This essay explores the notion of resilience by providing a theoretical context and subsequently linking it to the management of safety and security. The distinct worlds of international security, industrial safety and public security have distinct risks as well as distinct ‘core purposes and integrities’ as understood by resilience scholars. In dealing with risks one could argue there are three broad approaches: cost-benefit analysis, precaution and resilience. In order to distinguish the more recent approach of resilience, the idea of adaptation will be contrasted to mitigation. First, a general outline is provided of what resilience implies as a way to survive and thrive in the face of adversity. After that, a translation of resilience for the management of safety and security is described. LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/juul-gooren-phd-cpp-a1180622/
More than 25!years after Moore’s first introduction of the public value concept in 995, the concept is now widely used, but its operationalization is still considered difficult. This paper presents the empirical results of a study analyzing the application of the public value concept in Higher Education Institutions, thereby focusing on how to account for public value. The paper shows how Dutch universities of applied sciences operationalize the concept ‘public value’, and how they report on the outcome achievements. The official strategy plans and annual reports for FY2016 through FY2018 of the ten largest institutions were used. While we find that all the institutions selected aim to deliver public value, they still use performance indicators that have a more narrow orientation, and are primarily focused on processes, outputs, and service delivery quality. However, we also observe that they use narratives to show the public value they created. In this way this paper contributes to the literature on public value accounting.
Abstract Aim: To gain insight into the relationship between self-management abilities (taking initiatives, investment behaviour, variety, multifunctionality, self-efficacy, positive frame of mind) and physical, psychological and social frailty. Design: A cross-sectional study. Methods: 145 community-dwelling older people receiving home-care completed a questionnaire on sociodemographic factors, the Self-Management-Ability-Scale and the Tilburg Frailty Indicator. After determining correlations, sequential multiple linear regression analyses were executed. Results: All self-management abilities are negatively associated with physical frailty; five (except multifunctionality) are negatively associated with psychological frailty. Variety in resources and positive frame of mind are negatively associated with social frailty. Sociodemographic characteristics, chronic diseases and self-management abilities together significantly explain participants’physical (34.9%), psychological (21.4%) and social (43.9%) frailty. After controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and chronic diseases, the self-management abilities together significantly explain 11 per cent of psychological and 6.8 per cent of social frailty. Having a positive frame of mind significantly negatively influences social frailty.
