Beyond the Berlin Wall?: Investigating joint commissioning and its various meanings using a Q methodology approach

Helen Dickinson, Stephen Jeffares, Alyson Nicholds and Jon Glasby

Public Management Review, 2014, vol. 16, issue 6, 830-851

Abstract: Joint commissioning has been extensively alluded to in English health and social care policy as a way of improving services and outcomes. Yet there is a lack of specificity pertaining to what joint commissioning actually is and what success would look like. In this paper we adopt a Q methodology approach to understand the different meanings of joint commissioning that those involved in these arrangements hold. In doing so we get beyond the more orthodox interpretations of joint commissioning found in the literature although the appeal of joint commissioning as a 'good thing' is still prominent across these accounts.

Date: 2014
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14719037.2012.757353 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:pubmgr:v:16:y:2014:i:6:p:830-851

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RPXM20

DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2012.757353

Access Statistics for this article

Public Management Review is currently edited by Professor Stephen P. Osborne, Jenny Harrow and Tobias Jung

More articles in Public Management Review from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().