PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 14964514

Multicultural development in human services agencies: challenges and solutions.

Cheryl A Hyde
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Comprehensive multicultural organizational development (MCOD) is increasingly necessary in human services agencies. This article presents results from an exploratory study that identified challenges and solutions to MCOD, against the backdrop of daily realities of agency life. The author conducted interviews with 20 consultants and 20 practitioners experienced in MCOD. Qualitative analysis revealed four challenges--socioeconomic environment, organizational dynamics, conceptualization of the change effort, and consultant competence; and four solutions--collaborative environmental relations, leadership development, assessment and planning, and consultant selection. Results suggest the complexities of MCOD and ways that human services agencies can sustain such efforts.

Explore related subjects

ConsultantsCultural DiversityFemaleHumansLeadershipMaleMotivationNeeds AssessmentNew EnglandOrganizational CultureOrganizational InnovationSocial WorkStaff DevelopmentJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Cheryl A Hyde. 2004. Multicultural development in human services agencies: challenges and solutions.. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw%2F49.1.7

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

UK national survey of enucleation, evisceration and orbital implant trends.

AIM: To evaluate current clinical practice in the UK in the management of the anophthalmic socket; choice of enucleation, evisceration, type of orbital implant, wrap, motility pegging and complications. METHODS: All consultant ophthalmologists in the UK were surveyed by postal questionnaire. Questions included their practice subspecialty and number of enucleations and eviscerations performed in 2003. Specific questions addressed choice of implant, wrap, motility pegging and complications. RESULTS: 456/896 (51%) consultants responded, of which 162 (35%) had a specific interest in oculoplastics, lacrimal, orbits or oncology. Only 243/456 (53%) did enucleations or eviscerations. 92% inserted an orbital implant after primary enucleation, 69% after non-endophthalmitis evisceration, whereas only 43% did so after evisceration for endophthalmitis (50% as a delayed procedure). 55% used porous orbital implants (porous polyethylene, hydroxyapatite or alumina) as their first choice and 42% used acrylic. Most implants inserted were spherical, sized 18-20 mm in diameter. 57% wrapped the implant after enucleation, using salvaged autogenous sclera (20%), donor sclera (28%) and synthetic Vicryl or Mersilene mesh (42%). A minority (7%) placed motility pegs in selected cases, usually as a secondary procedure. 14% of respondents reported implant exposure for each type of procedure and extrusion was reported by 4% after enucleation and 3% after evisceration. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights contemporary anophthalmic socket practice in the UK. Most surgeons use porous orbital implants with a synthetic wrap after enucleation and only few perform motility pegging.

Consultants↗