This study explores how non-executive directors are challenged by management while they seek to improve the effectiveness of supervisory boards in the Netherlands. A combination of semi-structured interviews and a questionnaire among non-executive directors indicates that supervisory board members mainly experience boardroom challenges in three core areas: the ability of non-executive directors to ask management critical questions, information asymmetries between the management and supervisory boards and the management of the relationship between individual executive and non-executive directors. The qualitative in-depth analysis reveals the complexity of the main contributing factors to problems in the boardroom as well as the range of process and social interventions non-executive directors use to address boardroom issues. The findings highlight the need to better understand boardroom processes and the need of non-executive directors to carefully manage relationships in and around the boardroom.
LINK
Background: Regular inspection of the oral cavity is required for prevention, early diagnosis and risk reduction of oral- and general health-related problems. Assessments to inspect the oral cavity have been designed for non-dental healthcare professionals, like nurses. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the content and the measurement properties of oral health assessments for use by non-dental healthcare professionals in assessing older peoples’ oral health, in order to provide recommendations for practice, policy, and research. Methods: A systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE.com, and Cinahl (via Ebsco) has been performed. Search terms referring to ‘oral health assessments’, ‘non-dental healthcare professionals’ and ‘older people (60+)’ were used. Two reviewers individually performed title/abstract, and full-text screening for eligibility. The included studies have investigated at least one measurement property (validity/reliability) and were evaluated on their methodological quality using “The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments” (COSMIN) checklist. The measurement properties were then scored using quality criteria (positive/negative/indeterminate). Results: Out of 879 hits, 18 studies were included in this review. Five studies showed good methodological quality on at least one measurement property and 14 studies showed poor methodological quality on some of their measurement properties. None of the studies assessed all measurement properties of the COSMIN. In total eight oral health assessments were found: the Revised Oral Assessment Guide (ROAG); the Minimum Data Set (MDS), with oral health component; the Oral Health Assessment Tool (OHAT); The Holistic Reliable Oral Assessment Tool (THROAT); Dental Hygiene Registration (DHR); Mucosal Plaque Score (MPS); The Brief Oral Health Screening Examination (BOHSE) and the Oral Assessment Sheet (OAS). Most frequently assessed items were: lips, mucosa membrane, tongue, gums, teeth, denture, saliva, and oral hygiene. Conclusion: Taken into account the scarce evidence of the proposed assessments, the OHAT and ROAG are most complete in their included oral health items and are of best methodological quality in combination with positive quality criteria on their measurement properties. Non-dental healthcare professionals, policymakers and researchers should be aware of the methodological limitations of the available oral health assessments and realize that the quality of the measurement properties remains uncertain.
In the context of a European knowledge economy, the Dutch non-university institutions systematically develop research activities at a higher frequency than before. With this development, they have been accused of academic drift, of striving to receive a status comparable to traditional universities. This study considers the perceptions of both managers and lecturers in non-university higher education concerning the organisational aims for research activities. The intention is to add an empirical base to the debate of academic drift, especially to the potential of academic drift on the staff level. The results show a moderate indication of potential for academic drift on the staff level. In addition, managers have more positive perceptions regarding all aims for research than lecturers, but both groups prioritise that the results of research should, first and foremost, be directed towards improving the quality of education.
