years of supervision from %ndy Chadwick, whose knowledge and enthusiasm for the +eld of political communication is inspiring. Chris )atkins, from the Department of Computer Science, provided technical expertise, and a perspective outside of political science that helped clarify my ideas early on. I am grateful to Ben 0’Loughlin for -umping in to be the primary supervisor half way through the project( Ben had already provided important feedback, alongside 2ames Sloam on my advisory panel, both of whom placed my work in a broader literature that I would never have known otherwise( I am grateful for the support from Ursula Hacket who stepped in for the final years and not only brought me energy at a time when I was struggling to see a route forward, but also provided excellent challenges to my theories, consequently strengthening my ability to defend my ideas( 4inally, I could not have come this far without Cristian 5acarri, who supervised the project from start to end.
    [Show full text]
  • Progress in the Art of Social Accounting and Other Arguments for Disclosure on Corporate Social Responsibility
    Vanderbilt Law Review Volume 29 Issue 3 Issue 3 - Symposium: Financial Institutions, Municipal Finance, and Community Article 1 Development 4-1976 Progress in the Art of Social Accounting and Other Arguments for Disclosure on Corporate Social Responsibility Douglas M. Branson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Douglas M. Branson, Progress in the Art of Social Accounting and Other Arguments for Disclosure on Corporate Social Responsibility, 29 Vanderbilt Law Review 539 (1976) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol29/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW VOLUME 29 APRIL 1976 NUMBER 3 Progress in the Art of Social Accounting and Other Arguments for Disclosure on Corporate Social Responsibility* Douglas M. Branson** TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL ACCOUNTING ............ 546 II. AN INVENTORY OF TYPES OF SOCIAL AUDITS ........... 551 A. The Process Audit ............................ 551 B. The Complete Audit .......................... 560 C. The Complete Audit - Another Approach ...... 562 D. The Super Social Audit ........................ 566 III. PRESENT PROSPECTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUR- THER PROGRESS IN SOCIAL ACCOUNTING ............... 574 IV. PROGRESS IN THE ART OF SOCIAL ACCOUNTING - A FIRST ARGUMENT FOR DISCLOSURE ......................... 580 V. INCONGRUITIES IN THE PRESENT DISCLOSURE SYSTEM - ANOTHER ARGUMENT FOR DISCLOSURE ................ 582 A. The Purposes of Disclosure - In General ........ 582 B. Utility in the Investment Process - An Argument for Disclosure on Social Responsibility .........
    [Show full text]