IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v203y2018icp1-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empowering citizens or mining resources? The contested domain of citizen engagement in professional care services

Author

Listed:
  • Glimmerveen, Ludo
  • Ybema, Sierk
  • Nies, Henk

Abstract

When studying individual attempts to foster citizen engagement, scholars have pointed to the coexistence of competing rationales. Thus far, however, current literature barely elaborates on the socio-political processes through which employees of professional organizations deal with such disparate considerations. To address this gap, this article builds on an ethnographic study, conducted in the Netherlands between 2013 and 2016, of a professional care organization's attempts to engage local citizens in one of its elderly care homes. To investigate how citizen engagement is ‘done’ in the context of daily organizing, we followed employees as they gradually created and demarcated the scope for such engagement by approaching citizens as either strategic partners (pursuing ‘democratic’ rationales) or as operational volunteers (pursuing ‘instrumental’ rationales). In order to deal with such potentially incongruent orientations, we found that employees used discursive strategies to influence the balance that was struck between competing rationales; either through depoliticization—i.e., the downplaying of incongruities and the framing of disparate considerations as being complementary within the pursuit of a shared, overarching goal—or through politicization, i.e., the active challenging of how their colleagues prioritized one consideration over another. By showing how the successful conveyance of such (de)politicized accounts helped employees either defend or redraw the boundaries of what citizen engagement was (not) about, we contribute to extant theorization by (1) developing a processual approach to studying citizen engagement that (2) is sensitive to organizational politics.

Suggested Citation

  • Glimmerveen, Ludo & Ybema, Sierk & Nies, Henk, 2018. "Empowering citizens or mining resources? The contested domain of citizen engagement in professional care services," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 1-8.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:203:y:2018:i:c:p:1-8
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.03.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027795361830114X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.03.013?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Llewellyn, Sue, 1998. "Boundary work: Costing and caring in the social services," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 23-47, January.
    2. Marilyn Taylor, 2007. "Community Participation in the Real World: Opportunities and Pitfalls in New Governance Spaces," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 44(2), pages 297-317, February.
    3. Finn, Rachael & Learmonth, Mark & Reedy, Patrick, 2010. "Some unintended effects of teamwork in healthcare," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1148-1154, April.
    4. Powell, Alison E. & Davies, Huw T.O., 2012. "The struggle to improve patient care in the face of professional boundaries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(5), pages 807-814.
    5. Haridimos Tsoukas & Robert Chia, 2002. "On Organizational Becoming: Rethinking Organizational Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(5), pages 567-582, October.
    6. Catherine Durose, 2011. "Revisiting Lipsky: Front‐Line Work in UK Local Governance," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 59(4), pages 978-995, December.
    7. Callaghan, Gillian & Wistow, Gerald, 2006. "Governance and public involvement in the British National Health Service: Understanding difficulties and developments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(9), pages 2289-2300, November.
    8. El Enany, Nellie & Currie, Graeme & Lockett, Andy, 2013. "A paradox in healthcare service development: Professionalization of service users," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 24-30.
    9. Croft, Charlotte & Currie, Graeme & Staniszewska, Sophie, 2016. "Moving from rational to normative ideologies of control over public involvement: A case of continued managerial dominance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 124-132.
    10. Contandriopoulos, Damien, 2004. "A sociological perspective on public participation in health care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 321-330, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elio Borgonovi & Paola Adinolfi & Rocco Palumbo & Gabriella Piscopo, 2018. "Framing the Shades of Sustainability in Health Care: Pitfalls and Perspectives from Western EU Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Evelien Tonkens & Imrat Verhoeven, 2019. "The civic support paradox: Fighting unequal participation in deprived neighbourhoods," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(8), pages 1595-1610, June.
    2. Brad Wright, 2015. "Voices of the Vulnerable: Community health centres and the promise and peril of consumer governance," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 57-71, January.
    3. Liberati, Elisa Giulia & Gorli, Mara & Scaratti, Giuseppe, 2016. "Invisible walls within multidisciplinary teams: Disciplinary boundaries and their effects on integrated care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 31-39.
    4. Croft, Charlotte & Currie, Graeme, 2020. "Realizing policy aspirations of voluntary sector involvement in integrated care provision: Insights from the English National Health Service," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(5), pages 549-555.
    5. McDougall, A. & Goldszmidt, M. & Kinsella, E.A. & Smith, S. & Lingard, L., 2016. "Collaboration and entanglement: An actor-network theory analysis of team-based intraprofessional care for patients with advanced heart failure," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 108-117.
    6. Croft, Charlotte & Currie, Graeme & Staniszewska, Sophie, 2016. "Moving from rational to normative ideologies of control over public involvement: A case of continued managerial dominance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 124-132.
    7. Xyrichis, Andreas & Lowton, Karen & Rafferty, Anne Marie, 2017. "Accomplishing professional jurisdiction in intensive care: An ethnographic study of three units," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 102-111.
    8. Neiterman, Elena & HakemZadeh, Farimah & Zeytinoglu, Isik U. & Kaminska, Karolina & Oltean, Irina & Plenderleith, Jennifer & Lobb, Derek, 2024. "Navigating interprofessional boundaries: Midwifery students in Canada," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 341(C).
    9. Burt, George & Mackay, David J. & van der Heijden, Kees & Verheijdt, Charlotte, 2017. "Openness disposition: Readiness characteristics that influence participant benefits from scenario planning as strategic conversation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 16-25.
    10. Abernethy, Margaret A. & Vagnoni, Emidia, 2004. "Power, organization design and managerial behaviour," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(3-4), pages 207-225.
    11. Shahzad Khurram & Sandra Charreire Petit, 2017. "Investigating the Dynamics of Stakeholder Salience: What Happens When the Institutional Change Process Unfolds?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 485-515, July.
    12. Gary T. Burke & Carola Wolf, 2021. "The Process Affordances of Strategy Toolmaking when Addressing Wicked Problems," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 359-388, March.
    13. Gifford, Rachel & Molleman, Eric & van der Vaart, Taco, 2024. "It's a jungle out there: Understanding physician payment and its role in group dynamics," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 350(C).
    14. Dixon, Keith, 2009. "Calculative practices in higher education: a retrospective analysis of curricular accounting about learning," MPRA Paper 18295, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Guiette, Alain & Vandenbempt, Koen, 2017. "Change managerialism and micro-processes of sensemaking during change implementation," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 65-81.
    16. Marina Fiedler & Isabell Welpe & Arnold Picot, 2010. "Understanding Radical Change: An Examination of Management Departments in German-speaking Universities," management revue. Socio-economic Studies, Rainer Hampp Verlag, vol. 21(2), pages 111-134.
    17. Risien, Julie, 2019. "Curators and sojourners in learning networks: Practices for transformation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 71-79.
    18. Lise Arena & Anthony Hussenot, 2021. "From Innovations at Work to Innovative Ways of Conceptualizing Organization: A Brief History of Organization Studies," Post-Print hal-03290300, HAL.
    19. Beth A. Bechky, 2006. "Gaffers, Gofers, and Grips: Role-Based Coordination in Temporary Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 3-21, February.
    20. Dragos Vieru & Pierre-Emmanuel Arduin, 2016. "Sharing Knowledge in a Shared Services Center Context: An Explanatory Case Study of the Dialectics of Formal and Informal Practices," Post-Print hal-01458031, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:203:y:2018:i:c:p:1-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.